top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 11:29:11 am

The Unequal Cousins

Raj Thackeray’s ‘sacrifice’ saved Shiv Sena (UBT) but sank the MNS Mumbai: In the volatile theatre of Maharashtra politics, the long-awaited reunion of the Thackeray cousins on the campaign trail was supposed to be the masterstroke that reclaimed Mumbai. The results of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) elections, however, tell a story of tragic asymmetry. While the alliance has successfully helped the Shiv Sena (UBT) stem the saffron tide and regain lost ground, it has left Raj...

The Unequal Cousins

Raj Thackeray’s ‘sacrifice’ saved Shiv Sena (UBT) but sank the MNS Mumbai: In the volatile theatre of Maharashtra politics, the long-awaited reunion of the Thackeray cousins on the campaign trail was supposed to be the masterstroke that reclaimed Mumbai. The results of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) elections, however, tell a story of tragic asymmetry. While the alliance has successfully helped the Shiv Sena (UBT) stem the saffron tide and regain lost ground, it has left Raj Thackeray’s Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) staring at an existential crisis. The final tally reveals a brutal reality for the MNS - Raj Thackeray played the role of the savior for his cousin, but in the process, he may have become the sole loser of the 2026 mandate. The worse part is that the Shiv Sena (UBT) is reluctant to accept this and is blaming Raj for the poor performance of his party leading to the defeat. A granular analysis of the ward-wise voting patterns exposes the fundamental flaw in this tactical alliance. The vote transfer, the holy grail of any coalition, operated strictly on a one-way street. Data suggests that the traditional MNS voter—often young, aggressive, and driven by regional pride—heeded Raj Thackeray’s call and transferred their votes to Shiv Sena (UBT) candidates in wards where the MNS did not contest. This consolidation was critical in helping the UBT hold its fortresses against the BJP's "Infra Man" juggernaut. However, the favor was not returned. In seats allocated to the MNS, the traditional Shiv Sena (UBT) voter appeared hesitant to back the "Engine" (MNS symbol). Whether due to lingering historical bitterness or a lack of instructions from the local UBT leadership, the "Torch" (UBT symbol) voters did not gravitate toward Raj’s candidates. The result? The UBT survived, while the MNS candidates were left stranded. ‘Second Fiddle’ Perhaps the most poignant aspect of this election was the shift in the personal dynamic between the Thackeray brothers. Decades ago, they parted ways over a bitter dispute regarding who would control the party helm. Raj, refusing to work under Uddhav, formed the MNS to chart his own path. Yet, in 2026, the wheel seems to have come full circle. By agreeing to contest a considerably lower number of seats and focusing his energy on the broader alliance narrative, Raj Thackeray tacitly accepted the role of "second fiddle." It was a pragmatic gamble to save the "Thackeray" brand from total erasure by the BJP-Shinde combine. While the brand survived, it is Uddhav who holds the equity, while Raj has been left with the debt. Charisma as a Charity Throughout the campaign, Raj Thackeray’s rallies were, as always, electric. His fiery oratory and charismatic presence drew massive crowds, a sharp contrast to the more somber tone of the UBT leadership. Ironically, this charisma served as a force multiplier not for his own party, but for his cousin’s. Raj acted as the star campaigner who energised the anti-BJP vote bank. He successfully articulated the anger against the "Delhi-centric" politics he accuses the BJP of fostering. But when the dust settled, the seats were won by UBT candidates who rode the wave Raj helped create. The MNS chief provided the wind for the sails, but the ship that docked in the BMC was captained by Uddhav. ‘Marathi Asmita’ Stung by the results and the realisation of the unequal exchange, Raj Thackeray took to social media shortly after the counting concluded. In an emotive post, he avoided blaming the alliance partner but instead pivoted back to his ideological roots. Urging his followers to "stick to the issue of Marathi Manoos and Marathi Asmita (pride)," Raj signaled a retreat to the core identity politics that birthed the MNS. It was a somber appeal, stripped of the bravado of the campaign, hinting at a leader who knows he must now rebuild from the rubble. The 2026 BMC election will be remembered as the moment Raj Thackeray proved he could be a kingmaker, even if it meant crowning the rival he once despised. He provided the timely help that allowed the Shiv Sena (UBT) to live to fight another day. But in the ruthless arithmetic of democracy, where moral victories count for little, the MNS stands isolated—a party that gave everything to the alliance and received nothing in return. Ironically, there are people within the UBT who still don’t want to accept this and on the contrary blame Raj Thackeray for dismal performance of the MNS, which they argue, derailed the UBT arithmetic. They state that had the MNS performed any better, the results would have been much better for the UBT.

