Like all those who mobilise on the basis of ethnicity and religion, Bal Thackeray fashioned the Shiv Sena’s formidable clout out of political building blocks that were base and primordial. The language of hate and, when needed, violence were deployed to generate fear and insecurity, pride and solidarity. The founder-leader of the Shiv Sena first invoked Maratha pride against the State’s linguistic minorities and then the divisive agenda of Hindutva against religious minorities. Mumbai’s jobless were not offered land or employment, but they were taught whom to blame for all their miseries: the south Indians, the Gujaratis, and the Muslims. As a strategy of political mobilisation, this worked wonderfully well. The Sena’s brand of collective identity and the use of lumpens in direct action displaced trade unionism as the organising principle in political bargaining. Thackeray’s legion of followers raised him to the status of a demigod who could force an entire State to shut down with the mere threat of violence. Of course, the Sena leader did not gather strength overnight. From his days as a caricaturist, he perfected the art of lampooning political rivals, and drew crowds with his acerbic oratorical skills. Like Hitler, whom he admired, Thackeray knew how to command loyalty and inflame passions. Every failing of his opponents added to his muscle power. Although the Sena took time to grow into a political force, and come to power with the help of the Bharatiya Janata Party, in another sense, it was a rapid political success, inspiring organisational fear in opponent parties, and proving to be of political use to the powerful and the moneyed classes.
But the Shiv Sena’s success came at a great price for not only Mumbai and Maharashtra, but India as well. Mumbai’s communal fault lines were thoroughly exploited by Thackeray and his Sainiks, especially in the weeks after the demolition of the Babri Masjid in December 1992. As the Srikrishna Commission documents, Muslims were systematically killed in riots engineered by Sena leaders. The brazen anti-minorityism of the Sena fed the BJP’s agenda in other parts of India too. Other States in India have seen the rise of regional parties, which too have invoked regional and linguistic pride in their political mobilisation. But none of these parties displays the unreconstructed chauvinism of the Sena. Ironically the one outfit to rival its methods and approach is the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, which broke away from Bal Thackeray in 2006. Even as people in Mumbai and Maharashtra mourn the passing of the patriarch, they ought to reflect on the manner in which his sectarian politics diminished the great city and State and demand of his legatees a change of course.
I see exaggeration, not so much in the criticism of thackeray but in the attempt to show that
his divisive politics is unique and one of it's kind
Indeed his legacy is not any more troubling than what Karunanidhi's might leave behind.
I while there cannot be a second argument that Thackeray policies were divisive, it is
Karunanidhi's brand of regionalism that is more ruthless and devoid of any nationalism
Well done.
Now could you please speak up against those zealots who arrested those young
women owing to their facebook ( if i may add, a reasonable) post ?
Even the political parties having national following, conveniently
whip up regional/ religious / linguistic feelings that has been
witnessed on several occasions viz anti sikh riots in Delhi and at times
of inter-state border and river water disputes. All pots are black and
so are the kettles.
The article presents itself as an expression of the sectarianism, regionalism and the communalism led shiva sena's founder leader Bal Thackery's legacy. While voicing for his land and people, he remained within the spectrum of his gains as a self-contented
leader and the king maker from time to time. He let himself to unleash inhuman atrocities against people of different religion, land and ethnicity. Violence is an ontological force of the prejudiced over against the imperatives of the moral commands of one's conscience and the inner voice of goodness unto the world without limits. The non-violent legacy of the Rashtrapithaji remains as a piercing double edged sword to the so called regionlist politics who engineers ways and means to devastate a land with its pristine purity of 'Sarvajeeva Sukham'and 'Loka samastha sukhino Bhavanthu.' Let the legacy of the Mahatma be kept alive over against the parochialist power-geared political motives of any. jai Hind!
Very clearly told if someone wants to understand....Whatever he did was
for his personal benefit and was on communal lines. In a secular state
like India such people should not be given so much of hype ....and yes
the Mumbai was closed in fear not in respect.
I find exaggeration in this article , not so much in it's criticism of Thackeray but in it's
attempt to show him as very unique in his divisive politics. I think this is incorrect.
His legacy is only as troubling as the legacy that Karunanidhi may leave behind or laloo
Prasad may leave behind.
