If India’s democracy has a weak spot, it is that politics as profession is not viewed as public service but rather as a system of cornering the spoils.

The Great Indian Electoral Circus has begun. And while the chorus will sing paeans to the strength and vibrancy of Indian democracy, it is an appropriate time to add a discordant voice.

Of course, it can be no one’s case that India doesn’t have a vibrant democracy, especially if it is defined in terms of its competitiveness – which other democracy has so many parties in the fray and in contention to be in a rainbow coalition Government? India’s voters have always exercised wisdom, voting out incompetent and venal Governments and returning to power those seen as competent and congenial.

If India’s democracy has a weak spot, it is that politics as profession is not viewed as public service but rather as a system of cornering the spoils. And that is why the vibrancy of competitive politics fails to translate into a system that delivers good governance for the voters.

The most obvious manifestation of this sore is the proliferation of dynasties. The virus has afflicted even the more ‘technocratic’ politicians. So, former Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha steps aside for his son Jayant to contest from his constituency, Hazaribagh. And current Finance Minister P Chidambaram steps aside for his son Karti to contest from Sivaganga. It is perfectly possible that public service runs in certain DNAs, but it is more reasonable to suggest that dynastic politics is the easiest way to preserve the spoils of politics in the family.

Don’t mistake the spoils of political power simply for money. It is much more than that. It is about networks of patronage. It is about the perks of political power. Most intangibly, it’s about being an insider in what is still an insular political setup, and the attendant benefits – economic, social and cultural of being part of this elite. Public service would be a distant thought in the minds of India’s power set.

Presumably, if making money was the only consideration, it would be possible for second and third generations of political families to live comfortably off the money made by an earlier generation without engaging in the rough and tumble of political life. But while money can be preserved, the other spoils of power dissipate the moment you step out of the cauldron. So you need to stay in (even if you are unmotivated by the profession) to preserve the spoils you have got used to.

That is also why you now witness the unseemly rush of politicians to switch parties, in a desperate attempt to ride the winning horse. It is the spoils of power that motivates Congress MPs Jagdambika Pal and Satpal Maharaj to jump ship from the Congress to the BJP on the eve of an election. If they genuinely believed that BJP was the better party through which to serve the public of India, why did they wait until the fag end of their (Congress) tenures in Parliament to switch? Surely, the realization ought to have dawned earlier.

It isn’t about individuals alone. Political parties follow the same logic while selecting candidates. They often call it winnability. Why would the BJP, supposedly riding a pan-India Narendra Modi wave, opt to field the tainted BS Yedyurappa and BS Sriramulu as candidates from Karnataka? Because the prospect of that extra few seats that Yedyurappa and Co may win and enable the BJP to capture power at the Centre make public service through a clean politics an irritant, not a goal. No party, whether BJP, or Congress or any of the regional parties will eschew this politics of expediency, because for them politics is primarily about capturing power and its collateral spoils, and not capturing power and performing public service.

In the end, only voters have the power to change this. They can begin by rejecting candidates from political families or turncoats who have been in several parties. But in India’s parliamentary system, voters have to choose not just their MP, but also a government. And at times, the choices may conflict. It would be safe to say that most voters opt for a government/party more than the candidate. That keeps democracy competitive but doesn't change the spoils-oriented nature of politics as a whole.

That may not change in 2014, but the day of reckoning for all political parties and politicians will arrive sooner than they expect. People are getting tired of the politics of spoils. They want good governance.