Thackerays should get into electoral ring
Raj Thackeray as a Maharashtra Assembly election candidate was an exciting prospect when he declared it in May. A Thackeray in the election fray, for the first time in 48 years, would have been a break from the family tradition that deeply believes more in the idea of a remote control than direct representation. As things stand, Raj Thackeray announced this week that he would not contest the election. Ever his uncle’s doppelganger, Raj justified the turn-around saying “it (fighting an election) is not in my genes”.
Had he contested from Mumbai, specifically central Mumbai that’s his citadel, it would have given his voters a chance to interact with him rather than merely watch him on posters and television. It would have given the Marathi manoos here the golden chance of asking a Thackeray what he proposed to do to preserve and nurture its Maharashtrian character.
Raj is, lest we forget, the tough leader who had warned the Maharashtra Housing Area and Development Authority (MHADA) of “direct action” five years ago if their batch of houses then were not sold exclusively to Maharashtrians. In the intervening years, central Mumbai has become more gentrified than anyone had envisaged then, directly and otherwise challenging its Maharashtrian-ness, as redevelopment demolishes its native character. Shivaji Park, where he resides, is fighting to join the redevelopment bandwagon. All of this isn’t a bad thing at all; the gap between the Thackerays’s favourite Marathi manoos political card and what they do to ensure that the manoos is not edged out is what rankles many.
His uncle, the late Bal Thackeray, perhaps would not have approved of a family member representing only a constituency; the Thackerays represent the loftier idea of the Marathi manoos, after all. The late Thackeray had only disdain for electoral niceties and Constitutional obligations. Barred by the Supreme Court from contesting any election for six years in 1995, in the landmark case on using religion in political campaigning, Thackeray had famously roared: “As if I was going to fight for a seat”.
Raj’s bete noire and cousin Uddhav Thackeray, leading the Shiv Sena, has let it be known that he would like to be the chief minister of the state, assuming that the Sena with its ally BJP will out-number all other parties and alliances. But, he too is loath to contest the election. Having either of the cousins in the electoral fray would have presented disinterested observers the chance to track how a member of the fiercely political but supercilious clan sought votes for himself.
It’s not that either of them is so busy strategising and campaigning that they cannot contest. Party leaders with political parties far bigger and dispersed than the Senas, have sought a direct mandate. For the Thackerays, besides other considerations, not being an election candidate has also been about not being questioned, about evading the scrutiny that being a contestant brings, about not subjecting themselves to the rigours of an elected representative, about not being held accountable.
Why bother with providing information, filing affidavits and answering seemingly-pointless questions when they can simply bark orders at lieutenants and sit pretty? This is the nub. The Thackerays have all along demanded answers and sought justifications from others, but detested even the idea of giving any themselves.
Being an electoral candidate brings public scrutiny and the eye of the Election Commission, among the few relatively autonomous organisations still around, on a number of personal details including income, wealth and assets of oneself and one’s spouse. This is not a prospect any of the Thackerays relish. They would rather hold the remote control over a deputy.
Since politics is the art of the unpredictable, should political alliances change in the next few weeks, Raj may change his decision again. Many in the Congress are secretly hoping that he will, for narrow political ends. Both the cousins should make a break with the past and contest, for the sake of transparency and accountability.