Infact , Karunanidhi's regionalism is more ruthless and devoid of any tinge of nationalism.
The Editorial reflects the more candid route taken by 'The Hindu' these days. one should acknowledge the fact that all political parties in India are adopting a similar approach in deed, only to garner votes, sustain illiteracy & poverty and to the detriment of democracy. The policies of DMK and AIDMK & allied parties in TN have not only turned out to be myopic but also quietly sealed the entry to people from other states. Similar pattern is applicable to literate states Kerala and Bengal. If India is to attain real freedom, it must strengthen its democracy by initiating EC reforms and rigorous law enforcement. A decade of rule by IAC party can do better to the nation in comparison with the contribution made by all parties put together so far.
As someone who continues to experience the marginalizing and divisive effects of the 'Bumiputra' policy here in Malaysia, the line "The language of hate and, when needed, violence ... deployed to generate fear and insecurity, pride and solidarity" could well describe the genesis of the Malaysian problem in 1969. The only difference here is that the policy was craftily deployed with the active collaboration and connivance of 'Uncle Toms', self-serving Indians and Chinese who blithely ignored the consequences of hate and marginalization so that they could continue to quietly collect their thirty pieces of silver.
Good article. Very precisely written. It amazes me how such a
xenophobic person like him can brainwash even the most
educated people of a society and manage to win their loyalty just by
lashing the whip of a headstrong personality and using hatred as an
unifying tool. No wonder his counterparts -- all the dictators and
oppressors in history -- have been so successful and popular despite of
all their misanthropy and mass-murder!!
Extremely good edit.When Lumpen Politics and the person who led it is being lionised on his demise ,this edit brings some sanity.All those platitudes by many politicians, actors and businessmen seem to be out of fear rather than anything else.This type of violent politics is best gotten rid of this country.
Every one knows that shiv sena was propped up by the congress to crush
the once powerful leftist trade union movement of the early
seventies.The irony is the same marginalized leftist later on aligned
with the congress to fight sena.Little wonder why congress is having
the last laugh especially in Maharashtra.
Shiv Sena started as a party with the sole agenda of taking on soft targets like the South Indians who were well entrenched in most of the lower and middle order jobs in the city that the manoos' felt wrongly deprived of. Little did the manoos reflect upon the fact that the city had them and others from Bengal, Bihar, Punjab and UP much before independence. It did not have the courage to touch the business class lest it affected the economy. Having succeeded in rooting out the Madrasis from the competition list, it took on the minority community that was encroaching into the manoos' domain. In the process it created enough enemies for the manoos' that it was looked upon by them to provide perpetual protection. It did try and take on the Biharis but miscalculated their strength and determination. The Sena cannot provide a vision for the state, let alone for the Nation. It is a Mumbai centric party that survives on a local base doling out cheap and populist promises seldom fulfilled.
Loosely based on the worn-out ideologies of E.V.Ramasamy Naicker, Thackeary understood the using of violence to reach the grassroot level mass and emerged as the inevitable force in Maharastra. It is reallly shameful, except The Hindu, none of the mainstream media took the courageous way of calling spade a spade. I hope forgetting the misdeeds of Sena, the younger generation of Maharastrians once again should not fall in the wrong hands of junior Thackearys. Thackeary was a communal, narrow-minded leader without having any great vision about his state or the country. I personally urge the freedom loving people should stand on one side to strongly oppose this kind of nauseating sectarian politicians in future.
Unfortunate article. As a Marathi manoo I can tell you that my parents were supporters of socialists/communists - Madhu Dandavate, Dange etc.in the early years. However reverse discrimination against Maharashtrians and the inability of the socialists to group together led us to support Mr. Balasaheb Thakre. And yes, I as a Maharashtrian have experience condescending remarks from arrogant outsiders in my hometown... The disparaging remarks include 'ghati', 'kaamwali' etc. No wonder 2+ million folks turned out for his funeral.
The Hindu should look at the root causes of these type of issues. Hindi movies have blatantly resorted to ridiculing non-Hindis. e.g. A South Indian teacher (Padosan) is ridiculed in Padosan.
