Rahulian Gandhism redux

Primogeniture- i.e. automatic, uncontested, inheritance of authority by the eldest male child- is useful because it points clearly and unambiguously at one and only person to whom a display of loyalty would count as demonstrating one's adherence to an objective principle rather than a subjective preference. This is important if loyalty is considered a trait that can command a market price. Out of all the innumerable factions into which the Congress split after 1969, Indira's prevailed because primogeniture was maintained. A 'favor bank' or 'institutional memory' was created under the unambiguous control of the Heir or the Regent. This did not prevent further splits but there was still 'money in the bank' such that future alliances were eased. 

Sonia Gandhi may have lost the astute advise of Ahmed Patel, but she is still in command of the INC's 'favor bank' or 'institutional memory' of who owes what to whom. Loyalists may command a premium for not defecting by reason of a supposed trait of dog like devotion, but, rather, the foresight and scruples to maintain one's credit with the prevailing favor bank. 

Rahul may not be the brightest scion of his dynasty but he is the undisputed heir. However, he does not seem to have been able to advance the careers of his loyalists- unless one thinks Jairam Ramesh is doing well- nor to have a political future such that there is any possibility of his punishing disloyalty. Still, so long as Sonia is alive, there is a reputational benefit in being seen as a loyalist of the dynasty. This is especially true of Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot who is believed to be Sonia's choice for the next Congress President. Gehlot, who is of quite humble origins- his father was an itinerant performer of magic tricks!- rose thanks to his loyal service to the dynasty and his own political skills and image of purity and simplicity. He has professed his loyalty and readiness to obey Sonia at any cost. But is he sincere?

Why would Gehlot give up Rajasthan so as to come second to Modi in 2024? It's not as though he'd actually be the supremo of the INC in the way that a Mayawati or a Mamata will always be the supremo of their respective parties. One reason Gehlot may be taking Sonia's offer is that he knows that anti-incumbency is strong in Rajasthan. Also the 2019 victory was widely credited to Sachin Pilot. Why not let Pilot be CM- but with his hands tied by Gehlot's allies- in the knowledge that he will fuck up and lose his luster? Gehlot's own son might get something juicy while biding his time. 

The problem with this scenario is that how much authority, as Party President, will Gehlot actually have? Surely, Pilot and other CMs won't trust him and will keep running to Sonia, or even the idiot Rahul? This would mean Gehlot would be too busy fending off attacks or putting out bush fires or combatting emerging schisms to build up a grass-roots booth management based campaign.  So, in 2024, he is the fall guy for another big defeat for Congress.

This highlights the other aspect of this deal. Are the Gandhis bowing out so as not to bow out? They keep influence while shirking responsibility for electoral failure. Power without responsibility is a sweet deal. The problem is that Indians instinctively seek countervailing power while themselves shirking responsibility. This is a recipe for governance failure and neglect of booth management. Everybody in authority has the alibi that they don't have real power and thus aren't really responsible. 

Perhaps Gehlot will appear loyal but encourage his supporters to rebel. This would be rather a transparent move. On the other hand, Congress can't afford to lose another State because of a rebellion by legislators. In particular, in Rajasthan, there is the danger that the BJP would support the rebels and let them form a Government. This would increase Gehlot's bargaining power. He might get the deal he really wants- viz. keeping the Chief Minister's chair while being projected as his Party's P.M candidate in 2024. This would violate Rahul's insistence on 'one man, one post'. But perhaps Rahul has already become irrelevant. 

Is Congress's decline inevitable? No. Rahul's pad-yatra- his 'Unite India' walk from the South to the North of India might actually enthuse young people. After all, Murli Manohar Joshi's 'Ekta Yatra' in 1991- like Rahul, he marched from Kanyakumari to a greatly unenthused Kashmir- is still remembered as having helped Modi to rise within his party. 

AAP, in Punjab, has shown that a young guy can go from working in a mobile phone repair shop to becoming an MLA- that too running against a sitting CM. Obviously, Congress can't offer advancement that rapid but Gehlot can pretend that something like it will happen quite soon down the line. A hundred years ago, Congress only gained momentum by fooling young people it wasn't utterly shit. This is also the only way it can revive itself now. Just as all sorts of nutters- Vinobha, JP, Krapalani, etc.- wasted their lives as Gandhians, we might have a cohort of Rahulians perambulating all over the place who will spend the remainder of their lives sporting different degrees of stubble while mumbling about 'vichardhara' and the need for peas and lurve. 

Post Script- One day after I published this, over 80 Congress MLAs have resigned out of a total of 107. While Rahul walks, his party, it appears, has given the BJP a walkover in Rajasthan.