‘The’ difference

 

 

THE difference between the organisational culture of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and most other parties, prominently including Congress, came to fore through a few recent developments. Those developments demonstrate clearly how the BJP has developed consciously and conscientiously a fine culture while many other parties indulged in obnoxious internal nepotism and dynastic succession no matter the merit or an absence of merit of the person or persons.

 

The continued success of the BJP can be owed to the fine internal culture it has evolved since its inception in 1980. No matter the setbacks the BJP suffered, its overall conduct is that of a party that has made winning a habit -- of course through non-stop hard work to build the organisation, election or no election. When Mr. Nitin Nabin arrived at the BJP’s Head Quarter in New Delhi to take the charge of the high position of party’s national Working President, most senior leaders -- including Union Home Minister Mr. Amit Shah and party President Mr. Jagat Prasad Nadda and countless other senior-most leaders were waiting for his arrival. Mr. Nitin Nabin was welcomed with flowers at the gate, and was led to his office by none other than Mr. Amit Shah and Mr. Nadda among others. He was most honourably seated in his office and welcomed again with flowers etc in a traditional manner.

 

That Mr. Nitin Nabin was a young man, was never the issue. What mattered most to everybody was his elevation to the coveted post. So, he was given the fullest possible institutional reception on his first day in office. The internal scenario in most other parties is altogether different. In Congress party, for example, no such common worker can aspire to be anything in the party -- unless he acts almost as a courtier of the Sonia-Rahul-Priyanka Darbar. Those who try to voice independent voices or honest opinions on how the party’s effectiveness could be improved through international conversation, are thrown out of the Congress party. In many other parties, dynasticism is the rule. Sons and daughters take over from their elders and run the show with nothing in the name of internal openness and democracy. Such parties with dynastic culture dominate the non-BJP political scenario of the country. Decisions are not made on the basis of ideology or ideals but on the basis of convenience of the top person and his cronies. In sharp contrast, the BJP shines with the difference in the organisational culture.

 

Though many critics state that the BJP lacks an internal democracy, that accusation does not withstand a wise scrutiny. The BJP is seen following an internal democracy -- in addition to a disciplined organisational culture in which everybody and anybody is smaller than the party. So, a young Mr. Nitin Nabin takes charge as Working President, Mr. Amit Shah waits for his arrival at the BJP Head Quarter. That is the party protocol. Even when Mr. Jagat Prasad Nadda overstayed at office, the party did not squirm or crib since its discipline does not allow any such liberties. But this strictness of discipline does suggest any autocracy within. On the contrary, it indicates the cadre’s faith in the leadership’s wisdom to make right decisions on all issues. In sharp contrast, what prevails in many other parties in the name of discipline is an autocratic control of the dynastic management. While the BJP displays certain fluidness of internal thought-process which allows the organisation to renew itself periodically, in most other parties, that dynamic flow of thought is sorely missing. The difference gets all the more highlighted when the BJP insists that its politics is for the betterment of the people and the country and the leaders are only incidental. In most other parties, leaders are the sole arbiters of party’s fortunes -- but not of misfortunes, as is clear from whatever has been happening in the Congress party. That is ‘the’ difference.