It is at this juncture Balasaheb becomes important. And yes, I too encountered non-cooperation/stonewalling (as an outsider) from a few Chennaites during my stay there for a year. I have no grudges, but in fact empathize with them and share their concerns.
Troubling legacy of media:
The editorial aptly demonstrates biased approach and single dimension in the life of Bal Thakre. It shows poor understanding of politics in Mumbai. It simply disregards the congress politics during 70's and 80's that led to rise of Sena. Even at this point of time where is Congress and Left parties when middle class being driven out of Mumbai. The blanket approach to smear the Sena with Communalisam and Regionalism is shows the double standards of media that fails to take cognizance of work done in Mumbai during 5 years. Avoid ivory tower approach.
Thackeray has been accused of successfully creating vote-banks in Maharashtra by using a language of hate and violence against linguistic and religious minorities. But, before criticizing the Shiv Sena leader, his opponents should not have ignored the fact that his weapon of ‘sons of the soil’ slogan was employed in all regions and by all political parties in India. At the most, the intensity of the demand could be graded from State to State. Thackeray has been accused of playing hindutva cards to fight religious minorities. Politically, hatred towards linguistic and religious minorities shall not be considered in isolation. The matter involves appeasement of minorities by some political parties and governments and the in-built provisions of special minority rights and reservation in the Constitution. Hatred and special love are sides of the same coin and are used by politicians to create vote-banks. None is free from violence. Chronologically, the hatred followed the appeasement. As pointed out by The Hindu, Shiv Sena strategy might have “worked wonderfully well”.
While criticizing the voilent ways of Shiv Sena it must be remembered the force was a effective counter to the gangs of smugglers and anti-national thugs. To the film industry and certain industrialists Shiv Sena was the unofficial protector from these elements who clearly had backing across the border.
Moreover no political party in India can claim to be voilence free while in other political parties the leaders feigned ignorance, Balasaheb had the courage to own up the activities of his partymen.
Every word written here in the Editorial is correct It may be added in
this context that Congress - NCP coalition govt or the Bjp-Sena govt
which preceded it did not show guts to prosecute the shivsena cadres
or leadrs for their criminal activities organising and participating
in riots as mentioned clearly in the Srikrishna Commission, rather,
they withdrew the existing cases.The Congress is a greater culprit in
the sense that the Party and the Maharastra govt.tried to utilise the
services of Thackeray and his Sena to physically attack, even murder(
Krishna desai, MLA and prominent TU leader was murdered by the Sena
cadre) the TU cadres and leaders to demolish them.The sena captured
TUs in Bombay in this way. Thackeray gained his prominence in this way
and came to a position where he could dictate terms.The ruling State
govt.s bowed before him for fear of violence being resorted to or
Bandhs organised.The latest action by the Cong.-NCP govt is to arrange
state funeral to Bal Thackeray.
The Hindu...objective analysis, as always!!!
Finally a sensible article... his greatness was in the fact that he was
able to mobilise the crowd and not in his policies which divided India
deeply in terms of regionalism and religion.
A well balanced editorial. The Maharashtrians should realize the damage
done to their reputation for siding with divisive politics.Same path is
being tread by Chandrasekhar Rao of TRS in Andhra Pradesh.
Good Editorial. How I wish that The Hindu speaks similarly eloquently about making of dynasty politics impacting the ethical and moral structure of India under the Banner of a party founded by Greats like Pandit Nehru etc, how dynasty is cloaked and presented as if the party functions on democratic lines, how a President ( Ms. Patil) , a P.M. (MMS) are selected , how a CAG is derided , how a Minister threatens of blood to an activist, how neo-and pseduo secularism is practiced ,how institutions are destroyed , how people and govt are looted etc and above all opposition is blamed for all ills and comparisons are drawn always with oppostion parties as if Oppostion ruled the country for 50 plus years and Congress ruled the country for leass than 10 years. .
None coud disagree with your analysis of Balasaheb Thakeray's rather aggresive posture against lingustic and religious minorities. But fact remains that such distortions occur because of the unhealthy policies of certain political parties, especially congress, to woo and pecify the minorities only for their votes (at the cost of majority) and not their welfare and step motherly treatment of the majority. I wonder whether such reactionary forces would have grown in case wiser councels had prevailed and these parties had been fair to both the minorities and the majority. Bala saheb was an outspoken expression of the voice of silent majority.
