Canada joins the list of countries run by political dynasties

Justin Trudeau is set to become Canada’s next prime minister, after the general election on October 19. His success is a triumph for his Liberal Party. But it also marks a significant change in Canada's political history: the arrival of its first political dynasty.

A political dynasty is a family which appears to have unusual access to political office, where successive generations enter politics and succeed. Sometimes power is transferred across families to spouses or siblings.

Think: Kennedys.

Justin’s father, Pierre Trudeau, was prime minister from 1968 to 1984, with a gap of only 9 months (1979-80).  In fact, Justin grew up in the Canadian equivalent of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue: 24 Sussex Drive. Pierre died in 2000, and Justin first came to national prominence when he delivered a stirring eulogy at the funeral.

On the other side of his family, Justin’s maternal grandfather was also a government minister; and a much older ancestor was a British colonial leader in early Singapore (who married a Malaysian, making Justin Trudeau actually part-Asian, six generations back.)

Political dynasties have been common in US history since the beginning. Cousins Sam and John Adams both rank among the leading Founding Fathers. The Adams family provided both the 2^nd president (John), and the 6^th (John’s son, John Quincy Adams). Benjamin Harrison (23^rd president) was the grandson of William Henry Harrison (9^th). James Madison (4^th) was a second cousin to Zachary Taylor (12^th). Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin Delano Roosevelt were distant cousins. Everyone knows the Kennedys. And now we have a Bush and Clinton competing to get on the ticket for 2016.

It’s the same further down the political food-chain, with many families successively sharing seats in Congress or power at the state and local level. The New York Times calculated that the son of a US Senator is 6000 times more likely to become a Senator than the average male baby-boomer.    

Other countries aren’t much better.

In the Philippines, elections in 2016 will be dominated by dynasties. About two-thirds of the outgoing Congress are heirs of political families. The outgoing president is the son of Corazon Aquino, who led the uprising against the dictator Ferdinand Marcos after Marcos had her husband whacked for being a prominent political opponent. But the Marcos clan is back in the picture, with Ferdinand’s wife, son, daughter and nephew all running for different offices. Also running is the grandson of another president.    

In India, the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty is a huge political player, although it has been on the backfoot in recent years. The Guardian wrote in 2007 that "the Nehru-Gandhi brand has no peer in the world — a member of the family has been in charge of India for 40 of the 60 years since independence. The allure of India's first family blends the right to rule of British monarchy with the tragic glamour of America's Kennedy clan."

The current leaders of Japan, Kenya, Togo, South Korea and Bangladesh are also all related to former leaders of those nations,

Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised by the notion of an inherited right to rule. The principle of monarchy is found in most early cultures, with power usually passing from father to son, but sometimes to female relatives. (Notable exceptions include some matriarchal Native American societies.)  Some actual monarchies persist, and some dictatorships act like monarchies: think North Korea, Syria and many of the former Soviet republics in Central Asia.

But what about in countries where the rule of law and democratic ideals are preached?  So how do these families do so well in democracies?

Political scientists are quick to answer that:

• First, a name becomes a brand, and a brand gets you name recognition.
• Second, coming from an elite family gives you connections: who did you grow up with; who did you go to school with; who did you date; who did you marry; who did you work for — all of these connections can become huge assets down the line.
• Third, and perhaps most importantly: money. Elites are elites because they are usually rich. Super-rich. Money pays for campaigns and can also buy friends and influence. And even if they claw their way up from relatively humble origins like the Clintons, power in turn can create wealth.

Not many political scientists will argue this is healthy for a democracy. Many say platforms and programs are neglected in favor of pursuing personal power.

Perhaps a better historical model is what the ancient Greeks called oligarchy: where power is shared among a few elite families.

By the way, the Trudeaus have a connection to the Kennedys. According to her autobiography, Justin’s mother, Margaret, had an affair with Ted Kennedy, after she became estranged from her husband.