Is dynasty in politics a boon or bane for democracy? There is no doubt that 99 percent of the answers to this question will be negative. There is not a single party in Indian politics or a single State where a person with a political family background has not entered electoral politics. In fact, dynasty politics is a stain on Indian democracy, which is not being washed away.
In the campaign for this year’s Lok Sabha elections, BJP, especially Prime Minister Narendra Modi, launched a strong attack on dynasty politics. Naturally, his first target was the Congress. Because, according to many, if anyone has given birth to dynasty politics in independent India, it is the Congress. Of course, this cannot be denied. From Motilal Nehru to Rahul Gandhi, there are 16 names who have been or are active in politics. According to a survey published by a leading English newspaper, in the first 424 candidates announced by the BJP, which is strongly criticising the Congress for its nepotism, one in every five candidates is from a political family. Of course, in the list of the first 250 candidates announced by the Congress, one out of every four candidates belong to a political family or comes from a dynasty. The BJP defends itself by claiming that the party is not bound by the whims and fancies of a single family like the Congress. In short, BJP believes that candidates who follow the footsteps of their elders and enter electoral politics are not dynastic. The BJP is only opposed to the claim that political power is centered around one family.
BJP has repeatedly singled out Congress, DMK, even TMC and Samajwadi Party, as examples of dynasty rule. The current list of BJP candidates includes D Purandeshwari from Andhra Pradesh, the daughter of Telugu Desam Party founder NT Rama Rao. She was in the Congress as was Kiran Kumar Reddy (once CM), who is also a BJP candidate. One of the BJP candidates in Bihar is the son of Madan Kumar Jaiswal, former MP from Betiya. Vivek Thakur, who is contesting from Nevada, is the son of former Union Minister CP Thakur. And in Gujarat, the BJP has given the ticket to Poonamben Madam, daughter of six-term MLA and former Mayor Hemantibhai Madam. Another veteran candidate in the state is Bharat Singh Dabhi, son of two-term MLA Shankarji Okhaji Thakor. High-profile BJP candidates from the political family include Bansuri Swaraj – the daughter of late Sushma Swaraj from New Delhi, and BS Yeddyurappa’s son B Y Raghavendra, the sitting MP from Shimoga who has been re-nominated. Karnataka’s list includes former Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai, the son of R Bommai. The Congress has fielded 14 candidates from prominent political families, including Mallikarjuna Kharge’s son-in-law Radhakrishna Doddamani, Ramalinga Reddy’s daughter Saumya Reddy and SS Mallikarjuna’s wife Prabha Mallikarjuna.
It would not be wrong to say that nepotism is a pest that every party in the political history of the country possesses. Dynasty politics flourished in Jammu and Kashmir with the support of Islam, and in Tamil Nadu with the help of the Dravidian movement. In Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, the two largest Hindi-speaking States, the Yadavs abused power by running a caste-based dynasty. During his tenure, Lalu Prasad Yadav exploited and abused democracy to the extent of officially collecting ransom. After being accused in the fodder scam, he made his uneducated wife the Chief Minister, and later brought forward his children. The party workers and the common people of Bihar did not benefit from this. In Uttar Pradesh, Mulayam Singh Yadav also ‘enjoyed’ a similar share. If we examine his career and that of his son, Akhilesh, it is very much clear that these families came to power in the name of democracy and enjoyed a dynasty to benefit their own family. As a result, both these States remained ‘sick’ due to backwardness, unemployment, migration, hooliganism, etc. Only after the Yadavs were dethroned, the status of these states began to change to some extent.
The dynasties of Sharad Pawar and Balasaheb Thackeray’s, however, have a different angle. Both leaders shifted towards dynasties mid-way of their career. Balasaheb ran the Shiv Sena single-handedly, but did not aspire to hold power. But, Uddhav Thackeray could not resist the temptation and due to this Shiv Sena’s wheels turned towards dynasty politics. The interference of his son as a minister, and also some relatives in the government led to discontent against Thackeray’s dynasty rule. This led to a major defection in Maharashtra politics and a vertical split in the Shiv Sena. After Sharad Pawar formed his own Nationalist Congress Party in 1999, a new political dynasty emerged. He has been the party president for 23 consecutive years. Even though the NCP has split like the Shiv Sena, the ownership of the party has remained with the Pawar family, whether it is the unilateral support of the BJP in 2014 without asking for it or the establishment of the Maha Vikas Aghadi with the Shiv Sena in 2019. Such decisions cannot be made easily in a democratic party. Now that the third generation of the Pawar family has entered the fray, the next heirs are ready.
A great financial empire is also ready. It would be wrong and dangerous to think of it as a democracy. In the generation of doctors, lawyers, teachers, businessmen, shopkeepers or those other sectors, such nepotism exists, but it is not publicised. On the contrary, such dynastic politics is visible to all. The widespread effect of family rule is the wealth, corruption, monopoly and arrogance arising out of it.
