Why do Indians Embrace Political Dynasties?

By siliconindia   |   Wednesday, 15 February 2012, 13:30 Hrs   |    20 Comments
Printer Print Email Email

Indian politics and the parliament are full of relatives, from fathers-sons, fathers-daughters, wives, widows, in-laws, nephews and uncles etc. it’s all about family there in India and it’s here to stay. The list of political sons and daughters are endless in India including Priyanka Gandhi, Sameer Bhujbal, Nilesh Rane, Milind Deora, Priya Dutt, Varun Gandhi, Jyoti Mirdha, Deependra Hooda, Jayant Chaudhary, HD Kumaraswamy, Akhilesh Yadav, Adhikari Suvendu, Agatha Sangma, Supriya Sule, Sachin Pilot, Omar Abdullah, Yadavs, Scindias, Badals, Thakerays, Patnaiks, Reddys, Karunanidhi’s family and the Marans etc, the list never ends.

Why do we accept the political dynasties? According to an India RealTime article by Rupa Subramanya, internal party organization is a vital factor in determining whether a party becomes dynastic or not. The author quotes Pradeep Chhibber, a political science professor who argues that a self-perpetuating and oligarchic political party primarily promotes dynasticism, which can only be countered by independent and democratically accountable organizational structure, which most Indian political parties lack. Another prominent reason he points out is that voter mobilization through independent civil society bodies are largely absent in the country. Finally, the nature of campaign funding is said to be the major factor that nurtures dyansticism in India because the funds are collected and dispersed by central party officials and the local bodies have no role in it, which make the normal followers of a political party highly dependable on its central command.