The psychological dynamics of dependency on political families, coupled with the dangers of corruption and authoritarianism, present significant challenges to the establishment of genuine democratic governance.
by Luxman Aravind
Dynastic politics in Asia extend beyond mere familial legacies; they constitute a profound issue that shapes the socio-political realities of numerous nations. Prominent families such as the Bandaranaikes, the Rajapaksas, the Senanayakes, the Gunawardenas, the Jayawardenes, all in Sri Lanka, the Marcoses in the Philippines, the Nehrus and Gandhis in India, the Kims in North Korea, and the Hasinas and Zias in Bangladesh have significantly influenced their countries’ political trajectories. While these families have maintained their hold on power through various means, they have also experienced significant declines, often precipitated by economic mismanagement, public discontent, and civil unrest. This decline does not negate the potential for resurgence; rather, it highlights the cyclical nature of dynastic politics that can easily re-emerge if societies do not actively work to prevent it.
The philosophical discourse surrounding governance provides valuable insights into this phenomenon. Plato, in The Republic, argued that the ideal state should be governed by philosopher-kings, individuals best equipped to lead due to their wisdom and virtue. This perspective raises important questions about the consequences of dynastic rule, which often prioritises family lineage over merit. As Plato stated, “The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.” This highlights the danger of complacency in the face of corruption, particularly in societies that accept dynastic authority as a norm.
The psychological dynamics underpinning the acceptance of dynastic rule are complex and deeply rooted. Citizens frequently develop a cognitive bias that equates well-known family names with stability and national identity. In India, the Nehru-Gandhi family’s historical significance and its connection to independence leader Jawaharlal Nehru have enabled them to present themselves as embodiments of continuity amid political turmoil. Similarly, in Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina and her Awami League party leverage the legacy of her father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, portraying themselves as custodians of his vision for the country. As Aristotle pointed out in Politics, when governance becomes synonymous with family loyalty, it often results in tyranny: “What is a tyrant? He is one who, disregarding the common good, acts solely in the interests of his own family.” This psychological dependency creates an environment in which voters are often hesitant to question the capabilities or integrity of these dynasties, leading to unchallenged authority.
The hold of dynastic families can result in significant corruption and abuse of power. For instance, the Marcos regime in the Philippines was notorious for its corrupt practices and human rights violations, serving as a critical example of how dynastic politics can devolve into authoritarianism. Despite the Marcos family’s notorious past, Bongbong Marcos’s rise to the presidency in 2022 exemplifies the challenges societies face in dismantling the influence of entrenched political families. The use of historical revisionism to craft a narrative of a “golden era” during the Marcos regime is a strategic move that exploits collective memory and nostalgia, complicating efforts to hold dynasties accountable.
Sheikh Hasina’s tenure in Bangladesh is similarly illustrative. While she has managed to consolidate power, her administration has been marred by allegations of authoritarianism and violence against political opponents. Notably, she was compelled to resign in this year amid one of the bloodiest political crises in the country’s history. The violent clashes between opposition parties and law enforcement were a stark reminder of the potential for upheaval when governance becomes synonymous with repression and familial loyalty. Confucius taught that “The man who moves a mountain begins by carrying away small stones,” reminding us that meaningful change requires persistent effort. Despite Hasina’s loss of power, the legacy of violence and political turmoil remains a significant factor influencing public perception. As economic challenges persist, the potential for renewed civil unrest looms, with extremism on the rise. External parties, such as the U.S., have greater manipulations than ever before, suggesting that the political environment remains volatile and deeply divided.
The risks associated with the resurgence of dynastic politics are significant. Political families possess not only substantial resources but also the capacity to manipulate public sentiment, further entrenching their influence. Nietzsche remarked, “He who has a why to live can bear almost any how,” emphasising the necessity of purpose and agency in overcoming oppression. The psychological conditioning of the populace can lead to a form of learned helplessness, where citizens perceive political change as unattainable. This mindset is often reinforced by controlled media narratives that glorify dynastic leaders while vilifying their opponents, thus stifling dissent and normalising the notion that governance is a familial enterprise rather than a civic duty.
To prevent the re-emergence of dynastic rule, societies must actively dismantle the frameworks that support such power structures. A crucial initial step is to eliminate the perception of public governance as a profitable business. Robust reforms should be implemented to ensure transparency and accountability in political financing. Establishing stringent regulations around campaign financing and lobbying can significantly diminish the influence of wealth in politics, fostering an environment where political power is not viewed as a commodity. As Machiavelli cautioned in The Prince, appearances can be deceptive, and leaders must maintain the facade of virtue while being prepared to act immorally if necessary.
Encouraging grassroots movements and civic engagement is equally vital. Citizens should be motivated to participate actively in the political process—not merely as voters but as informed advocates for change. Initiatives focusing on civic education can empower individuals to understand their rights and responsibilities, fostering a more politically engaged populace. In India, for instance, various non-governmental organisations work to educate citizens about the importance of accountability in governance, highlighting the impact of corruption and the necessity for demanding more from political leaders.
Moreover, a culture of non-violent resistance is essential for challenging entrenched power. Historical precedents, such as the people power movements that challenged dictatorships in the Philippines, serve as powerful reminders of the efficacy of collective action. Non-violent movements can galvanise public support without resorting to chaos, enabling citizens to confront dynastic rule effectively and advocate for more equitable governance. The teachings of Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita resonate here, as he emphasises the moral obligation to fight against injustice. As he asserts, “When righteousness declines and unrighteousness rises, I manifest myself,” suggesting that change can occur when citizens act to restore justice.
Strengthening the independence of the judiciary and law enforcement is another crucial strategy for preventing the resurgence of dynastic politics. An impartial judicial system is essential for holding political elites accountable, ensuring that laws apply equally to all citizens, including those from powerful families. Countries with strong institutions, such as Singapore, provide compelling examples of how integrity in governance can contribute to political stability.
It is crucial to recognise that eradicating corruption is not only vital for dismantling the foundations of dynastic politics, but that psychological dependency and feelings of insecurity towards ‘newly-formed’ or immature political entities often leave the public vulnerable to deceptive, short-sighted propaganda. These factors are instrumental in sustaining and even revitalising dynastic politics in a new guise. When governance is viewed merely as a vehicle for personal gain, the integrity of the political system is profoundly undermined.
Post a Comment