Apropos the excerpts of Patrick French’s book (The Princely State of India, Jan 17), the website for the full dataset for family politics in the Lok Sabha was inadvertently misspelt. It should be www.TheIndiaSite.com.
Your cover story on our ‘mummy-papa MPs’ by Patrick French (The Princely State of India, Jan 17) shows how democracy has taken a weird and wonderful turn in the hurly-burly of Indian politics. In a country where privy purses for princely states were abolished as retrograde, we now have political dynasties at all levels—from elections to the municipal bodies right up to elections to the Lok Sabha. This is not very different from what the Supreme Court described as the ‘Uncle Judge syndrome’. Perhaps we should have a tricameral system, with a new chamber created to accommodate descendants of politicians!
H.N. Ramakrishna, Bangalore
Indian history is becoming the biography of a few families.
R.S. Pillai, Kollam
Except for Jawaharlal Nehru, Indian politicians of the first three generations since independence have left us a legacy of neglect, apathy, corruption and ineptitude. It’s time we cured ourselves of this fetish for ‘blue blood’.
S. Chakradhara Raju, Hyderabad
The trend-setter of dynastic politics was Jawaharlal Nehru, who appointed his sister Vijayalakshmi Pandit as an ambassador to the Soviet Union and his daughter Indira Gandhi as the president of the Indian National Congress.
Pradip Singh, Stafford, UK
The Nehru-Gandhis, the Pawars, the Sangmas, the Pilots, the Solankis, the Badals, the Scindias, the Yadavs, the Abdullahs and the Devi Lal and dmk clans have all, in steadfast sincerity of purpose, contributed to and consolidated what Warren Buffet once called the ‘Lucky Sperm Club of India’.
S.M. Kompella, Kakinada
French’s article made for disturbing reading. It’s human to ignore or get inured to general trends; however, once set down as cold facts and numbers, they become impossible to gloss over. Western democracies have created a culture of politicians rising through hard work in student life or community service. India, however—thanks to the party that once boasted visionaries of modern democracy—still suffers from a feudal culture reeking of sycophancy and nepotism.
Udayan Dhar, Mysore
What Patrick French (politely) fails to note is that many of these political families live in opulence in the cities although they get elected from underdeveloped constituencies in the hinterlands. These politicians benefit from the gullibility of illiterate and ignorant voters, so it shouldn’t be surprising that they keep those constituencies underdeveloped.
M.A. Raipet, Secunderabad
Our young parliamentarians, by continuing the legacy of corruption started and maintained over the years by their parents, have belied the belief that youth is idealistic.
Gilbert D’Souza, Bangalore
Why single out the Congress? Regional satraps too push their children into politics to control the spoils of office. It isn’t as if the Left is free of the dynastic virus. The same goes with the professions too, and also the civil services and journalism. If there can be Kennedys, Clintons and Bushes, why not Gandhis, Nehrus and Yadavs.
K.E. Thomas, on e-mail
Indians, true to form, have turned politicians into a separate caste. You go to the Brahmin for priestly services, the Vaishya for business or trade, the politician for political favours. This is India, after all.
Lutufullah, Aurangabad
I think French would have arrived at the same inference from an analysis of the Lok Sabha of the ’50-60s.
Ashish Agrawal, on e-mail
The BJP has led us to believe that dynastic succession is the preserve of the Congress. In fact, all parties—except perhaps the AIADMK, for Jayalalitha doesn’t have children!—practise dynasticism. I think nothing wrong with that either, provided the successor is capable of political work.
Scaria Varghese, Melbourne
French has merely quantified what is well known: it’s not what you know but who you know that counts. Or, in the case of politicians, whose son or daughter you are.
Bonita, Chennai
One way out of the dynastic morass would be for all seats to be reserved by rotation from term to term for candidates from the SC, ST, general and woman categories.
Munuswamy Ganapathy, Chennai
French’s article brings out the sad fact that our educated, urban classes stay off politics. Therefore, it is natural for the Gandhis, Abdullahs, Scindias et al to keep passing on the throne to their descendants.
Siddharth, Boston, US
As long as our MPs are elected through fair, democratic means, why should the public bother about who their parents are? We Indians are far too opinionated about everything. Let’s leave politicians to do their jobs and get on with ours. It takes guts to be in politics, so let’s respect politicians for whatever little good they manage to do or get done.
Chetan T.A., Bangalore
Even Bollywood looks like one big family enterprise now. The awards go either to the Kapoors, Bachchans or Chopras. What a stinking cartel!
