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.

What if Joseph Stalin had become a priest?

Updated: Oct 21, 2024

What if Joseph Stalin had become a priest?

It is 1894. A short, intelligent adolescent with a pockmarked face (owing to a severe bout of smallpox) is kneeling in prayer in a dimly lit room of the Tiflis Theological Seminary in the distant country of Georgia. The air is thick with the scent of candle wax and the echoes of hymns sung in Georgian.

The boy’s name is Iosif Dzhugashvili, better known as ‘Joseph Stalin.’ Looking back at this point in time, it seems fantastic that Iosif, son of a cobbler, who would one day become one of the most ruthless dictators and change the course of world history, had once flirted with the idea of becoming a man of God.

The tantalizing question is what might the world have looked like had Stalin become a priest?

Yet, in a twist of fate that would alter the course of the 20th century, Stalin’s ambition took him down a different path—a path of revolution, bloodshed, and power.

The seminary, as his great biographer Stephen Kotkin suggests, was both a crucible and a battleground for young Stalin. It was here that he first learned the power of ideology (Marxist), the thrill of defiance, and the strength of iron discipline—traits that would later define his rule over the Soviet Union.

Had Stalin embraced the priesthood, his intellect and charisma could have propelled him to prominence within the church, perhaps even as a reformer or a nationalist leader rallying against the Tsarist regime.

Imagining a world where Stalin never left the seminary, one might envision a Russia where the Bolshevik Revolution still occurs, but without the brutal efficiency and paranoid purges that Stalin brought to the Soviet leadership.

Leon Trotsky, who Stalin would later exile and hunt down, might have steered the Soviet Union towards a different kind of socialism—one less steeped in the terror and cult of personality that Stalin cultivated. There would have been no Great Purge (1936-38) and no Gulags where millions of innocent Soviet citizens perished in the name of political consolidation.

On the international stage, Stalin’s absence could have dramatically altered the dynamics of World War II. A Soviet Union led by someone less ruthless than Stalin might have responded differently to Hitler’s advances.

Perhaps a less iron-fisted leader might have sought peace with Nazi Germany sooner, leading to a drastically different outcome in Europe.

The Cold War, too, might have unfolded with less intensity, devoid of Stalin’s paranoia-driven policies that shaped the Iron Curtain and defined the East-West divide.

The trajectory of global communism without Stalin’s iron grip would likely have been less monolithic and more fragmented. Stalin’s dogmatic imposition of Marxism-Leninism shaped not only Soviet policy but also the trajectories of countless communist movements worldwide.

His influence extended from Mao’s China to Castro’s Cuba, setting a template for authoritarian socialism that would not have taken root without him. Stalin’s spirit continues to influence authoritarian leaders in the world even today in the form of personages like Vladimir Putin.

The absence of Stalin’s personality cult could have allowed for a more pluralistic form of international communism.

Until his death at age 74 in 1953, Stalin pretty much dominated world history and his geopolitical policies continue to reverberate even today. Had he remained a priest in that Georgian seminary, the world would have been spared a dictator whose butcher’s bill exceeded that of Hitler’s or Mao’s.

Comments

bottom of page