FRONT PAGE | Sunday, February 1, 2009 | Email | Print | 
Only a Gandhi can be king
Swapan Dasgupta
Last week, a tabloid newspaper whose political leanings are best described as anti-BJP and pro-sensational, lampooned the saffron party for being complete losers in the so-called youth race. It arbitrarily selected some BJP members of the Rajya Sabha, most in their late-50s, and contrasted their non-youthfulness with Congress celebrities in their 30s, all elected members of the Lok Sabha. The implication was clear: The BJP is a party of fuddy-duddies and only the Congress offers hope to the New India that loves going partying in pubs, networking on Facebook and livening up the social life of Lutyens’ Delhi.
I have no complaints about editors rooting for the Congress’ victory in the general election and doing the groundwork for the fourth member of the Nehru-Gandhi family to become Prime Minister. The right to genuflect at the altar of any god or false prophet is constitutionally-guaranteed and, hopefully, will always remain so. What is interesting though are those (apart from Rahul Gandhi) that have been projected as representatives of the Congress’ Gen-Next: Jyotiraditya Scindia, Sachin Pilot, Jitin Prasada and Milind Deora. Apart from age, a felicity with the English language and People-Like-Us clubability, what binds these youth icons?
The answer is inheritance. Every single one of these personable Page Three figures has been catapulted to the centrestage of politics on the strength of an accident of birth. True, this is not a disqualification. Nor should it be said that in time to come many of these individuals will not distinguish themselves for reasons of ability, rather than pedigree. For the moment, however, they enjoy a head-start because of privilege — a principle that flouts every norm of modernity.
The new mansabdari system that has become the basis for the Congress is what distinguishes it from the other national party. Arun Jaitley, Sushma Swaraj, Narendra Modi and Shivraj Singh Chouhan may be faulted for being born when they were. Tragically, selecting the year of birth is something that an individual has very little control over. Yet, what distinguishes each of them from the Congress’ youth pantheon is that they were not to the manor born. They have got to where they have on the strength of their abilities. They have not inherited political seats and they are not blessed by entitlement.
Incidentally, the BJP too has its share of bright young Lok Sabha MPs. There are people such as Dharmendra Pradhan from Orissa, Ashok Argal a fourth term MP, Shahnawaz Hussain from Bihar and Kiren Rijiju from Arunachal Pradesh. Each of them has climbed the political ladder the hard way. But why are they not held up by the socialite media as the young face of the BJP? Is it because they don’t attend the right parties and don’t flaunt their mobile phones? If so, there is something seriously perverted about the yardstick with which the media assesses the political worth of individuals.
Of course, the BJP system is by no means perfect. There have been absolute dullards, people whose achievements have invariably exceeded their performance, who have got importance because they attended RSS shakhas in their youth. They have benefitted from being a member of a fraternity, much as some people have taken political advantage from being identified with a particular caste or religion. But this seems a minor aberration compared to the Congress way of life.
The Congress’ claim to be a party of modernity is built on spurious foundations. There is a superficial dimension to being contemporary — that which corresponds to the term ‘hip’. This involves following trends in fashion, emulating facets of American culture, being at ease in the beautiful world of cosmopolitan India and becoming gizmo-obsessed. In the past, individuals were measured by a blend of professional abilities, sense of values, civility and cultural demeanour. Today, the media has imposed a new hierarchy based on consumption patterns which gives a natural advantage to privilege and ostentatiousness. Quite unthinkingly, the Congress and its cheerleaders are attempting to make vacuousness the hallmark of Modern India.
What makes this drift to mindlessness doubly galling is that it is prefaced by the astonishing arrogance of birth. The Gandhis may be India’s most formidable pre-sold brand but it does not accord to the family the divine right to treat India and its institutions as a private estate.
The unfortunate Pranab Mukherjee is a case in point. Here is a veteran Congressman of sobriety and worth who sits on every ministerial committee on every conceivable subject, a man who is acknowledged to be capable of handling diverse responsibilities, including finance and external affairs, and a man who has a deep sense of his party’s historical roots. With Manmohan Singh temporarily out of action, it was natural that such a man should have been officiating as Prime Minister. Instead, every ingenuous trick has been played to undermine his importance, to show that he is not a first among equals and that he doesn’t enjoy the full trust of the owners of the Congress. After PV Narasimha Rao, one of India’s great Prime Ministers, the owners have decided that competence always comes second to loyalty and subservience. The Congress youth are relevant because their fathers served the owners loyally and because it is hoped that the same loyalty has become a family trait.
The Congress model of modernity is akin to the Chinese Communist Party’s prescription for its youth. Young China can enrich itself, have a ball in the pubs and discos, even get on Facebook, but it is forbidden from thinking for itself. To this the Congress has added its proscription — don’t have ideas above your station.
The hierarchy of dynastic India is defined and unshakable. The slumdog can be a millionaire but only a Gandhi is King.
Email | Print | Rate:
|