Ploughing Backwards

Repeated farmer protests in Punjab which masquerade as a movement for rights risks derailing the state’s economy and deepening its political woes.

Punjab
Punjab

The protests by Punjab’s farmers have once again exposed the enduring grip of regressive populism on Indian politics. Far from being a genuine movement for agricultural reform, these demonstrations reflect an unwillingness to embrace necessary economic change. With the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM) and other farmer unions mobilizing protests across the country, ostensibly against ‘repression’ by the Punjab government, the movement has now taken on a performative character, detached from the larger economic reality of the state and the nation. The recent clearing of protest sites at the Punjab-Haryana border signals a long-overdue pushback against an agitation that has outlived both its credibility and its public sympathy.


This latest round of demonstrations stems from the same demand that triggered the 2020-21 protests: a legally guaranteed minimum support price (MSP) for crops. This is a deeply flawed demand. An MSP guarantee in perpetuity would entrench inefficiencies in Indian agriculture, burdening government procurement systems and distorting market prices. Punjab’s farmers, disproportionately reliant on wheat and rice cultivation, already benefit from government procurement at rates that far exceed market prices, often at the expense of taxpayers and long-term agricultural sustainability. Encouraging diversification into less water-intensive crops and reducing subsidies for wasteful farming practices would serve Punjab’s interests far better.


The political undertones of this agitation cannot be ignored. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP)-led government in Punjab finds itself in an unenviable position. Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann’s decision to crack down on the protests and the dismantling of protest camps at Shambhu and Khanauri marks a stark departure from AAP’s earlier sympathetic stance towards farmer protests. The timing of this shift is telling. Speculation abounds that Mann, under pressure from either his party leadership or the central government, was forced to take a harder line. Some suggest that AAP supremo Arvind Kejriwal, known for his political manoeuvring, is attempting to sideline Mann by forcing him into an unpopular position with Punjab’s powerful farming community. Others believe the Centre, wary of another prolonged agitation, compelled the Punjab government to act or face the prospect of President’s Rule. Regardless of the motivations, Mann’s decision to confront the protesters has drawn predictable criticism from opposition parties, but in reality has provided relief to industries and commuters.


Beyond domestic politics, there have long been allegations that foreign interests are influencing these protests. The notion that overseas networks, including entities linked to George Soros and other global financiers, may have played a role in amplifying unrest cannot be dismissed outright.


The protests also reflect an enduring refusal among Punjab’s farm unions to acknowledge changing economic realities. India cannot afford to cling to a procurement system that is neither financially viable nor environmentally sustainable. The World Bank, the NITI Aayog and independent economists have long warned against excessive reliance on MSP-driven procurement, yet farmer unions continue to reject every attempt at reform. Each time the government proposes alternatives, the unions move the goalposts, ensuring that no meaningful negotiation can take place.


At the heart of this problem lies an uncomfortable truth: these protests are not about securing a better future for farmers. They are about preserving an outdated and unsustainable economic model that benefits a narrow section of the farming community at the expense of long-term agricultural health. The leaders of these protests, aware of their diminishing public support, have sought to revive the movement under the guise of ‘police repression.’ But the reality is that the protests have already extracted their political and economic costs. Punjab’s industrialists, traders and ordinary citizens, many of whom suffered severe losses during the 2020-21 agitation, are relieved to see action taken against these blockades.


If the farmer unions were truly interested in progress, they would push for investment in agricultural innovation rather than holding the state hostage with unrealistic demands. Instead, they persist with tactics that recall the worst of India’s obstructionist political culture.

Comments

bottom of page