The Shiv Sena is entitled to memorialise Bal Thackeray, the man who built and led the party into a formidable political force in Maharashtra, but it should do so on private land that it acquires on its own steam and not at a public space.
The Shiv Sena is entitled to memorialise Bal Thackeray, the man who built and led the party into a formidable political force in Maharashtra, but it should do so on private land that it acquires on its own steam and not at a public space. The makeshift Thackeray memorial at the cremation site in Shivaji Park — a central recreational and socio-political space for all Mumbaikars — is already turning into a contentious spot as hundreds of thousands of people prepare to gather to commemorate the death anniversary of B.R. Ambedkar on December 6. Chaityabhoomi, where Ambdekar’s last rites were performed in 1956, is quite close to the makeshift “memorial” where Shiv Sainiks stand vigil around a photograph of Thackeray. Although Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan has ruled out permission for a Thackeray memorial at the site, Shiv Sena leaders have refused to dismantle the elaborate edifice they have erected, complete with halogen lamps. If an earlier proposal to build a memorial for Ambedkar — the father of the Indian Constitution, a document that proclaims equal rights for all Indians regardless of language, religion, ethnicity, caste or place of birth — at Shivaji Park was turned down, the idea that place can now be given there to Thackeray, with his divisive politics and sectarian appeal, defies reason.
Public memorials should embody the highest civilisational ideals of a society — of unity, solidarity, and a shared destiny. They should honour those who command respect from all Indians regardless of political affiliation or ascriptive identity. Not even the staunchest of Thackeray’s supporters can claim he epitomised such ideals. If a weak-kneed Congress-NCP government lets the Shiv Sena have its way, this will not be the first time public land has been used to memorialise an undeserving politician. But unlike the others, Thackeray held no official position; and though he held the ‘remote control’ for the Chief Minister for a term, he was never an elected representative of the people. Actually, he was indicted by a judicial commission of inquiry for orchestrating communal violence, and was barred by the Election Commission from voting and contesting in any election for six years for having sought votes in the name of religion. To erect a memorial at Shivaji Park for such a man is to insult democracy and public memory. It could easily turn into a divisive symbol for all the peoples Thackeray vilified as the hateful Other: Gujaratis, south Indians, Muslims and Hindi-speakers. The Sena should make all the necessary arrangements for a private memorial if it wishes. But under no circumstances should any of Mumbai’s public spaces be used.
Keywords: Shiv Sena, Bal Thackeray, Thackeray memorial
a very good and sensible article and i thank the Hindu for publishing this article.
Pranams to the editorial board for this bold editorial. The Memorial should be in a private
Place and the followers of Thackeray can exercise their rights in a private place. Mahatmaji
And the former presidents and prime ministers stand on an entirely different footing. They
By their service have served the nation, and not a particular group.
Thackery can no way be compared to the great Ambedkar who laid the Constitution for the country . . But im intrigued by the fact that Ambedkar's memorial was refused to be set up there ! If people there are so conservative about the place , then one must respect that and leave them at peace !
Memorializing of political leaders on public space & at Exchequer
should be condemned but as a principle and not as an opportunity to
start vilified campaign against any individual or community.One cannot
make suitable assumptions or absurd comparisons to justify his stance.
Author's criteria for public memorial such as embodiment of unity,
solidarity & a shared destiny is applicable to Maharashtra also which
is proved by respect someone commands across all classes. On the other
hand it should command respect from all Indians irrespective of class,
caste, religion & political affiliation are idealistic hardly make
anyone eligible for such honor.The reason that someone never fought a
election & can not considered as people's representative is misleading
because the list encompasses many of our respected social workers to
anna hazare & even prime minister Manmohan singh who represented in
upper house.Arguments based upon prejudiced & selective interpretation
of facts will weaken the case
Everybody knows about the approach which shivsainika adopts to fulfil their purposes,
therefore it is a wild thought to expect them to understand what democracy and the
constitutional values are.... The government in maharashtra must exhibit the required
willpower for not succumbing to the pressure which some hooligans may create.. He doesnt
deserve a memorial at shivaji park.. Off course they can built even a tajmahal kind of
structure in his memory but from their own fund and place...
Such a mental peace one feels when he/she finds an article like this, which clearly explains internal thoughts of a secular, freedom-loving "Aam Aadmi" about the "memorial issue", in a decorated newspaper like "The Hindu".
Applauds for "The Hindu" for writing such a bold and straight forward article. I feel "The Hindu" is the only avenue left to express your feelings.. coz Facebook is not safe for commenting now a days.
Self-proclaimed 'sainiks' are prompt in action when misguided by person on helm to burn public property mindlessly. Then, Why should we, the people, through our selected government allow them to build a memorial on a public property which they don't consider theirs once they come on a rioting spree?
We don't want any nuisance on name of religion, caste or creed. Nor do we want any more public property to be burnt down to ashes. What we want is peace, democracy and freedom of thought.
If The Hindu editorial ‘Memorialising Thackeray’ (December 4, 2012) helps to frame objective laws and rules to govern construction of memorials to politicians, it would serve some purpose. In fact, the question is a bigger one that should encompass all physical memorial structures and other forms of memorial entities, involving not only politicians but also others. In this respect, your definition of a memorial is pathetically vague and continues to suit the highly corrupt political field in our country. All the charges you have leveled against the late Shiv Sena leader are applicable to many others here. And, as you have pointed out, “public land has been used to memorialize undeserving politician(s)”. That is the strong precedent. But your intention seems to be limited to prevent ‘any of Mumbai’s public space’ from being used for a Thackeray Memorial.
