Though India proclaims itself as one of the largest democratic country in the world, and the election results turn out to be surprises for the psephologists, I feel India can never come out of its fancy for dynastic politics and rule. Look at the way the Uttar Pradesh population have brought Akilesh Yadav and in down south the tough fight going between the sons of the DMK supremo. In Andhra Pradesh, it is Jagan Mohan creating a lot of noise for his ascendency with the help of the party functionaries who have been loyal to his father. In Kerala, in Karnataka, in Jammu Kashmir and above all in Delhi almost all the sons and daughters are in the vital positions of the party or control.
In South and especially in Tamil Nadu it is very explicit; PMK chief who claims itself to be a representative of the downtrodden always on the look out for putting his son in the vital position. The newly emerged DMDK and actor Vijayakant calling himself as the savior of the poor Tamils only kept his wife, brother in law in the controlling posts of the party. The less said the better about the DMK and its leaders.
Rather than ruling ourselves we love to be ruled because we strongly believe that ‘family concept’ is unique in Indian culture and we love our family and children unlike foreigners. We want them to be in the most ‘lucrative’ positions and we respect people who ‘love’ their family and go to any extent to safeguard the interest of their family members.
Therefore, instead of the King announcing his son will be the next ruler, we, the people vote for the son and make him the ruler. That is the speciality of Indian dynastic democracy. We also believe in theatrics. So let us rephrase slightly the famous oration of Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address to suit Indian democracy: ‘that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of dynastic democracy -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth’.
