There is a distinct Asian flavour in American politics today.

It’s called political dynasty.

From Japan to India, China to Bangladesh, Singapore to The Philippines, Asian voters have for decades been asked to choose or accept the wives, children and brothers — and in rare cases, daughters — of  political leaders.

Governments have been handed down like family jewels because the pervasiveness of birthright in Asian politics provides access to money and a well-known name.

These political dynasties thrive under the mantle of legitimacy but exert a pervasive influence on local politics.

While these first families reflect a contradiction to democratic values, they thrive because democracy affords tolerance.

For them, hereditary is 9/10ths of the law and their inattentive or slavish electorate is made to believe that.

In Japan for instance, politics is a family business.

Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda is the son of a prime minister. His predecessor was the grandson of a prime minister. So was the man he defeated to win his party’s leadership last fall.

More than 30 per cent of elected members from all parties in Japan are related to predecessors in Parliament.

In South Asia, dynasties in Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, have hindered democracy and economic growth by clinging to power.

In The Philippines, where the Constitution explicitly prohibits political dynasties because they preclude equal access to public service, family ties at the ballot box are a way of life.

Singapore and South Korea both have fathers who have made their sons rulers after a game of political Monopoly.

As the race to become the leader of the free world heats up, Americans are now caught in the quandary posed by family politics.

If Hillary Clinton wins the democratic nomination and becomes president, only people with the name Bush or Clinton would have sat in the Oval Office since 1989.

This begets the question why a country of so many can only find so few to lead.  Is it because of access to money or an appetite for power? Or is it because of political skills honed by husbands, fathers and siblings?  While Hillary Clinton represents the disturbing undercurrent of family politics, her charismatic challenger Barack Obama is getting traction with his simple and timely call for “change.”

The unfettered Obama brings a fresh face to American politics.  A fresh face that will reinforce the belief that any child in America can grow up to be president.

A face that can bring hope to the people of Asia where family politics rule.

Obama represents dynamism.

Clinton represents a dynasty.

Whether the American people will line up behind him in November should he beat Hilary Clinton for the Democrat ticket remains to be seen.

But here is some food for thought.

Chelsea Clinton and the Bush twins will be eligible to run for the White House in 2017.