piyush kaviraj

feelings and musings…

Tag Archives: Bihar Elections


by Leave a comment

Why Regional Political Parties Ultimately Get Reduced to Family Dynasties


Introduction

Indian politics frequently witnesses strong rhetoric against dynastic leadership, especially during elections. In states like Bihar, the NDA repeatedly accused the RJD and the Congress of being dominated by political families—largely because the Gandhi family and the Lalu Prasad Yadav family present highly visible symbols of dynastic politics.

However, the post-election reality tells a more complex story. Several leaders who were sworn in as ministers—including a deputy chief minister—belong to established political families themselves, being sons, daughters, or siblings of senior politicians. This contradiction highlights a deeper truth: dynastic politics is not limited to one party or ideology; it is structurally embedded in the way regional politics in India operates.

Understanding why dynasties emerge across party lines requires looking beyond election narratives to the underlying social, institutional, and political forces that shape regional parties.

1. Parties Built Around Charismatic Founders

Most regional parties originate from the personality and popularity of a single dominant leader—Lalu Prasad Yadav (RJD), Mulayam Singh Yadav (SP), Karunanidhi (DMK), Devi Lal (INLD), Ram Vilas Paswan (LJP).
When the party depends excessively on the founder’s charisma rather than strong cadres or institutions, leadership naturally flows to family members after the founder’s exit.

2. Weak Internal Democracy and Organizational Structures

Regional parties often lack mechanisms such as:

  • elections
  • transparent decision-making
  • merit-based leadership pathways

Therefore, leadership transition is personal rather than institutional. Kinship becomes the most convenient, predictable, and “safe” method of succession.

3. Trust, Loyalty, and Control Over Sensitive Networks

Political operations in states like Bihar, UP, and Haryana depend heavily on:

  • informal patronage networks
  • caste/community intermediaries
  • fundraising circuits
  • local power brokers

Founders trust family members to handle sensitive matters far more than party colleagues. This creates an inner circle of relatives who eventually become the visible face of the party.

In regional parties, political survival depends on managing sensitive networks—local strongmen, caste intermediaries, fundraising channels, alliance negotiations, and bureaucratic leverage. Leaders fear internal sabotage or power grabs, making loyalty more important than competence.

Past examples show it is better to rely on a family member

This is why many founders turn to family members, who are perceived as more trustworthy and less likely to challenge authority. A classic example is Lalu Prasad Yadav choosing Rabri Devi as Chief Minister. For him, family guaranteed loyalty, enabling him to retain real political control from behind the scenes during his legal troubles.

In contrast, Nitish Kumar’s experiment with Jitan Ram Manjhi shows the risks of choosing a non-family successor. Nitish appointed Manjhi to broaden his social coalition, but Manjhi soon asserted independence, challenged Nitish’s leadership, and attempted to build his own power center. Nitish eventually had to remove him within a year and retake the Chief Minister’s post.

This contrast demonstrates why many regional leaders prefer dynastic succession—it minimizes political uncertainty and prevents the rise of rival centers of power within the party.

4. Caste and Community-Based Mobilization

Caste remains central in the functioning of regional political parties:

  • Bihar: RJD’s Yadav base and LJP’s Paswan base see family leadership as continuity.
  • UP: SP’s reliance on the Yadav vote makes dynastic succession appear natural.
  • Haryana: Clan- and khap-driven politics sustain multi-generation family dominance.
  • Tamil Nadu: While caste is important, Dravidian ideological lineage gives dynastic succession cultural legitimacy.

Thus, dynasties are not accidental—they align with voter expectations and community identity.

5. Voter Expectations and Cultural Acceptance

Voters often perceive political families as:

  • reliable
  • experienced
  • consistent
  • familiar

In Tamil Nadu, the cultural tradition of hero leadership legitimizes family-based succession (e.g., Karunanidhi → Stalin). In Bihar and UP, family names carry symbolic meaning tied to social justice, Mandal politics, or historical struggles.

6. Financial and Organizational Advantages

Running a party requires networks of donors, workers, and logistical channels.
Family successors inherit:

  • donor lists
  • local strongmen
  • booth-level networks
  • organizational memory

This makes them electoral “safe bets,” reducing the costs and unpredictability of promoting an outsider.

7. Institutional and Legal Loopholes

India’s legal framework governs electoral processes but does not regulate internal party democracy.
As a result:

  • nepotism is not restricted
  • leadership decisions are unilateral
  • party ownership remains concentrated

The absence of institutional safeguards makes dynasties almost inevitable.

8. State-Specific Patterns That Reinforce Dynasties

Bihar

Dynasties hold power due to weak institutions and strong caste identities. However, they are fragile—splits like LJP show instability. The fate of JDU (Nitish’s party) seems uncertain after Nitish Kumar resigns from active politics.

Uttar Pradesh

SP’s family dominance is stable but factionalized. BSP is ruled by one leader but lacks a dynasty only because no successor has been groomed.

Haryana

Haryana’s dynasties are among the most stable, supported by clan-based dominance and rural elite control.

Tamil Nadu

Tamil Nadu’s dynasties, especially DMK’s, are ideologically legitimized and supported by strong organizations—making them enduring and comparatively less contested.

