Beyond dynasty, towards competence

So? What’s the big deal? Human trafficking is a white-collar crime, compared to murder, rape, armed robbery and kidnapping, and we know that across our unfortunate land we are increasingly being forced to elect people who have been charged with one or the other of these crimes.

Often, the choice that Indian voters face is between two criminals, and in such situations, they usually select the better criminal, as a wise old man once explained to me in D.P. Yadav’s constituency. During an earlier election in Uttar Pradesh, I stopped at a teashop in Yadav’s constituency to ask why people voted for a man infamous for his illicit activities and the old man said, “Because the man who is standing against him is also a criminal, so we may as well vote for a stronger and better criminal.”

Indian politics is truly the last refuge of scoundrels. And heirs. When we are not choosing between two criminals, we are these days increasingly offered a choice between two heirs. Nearly every major political leader in the country has started his own baby dynasty, his personal experiment in hereditary democracy. The BJP, which at one point fought a strident battle against the Congress Party’s “dynastic politics” now participates fully in dynasty making, so that in Uttar Pradesh we have the heirs of Rajnath Singh, Kalyan Singh, and Lalji Tandon all fighting to keep the family business intact.

Rumour has it that the BJP’s holier-than-thou national leaders are encouraging this trend because they have themselves discovered the benefits of hereditary democracy.

... contd.