Nepotism, did you say?

In every profession where personal brand matters, parents are busy installing their children

Alok Tiwari

 

The release of Zoya Akhtar’s The Archies movie, featuring a bevy of star kids, has stirred up the nepotism debate in Indian film industry afresh. It was much in currency when actor Sushant Singh Rajput had died. Many then asserted the reason for his suicide was frustration with prevailing nepotism that made it difficult for outsiders like him to succeed. Film industry is hardly the only place where nepotism is an issue. Politics has had it for some time. BJP has for some time used it as a stick to beat Congress with, levelling the charge of ‘vanshwaad’ for relying on Gandhi family for leadership. The opposition has been hitting right back pointing at numerous political dynasties within the BJP. The anointing of Home Minister Amit Shah’s son Jay Shah to key post in BCCI without any apparent qualification or background in the game was Exhibit A in that case.

We instinctively speak out against nepotism, loosely the practice of giving opportunities and work to relatives and friends while denying the same to others who might have same or greater claim. It militates against our sense of fairness. This is more so in case of public offices where we want the best person, and not someone with right lineage, to take the job. But it is precisely in politics that nepotism is most glaringly present. With stakes so high and trust so low, it is hardly surprising that most politicians look for people they can rely on completely. Such persons are more likely to be in family. Many of the smaller political parties are almost entirely family-led units.

Counter intuitively, this goes down well with party workers as well as voters who we imagine should be revolting against it the most. In election after election, we have seen relatives of politicians not only being accepted unquestioningly in their parties but also having much better chance of getting elected. Maybe it has to do with the brand a leader turns himself or herself into and voters feeling a certain level of comfort with a familiar name. This is more pronounced in case of a politician’s death, especially if it has been sudden and untimely. Fielding someone from the family in their place instantly attracts ‘sympathy votes’ and sees the relative sail into legislative chamber.

Intelligentsia and those from middle class, brought up glorifying ‘self-made’ figures, and devoted to notions of meritocracy are deeply resentful of this practice. They are the ones kicking up the most dirt whenever most egregious examples of nepotism surface. Yet, among them nepotism is just as rampant as among politicians and film stars. If it does not attract the same anger as in these two cases it may be because it goes by the different names such as parenting, upbringing, inheritance, and legacy.

Just look around. In every profession where personal brand matters, parents are busy installing their children. How many times have you seen the name of junior prop beside a doctor having a roaring practice? Or had your case palmed off to an upcoming lawyer who happens to be the child of the one you were consulting even though the name and reputation of the senior one took you to the firm? There is suddenly the next generation of chartered accountant dealing with your firm’s accounts and filing your tax returns. We never see howls of protest over how more deserving doctors, lawyers, or chartered accountants might be getting sidelined because of this. On the contrary, the great lawyer or doctor families occupy place of pride in the society.

Kids take over their family business all the time, along with all the goodwill and clientele built by the previous generation. This is seen completely natural. The only places safe from this are salaried professions where giving a job is in someone else’s hands. Even in those it helps to have an established parent who can and often does put in a word easing entry of a newcomer. Other things being equal, pedigree will help in entry and in career progression.

A step lower than that and parental position still offers other less visible privileges. Right from going to a fancy school to a highly rated college, it matters who your parents or wider family are. Those who clear tough entrance exam may pat themselves on the back for the work they have put in, or how clever they are, but the fact their family’s resources provided for the expensive tuitions or atmosphere for proper studies often get obscured. This is never frowned upon. In fact, it is considered part of parental responsibility.

Children of politicians and film stars at least must continuously prove themselves. They have to win elections and deliver hit performances despite the head start they may receive. That needs talent as well as hard work. Those old enough may remember the hopeless attempts of Gulshan Kumar to launch his younger sibling in movies. There are numerous other film stars and cricketers whose next generation failed to click despite the help and celebrity of their parents.

Nepotism may help open the door initially but then these people are on their own in public arena. Not so much the dynasts in other profession for whom parental or family help often remains on tap for much longer, almost guaranteeing their success unless they prove particularly inept. I am not against parents helping their children settle down in the world. It is their duty to do so. The purpose of this discourse is to point out that there is a thin and often blurred dividing blatant nepotism and bestowing family privileges. Both make for an unfair and unequal world. And that our outrage on nepotism may need to be a bit more nuanced, and a bit more evenly spread than it is.

This column appeared in Lokmat Times on Dec 20, 2023