9. Limited Space for Non-Family Leadership

Party workers and emerging leaders often lack:

  • access to media
  • financial resources
  • high-level connections
  • influence in candidate selection

Meanwhile, family members enjoy structural privileges that significantly reduce barriers to entry. This entrenched inequality keeps dynasties intact.

10. Dynastic Politics Becomes the Default Model

Ultimately, family rule becomes common across parties because it offers:

  • continuity
  • predictability
  • resource stability
  • a secure vote base
  • cultural acceptance

Regional parties consistently find it easier to rely on families for leadership transitions.

Conclusion

The post-election irony—where leaders who criticised dynastic politics end up promoting their own family members—reveals that dynasties are not ideological flaws of any one party. They are structural outcomes of how regional politics functions in India.

Until parties build stronger institutions, internal democracy, and transparent leadership pipelines, dynastic consolidation will continue to be the most stable—and therefore the most common—path for regional political parties.


by Leave a comment

A Slow Rise Might Be a Blessing for Jan Suraj (or any new party that sincerely wants to work for Bihar)— and for Bihar


Even if Prashant Kishor’s party gets just a few seats, it could still reshape Bihar’s politics. Sometimes losing an election is the best way to win public trust.

By Piyush Kaviraj

Bihar stands at a political crossroads. The old guard is weary, the youth restless, and public faith in governance brittle. In this climate, Prashant Kishor’s Jan Suraj captured attention with its promise of reform. But a slower political rise — not an overnight victory — might actually serve both the movement and Bihar better.

What if losing becomes winning for Bihar?

Keeping exit polls data aside, if Jan Suraj wins outright, it will be a big success for Prashant Kishor. But if the party comes second or even third, securing just a few seats, too could be a quiet victory .

Sometimes, losing an election allows a movement to build credibility, discipline, and experience — all of which are essential for lasting reform in a politically layered state like Bihar.

Bihar’s long wait for steady governance

For decades, Bihar’s story has been one of unrealized potential. It has a young population, a deep talent pool, and an enduring migration crisis. People want change, but are cautious after years of political churn.

Jan Suraj has tapped into that sentiment, but trust must be earned slowly. Bihar doesn’t need another quick wave — it needs consistent, grounded leadership that grows into the role rather than rushes toward it.

Inexperience and the temptation of power

Even if Jan Suraj’s MLAs are honest and well-intentioned, they will be new to the machinery of governance. Bihar’s bureaucracy is dense, political alliances are fragile, and the system often resists reform.

Fresh legislators can easily be trapped, framed, or swayed. Even before the polling, some of their candidates were seen changing sides, or withdrew from contest. Worse, the sudden thrill of power can test their integrity. A few years in opposition would allow them to learn governance without the burden of ruling, and to understand how policy, budgets, and politics really work.

The cautionary tale of AAP

The Aam Aadmi Party once embodied similar hopes of clean politics and people-first governance. But swift success brought turbulence — internal rifts, corruption allegations, and several leaders behind bars.

Jan Suraj may not face the same fate, but the lesson stands: rapid power without institutional depth can destroy reformist credibility. Building political and administrative maturity slowly could help Jan Suraj avoid that trap.

Opposition as a training ground

Even from the opposition benches, Jan Suraj could play a decisive role. They can act as policy watchdogs, question inefficiencies, and keep governance discussions alive.

At the grassroots, their volunteers can work on local development, engage with communities, and demonstrate small-scale impact. This period can also help them understand what resonates with Biharis, refine their message, and build loyalty beyond slogans.

Where Tejashwi has an edge

Unlike Kishor’s team, Tejashwi Yadav already has administrative experience. His tenure as Deputy Chief Minister gave him some exposure to governance, and his focus on job creation has earned him a measure of credibility among Bihar’s youth.

Jan Suraj, meanwhile, could use this time to gain practical experience on the ground — managing local issues, experimenting with solutions, and proving their seriousness before seeking full control of the state.

The Prashant Kishor paradox

Kishor’s technocratic image is both an asset and a liability. His experience with multiple national parties gives him unmatched strategic insight, but also makes many Biharis skeptical of his loyalty to one cause.

Jan Suraj’s cadre — composed of teachers, students, and local workers — represents something more grassroots and idealistic. Bridging that gap between Kishor’s policy expertise and the cadre’s local sincerity will decide whether Jan Suraj becomes a genuine people’s movement or just a political consultancy with a new logo.

Lessons from Bihar’s own history

Bihar’s political evolution has often followed this arc. From Jayaprakash Narayan’s movement to Nitish Kumar’s early years in opposition, history shows that political maturity is usually forged outside power. Movements that grow slowly tend to survive longer and lead more responsibly.

Hoping for sincerity — and second chances

This is not about endorsing or dismissing any party. Bihar needs leaders who listen before they rule, who put competence above symbolism.

Against cautious wisdom, I want to believe that both Prashant Kishor (or Pushpam Priya or any other sincere youth leader) genuinely wish to work for Bihar’s development. If so, they deserve a chance — for PK, one to prove that a strategist can become a leader, and the other that experience can evolve into meaningful reform.

If Jan Suraj spends the next few years listening, learning, and delivering on the ground, its real victory might not come in 2025 but may be in 2030 or later. And perhaps that kind of victory — slow, earned, and deeply rooted — is the one Bihar waits for all along.