Women Inheritors

This week’s Economist has an interesting article on women. It talks of the growing trend of women in power who have inherited politics from their fathers, husbands or other relatives. The latest of them being Yingluck Shinawatra of Thailand, who is the youngest sister of the exiled ex-President Thaksin Shinawatra.

In spite of feeling strongly for gender equality and women empowerment, I could not bring myself to appreciate this growing trend of dynastic political rule across the globe. There seems to be some sense in the logic that the leaders of today choose the most able among his family, whichever may be their gender, as in the case of Thanksin who chose his youngest sister over the other 6 siblings to succeed him. However, the matter remains that limiting politics to one dynasty amounts to stifling growth of both democracy and politics itself. How is it ever possible that all political prowess and fervour be endowed in the same family? Man or woman, dynastic rule is a trammel in the path of exceptional potent growth of the democracy that most politicians make us dream about.

My point is a person who has interest in politics and is ready to serve, and most importantly has garnered public support on his own accord should only have the right to succeed. Even in India, the dynastic rule has stifled out the ingress of fresh blood and new thoughts in politics. While people of inherited legacy may get elected easily riding on popularity of their relative, the real contribution of such men or women is precious little. There is little improvement and little scope of change. In fact very often they are put in place only to glorify and further continue the existing policies, sometimes because the predecessor has become unpopular on account of such policies or has been rendered ineligible to continue. This is most lucidly put in the article in the following words.

“Perhaps the most powerful trend now boosting the influence of political daughters is the family need to tame—for electoral purposes—the authoritarian character of fathers. Daughters seem to embody their male relatives’ agenda—but with the rough edges planed away. A remarkable number of today’s presidential contenders are daughters of strongmen: Ms Park in South Korea, Ms Le Pen in France, Peru’s Ms Fujimori, Zury Ríos Montt in Guatemala, Dariga Nazarbayeva in Kazakhstan. Ms Yingluck is a variation on the theme: on the campaign, she toned down her brother’s populism and made a virtue of being untainted by his corruption. Alessandra Mussolini turns out to have been a trailblazer: the kinder, gentler face of fascism.”

To conclude, the best way to prevent dynastic rule would be to enact a law preventing close relatives of a former head of state from contesting for the top position, as is the case in Guatemala. Though it is only wishful thinking living in India, but there are examples galore of inefficient successor in dynastic rule. Monarchies undergo such crisis as is widely known (The King’s Speech), which is why we chose a democratic system. But dynastic politics defeats that very purpose.