Charisma and clout

Sonia Gandhi has become the uncontested leader of a 113-year-old party and its only hope for a respectable showing in the 1998 election. Why does the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty matter so much in politics? We political scientists, sociologists and psychologists are to be faulted for not taking the question seriously. We explain politics in terms of caste, class, socio-economic alignments and other such factors, but seldom in terms of personality.

Some social psychologists explain the dramatic rise of Sonia in national politics as the work of the mass media. The explanation is plainly banal. Why should her personality lend itself to charisma packaging and not, say, that of the young, modern, presentable Madhav Rao Scindia, or Rajesh Pilot? The media can only project a personality that instinctively appeals to people; it cannot manufacture such a personality. People see Sonia as the wife of Rajiv, daughter-in-law ofIndira and the granddaughter-in-law of Jawaharlal. Lineage greatly matters to our people.

Max Weber first talked of charisma and the charismatic personality. By this he meant persons endowed with superhuman qualities, like Moses or Christ. His reference point was basically Hebraic and Christian traditions, though one can say that persons of exceptional qualities and abilities, like Napoleon, de Gaulle, Roosevelt, Nehru or Gandhi could be seen as charismatic personalities in the Weberian sense. There is hardly any instance of charisma being passed over from father to son or daughter in the West.

Sonia in this sense is not a charismatic leader, though she is a member of a family that enjoys enormous charismatic appeal in India. She has not yet done anything spectacular, except capture the moribund Congress. A comparison often drawn between the Nehru-Gandhi family and the Kennedys is simply wrong. Ted Kennedy, the only surviving Kennedy brother, after the assassinations of John in 1964, and Robert in 1966,never even came close to getting a presidential nomination of the Democratic Party; and no one offered Jacqueline Kennedy the chairpersonship of the party. Here Congress members besiege Sonia to take over the party.Inherited charisma dissipates quickly. Indira Gandhi stepped into the office she inherited from her father. The day Shastri died thousands of people gathered at her house shouting 8220;Jawaharlal Nehru ki jai8221;. By hailing him they were entreating Indira to take his place.Rajiv Gandhi took Indira8217;s place the day he lit his mother8217;s funeral pyre. This mournful scene was transmitted to millions of viewers and listeners by the government-controlled media. But such charisma doesn8217;t last long too. True, Indira later earned and even enhanced the post she acquired by inheritance, by winning on her own the 1971 election. But when Jayaprakash Narayan indicted her and her corrupt government, her charisma crumbled.Rajiv Gandhi8217;s inherited charisma was as glitzy as Bollywood pastiche and therefore as superficial.No one knew this better than his one-time friend, the Raja of Manda. The day he left Rajiv8217;s Cabinet he made a simple statement that ended Rajiv8217;s term in ignominy: kickback in defence purchases. Compared to the previous two Nehrus, Nehru III turned out to be politically inept. Only in death did he come to acquire in people8217;s eyes a fraction of the appeal he enjoyed on becoming prime minister.Apart from some deep cultural reasons that are at the root of this phenomenon of charisma by inheritance, there is a tangible socio-economic reason for it. Our society is in great flux. The Nehru-Gandhi dynasty symbolises continuity, coherence and national unity. For this reason, entirely mistaken in my opinion, people see this family as the guarantor of national integrity. After the assassination of Indira Gandhi in 1984, people felt what V.S. Naipaul called the chilling sense of national dissolution8217;. So they voted en masse for Rajiv.

People also see the Nehru-Gandhi family as the benefactor of the poor and thedowntrodden. This noblesse oblige image of the family also goes into the making of the charisma. The Nehru-Gandhis too are seen by people as having a soft spot for the poor.But the noblesse oblige image of the Nehru-Gandhis may be fading. The Hindi heartland is too divided over the Mandir-Mandal issue to be united by anyone, however charismatic. It8217;s highly doubtful if the Jats, the Yadavs, the Kurmis or the Dalits, who are well represented by local chieftains like Laloo Prasad, Mulayam Singh or Kanshi Ram, will walk over to someone who speaks vaguely of social justice. These persons are by no means charismatic leaders 8212; rather they are popular leaders who articulate the interests of their caste. The BSP of Kanshi Ram, the SP of Mulayam Singh or the RJD of Laloo Prasad will survive as parties even after they disappear. They are held together by hard self-interests.The dynastic factor has badly distorted our politics in the past, crippled the Congress organisation and blocked the emergence of good leaders.Narasimha Rao8217;s deft moves to checkmate 10, Janpath seemed to have eliminated the dynastic factor. But it was there all the time, at times weak and at times strong. Should the Sonia Congress 8212; it8217;s unquestionably hers today 8212; get anything over 170-180 seats, the dynasty will play a decisive role in the post-election scenario.The writer is a senior fellow at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, New Delhi