When Organizations Grow: The Inevitable Struggle for Power

Recent news highlights how estranged political cousins in Maharashtra have reunited over the imposition of Hindi in state schools, aiming to protect the Marathi language from being sidelined. This raises a crucial question: if the core cause for both the Shiv Sena (united until 2022) and the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS), formed in 2006, was the welfare of Maharashtrian people, why did they need to split? My objective isn't to analyze political party divisions, but rather to explore how the growth of any organization, body, or association often leads to differences of opinion and power struggles.

The Genesis and Early Challenges

Every organization is formed with a specific goal, whether it's advocating for a societal segment, a region, a sport, a recreational activity, social welfare, or even acting as a trust. These bodies go through various phases before becoming established. Each phase presents its own challenges, from establishing rules and navigating regulatory frameworks to, most importantly, managing the diverse views of the humans at their core. The sustenance of any organization is therefore a delicate balance.

When an idea is first conceived, a handful of people are typically involved, with energy and enthusiasm at their peak. These individuals take on the responsibility of identifying and convincing others to actively participate. Regardless of an organization's size, it's unrealistic to expect everyone to be involved in its day-to-day functioning. Ideally, a few selected and capable individuals should lead. As the saying goes, "Too many cooks spoil the broth," and having more leaders than necessary can hinder progress. It's the responsibility of these core leaders to not only recruit interested members but also to engage them in various initiatives. While it's impractical for all members to participate in every initiative, a majority should ideally be involved.

Growth, Popularity, and Shifting Dynamics

Once the challenging establishment phase is over, the next hurdle is maintaining momentum. If an organization successfully gets its operations running, it naturally grows. Growth often brings popularity, which in turn leads to fame. This is the phase where individuals who weren't part of the core team, now seeing a ready platform, might want to get involved. This can also lead founding members to believe they are indispensable. The very growth that brought popularity can make existing leaders reluctant to cede power, and skeptical about whether new individuals, even if capable, can effectively run the show.

Deviations, Internal Strife, and Sustained Existence

Growth can sometimes lead to a deviation from the organization's original objective, or even to leaders exploiting their positions for personal gain. This often triggers internal struggles to replace these leaders, resulting in different groups emerging with differing ideologies. As mentioned, with humans at the core of any organization, these issues are bound to arise. An organization's ability to endure these internal differences depends heavily on the strength and integrity of its foundational rules, which serve as its pillars.

Consider the Indian National Congress, formed to achieve freedom from the British Empire. Its growing popularity brought many Indians into the movement. However, this immense growth also led to internal power struggles, eventually contributing to the birth of the Muslim League and, tragically, the partition of India. While the "divide and rule" strategy of the British certainly played a role, the Congress's growth could not entirely hold its leaders together. Nevertheless, the ultimate objective of freedom was achieved, and the Indian National Congress comfortably won the first three democratic elections. What led to its later decline in popularity was, in part, individuals leveraging their positions for personal gain, leading to corruption among politicians. This ultimately resulted in further fragmentation of the party that spearheaded India's freedom.

A similar pattern is observed with the birth of regional parties, often formed with the objective of creating separate states or better serving local populations within existing states. Once these parties gain power due to their popularity, leaders can become disconnected from the ground reality, with workers being exploited while leaders enjoy a comfortable life, whether in or out of power.

Beyond Politics: Other Organizations

These examples aren't limited to political parties; similar dynamics play out in smaller associations. Take the Malayalee Associations formed by migrants from Kerala to Mumbai. Initially, their purpose was to keep people connected and provide mutual support. Now, many successful Malayalee Associations have become cash-rich, generating revenue through educational institutions and sponsored events. These organizations have grown to such an extent that people actively vie for administrative positions. While not all motivations are for personal gain, these positions undoubtedly offer access to influential personalities and institutions. As a Keralite, I've witnessed this firsthand, and it's likely true for other migrant associations as well.

I also know of an orphanage in the Palghat district of Kerala to which my family used to contribute. We visited it and spent time there. This orphanage has now received so much in donations that it requires professional staff to manage its affairs, leading to a portion of the funds being used for administrative expenses. While it's true that any growing organization eventually needs professional staff, this orphanage became so popular that a few years ago, its administration was taken over by individuals affiliated with a political party, transforming it into a bastion for that party. The orphanage still operates, but its neutrality and, arguably, its sanctity have been lost. One can only hope its original objective isn't entirely compromised.

The Enduring Nature of Organizations Despite Imperfections

As long as human beings are part of such bodies, greed will inevitably lead to power struggles, and the original goals and objectives of these bodies may become diluted. However, the existence of these organizations often continues, even if a few individuals benefit personally. We cannot have social bodies without human participation. While some individuals may take undue advantage of their positions, these bodies persist because people still derive some, if not full, benefit from them. As the saying goes, "It's better to have something than nothing." Ultimately, it's up to the members of these bodies, associations, political party workers, or citizens of a nation to hold their leaders accountable and ensure that the stated objectives are being met, rather than blindly accepting what their leaders say.