Deepak Kumar Agrawal, on e-mail
The Congress should appoint a minister of cabinet rank for the exclusive task of defending or denying Rahul Gandhi’s remarks on issues ranging from Hindutva terrorism to coalition politics. Digvijay Singh, a man after Rahul’s own heart, would prove ideal for the post.
Anand & Swati Sriram, Mumbai
First it was the Mughals, then the Brits. Now, we are squirming under the thumb of political dynasties (The Princely State of India, Jan 17). We are a democracy now, but people still behave like slaves.
Jayalakshmi C., on e-mail
They say politics is the last resort of scoundrels. The parameters of Indian politics tell a different story. It is indeed the first resort of scoundrels.
S.P. Sharma, Samastipur
Dynasty is a fact in all three organs of our state—legislative, executive and judiciary. Let future issues focus on ‘Mummy Papa Judges’ and ‘Mummy Papa Jt Secretaries’. Give us the complete picture.
B. Sunil, Delhi
Who is going to read Patrick French’s findings and use them while voting so that the true spirit of democracy prevails in this great land of ours? The semi-literate voters who flock the booths and believe in caste, religion and the freebies offered? Or the so-called educated folks, who don’t really care to vote at all?
G.L. Kakral, Pune
These bunch of dum heads will continue to be in power until the people stop acting like dum heads. That day is not far from here...
Pt Nehru was certainly the trend setter in starting the practice of dynastic succession in politics. Indira Gandhi consolidated the practice by initiating Sanjay and later Rajiv Gandhi into the political firmament. Now, every politician is afflicted with the syndrome.Reasons are not far to seek.Voters' illiteracy and their blind obsession with the caste -based politics.These are the failings of the Parliamentary democracy.in India.The British democracy is a class by itself.One does not hear about dynasty in politics except for the Crown!
A K SAXENA (A retired civil servant)
"The Princely State Of India"
Pt Nehru was certainly the trend setter in starting the practice of dynastic succession in politics. Indira Gandhi consolidated the practice by initiating Sanjay and later Rajiv Gandhi into the political firmament. Now, every politician is afflicted with the syndrome.Reasons are not far to seek.Voters' illiteracy and their blind obsession with the caste -based politics.These are the failings of the Parliamentary democracy.in India.The British democracy is a class by itself.One does not hear about dynasty in politics except for the Crown!
These an interesting facts, but unfortunately only 1/3rd. Our Governments has three organs -Legislative, Executive, Judiciary. Dynasty is a fact for all of them, but we are still unaware of dynasties in judiciary and bureacracy, though they have much older dynasties going back to at least 3 generations. So please come up new issues like "Mummy Papa Judges" or "Mummy Papa Jt Secretary". Then only we will get complete picture of dynesties controllng our governments.
Patrick French writes well and sympathetically, and there is some truth in what he says. But there is still a gnawing intrusiveness in his, and similar articles by non-Indian commentators, including Jeremy Seebrook. You can feel a sense of condescension in their writings, that they somehow know India better than most Indians themselves. However, in contrast to awful academics like Paul Brass and Martha Nussbaum, one can also feel a strong affinity, respect and liking for India. Their criticism is largely constructive,strongly hinting that Indians can do better. Brass is not a well wisher of India, and even his theory of communal riots in India being mostly planned, has not one morsel of compassion, depth or humanism. Nussbaum finds in India an easy target to vent her pseudi-liberal, pseudo-left outpourings as a weapon to counter the idea that Islamism and Islamic terror is the greatest threat to the US and the world at present.
The biggest family dynasty in the political business that has not been highlighted well in this article is that of DMK - Karunanidhi. Sons and daughters from three wives, nephews and grand nephews command unprecedented power in the state and central level. Grand children of this master politician who have stayed away from the political scene out of fear of being targeted by their own kin have a complete monopoly over the film industry with the backing of their goon family. If there is one family which has monopolized nearly every industry and are in the money making business through pure misuse of power, it is the Karunanidhi clan.
“Main apne pita, nani aur pardada ke bina us jagah par nahin pahunch sakta tha jahan main aaj hoon (Without my father, grandmother and great-grandfather, I could never have been in the place that I am now.)” - Rahul G
a typo has crept in... it ought to have been dadi.. d ( his Ma and Chacha... are notable absentees..)
In India, as it is admitted, caste and profession is an important identity.
