Agents, power brokers, political mafia

The object of INC is the advancement of the people of India, the establishment of a Socialist State based on democracy where there is equality of political, economic and social rights. Congress, among all political parties, has better cadres and supporters who carry this spirit.

In the process of becoming a leader, some tend to lose this objective. The instances of demands for political recognition, rewards are routine and not abnormal. But many of the leaders who fight for positions are economically well off, not depending on politics for livelihood.

It is understandable if they take politics as a full-time profession. But many are doing it as a part-time service or hobby. They are more after the privileges, power and perks associated with the position, posts to satisfy their egos, image. It is a price for their service.

It is perhaps their way of ensuring equality of political and social rights, maybe for themselves and their groups. It has become more like subcontracts or leasing a territory to group leaders. They become a political mafia threatening others not to enter their operational area.

The group leaders were given an opportunity by the party to work with cadres. By their association with cadres, they act as power brokers to get benefits and steal the party loyalty of cadres to themselves. The party cadres become transferable to another party with group leaders.

These leaders may be called agents, power brokers, subcontractors or political mafia. They come in a variety of sizes, strength and area of influence. Few of them start a party with stolen cadres and become regional leaders. They are parties germinated by acts of illegitimacy.

We should understand that the entire political system has shifted to power agents, brokers, bargainers. BJP is professionally, methodically identifying and recruiting such potential weak targets in the opposition ranks. It has enough money and power to accomplish it.

This rise of individuals controlling groups bargaining with the party is due to the failure of internal democracy within. The fact is none of the parties has it. Most of them do not have charismatic leaders. Even then, it is hard to control opportunistic, materialistic leaders.

Recognition and Rewards

Internal democracy is not a one-stop solution for groupism, power bargains and ego clashes. They are holding on to the spirit of democracy, freedom of rights to expressions; to make demands; but try to extract it by arm-twisting the rules, practices, principles, justice and truth.

We cannot escape such ego clashes and differences. All have their way; have likes and dislikes, strengths and weaknesses, ambitions and aspirations. The system has to protect, safeguard the interests of all. A mechanism is required to resolve disputes, to ensure equality, justice.

Congress has a democratic process to discuss, solve internal disputes. But most of the time, it is endless, sometimes it is meaningless as there is a lack of discipline. Their leaders continue their efforts to squeeze and extract the last drop of benefits from the party.

They appoint persons or committees to talk to leaders concerned when ego clashes are proving to be tough. The committees for dispute resolution are to establish the truth from the arguments, points presented before them by the parties. All have to abide by it. But they do not.

The leaders do not honour or not satisfied with the decisions of the committee. It is doubtful whether they will yield to any number of interlocutors, mediators. They will stop at every pitstop to fill their tank if possible till they reach the last stop, the high command.

Why should the high command intervene? They are also supposed to honour the conclusions or decisions of the committee they created or the interlocutors and mediators they deployed to interact to make the leaders see reasons. Why should they reopen decisions taken?

The Congress party has to decide where the bug should stop. It should preferably end with a one-stop dispute resolution mechanism. Why should it reach the hands of top leadership on every issue and that too repeatedly? Their responsibility ends with setting up an impartial body.

The demands for recognition, rewards do not have relevance, justifications or earth-shattering consequences for the party. What kind of deliberation is this? Who are they to represent and negotiate for other party members? Why does the party need agents to talk to its members?

Is there any gold standard to weigh in grams, units to present rewards and recognition proportionately, precisely, perfectly? Negotiation is okay for the exchange of information to understand facts and truth. If stretched beyond a point, it hurts the party, leaders and their honour.