BJP Ticket For BSY's Son Shows Party Can Be Pragmatic Despite Anti-Dynasty Rhetoric

The nomination of B S Yediyurappa’s son, B Y Vijayendra, from Shikaripura constituency for the Karnataka assembly polls, is a quiet acknowledgement by the party that political lineage sometimes matters.

BSY built the party when it had no base outside northern and western India, and to not allow him the simple privilege of deciding who will inherit his mantle would have been churlish and self-defeating.

It also makes no sense for the party to alienate the strong Lingayat community, whose tallest leader is Yediyurappa.

This choice may seem to go against the Prime Minister’s own frequent critiques of 'parivarwaad', or the tendency of some political parties to become privately-owned enterprises, but it would be foolish for any party to believe that inheritance should be ignored altogether.

Narendra Modi built his political career without a lineage, but it does not mean that lineage does not matter at all. Intelligent parties know when established principle must be bent in order to create success. A hallowed rule is not an end in itself.

We cannot know, at this point, whether Vijayendra will ultimately become as relevant to Karnataka politics as his father, but the early indications are that he does have the necessary spunk to carry it off.

In the 2019 Karnataka byelections, the party asked Vijayendra to take it into uncharted territory, including the Vokkaliga-dominated KR Pete constituency. He delivered.

With BSY at the helm and Vijayendra leading the poll charge, the party won 12 of the 15 seats at stake. Yediurappa being Chief Minister helped, but the ground attack in new areas rested with his son.

At this juncture, it is worth examining the anti-dynasty idea that helps Modi’s own brand image as someone who does not reward his relatives while in office. Political parties, and even businesses, need both inheritors and professionals to grow. Which particular individual should lead at what time is what the debate should be about.

Let us discuss the pros and cons of allowing inheritors to succeed their parents or relatives when the elders enter the stage of vanaprastha. 

The availability of a son, daughter or close relative solves a key succession issue on who should succeed the boss when it is time for the latter to walk off into the sunset.

Despite quarrels among siblings or cousins (Shiv Sena and DMK, for example), the boss’s preference usually carries the day. So succession planning is easier, and if done early enough, it works quite well provided the inheritor is competent.

On the other hand, when succession goes merely by relationship, sooner or later the party or business will be in trouble as an incompetent inheritor dons the mantle.

From Motilal Nehru to Jawaharlal to Indira Gandhi, the succession plans worked for the Congress party, but once Rajiv Gandhi entered the picture, despite initial success in 1984, the party’s overall fortunes started diminishing.

After a brief revival under Sonia Gandhi, the succession business finally found a dud in Rahul Gandhi. If the Congress party now succeeds anywhere, it is because it has somehow managed to find professionals who can win on their own despite Rahul Gandhi.

This happens in business dynasties too. When Dhirubhai Ambani passed away, he did not plan his succession well, and this resulted in his two sons fighting for their share of the inheritance.

Even after the division, one son fared less well than the other. Ultimately, it is only competence that matters, whether your mantle is inherited or earned.

For the BJP, the question of whether to reward political inheritors or entirely new faces is actually a matter of choice. Its Sangh ideology ensures that it can survive the passing of scions; its ability to tweak the rules to reward competent inheritors is thus a bonus where it can tap both into inherited charisma and competence.

Also, unlike family-run regional parties — Shiv Sena, RJD, YSR Congress, Telugu Desam, Bharatiya Rashtra Samiti, DMK, or the JD(S) — the BJP (apart from the Communists), as a cadre-based party, will never be enslaved by any political leader or his family for too long. It does not have to fear that a dynastic dud inheritor will end up owning the whole party apparatus.

It has the best of both worlds: it can use competent inheritors to build the party, and it can use competent politicians from its own large cadre-base to replace him or her when the need arises. This is how it discovered Modi in 2001. 

Among all major parties, the BJP alone has no need to fear being over-run by one man or one family. It can win both ways, unlike family-run parties that have to hope that every inheritor has some competence to lead. The law of averages works against this logic.