"Not even the staunchest of Thackeray’s supporters can claim he epitomised such ideals"."Thackeray held no official position"."He was barred by the Election Commission from voting and contesting in any election for six years for having sought votes in the name of religion.To erect a memorial at Shivaji Park for such a man is to insult democracy and public memory"..
Thousands of soldiers have died in action and have sacrificed their life.Paramilitary forces men get killed in hundreds defending the border from militants. Soldiers die in Siachen battling hostile weather for the sake of the nation.Men are missing in action and the government takes no steps to trace them.Maosits butcher policemen like animals.Police men have laid their lives in Mumbai fighting terrorist ill equipped with bare chest and bare hands.War memorial is being denied to the soldiers and brave hearts who fought for the country.Why was Thackrey given a State Funeral??
Will some body answer from the Govt??
Kudos for an excellent forthright editorial in the truest spirit of free and feareless press. There can't be two opinions on the views expressed in your editorial amongst Indians who rerally consider themselves as Indians first and Indians last. In the dangerous atmosphere of intolerance against dissent in the political class, not only amongst Shiv sainiks but also amongst the ruling class as was seen in Kolkatta, Delhi, Himachal Pradesh and elsewhere, we will have to be very vigilent to protect with all our might (i) Freedom & independence of the media (ii) Freedom and independenc of Judiciary and (iii) freedom and independence of CAG and (iv) CVC, CBI and Lokpal if we succeed to make them autonomous
I am in so favour of the opinions of the writer. I see no good reason why Shiv Sainiks should be allowed to memorialize Thackeray in a public place while, the proposal of the same kind for B.R. Ambedkar, who was so much revered by all of the Indians was turned down.I sincerely hope that Minister Prithviraj Chavan doesn't succumb to the hooligans' pressure.
Agree. One should also take the same stand about Gandhi family who usurped
hundreds of hectares in prime locations of Delhi for memorials.
A biased editorial on a non-issue. The premise that Bal Thackeray does not deserve a memorial in a public place provided by Govt (matching my view!) proves that the Govt's decision to accord a state funeral to him too was illogical. Ideally, using any physical space for the beloved departed ones (even for burying) especially when land is too precious for the sustenance of the less mortal left-behinds, deserves review. But, it is the people who will take the final decision, not the erudite editors, columnists or comment-posters! A pragmatic approach is to just name some existing landmark after the departed person. But, the best space that a departed soul can be accoded is one's heart, not a physical space.
This is just the right thing that needs to be said everywhere in India
especially now in Mumbai. It's the responsibility of the people of
Mumbai to protect their city's identity and respect. Unfortunately, they
are the ones who gave strength to people like Thakerey and hence we
can't expect much courage and conviction from them now. After all,
politics of division and hatred work very effectively.
It is a very bold editorial. Hats off to you for bringing out this piece. How I wish others in the media followed suit! Thackeray does not deserve a memorial to be built on a public space that too at the cost of the exchequer. If the Sainiks want one such memorial there is no harm in building at their own cost. Really it is an insult to democracy a memorial is being allowed by the soft core Hindutva Congress-NCP combine.
Nice article. Thackeray obviously is no match to Ambedkar. The
construction of public memorials should be brought from courts. His
party never stood for ideals even for freedom of speech. But if the shiv
sena was in power the scenario will be different.
what is need of the editorial when shivsena themselve proclaiming that they do not want any memorial at shivaji park!
Thanks for boldly calling a spade a spade without ambiguity. Bal
Thackeray had built and led Shiv Sena into a formidable political force
not so much because of any lofty ideals but with ruthless cunning plan
he moved in to fill political vacuum created by mindless urbanization
with its attendant evil of poor searching for a livelihood. Without
attempting some creative economic planning to move the economy away
from city centric approach, it will be impossible to defang the menace
of divisive elements exploiting this weak Indian soft underbelly. A
perfect antidote will be to shift economic accent away from GDP
indicators and initiate national movement to create infrastructure
towards village based limited scale industries based on locally
available resources, just the way it was suggested by Gandhi in his
admirable genius.
We Indians want to immortalise our leaders with temples, monuments and by any peice of public real estate. While the Father of the Nation deserved his small patch of land (Rajghat), rest of them served the country, took remuneration for their services and depending upon the party in power got big or small peices of real estate. Nehru, Shahstri, Indira Gandhi, Sanjay Gandhi (sic), Rajiv Gandhi, Annaduari, MGR, YSR, and others. In the process some good areas have become burial grounds (Marina beach) and taken away forever from the public. There should be a law that no memorial to be funded by the public exchequer and no land should be provided by the Government for such a project.
If the followers of a leader want a memorial, buy land from the open market and construct at your own expenditure.
This will definitely reduced the corruption in the trusts managing these memorials.
Courageous! Congrats for such a clear & hard worded article. But, one advise from this common Maharashtrian, since I like your newspaper a lot - Do you have office in Mumbai? If yes, please ask for Police protection.
Please Email the Editor