The Maratha Warrior

It has been two days since Balasaheb Keshav Thackeray's death. Not that his death was a shock to people, he was long suffering. With him comes to an end an era in the political dustbowl of the Maratha Land. Balasaheb was unique and intriguing in many ways. He was not your quintessential politician- someone for whom a plum post mattered. No. In fact, he never stood for elected office in his entire political life.  He was a backroom operator, the hand that controlled all actors on the stage. There also, unlike a sly agent, he never kept himself from the public's eyes. He was a band apart. But, that he was simultaneously much loved and much hated was an endorsement of his originality.

I hardly have followed much of Bal Thackeray, politically. After all, the Shiv Sena is not any major national party and I've never lived in Maharashtra. Whatever I know of him is through readings. I've also seen his television interviews. Well, to be frank, I loved the grit of the old man, voicing his opinions (however biased they may be) fearlessly, with a conviction that only comes from deep belief. His rise in politics is quite the story. I want to discuss, in brief, about how he placed himself in the place he was and the unique characteristics of Indian polity that made it possible. I'm no scholar in political analysis, so read ahead with that in mind.

Thackeray's politics was bequeathed to him by his father, who fought for the unification of Maharashtra through the Samyukta Maharashtra Movement. Thackeray was primarily an artist, a cartoonist specifically. He worked for the Free Press Journal during the late 50s rubbing shoulders with the likes of R.K.Laxman.  Laxman was a lifelong friend. Those were heady days of politics in a young democracy, so naturally a cartoonist had a field day. Not many know this, but Thackeray had his own version of The Common Man, called 'Kakaaji'. Regionalism had a strong flavour in his politics. The Shiv Sena, he launched in 1966 to counter the Communist trade unions' influence in the Bombay factories. It has been a much-debated issue, but many feel that the division of Indian states along linguistic lines is largely responsible for regionalism in Indian politics. Tamil Nadu is a classic example. In its early days, regional Dravidian-identity based politics held centre-stage. It does today also. Parallely, the Maratha Manoos was the fulcrum of the Sena's philosophy. He conceded to it himself in an interview. To give Thackeray credit, he never, ever promoted/played politics on caste lines( a major pain in the Indian political ass). Political analysts are foxed to explain this, as to how he made it possible to run a caste unpolarised regional party. Another important feature/character of Indian polity that Thackeray adopted and evolved to a fine art was the art of public speaking. Public speaking is foremost on any politician's arsenal. The Sena Supremo always spoke impromptu and people thronged to listen to his candid yet venomous talks, sometimes going non-stop for two hours. The annual Dussehra Rally in Shivaji Park is proof of that.

Thackeray was a vociferous proponent of Hindutva. He had a strong anti-Pakistan views and charged successive central governments of soft-pedalling on the issues of terrorism and conceding ground to Pakistan. Post 1947, Indian politics has been dominated largely by the Congress and its brand of socialist, welfare-state type politics. Hindutva is a much-misunderstood concept. Its essence is nationalism, to put the greater good of Bharath, the nation forward. Hindutva does not mean a Hinduism biased politics. But operationally it has been made out to seem so. There's even a Supreme Court judgement on this. It says, Hindutva can't be defined to mean anything related to Hinduism, but in fact is a way of life of the people who have continuously inhabited this land over thousands of years. If you think of it, Hindutva is an evolution of Thackeray's regionalism, to give priority to those from Maharashtra against perceived outsiders, while Hindutva advocates putting the nation's interests foremost. 

Thackeray's critics also hold him responsible for the violence that was unleashed post the '93 Bombay blasts against Muslim community. The SriKrishna Committee lay blame on him. But, many also credit Sena for protecting Hindus against retaliatory attacks from Muslim mobs. Riding on that incident, Sena won the Maharashtra assembly election in '95. Apart from all this, Thackeray held an iron-grip on Mumbai City. A phone call from him could turn things for/against you, depending on whether they were proximate to him or otherwise. The Bollywood revered him. It is no secret that Amitabh Bachchan's  Sarkar was a celluloid adaptation inspired from the cigar-smoking, wine loving Thackeray's life. The verdict may be undecided on the impact of his xenophobia driven brand of politics but his legacy on Mumbai City is unquestionable. The reverence in which he was held by the people of Maharashtra was well-evident in the massive crowds that turned up to bid farewell to his mortal remains chanting slogans of "Balasaheb Amar Rahe". His polarising nature and the popularity he enjoyed among people is proof of the dichotomy in the politics of India. But, somehow, Shiv Sena couldn't translate the cult around him to electoral success across the state.