Let me make a comparision with the United States of America. What if investment bankers, farmers, those representing medical establishments, lawyers, the military(?), in the United States, all decided that they needed to be represented in the House of Representatives? Where would the United States go? Is that happening in the United States? It is happening in India.
I was just viewing an NDTV program hosted by Barkha Dutt, on Mr French's book. The panel was distinguished, and included Mr French.
What struck me, was, how different will the Dalits be from the other's in power, once they get political power in their hands? Is Mayawati less assertive, than Ms Indira Gandhi was in her heydays? What if all sections of people in India, want, and contest for political power? We will have ruling classes, in each and every section of society, and the members of these ruling classes, will contest and fight against each other. India will then, slip into anarchy.
There is a saying, 'All is fair in war'. What if all the political society, followed this saying, and what if the political society consisted of all the sections, such as the Jats, the Rajputs, the Gujjars, the Dalits, etc? I do not think any Brahmin worth his salt, will contest elections, to showcase his community's interests.
Kudos is due to Outlook for bringing out the topical and so truthful an analysis : Preview of the new book by the veteran author Ratrick French : A Portrait – an intimate biography of 1.2 billion people’ with a well researched and an expertise on India polity. It presents an excellent coverage of the present day India vis a vis dynastic rule since 1947. It is also surprising to note that our previous rulers, the British never resorted to dynastic rule in reality during the past 2 centuries. The factual rulers, the Governor Generals were changed every 5 years and never repeated in their ruling tenures. Kings and queens were there as figure heads in Indian context. Certain nations of the then British Empire, however, have continued to retain them as “figure heads”. May I mention that the two leading and well known ‘cadre based’ political parties: BJP and the CPM, though divergent in their respective ideologies have been found rather free of the allegation of the dynastic character. It prevails in the oldest one and in most of the regional parties of the country which came into being recently. It is another matter that the preview casts insinuation about RSS as a family for the BJP and perhaps Marxism in the case of Communist Parties appears to be far fetched?
Moderator's Note: Please do not type in all caps
Very well written article. It is also a sad reflection of the urban, highly-educated population to stay away from mainstream political aspirations.The general low importance of political science as a education/career alternative compounds this problem. Highly rational economic behavior !!!
Seems natural then for these dynasties like Gandhis, Abdullahs, Scindias to continue passing on the thrones to their progeny, at the cost of ground level party workers. Political office becomes a family business, in fact more benefecial than a private business, since it is highly subsidized by public funds and at the cost of public welfare.
To Rahul's credit, he would do well to continue as Congress secretary and build the party that welcomes no-name yet knowledgable leaders with a work ethic to get things done.
As long as each one of them are selected to the parliament through fair democratic means,why should the public be bothered abt who their parents or their lineages are!!!!!!
We indians are known to be opinionated abt evrything,lets leave the politicans to do their job and lets get on with our lives.Its takes guts to be in politics and lets begin with respecting them for whatever positive things that they are doing.
The self appointed secularists of India have been playing the minority card just for their eloctrol gains, but that has not helped the minorities in any way . Infact their game has caused enormous harm . Fear,distrust, and inferiority, comlex were created in this taegetted group..Education, health, employment,and dignified life can be provided without dividing people on rellegious lines.Nitesh Kumar Iin Bihar has shown the way
Keeping it in the family is well entrenched in Indian society so nothing surprising there. Ethically, those elected should of course consider their constituents as family but Indians (or anyone for that matter) are not that developed ethically yet and may never be. I have come to believe that it is all in the how you raise your kids: with pure character, appreciation for real work, sense of fairness, compassion, justice and fulfillment. Kids who will know how much is enough to be happy and who will then focus on the larger family as in Indian idiom of everyone is family.
Surprisingly all these developments did not hinder economic progress of the country. Nor did any civil war nor military coup break to resist the dynastic politics and change the political system. Rather an overpopulous country is still chugging along with bouts of economic success albeit not evenly shared by the populace.
What happens hereafter? We don't know. May be more affluent middle class may turn to politics and all of a sudden in Indian parliament the feudals will be replaced by professionals in increasing numbers. (And that's possible only after the voters start disliking the dynastic politicians.)
So far both optimists and pessimists have failed equally in forecasting India's future.
