Does democracy really exist in India or are we still bound to be ruled by the dynasts in their metaphoric new incarnation? This question is pertinent, whenever our nation goes to choose its new ruler through general elections.Who had been the real ruler of India, after independence?The voice of the common man is represented or manifested by whom? The dynasties, the monarchs, the aristocrats, the kings, the barons in
fact substantially ruled this nation through contesting in the general elections.
The dynasts have camouflaged themselves in different garb, eventually making the equation inclining their way.The Maharaja, the king, or the concept of Malik is still imbued in the mental framework of common Indians. The mental slavery is still stuck rut in Indian blood and the dynastic rulers have made use of this mental slavery in maintaining their control over political dispensation.
Who had been the real ruler in India after independence is quite interesting to know. At the time of independence, there were around 540 dynasties.They were in fact, the proverbial monarchs controlling and directing this nation in an amicable understanding with the English – ruler. The most interesting and the most observing trait is that these dynasts do not have a particular political allegiance to prove their candor, instead the members of these clans do have different political allegiances just to ascertain their position in
perpetuity in the power sharing game. They still rule India in a camouflaged political metaphor.
The real character of these modern barons lies in the fact that they just want to be king, flying on the wings of their royal precedence.They are still relevant in Indian politics, albeit in a different garb.They look after their mutual vested political interest. This especial clique shares the political dividend just protecting and looking after the mutual political benefit whereby their diversified political allegiance provide them with a
certain status in which they are always successful in maintaining a privileged position in Indian political system.
While one family member joins Congress, the other joins BIP and yet another member joins some other political party, thus, creating a political equation in which their political interest has always remained intact and unharmed.But, the basic prickly question is that such modern monarchs do believe in their birthright to rule.An archetypal example is that of Rahul Gandhi who without any qualification is dreaming of becoming the prime minister of India.No doubt, India is a Democratic Republic, where old kings and barons are outlawed, but the inherent forte propels these modern kings to remain in the same status in perpetuity.
The Scindhias, the Patiyalas, the Gaekwads, the Gwalior dynasty and even many more are influential in the power sharing game albeit constitutionally and democratically.But,in their false hallucination they forget that India is not a monarchy or a hereditary democracy, where they will be doled out the throne.Just after independence, the seed of dynastic democracy has begun to flourish in the mindset of some of the dynasty. Besides these. there are many regional dynasties in India, which wields clout in Indian politics. Mulayam Singh Yadav’s family in UP, Naveen Patnayak’s family in Orissa, M. Karunanidhi ‘s family in Tamilnadu, Lalu Prasad Yadav’s family in Bihar and of course Nehru-Gandhi family is considered as a hybrid class of political dynasties where. they behave as the old feudal lord of medieval European society.
An estimate suggests that about 35% of the total MP’s, comes from dynastic family. But, the ring of sycophants and stooges are very common,not only in India but, also in neighboring countries. These
countries are also afflicted with this malaise.The painful aspect of the story is that, these dynasts do enjoy
the benefit of mental slavery of the common man and thus harm the true democracy and somehow also pushes the plutocracy.The gist is that these political monarchs,just want to be ensconced in Indian political system by hook or crook.Apt and deserving must be selected irrespective of their genesis and vice versa the
undeserving and daffy must be discarded and dejected.
There are many Asiatic countries which have powerful and influential Dynasts.This is in fact, very common and widespread phenomenon.Lee family in Singapore, Aung San Suu Kyi, the daughter of the hero of the Burma independence and the leader of the opposition in Burma, Hasina Wajed and Khaleda Zia, one is the
daughter of Sheikh Mujib, the leader of the independence movement and the latter is the widow of the assassinated military ruler Ziaur Rahman, Bhutto family in Pakistan are some of the examples of dynasty family in Asiatic countries.
But, the most surprising and puzzling is the presence of such hybrid class of politician in the leading communist country ‘Republic Of China’.The daughters, the sons and even the nephews of communist leaders are enjoying the privileged status and they are called as the “Red Princes”.It is also mentionable the Roosevelt, the Kennedy and the Bush family in the US, Queen Elizabeth in UK and the Abe family in Japan.All these families have given many successful and popular political leaders in succession.In India, mainly the dynasts of Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Mysore participated in politics and earned success.The list is long and exhaustive.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.