The choice for the post of Congress president has been narrowed down to Mallikarjun Kharge and Shashi Tharoor. Indian intellectuals, both liberal and non-liberal, have largely taken their position in favour of Shashi Tharoor. What are the arguments and methodology they used to conclude that Tharoor will make a better president for the Congress party? Let’s find out by analysing two articles — the first by journalist Sagarika Ghose for NDTV, and the second by author Chetan Bhagat for the Hindi newspaper Dainik Bhaskar.
Sagarika starts her treatise with the premise that the post of the Congress president has become a poisoned chalice and nobody wants to hold it. She goes on to argue that Kharge will not work as “he is aged, hardly exudes charm or energy…will not bring in any incremental votes and will be a dynasty puppet with no new vision to offer other than the same old tired slogans.” On the other hand, Ghose uses superlatives to claim that “Tharoor hi hai right choice (Tharoor is the right choice).”
Similarly, Chetan Bhagat doesn’t find anything good to say about Kharge but is eloquent about Tharoor. “Shashi Tharoor is well educated, an experienced former diplomat and also won three consecutive Lok Sabha elections. He speaks good English but at the same time has the ability to listen and have their feet on the ground in India,” Bhagat writes and adds another qualification about Tharoor: “His Hindi has also improved a lot!”
Both Sagarika Ghose and Chetan Bhagat argue that if Kharge wins, the atmosphere of despair will continue in the Congress as he will be ‘remote controlled’ and that will be a continuity of what they call ‘dynasty politics’. For them, Tharoor can herald the change as he is a ‘self-made leader’ and has the ability to attract the youth and middle-class urban voters and thus his losing the election will be a great loss for the Congress.
Both these commentators are wrong on three counts.
Also read: After 50 yrs, will Congress get a Dalit prez again? ‘Self-made, secularist’ Kharge is frontrunner
Disruption of status quo is wishful thinking
First, the Congress is not a revolutionary party and to suggest that it needs disruption to revitalise itself is a wrong diagnosis of the mess it is in. Despite being on a long downhill journey (and despite party leadership getting attracted to some Marxist jargons), Congress is still a party of India’s ruling elites, a party that loves and protects the status quo. To expect Congress members to install at the helm someone who will disrupt and overhaul the existing party structure is wishful thinking.
Chetan Bhagat’s argument is based on the assumption that if Tharoor is able to garner enough (one-fourth) votes, it will destabilise the party and thus herald a change in the Congress. This claim or assumption is fallacious because even if Tharoor wins the election, the party will not change its DNA. The structure of the party organisation has remained the same over the years and if that changes, then it will not be the Congress we all know.
Their second argument that the Congress needs an elite leader as party president is also wrong. The party still has a power centre concentrated around the Nehru-Gandhi family. This structure is not going to change just because they are holding organisational elections. Arguably, the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty is one of the most elite families in the country. It hardly needs a Shashi Tharoor to garner urban elite votes. The Congress is not losing urban elite support because it doesn’t have elite leaders. With the legacy and history of ruling the Centre and most of the states for decades, the Congress leadership is always more elite than the BJP’s.
Congress lost the support of the elite sections of society because it doesn’t have a power balance and electoral arithmetic in its favour. It probably lost the narrative. The party installing a Dalit or OBC leader as president will not bring Dalit or OBC voters to it. Similarly, having an elite urbane president will not fetch elite support. For that, the party needs to change its policies towards business and industry and get rid of Marxist rhetoric.
Also read: Congress choice for chief is between ‘think tomorrow’ Tharoor and ‘president not leader’ Kharge
Urban elites and their unfair comparison
The third reason both commentators are wrong is that their endorsement of Tharoor’s candidacy — who belongs to the same elite and urban background as themselves — is not because it’s good for the Congress. Rather, both Ghose and Bhagat want the Congress to be in disarray. Chetan Bhagat gleefully wishes that if Tharoor gets loses but manages to get 25 percent of 9,000 votes, then “the position of the new president will become shaky. Small battles may also erupt to gain control of the party.” A commentator can ask Congress members to vote for a candidate so that the old party structure is demolished. But will the Congress leaders vote in such a way and give rise to “small battles” in the party? Is that what the commentators want?
It seems that the urban elite is not comfortable with the idea that the Congress, which is still the second-largest political party in India, can be led by a person from a rural, Dalit, and underprivileged background. In the media discourse, the matrix used for comparing Kharge and Tharoor is not political and administrative experience, political acumen, or even what is good for the party. The criterion is interestingly different as Ghosh writes, “Shashi Tharoor is a genuinely aspirational meritocratic figure and a self-made global success story who can make the Congress a more attractive proposition for a ‘new India’.” This seems elitist and naïve at the same time.
Unlike Sagarika Ghose and Chetan Bhagat, I am not going to advise the Congress and its members what to do and whom to elect. I won’t compare the two candidates either. Let the electoral college of the party decide that. I would rather sit back and see what is happening in India’s oldest mainstream political party and how the elites are reacting to it.
Dilip Mandal is the former managing editor of India Today Hindi Magazine, and has authored books on media and sociology. He tweets @Profdilipmandal. Views are personal.
(Edited by Ratan Priya)