Dynasties first
IN a world filled with uncertainty, one thing remains reliable: political dynasties. The Congress has once again graced us with its favourite pastime of fielding family members of prominent politicians, this time for the Punjab byelections. The wives of Amrinder Singh Raja Warring and Sukhjinder Singh Randhawa, fresh from their triumphs in the Lok Sabha polls, have got the opportunity to secure the Assembly seats vacated by them. All is set for another round of ‘Warring vs Badal,’ this time starring Mrs Warring. The real qualification here? Bloodline. These ladies have been “handling the constituency” for years, which totally counts as political experience in dynastic politics.
The Congress party’s message is loud and clear: why bother fielding grassroots workers or fresh faces when you can pass on the baton to the wife? Why take the trouble of grooming new talent? Keeping power within the family tree seems to be the idea of ensuring ‘continuity’. In typical Congress fashion, the ‘one family, one ticket’ rule seems to have been conveniently shelved. While initially touted as a bold step toward internal democracy, it now appears to have been a mere gimmick. Nepotism is alive and kicking.
Sadly, this trend was visible in the recent Haryana Assembly elections, too, where family dominance overshadowed genuine representation. At the village level, the phenomenon of ‘sarpanch-patis’ also reflects this pattern. While the wives hold the nominal title of leadership, real power remains with their husbands. These women are often mere figureheads, with the men pulling the strings, thus undermining women’s political empowerment. It boils down to being a case of democracy in name but patriarchy in practice. The already beleaguered Congress might want to reflect on whether clinging to political dynasties is the way forward.
