Opinion We live in neo-feudal times
Handing parliamentary constituencies down in the family is so usual in India today that us political pundit types no longer write about this neo-feudalism. If I write about it this time it is because the Finance Minister of Punjab was sacked last week,like some thieving domestic servant may have been,drawing attention to the hazards of […]
Handing parliamentary constituencies down in the family is so usual in India today that us political pundit types no longer write about this neo-feudalism. If I write about it this time it is because the Finance Minister of Punjab was sacked last week,like some thieving domestic servant may have been,drawing attention to the hazards of hereditary democracy. This gives me the chance to gleefully expound on the subject.
I despise democratic feudalism because I believe that it has caused serious damage to the political fabric of India. In my view,our two biggest problems,corruption and incompetence,are a direct consequence of this peculiarly Indian form of parliamentary democracy. The reason why spoilt,unemployable scions of political leaders are thrust into public life is not because they understand politics,governance or economics,but because they understand that politics is about making money. An example of how much money can be made came last week when Jagan Mohan Reddy,son of the late Chief Minister of Andhra,reportedly paid Rs 84 crore in advance tax. When compared to the Rs 2.92 lakh he paid last year,this indicates a jump of 1,100 per cent. Not even Mukesh Ambani could match the business skills of young Jagan.
In the days when his father was Chief Minister,he often praised his sons business acumen in interviews. He is not interested in politics,the late YSR was known to say,he is a businessman. But,after Daddy passed on,Jagan tried immediately to force his way into the Chief Ministers seat. When this failed,he took to wandering about Andhra,stirring up the masses. Is it a passion to serve the people of Andhra Pradesh that motivates this young man or a desire to keep the family fortune from drying up? You work it out.
Hereditary democracy is rife in our ancient land. We have heirs in nearly every state. In Tamil Nadu,we have Karunanidhi & Sons,in Karnataka,Deve Gowda & Sons,in Maharashtra,there are too many political dynasties to list,in Bihar,Lalus chubby-faced son rose last week,in Haryana and Delhi,nearly every chief minister has given us an heir,in Uttar Pradesh,heirs abound in all political parties. And,in Punjab we have the first example of an entire state being handed over to an heir. Sukhbir Singh Badal was made Deputy Prime Minister by his doting Daddy much as you and I might leave some small property to our progeny.
Sukhbirs cousin,Manpreet Singh,was made Finance Minister in a cabinet filled with relatives of the well-known political firm of Badal & Son. Alas,Manpreet proved to be much smarter than Sukhbir,so he had to be given the boot. As Finance Minister,he understood well that giving farmers free water and electricity had ruined Punjab and was going to ruin it even more. But,Yuvraj Sukhbir saw that without freebies,the populace might start getting restless and start asking questions about his position,so he kicked his cousin out.
Like the scions of other political families,he understands well that the only way to make neo-feudalism acceptable is by operating a handout economy. In Tamil Nadu,Karunanidhi & Sons are famous for giving away free televisions at election time. In states like Andhra,Rs 2 rice has proved a certain vote getter. Everyone knows that freebies of this kind ruin the economy of a state and take away money that could have been spent more purposefully on real assets,but our political scions are interested mostly in instant gains. They could not care less if on account of their spendthrift ways,the economy of a once rich state like Punjab could end up bankrupt.
It is not just economically that hereditary politicians do serious damage,they do it politically to an even greater degree. When the leader of a political party decides that he wants to hand his political inheritance down to his son or daughter,what happens immediately is that he stops paying attention to strengthening his party. No longer does he go in search of intelligent,young Indians with a real desire to enter public service. He cannot afford to enlist this kind of person because they pose a clear and obvious threat to his chosen heir. So,the party starts to depend on charisma and the ageing patriarchs demagoguery.
When this happens,no more does said patriarch (or matriarch) bother with such things as real political issues because they no longer matter. All that matters is that the chosen heir appeals to the people enough for him or her to become acceptable as their future leader. If he is,then the family business continues to grow and flourish. Hereditary democracy has been very bad for India,but who cares about that.
Follow Tavleen Singh on Twitter @ tavleen_singh
Share