When late Sh. Jawahar Lal Nehru accepted partition of India after failure of Gandhiji to convince him to give up his claim of ruler of Independent India in favour of late Sh. Mohammad Ali Jinnah (as is hinted in some historical texts) and when he sytematically nurtured the culture of nepotism and sycophancy he showed his intentions of becoming a modern day Maharaj of India. His efforts could not materialise because of his early death. However his daughter carried forward his agenda. This mother father duo first made the earstwhile maharajas and rulers commons and thereafter systematically cultivated a culture where they made themselves modern day Maharajas of our BANANA republic and their future generations born princes and princesses (or born VVVIP's). Our present day vansh sabha having majority of haves regularly creates and modifies laws to favour haves by abusing which haves and exploit havenots. Their is no hope of any reverse trend as every common now days wants to be member of this VVVIP/VVIP/VIP club and enjoy life as such.
the solution to this monarchic democracy is simple and will make us a real representative democracy by rotational representation.the parliamentary seats rotate evry 2 terms from women to SC/GEN.The cabinet formation based on adequate respresntation for all with limitations to remain in the same ministry after 5 to 8 years including the prime minister.
I have always considered India, as an "elected monarchy". Not just because the progeny of our elected reps consider it their right to take the place of their parents but also because of the way the elected reps, whether first timer or progeny, behave in the first place - pure unadulterated feudal - VVIPs as we refer to them. Some layer their feudalism with a sophisticated veneer some display in raw - have no doubt both our feudal.
Problem, however, is that the larger culture sees nothing wrong in it. It is unlikely to change in any hurry. For me the question is will this slow down our already slow movement towards "rule of law" which is the sign of a mature democracy. Good news is we are no longer an "infant" democracy running the risk of "infant mortality" having got to "by and large free and fair elections" - we are probably an "adoloscent" democracy.
PUNAM TRYETE SHA PUTRA is ver very old Hindu traditon,If you have no son you will go to hell. Thousand of ancient religious texts are warning to Hindu .So that is natural son must take sit of his father.In politices there is power but in spritual world where you to renounce all material things Bhagwant Raman Mahrshi and Samratha Ramdas Sawmi also earnstly desirious that their nepew must be sit on their Gadhi and up to they sit on gadhi their soul lingered in their body.
People of India nerver complaint of this tradition on the contrary if son did not ocupied sit of father they blamed to son.
This analysis is another illustration of the fact that formal structures of power - such as representative democracy and impersonal bureaucracy - in due course take on its shape when poured into the mold of existing social relationships of loyalty and patronage. In India, as in many other Asian countries, (extended) family has been the unit of action and legitimacy for so long that Western political institutions based on the idea of the individual as the primary agent have reflexively changed their coloration and flavour in order to survive and thrive in their new context without excessive violence which would overthrow one or the other. World is replete with examples of failure of such "harmonization" and resulting violence - several and counting in Africa where in many parts the primary unit is neither the individual nor family, but clan or tribe, in tortuous history of modern Turkey, etc. History of the arrival of democracy at a stage of sustained non-violent continuance is always the history of its adaption to existing social circumstances which it seeks to change as it itself changes. Japanese democracy is a different creature from British democracy. British democracy today is unlike that of the days of William Pitt the younger.
In India, during its long history, the twin pillars of social existence have been family and caste. These served to negotiate power and influence for a long time, and will continue to do so for a while yet even as they take on new forms partly under the pressure of new laws and institutions which have been in tension with them and partly under the changing demands of a new economic world which is evolving the social and familial arrangement at growing rate. And politics, insofaras it remains democratic and non-revolutionary, will keep on mirroring them.
A few years ago there was an international debate about a distinct Asian conception of universal human rights, its primary spokeman being the Malaysian PM Mahathir Muhammed. That debate has now subsided and the UN declaration of human rights remains grounded in its Western individualistic substrate, but facts on the ground, as brought out in this statistical study of Indian politics, show that in daily practice of democracy there is a distinct Indian way, and perhaps an Asian way. For a political theorist and philosopher of democracy India today is as exciting an arena of study as America, France and Britain once were as new forms are being born, tested and contested.
Fantastically analytical!!! Indian Journos of the "liberal" varity should should read and learn.
Said that Indian Sociologists/Journos cannot even count let alone do statistical analysis. Thats probably facts are inconvinient to their ideology.
The trend setter was Jawaharlal Nehru. Others are copy cats of the Nehru Gandhi family. Nehru appointed his sister Vijayalaxmi Pandit ambassador in Soviet Union and his 40 year old daughter Indira Gandhi President of the Indian National Congress - a post, which unlike today, was not purely ceremonial and had been held before by stalwarts like Subhash Chandrs Bose.
