When Bal Thackeray’s ambitious nephew, Raj Thackeray, parted ways with the Shiv Sena a couple of years ago, it was expected that he would form a party very much like the one he had left behind. After all, in looks, mannerisms, aspirations and in the opinions he held he was very much like his uncle, more so even than his cousin, Balasaheb’s son, Uddhav. But the style in which young Thackeray went on to launch his Maharashtra Navnirman Sena in March 2006, with a crowd of a lakh and a half, a no-frills show, a ban on obsequious gestures and an all-inclusive agenda, it seemed that he was making a break with the past in more ways than one and launching a new-look party for a modern era.

Events of the last few days have destroyed that illusion. Raj Thackeray’s combative stance on the issue of north Indians in Mumbai is reminiscent of the Bal Thackeray of the sixties, when he launched a virulent agitation against south Indians on nativist grounds of protecting jobs for the “sons of the soil” and forced shops and other establishments to translate their signboards into Marathi. Raj Thackeray’s style, sarcasm, caustic tone and apparent fearlessness in the face of the law and of the various court cases filed against him, too are vintage Bal Thackeray.

The issue of north Indians in Mumbai though was originally raised by the Shiv Sena and has been put forward from time to time, most recently when Uddhav Thackeray, the party’s executive president, held “outsiders” (read north Indians) as being responsible for the molestation of two women on new year’s eve outside a suburban hotel (subsequent investigations revealed them to be local boys). Raj Thackeray’s relentless campaign on the subject, however, seems to be aimed both as an attack on his former mentor and an attempt to position himself as the true native — Bal Thackeray is known to be close to Amitabh Bachchan; the superstar even released a music album based on lyrics by Uddhav’s teenage son recently. This too is a challenge to the Sena, which has styled itself as a campaigner for the poor most recently by criticising the state government’s favouritism towards builders in the wake of the repeal of the Urban Land Ceiling (Regulation) Act and threatening to oppose building activity if the interest of slumdwellers was ignored.

... contd.