‘Naamdar versus Kaamdar.’ That’s how Prime Minister Narendra Modi had set the narrative against the Congress led by Rahul Gandhi in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. ‘Naamdar’ is one who hails from a political dynasty. ‘Kaamdar’ works and does not belong to any political family. The former was obviously for the Gandhi scion and the latter was for PM Modi himself. Continuing his tirade against family politics, PM Modi, at the first meeting of the BJP’s Parliamentary Party after recently held assembly polls in five states, again came heavily down on dynastic politics, saying it leads to casteism. He took the onus of denying tickets for the children of partymen in what is a rarity for a PM to come on record like this. Similarly, PM Modi before the first phase of polls in UP described dynastic politics as a big threat to and enemy of democracy, in what was a clear attack on the BJP’s key contender Samajwadi Party and its leader Akhilesh Yadav, which is dubbed as a family-run political outfit.
What is remarkable is that the PM has been launching a scathing attack on dynastic parties and their politics repeatedly, while cautioning his own partymen against practicing this type of politics. He has been targeting ‘family-run’ parties which, according to him, have hollowed out the nation.
Now the question is why PM Modi is frequently tearing into opposition over dynastic politics, describing it to be a threat to democracy. The answer to some extent lies in what PM Modi told the BJP cadres to do ahead of the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. He asked the partymen to challenge the family-led political parties everywhere till 2024. The party was asked to reach out to people with the message about how the family-run parties have ruined the nation and the democracy. “If the power is controlled by dynastic politics, then democracy will be nowhere to be seen in that state.” The biggest advantage for the BJP is that its leader Narendra Modi is not from a political family.
Needless to say, most of the regional parties in various states of the country are like family-run entities. Significantly, some of them have managed to gain some grounds in their regions where they put up massive challenges for the national parties, with the BJP being no exception. For the challenge to be reduced, the BJP wants these outfits to be weakened in the states. What gives the BJP an edge is that these parties are controlled by families, unlike the saffron outfit which has a leader who has come from the grassroots level. This has given PM Modi a much-needed political weapon to attack and weaken the ‘family-run’ parties in big Hindi belt states such as UP and Bihar. That’s why he is trying to impress upon the people that these political families control the entire party system and are creating a system that is a threat to a healthy democracy.
Referring to a letter from someone, the PM recently explained how 45 people from the family (Mulayam Yadav’s family) held various positions in Samajwadi Party. He took a jibe at Akhilesh Yadav saying “They laid thrust on my family”. The PM knows that the simmering anger among the common people against this family politics business will one day flare up, and the challenge of these regional outfits will start diminishing.
PM Modi explains that if a single party controls the organisation, it puts an end to internal democracy, and this is a danger to a healthy democracy. He was right when he said that from Kashmir to Kanyakumari, in most of the states, dynastic politics is dominant. This is not good for Indian democracy.
There is no denying that most of the national and regional parties have been controlled by single families for generations. The dynastic domination in the Congress is known to one and all. The entire country witnessed how Sitaram Kesri was forcibly removed from his chamber at AICC as party president in 1998. He was replaced by Sonia Gandhi. She was succeeded by her son Rahul Gandhi. When Rahul stepped down after Congress’ defeat in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls, again Sonia took over the charge. This is what PM Modi referred to when he said one family’s control on a party ends internal democracy.
Beginning from Kashmir, the National Conference is controlled by one family of the late Sheikh Abdullah. Dr Farooq Abdullah and Omar Abdullah from his family call the shots in the party. The same is the case with PDP which is controlled by Mehbooba Mufti, daughter of the late Mufti Mohammed Sayeed. The situation is no different in Punjab where Shiromani Akali Dal is controlled by the Badal family. Samajwadi Party in UP is controlled by the Yadav family with Akhilesh Yadav as party chief, Rashtriya Janata Dal in Bihar is controlled by Lalu Prasad Yadav, his wife, and his sons.
Maharashtra does not present any different picture, with Shiv Sena being controlled by Thackeray family, and NCP by Sharad Pawar’s family. Trinamool Congress in Bengal is controlled by Mamata Banerjee and her nephew. Down to South India, the ruling DMK in Tamil Nadu is controlled by the late M. Karunanidhi’s family members, and in Andhra Pradesh, the ruling YSRCP is being run by Jagan Mohan Reddy, who is son of late YS Rajasekhara Reddy. In Jharkhand, Mukti Morcha is controlled by Shibu Soren’s son Hemant Soren.
With the political families choosing only dynasts for candidature in elections, grassroots workers remain sidelined leading to resentment among them. This way, common people are forced to be away from democratic process. That’s what PM Modi tried to emphasise when he said that the health of democracy is affected badly due to politics being a family business. What he wants to highlight is that participation of the common man in the electoral process and governance is also part of democracy which is being stymied by the dynasts. PM Modi’s thrust has always been on inclusive governance ‘sabka saath, sabka vikas’. But this would be possible if the influential dynasts make space for the common man as well. While hitting out at dynastic politics, PM Modi’s objective is also to send out a message that the common people are being deprived of their rightful place in the governance system. Observers believe that the PM’s repeated attack on dynastic politics vis-à-vis the Yadav family in UP also caused material damage to the SP in assembly elections.
Another reason why PM Modi termed dynastic politics as a threat to democracy is the fact that the regional parties controlled by one family normally go to any extent to achieve their goals of being in power and fulfilling their monetary needs. What has been seen over the years is that the sole agenda of regional dynastic parties is to remain in power to be financially sufficient. As a result, these outfits remain more focused on financial aspects of being in power and this comes at the cost of governance and development leads to a rise in corruption. The parochial approach of these political parties also in some way is counterproductive vis-à-vis the efforts to strengthen democracy. What PM Modi was hinting at was that with a national party like BJP in power in the states, the vision about governance and democratic horizon will be broader and enhanced. So, the narrative of dynastic politics set by PM Modi is aimed at weakening the regional outfits whose only agenda is apparently to get power, ignoring the principles that are important components of any democratic setup.
PM Modi has in fact floated these views about political dynasties to create a narrative that portrays him as having risen from the grassroots, as having sweated it out for years before occupying the most coveted office in India.
The Writer is a political analyst and former Chairman, Andhra Pradesh Electronics Development Corporation. Views expressed are the writer’s personal.
