Opinion National Interest PoV 50-Word Edit

ThePrint On Camera Videos In Pictures

Society & Culture Around Town Book Excerpts Vigyapanti The Dating Story

More Judiciary Education YourTurn Work With Us Campus Voice

Opinion National Interest PoV 50-Word Edit

ThePrint On Camera Videos In Pictures

Society & Culture Around Town Book Excerpts Vigyapanti The Dating Story

More Judiciary Education YourTurn Work With Us Campus Voice

Ramachandra Guha is asking the wrong question about Rahul Gandhi

Analysing what enables Modi is difficult. Blaming Rahul Gandhi is the easy part.

For several years, an argument has been making repeated rounds in political circles — especially in Hindu nationalist ones, though even those not particularly sympathetic to Hindu nationalism have sometimes expressed the same view, if less often and less emphatically. The argument is that, for all practical purposes, members of the “Gandhi Dynasty” — Sonia, Rahul and Priyanka — have become unwitting promoters of Narendra Modi’s ascending political fortunes.

This argument is made especially with reference to Rahul Gandhi. Two principal criticisms are levelled against him. The first is that he comes from a dynasty, which no longer enjoys popular support given that Indian politics has become broadly anti-dynastic and has, of late, empowered those rising from modest backgrounds — Narendra Modi being the most prominent example.

The second criticism is that Rahul Gandhi suffers from political ineptitude. It is argued that the Congress party is unable to see these defects, and even if some members do, the party as a whole is unable to jettison him (as well as Sonia and Priyanka) from a position of privilege and leadership. Willy-nilly, Modi is the biggest beneficiary. Modi is undoubtedly a popular hero for many citizens, but there are many others who support him because there is no plausible alternative in national politics. It is suggested that the latter set of voters can be snatched away through a more imaginative and skillful political management.

This political view recently received a huge intellectual boost from a well-known and unwavering Modi critic, Ramachandra Guha. He is one of India’s leading public intellectuals and a highly respected historian. In a column in The Telegraph, Guha called the Gandhi dynasty “Modi’s Enablers.” The historian’s ire is especially directed at Rahul Gandhi, though he concedes that the Congress leader is “a decent human being.”

What are Guha’s criticisms? Rahul Gandhi “lacks discipline, gravitas and a curriculum vitae.” He showed discipline “only during the few months of the Bharat Jodo Yatra.” His capacity for hard work is episodic, not relentless. In contrast, his BJP adversaries work untiringly all the time. The energy Rahul Gandhi spends on X should instead be invested in “renewing his own party at the grassroots.”

How do we assess Guha’s criticisms? In the social sciences, a distinction is often drawn between opinions and arguments. Guha says his is an argument, not an opinion. His column is driven by “empirical evidence,” not by his normative opinions against the Gandhi dynasty or dynasties in general.

So let us examine Guha’s argument. What political outcome is Guha trying to explain? And what are the factors that, according to him, explain that outcome? Rahul Gandhi’s inability to defeat Modi is the outcome Guha seeks to account for, and the explanatory factors are a mix. He is politically........

© ThePrint