A young historian wants BJP to go at any cost

 I saw a Video shared in our WhatsApp group with an unexpected message! The video seriously echoed Modi's  demand that the country be rid of 'Namdars' . The historian argued that Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi should quit congress and even politics!  

The author was sure that their presence in the political arena actually helped BJP. He said that the trio are incapable taking people along with them and of convincing the opposition to rally around them.  In fact, the three have already offered to quit, but the loyal members in the congress party have replied  'No' to this offer.  

The author feels and is sure that once the Gandhis are out it is easy to rebuild congress and  vanquish BJP. It is clear that the young historian's agenda is to rid India of Modi and the BJP at any cost ! However at the moment the congress party is willing to take the risk. Perhaps they have different priorities!

I always wonder if it is ever possible to change India  which is dominated by political families. It is a huge task. Every state can boast of dominant political families. The list is long.  (Wikipedia has the whole list ) 

The author is convinced that BJP style of Hindutva is not good for India. And once BJP is vanquished India will be alright. I hope he has taken a measure of  the various political families and their impact on the politics of the country.

Even though India is a parliamentary democracy, the country's politics has become dynastic, possibly due to the absence of party organizations, independent civil-society associations which mobilize support for a party, and centralized financing of elections.[1] The dynastic phenomenon is present at the national, state, regional, and district level. The Nehru–Gandhi family has produced three Indian prime ministers, and family members have largely led the Congress party since 1978.[2] The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) also has several senior dynastic leaders. In addition to the major national parties, other national and regional parties such as Shiromani Akali DalShiv SenaSamajwadi PartyRashtriya Janata DalJanata Dal SecularJharkhand Mukti MorchaDravida Munnetra KazhagamJammu & Kashmir National ConferenceAIMIM, and the Nationalist Congress Party are dominated by families.[3][4] Wikipedia

It is mind boggling. Add to this the caste, religion and language barriers. It feels crazy. In addition, I have been always curious to know what happened to the royal families who merged into India.  Where are all the princes, administrators and the military who were part of the principalities  How have they accepted their lot? 

At the time of the British withdrawal, 565 princely states were officially recognised in the Indian subcontinent,[2] apart from thousands of zamindari estates and jagirs. In 1947, princely states covered 40% of the area of pre-independence India and constituted 23% of its population.[3] The most important states had their own British Political Residencies: Hyderabad of the NizamsMysore and Travancore in the South, followed by Jammu and Kashmir, and Sikkim in the Himalayas, and Indore in Central India. 

Hope historians have some information  



Comments

Sethuram Belur said…
We are indeed a crazy country. Wonder we have survived 75 years
Shekar Subramaniam said…
Cannot agree with him since dynasty politics hasnt helped India, Modi has!
N L Sriram said…
Caste politics is to the advantage of politicians, they can milk it to the fullest extent, so why will they put an end to it? Same with the media, every news report about elections has a detailed section on the caste breakdown of the constituency, which will keep fanning the flames.
D. Raghunath said…
This blog portrays the ambivalence regarding dynastic politics. Ab initio it is an expression of a parental desire for progeny to step into their shoes. After all doctors, engineers, cricketers etc want their offspring to follow the profession. On the other hand if there is a sense of entitlement it is dangerous. There are instances of individuals who have been apolitical veering back to their parental preference. However when they chart their unique path it would be unfair to label them 'dynasts' e.g. Naveen PatnaiK.
As regards BJP, the party is expressing the national awareness that 'secularism' espoused in the post-independence period had Hindu bashing at its core. Whether the party stays or goes is up to the electorate, nevertheless, the majority in this country has been aroused.
Having been fairly close to the bureaucracy during my formative years and also having been a part of the establishment I am not convinced that the removal of BJP will automatically lead to a 'Shining' India!

Popular Posts