Taking a broader view of 'communialists' - anybody who by word or deed treats the 'other' (somebody who either by sheer accident of being born into a race or religion or caste or language or chooses to cross into another ) different from 'my community', The Hindu should treat all groups with the same brush - the BJP, Shiv Sena, the Muslim League, Akali Dal, the DMK, AIADMK, MDMK, the PMK, BSP, the Republican Party, VCK, TMC, the various caste based parties in Kerala and other states. Phew, what would we be left with when some of the other 'non-communal' parties like the Congress and the Left either taking communal positions when it suits them or at least not taking a clear stand, by aligining with the communalists?
I like the stand which The Hindu has taken in this editorial.
Very candid and true. It needs lot of courage to say so openly. Good one.
While being less critical about Mr. Thackerey, it can be said that he threw political correctness to the wind. That tendency did produce views which were although sharp but correct. He was the only leader of stature among the current lot who didn't care about caste dynamics and denounce the reservation system as faulty. It takes some strength to speak your mind though it will be hurtful to your election prospects.
While I am generally in agreement with your views, I wish to make a few points. There is a need to find out why Bal Thackeray became so hugely popular among the unemployed Maharashtrian youth. A very impartial examination would perhaps reveal that the cosmopolitan Bombay of the sixties and seventies was arrogantly and rabidly anti-Marathi. Secondly, the opportunities in the job market in Mumbai were denied to the Marathi speaking youth in unfair manner. That was one main reason for Bal Thackeray’s early successes. The leftists did not address this Marathi youth grievance properly. Secondly, it was a national party, BJP, which gave respectability to Shiv Sena’s politics by making an alliance with it and one cannot overlook this fact.
Finally an article with proper analysis of the Shiv Sena leader's legacy. I was sitting in utter disbelief watching TV yesterday listening to the fawning tributes given to Mr. Thackeray from so called 'senior journalists' and 'columnists'. Kudos to The Hindu for standing up for truth.
The Hindu newspaper is constantly criticizing Shiv Sena. So there is nothing new in the editorial. However by not mentioning good things the editor has only exposed his bias. Shiv Sena never started ( initiated) any riots or threats. After Babri structure demolitioin violence was started by muslims and many Hindus were killed , burning of Hindus in Radhabai chawl was infamous case.This continued for almost one month. By not mentioning both sides of the stories media is failing in its role.
What pains you more is to see all the leaders, celebrities, and other opinion-formers rushing lemming-like to call him a great man and great leader. Could someone have the guts to say, sorry he doesn't deserve our respect and tributes.
No doubt that Mr. Bal Thackerey has left behind a troubled legacy. But some credit must go to deceased leader. Unlike most of other politicians of his time, he kept away from caste politics.
Finally, a sensible article. All those positive comments, even some from someone like Lata Mangeshkar, are distressing to say the least! Only one error in the writing: he did not invoke "Maratha" pride, but rather "Marathi" pride. Maratha is a caste, while Marathi is the language spoken in Maha, and it was Pawar who played the Maratha card to solidify a vote bank. Fortunately, people are seeing through Maratha politics. Hopefully (just hoping) people in Maha will one day realize that the "Marathi manoos" card is being played for votes and votes alone.
I find your assessment and analysis of Thackeray's legacy bit exaggerated. Shiv Sena was not a pioneer of sectarian regional politics in India. The credit must be accorded to the DMK and Annadurai. Moreover, Shiv Sena did not influence the whole of Maharashtra but only the urbanized golden triangle of Mumbai-Pune-Nashik belt.Shiv Sena came to power in 1995 with the help of not only BJP but was also supported by number of rebel MLAs, mostly from a faction of the Congress, which is now called as NCP. Inspite of Thackeray's immense popularity, Maharashtra remains bastion of the Congress mainly due to inability of Shiv Sena to make inroads in rural Maharashtra, which is still dominated by the Congress and NCP. The regional politics pioneered by the DMK and practiced later by Shiv Sena has now become the salient characteristics of the Indian polity. You may dislike and criticize it, but you cannot simply ignore it.
wonderful editorial
Please Email the Editor