DYNASTISM IN INDIAN POLITICS

Sahadev Meher    

Ours is a democratic form of government which is meant for the people, of the people and by the people. All the power of govt. originates from the public and ends with the public. Here the people are all in all – they can throne and dethrone any govt. they like. So in this form of govt. if the sovereign power runs down from a ruler to his offspring like monarchy, it may not be so successful, because all the sons and daughters of a same family are different in their mind, action, capability and thinking.

If we go into the history of India we can see that congress is the only political party  who has ruled over for more than fifty years after independence. After the first prime minister of India Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru to Lalbahadur Sastri and Indira Gandhi, the administration  is under the control of Gandhi family till now. Dr. Manmohan Singh, the toy Prime minister is ruling in the direction of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and even if Rahul Gandhi, who was only a MP beforehand.  Some of the most senior and efficient leaders also want to see Rahul Gandhi as the future Prime minister of India. What more can be seen as an example of flattery and undignified activity? Rahul Gandhi, who is quite inefficient and inexperience to face the varieties of problems of a vast country like India having various   diversities, cannot solve these problems. As he has no field knowledge about poverty and problems of the majority of people, which engulfs nearly sixty percent of people in remote areas. He has come from a well to do family where there is no poverty, no problems and no superstitions and no struggling for bread and butter. If he will be made the Prime minister of India he cannot really feel the pain and sufferings, problems and difficulties of common people.

Of course in a democratic from of govt. dynastism can be seen everywhere, not only in India but also in Asia and Europe. The famous journalist mark Tully has mentioned in his writing “ political dynastism ”that the system is also prevailing in some dignified families of some   developed  countries like – lee family of Singapore, Aungsan family of Mianmar, Ziaur rahaman and Sheikh Muzibur family of Bangladesh, Bhutto family of Pakistan and even if Kennedy and Bush family of USA. In dynastism the unity and integrity of the party is maintained intact though the leader is not so capable and experienced. For instance- in 1996 just after the demolition of Babri Masjid in the last part of Narasingh Rao govt. there was created a disruption in the congress party in which this party was on the verge of a division which would have led the fall of congress govt. At that time if the daughter -in-law   of Gandhi family, Mrs. Sonia Gandhi would not have taken the initiative to lead the congress party it was sure to face a division.

According to mark Tully, now in Indian parliament there are nearly 28% MPs belong to political parties run by their father and grandfathers. These MPs though not so efficient and capable are able to keep their political parties united and strong formed by their ancestors. For example –in  U.P- Mayabati after Kansiram of Samajbadi party, in Jammu Kashmir- Omar Abdula after his father Sheikh Abdula of National conference party, in Bihar- Rabdi Devi the most simple and innocent lady who took over the rein of RJD after Lalu yadav have  been able to keep their parties strong & united. Here although the parties are surviving but it is not fare & good for the democracy & for people. In those parties the old thinking & action prevails where as the changing times and  society requires new thinking and  new procedure to cope up with the changing world.

It we look in to the history we can  able to see that in Monarchy  system of administration also dynastism is not  so successful. For example in Moghul dynasty the thinking  capacity of Aurangzeb, and Shahajahan was not so same and powerful  as Akbar which resulted the decline of a so powerful Moghul Kingdom .So whatever form the government. maybe -democratic or monarchy if will not  changing with the time and  capacity it will not be fruitful.   If the new comers, new ideas and new procedures are not accepted, it cannot be everlasting because the administration completely rest on the capacity and ability of a ruler. The ideas and capacity of a person of a family may be strong, admirable and suitable but all his successors cannot be expected likewise as every individual is different in their ability, thinking and every other activity which is a natural law.

– The author is reputed State-level Columnist based at Patnagarh, Bolangir, Odisha.