Dislike for dynasty

It is difficult to say since when the media had these abnormalities as it goes deep back into several decades. It is not required to dig much into past history as we have enough instances to establish a common strain that is not normal. What our concern is, why does it happen?

It is more or less true that the word dynasty creates goosebumps among ‘intellectuals’. We have enough of them in the media. They acquire ‘intellectual calibre’ as they join media to ‘advocate and judge’ what is right and wrong. Maybe they can now recruit judges from media. 

The dynasty question was visible after Nehru or to be exact after Lal Bahadur Shastri’s death. Indira’s rise to the throne was pricking many of them. Merits, qualification, seniority, experience all came into question as Indira was called ‘Goongi gudiya’. 

Perhaps no one raised a ‘dynasty’ question when Jawaharlal Nehru became a congress leader. Nehru earned his position as a top leader on his own rights and merits. But his dynastic lineage can not be denied. He also needed Gandhi’s endorsement, nomination to become Prime Minister.

Indira Gandhi carrying an image of ‘Goongi gudiya’, was initially tentative but turned assertive and became an iron lady to disappoint many of the erstwhile leaders of the grand old party. She overcame the challenges to her leadership, posed by her senior Congress leaders.

The senior Congress leaders split the party, forming their group Congress(O); allied with Jana Sangh, Swatantra Party and SSP to form a grand National Democratic Front alliance. Indira proved her abilities again when she won the general elections in March 1971 against this alliance.

Her handling of the India Pakistan war in 1971 and the incredible win established that further. Why then senior leaders and ‘intellectuals’ do not want to allow them time to prove themselves. Maybe they are afraid of their popularity, brand name, family goodwill and sacrifices.

If dynastic leaders could establish themselves, it is ‘unfair and improper’ as it is ‘misuse’ of family linkage, encashing their brand name; they are jumping the queue denying others fair opportunities; it does hurt their ‘much-overblown’ egos, pride and ambitions.

Most of the times these ‘seniors and intellectuals’ do not express openly their reservations and opinion that these dynastic leaders are inferior in terms of intellect, experience in comparison to themselves, They ignore their shortcomings to assume top leadership.

Even the euphoria of big electoral victory and that of a spectacular win in Indo Pakistan war only a temporary adulation. Indira Gandhi, the ‘Goddess Durga’ of politics in 1971 became an ‘autocrat’ in the eyes of her opponents, intellectuals, and media by 1975.

Anti–Congressism

Most Intellectuals did not side with Indira Gandhi. The media is not different from intellectuals. They reflect the middle class from which most of them come from. They did not like bank nationalisation and none of the populistic welfare measures for the poor and downtrodden.

Perhaps that is why they could see wisdom and vision in Modi and their blind support or silences reflected it. The Modi government is selling ‘family gold, silver, land’ to the private sector. We may have to go in search of our stolen property to Britain or some islands.

When you form an idea and associate with a line of thinking we do not change so easily to reexamine, introspect and correct our position. This has become a basic trait of intellectuals. So the education serves to impose their views and not to search for what is true and right.

The media and the intellectuals which we can consider as inseparable twins for almost all purposes remained anti-Congress and more specifically anti-dynasty. Their positive cooperative attitude towards Congress and Gandhi family could have changed the fate of India immensely.

Unfortunately, that did not happen. They could put up with power-crazy politicians to divide people on caste, religion, region, language and in every possible way. These divisions and hatred have now allowed fascist forces to dismantle and destroy democracy and its foundations.

Honestly one can say, there existed a window of possibility for Indira Gandhi to call intellectuals or media if not her opponents, to persuade and prevail on them to understand the reality. It was not that she was an arrogant bigot or tyrant but a listener amenable to reasons,

But persuasion is often mistaken as a sign of weakness or acceptance of guilt. Being a shrewd politician that Indira was, she was perhaps aware of the mindsets that are driving them and the futility of such an exercise. She may have allowed the truth to establish itself in the normal course.

It was not much different when Rajiv Gandhi took over as Prime Minister after the assassination of Indira Gandhi. The same dynastic question came up; it was feeble and subdued as there was no real viable alternative. He was a softer version; an original reluctant politician.

He earned a nickname of Mr.Clean. But the honeymoon with the media evaporated much more quickly. No one will explain how he suddenly turned a different person. He was a truly gentle and straightforward person who became a victim of wily ambitious politicians around him.

He has not corrupted the system. Maybe the system has corrupted him or short-circuited him before he could embark on his serious journey in politics. Anti-Congressism of opportunistic politicians, media and intellectuals combination reared its head again but to fail miserably.

Anti–Congressism was lesser during Rao’s regime. He had no populist backing. He was not a permanent threat due to his age. Senior leaders waited for their turn. So these are power games more than anti-dynasty. But the media saw power only by being anti-Congress/ anti-dynasty.

Sometimes it looks better to be uneducated to judge people and issues on intuition and one’s own life experiences than to be an educated lot who tend to assume a superhuman human image of themselves; look down on others, their ideas, opinions and develop mental blocks.

Lies and falsehood spread easily by vested interests including media due to negativity that is prevailing among people. 

These are situations where there is a need to drive the truth into the minds of people. It may be by targeted campaigns and communication using all means.