Cong crisis stems from Gehlot's yearning for CM post

­Congress is finding it difficult to resolve its organizational problems. The attempt of the party leadership to install Ashok Gehlot as president of the party has run into serious trouble following a rebellion in Rajasthan Congress over the appointment of the next chief minister in the State. The crisis in Rajasthan can't be dismissed as a local one. It has to do with the ideological stance and organizational structure of the party.

No appraisal of political developments in Rajasthan is possible without taking into consideration the social milieu of the State and the prevailing caste equations. Speaking in social terms, Rajasthan is one of the least developed States in the country with its continued adherence to feudal values and practices. It is not so long ago when Roop Kunwar of Deorala in Sikar district committed Sati and burnt herself to death. The infamous village has a shrine that attracts devotees from across the state.

In caste terms, society is too rigid. The social equations indeed have witnessed post-Mandal changes, resulting in shifting alliances. The Congress has been facing a crisis since it came into power and Gehlot became Chief Minister. Sachin Pilot, who has been staking claim for the post of Chief Minister since the day the Gehlot ministry took oath, is a leader of the Gujjar community. The community has traditionally voted for the BJP. It shifted its allegiance in the last elections following an indication from Congress that it might make Pilot the chief minister. However, of late, the community is said to have lost interest in its leader and has hardly been supporting him in the battle for the post. They did not take to the streets when Pilot tried to stir up a rebellion against Gehlot.

However, the centrifugal tendencies in the party have different roots. Though the majority of the desertions from the party had non-political reasons behind them, such as ED, IT and CBI investigations, some of them indeed aspired for posts and positions. Desertions of Jyotiraditya Scindia and Kapil Sibal are examples. Their inability to get re-nominations to the Rajya Sabha pushed them to leave the party. The desire to grab the post of chief minister has prompted Pilot to rebel, and the desire to stick to the post has prompted Gehlot to create the current crisis.

It should be noted that these rebellions are distinct from the Group of 23 rebellion in that none of the local leaders have challenged Gandhi Parivar's leadership. All they wanted was that the leadership should refrain from imposing a leader from above. It is really complex.

These rebellions exhibit the lack of inner democracy in the party. It is not that only Congress is suffering from this inadequacy. All other parties are facing same problem. In every party, the central leadership appoints a chief minister the way Congress appoints its own. The elections for president and other office bearers are also heavily influenced by the top leader of the relevant political party. Even in the most impersonal and ideologically driven Left parties, the general secretary and other office bearers are chosen by an elite group at the top. They have an excuse to offer that they believe in democratic centralism and the top leadership is mandated to select people. It is also true that they strictly follow the procedure, and no one would dare to manipulate it. However, the democratic centralism that leads to dictatorship needs no elaboration.

This crisis in Congress has given an opportunity to the rival BJP and the latter has immediately grabbed it. But has the party any right to criticize Congress? The BJP cannot choose its president without the concurrence of the RSS. People are aware of the fact that every important appointment in the party and the government requires endorsement from the RSS. Is it not absurd that an organization that claims to be non-political takes decisions on behalf of an important political party in the country, which happens to be the ruling party of the country for a few years now? Does it not reflect adversely on the democracy of the country?

The issue of internal democracy has become all the more important since Rahul Gandhi started his Bharat Jodo Yatra. The revival of democracy is its central theme. How can he think of democratizing the country and society when his own party does not have democracy?

The crisis in Congress has also given us an opportunity to think about various aspects of the problem. The lack of democracy is directly linked to the ills of society. The caste system is the most important of them. It is a reality that no one can win an election without using the card of caste. It violates the sanctity of elections when the people choose their representatives on the basis of castes. When a voter votes on this basis, he or she effectively ceases to be a citizen because his or her allegiance is not to the constitution but to the decadent values of caste. It also applies to voters who vote on the basis of religion.

In this context, scrutiny of recent political trends becomes important. The anti-defection law has become almost redundant. MLAs can desert the party on slight provocation. Money and other considerations play the main role. This has made opposition parties vulnerable to extra-constitutional bullying from the ruling party. Those who have won elections as representatives of their caste or community hardly care for party discipline. They cross the floor whenever they want.

The Congress crisis is not limited to internal democracy; it is linked to the overall deterioration of the democratic system caused by money, caste, and religion.

(The author is a senior journalist. He has experience of working with leading newspapers and electronic media including Deccan Herald, Sunday Guardian, Navbharat Times and Dainik Bhaskar. He writes on politics, society, environment and economy)