Bilawal and us

Instead of sneering at Pakistan, we need to be more concerned about our own traditions of hereditary democracy that are now so entrenched that, other than the Marxist parties, every political party in India now practises them. Last week Chandra Shekhar’s son, whose only political credential is that he is his father’s son, won the Ballia seat on behalf of the Samajwadi Party, whose leader has already anointed his son as heir apparent of the party.

The Congress has the most famous heir of all, but there are heirs galore in nearly all Indian political parties. When people like me object to this democratic feudalism, the heirs assert that they would not be there if they did not win elections. So it is democracy after all. Right? Wrong.

The heirs contest from Mummy, Daddy or Uncleji’s seat, often in the wake of the sudden demise of a revered relative, which means it is usually a safe seat. One time around even an incompetent idiot can win. But the cost to the political party and to Indian democracy of this feudal practice is huge. Because of it, we now have political parties that have more powerbrokers than public servants. Because of it, parliamentary constituencies have become feudal estates handed down as the Maharajah of Jodhpur’s son will one day inherit the Umaid Bhawan palace. If this is a good idea, then we may as well re-recognise the princes and give them back the countries they ruled for centuries. There were some bad eggs, but we have never given princely India credit for preserving Indian architecture, painting, music, manuscripts and crafts. They would not exist today without that patronage.

Our democratically elected heirs are not of such good quality. Most of them enter politics with ideas of power and pelf rather than public service, and this cannot be good. If we want our political parties to get back the contact with ordinary people they once had, it is essential that at election time they look out for candidates who have been thrown up because of their public service. We can learn much about what needs to be done by watching the primaries that are currently underway in the United States. Those who want a ticket at election time must prove that they have public support and a point of view that their constituents agree with. If we still end up with a pantheon of young leaders who are heirs then so be it. But let us at least find out if the ordinary voter votes with the hope of improving his own life or only because he likes someone’s name or face.

If Rahul Gandhi’s patent lack of appeal to voters in Uttar Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh and Gujarat is anything to go by, then the Indian voter could be growing up. Evidence of this comes in the demand for real things at election time, things like bijli, sadak, pani and jobs. In the old days, when I was nearly as young as Bilawal Bhutto and covered my first Lok Sabha election, I remember that people voted for Indira Gandhi because she was Indira Gandhi and they liked her. This is no longer true, so there is a little hope.

Meanwhile, can we look into our own girebaan, as the Urdu saying goes, instead of sneering at poor Bilawal Bhutto. And let us hope that when he goes back to Oxford to finish his studies, someone teaches him that democracy is not revenge but a system that, with all its flaws, is the best one we know.