Patrick French could have said it all in one sentence - India is a feudal plutocracy. 448 pages @ Rs.1.56 a page is too much to write at too high a cost for a bold banner highlighted & written across India's political archtecture.
Patrick French could have said it all in one sentence - India is a feudal plutocracy. 448 pages @ Rs.1.56 a page is too much to write at too high a cost for a
In short, Indians, true to form, have made the job of politician a caste one, like carpenters and priests in the old caste order. You go to Brahmins if you want priestly services; they pass the job to their sons. You go to politicians for political services; they pass the job to their sons.
What is so surprising about this Indian form of caste politics? This is India, after all.
Hi Patrick,
This is indeed a brilliant article and a great piece of research.
However, I feel that an early inference has been reached by you in concluding that Indian politics is becoming more hereditary.
We can conclude that in the current parliament, it is more likely for a younger MP to be an HMP rather than an older one.
But this could have been true during 1950s and 60s as well. And in fact this is quite a natural happening. For people without significant family background, it would take more time to establish a position or make their entry into politics. Something, not just limited to politics but to fields like business, entertainment etc. I feel if a similar survey is conducted across the world for different fields, similar results would be obtained.
To conclude that Indian politics is becoming more hereditary, one should take the MP class of 1950s and 1960s and see the HMP statistics there in comparison to what we have for the class of 2009.
This will bring out newer facts and revelations about the trends in Indian politics.
Thanks
Regards
Ashish
-- Ashish Agrawal Final year dual degree student Department of Computer Science and Engineering IIT Kanpur www.ashishagrawal.com
Co-Founder/ Director IN Mobile Labs www.inmobilelabs.com
PRASAD
Congress will lose power in 2014. Wishful thinking! I read yesterday India Today survey. Junior Gandhi is still striding top in the opinion polls as a Prime Ministerial material.
Wow ! Thank you for your analysis and the article hit the Bulls Eye ! 10 out of 10.
good article.
I am glad we have a choice... some of the princes are good. For eg: Jyothiraditya Scindia is good. Not much about the Junior Pilot or Junior Gandhi who I thought were complete idiots.
Congress will lose power in 2014. Hopefully Junior Gandhi will be mature when he returns to power in 2019 or beyond whenever!!
Re: "Initially, it appeared that heredity was not the most important aspect in Indian politics, in that ‘Family’ was not at the top of the list of routes to Parliament. In total, 28.6 per cent of MPs had a hereditary connection."
If the parliament should overall reflect the society, then 28.6% of MPs having a hereditary connection will be highly statistically significant. You just need to run a chi-squared test for this observed statistic against the estimated proportion of people in general population who have a hereditary political connection (my guess is <1%).
Elementary, Patrick!
The BJP has led us believe dynastical succession is a Nehru family preserve. It shows almost all the political party practice this except AIADMK. Jayalalitha hasn't a progeny to encourage following her footsteps. There is nothing wrong in dynastical succession provided the person is capable to do the job.
A very informative analysis of the Indian political system. It is indeed revealing and almost accurately projects the emerging electoral trend in India.
It is a wake up call for the Indian voters to protect their representative republican democracy.
Thank you 'Outlook', for publishing the valuable and educative excerpts from the book.
Moderator's Note: To avoid getting your messages deleted and posting privileges withdrawn, please do not make your entire messages in bold.
The author has merely quantified what everyone already knew. It's not what you know, but who you know that counts. or in the case of politicians - whose son/daughter you are.
We should not lose sight of the fact that it required an author from England to bring out a painfully researched book like this on our modern day royals wannabes. An Indian (passport holder, that is) wouldn't bother, and if he did, the conclusions would have been played with- to please someone, hide someone, or run someone down! Forgive the pessimism, the Indian society of our times would well be a nightmare for George Orwell. Moral of the story however, is similar to Maughum's conclusion of his famous short story,'The Rain' with Sadie Thompson(the main character)'s concluding dialogue piece, " you are all the same....'
It is no different in the United States. We have the Kennedys of Masschussetts, Bushes of Texas (and Florida), Browns of California, Tafts of Ohio, Pauls of Kentucky (and Texas) and Cuomos of New York. Sovereignty is derived from the people, especially people with blue blood.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
But:
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy: http://blog.outlookindia.com/default.aspx?ddm=10&pid=1669&eid=5
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT