Why are we scared of 'the dynasty'?

Who is scared of the dynasty? A lot of people surely are.

The debate over the Nehru-Gandhi descendants reaping political advantage of the bloodline has been around for decades. It evokes a range of emotions, all bitter, right from plain hatred to envy to exasperation. For many, particularly the political rivals, it has been a handy stick to beat the Congress with. In the narrative of the Opposition’s politics in the country, anti-Congressism and anti-Gandhi family feelings get inseparably mixed up.

The argument from this side is persuasive. Dynastic rule — a misnomer but lets go with it for the purpose of convenience — goes against the principle of democracy. It violates the core idea of equality of opportunity by paradropping members of ’the family’ into the leadership position. Others have to struggle for years to make the cut and go up the political rungs; some never make it to any position of relevance in the party. In an ideal democracy, pedigree should be secondary to competence; the advantage of birth should be secondary to fairness in competition.

The argument has merit; the only trouble is that it reduces itself to a mindless rant when it gets pathologically obsessed with one set of people. In a perfect world, the members of the Gandhi family should be earning their spurs in the right way. But unfortunately, we live in a feudal, community-centric world, where nothing is even close to perfect. There are hundreds of examples across the political spectrum where political legacy follows the family route.

Naveen Patnaik, the Chief Minister of Orissa and the leader of one-time BJP ally BJD, would be nowhere in politics without his father’s legacy and the story of family politics involving Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal and his son Sukhbir Singh, the chief minister in waiting, is well known. The Shiv Sena, the most trenchant of critics of dynastic politics, has been busy promoting party supremo Balasaheb Thackeray’s son Uddhav as his successor. Grandson Aditya is being promoted with an eye on the long term, post-Uddhav scenario.

The case of DMK chief M Karunanidhi and his sons — now a daughter — squabbling for power is common knowledge. BJP too wants a slice of the Nehru-Gandhi legacy. It has been promoting Varun Gandhi, a beneficiary of the political legacy of her mother, Menaka. Pankaj Singh, son of former BJP president Rajnath Singh, is an important local leader of the party in Uttar Pradesh.

In the Congress, the beneficiaries, besides the Gandhi-Nehru descendants, are too many. Sachin Pilot, Jyotiraditya Scindia and Milind Deora are among the more prominent ones.

To put it in short, dynastic or family politics is too widespread in the country. It is because most parties are personality-centric and grow up and survive around the aura of one person only; examples: Jayalalithaa’s AIADMK in Tamil Nadu, BSP of Mayawati, Samajwadi Party of Mulayam Singh, Trinamool Congress of Mamata Banerjee, RJD of Lalu Prasad and RLD of Ajit Singh. The dynamic within parties is such, that without a single rallying point, most of them would collapse.

In an ideal scenario, there should be strong intra-party democracy to sustain the party in the absence of its mascot. But that is rarely the case in India. Even the BJP, which claims to have strong democratic practices within, has to fall back on its mother organisation, RSS, in times of crisis.

What worries the detractors most about the Gandhi family? Its power to keep the Congress together, and attract votes. The party would disintegrate without it, electorally and organisationally. That is what most parties have been waiting for a long time. Unless the party weakens, there is little chance for other parties to challenge it successfully. The ground reality has changed a lot over time. The Congress is no more a force to reckon with in many parts of the country. But the old fear remains. This explains the emphasis on the dynasty and the relentless attack on it.

The best answer to destroy dynastic politics should be democracy itself. If popular vote goes against the members of political families, they would cease to exist. If the Congress is thrown out of power for long, it is possible that the party would lose respect in the Gandhi family’s ability to lead the party and win votes. It would then look for alternatives. It had happened during Indira Gandhi’s early days and when Narasimha Rao was prime minister.

Why has the country failed to develop a good enough challenger to the Congress after so many decades? Is it because the rival parties are simply incapable of developing good leaders? The only person who rose equal to the Gandhi family in stature was Atal Behari Vajpayee. There’s is no one around in sight now. This is pathetic. The dominance of the Congress makes the country a lop-sided democracy. This has to change.

Harping on the dynasty only reflects a complex of inferiority in the rivals. The rivals must think better.