Yes, I criticise Raj Thackeray but.....

The last few weeks (October, 2008) saw almost everyone in offices and general gathering discussing the Raj Thackeray's Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) and its activists' terror in Mumbai. His party workers resorted to brutal means to help their firebrand leader acquire frontpage headlines and create space in Maharashtra politics.

The protest was regarding the unrestricted inflow of migrating public to Maharashtra, the city of dreams Mumbai in specific. And, hence the MNS's activists' target was non-Marathi public, Biharis in particular.

Most of the people looked justified to an extent in condeming Raj for his political stance, which clearly looked more like anti-Indian than pro-Maharashtrain. There was no doubt that MNS's only aim was to thrive in political circles with pro-Maharastrian sloganeering.

It looked quite flabberghasting to the rest of the India, especially the north Indians (Bihar in particular), as the protest was to oust them by force to assert Marathis' claim on Maharashtra and Mumbai in specific.

People across India watched in disbelief how Raj Thackeray's party workers went overboard to proclaim their 'right' as natives. Knowledge about Indian constitution's provisions allowing all citizens to work and reside at any place of India, except in Jammu and Kashmir, was unexpected from MNS' activists. And, perhpas, that was adequate for a emerging polititian like Raj to secure a vote bank.

At one time, it felt like the violence of Mumbai may spread to people across India, claiming locals' right to oust others and that too by citing examples of the MNS team. Many demanded that he be put behind bars for projecting Maharashtra, as a separate nation existing in India.

In my personal view, I believe people should be encouraged to shift to different regions to learn and share a different culture, tradition and way of life. Biharis, in particular, deserve the biggest appreciation for firmly holding to their original culture and demonstrating a thoroughly hard working and determined mind, which believes in rising despite all challenges of life.

But that’s my personal opinion may be because of the role they played in transforming life of a non-serious Punjabi lad like me and encouraging me for higher studies and become a journalist.

Everyone expressed hatred for MNS and its President, may be because the real objective behind such a rough politics or extreme measure ahead of elections was an open secret for anyone.

The only difference Raje’ approach of influencing local voters is that 'language and regionalism' are perhaps new factors for most of the new audience.

Otherwise, the existing political factors like caste, religion or reservation, or even so called 'Secularism', is nothing less dangerous than the new feature of Indian politics. One can review vote bank politics prevailing in any State of the country on the basis of these factors. North to South, East to West, these factors dominate the political leaders' mind, the ongoing distribution of election tickets bespeaks it loud n' clear.

As per general opinion, Raj’s was a case fit for triggering internal disturbance and deserves harshest punishment for dividing nation and creating terror'.

Media’s role looked more notorious than Raj himself. The issue went blown out of proportion courtesy electronic media. I believe it could have been discouraged to get unwanted publicity. But the electronic media proved an ultimate help for Raj Thackeray to gain immense popularity in just two months.

Government’s role also deserved criticism. It was too painful to imagine innocent people from north Indian being beaten mercilessly for no reason of theirs. It was State government who should have ensured better sense to prevail. It could have assured the agitated people, not just MNS, to do something under law to regulate things and welfare of locals.

But my thoughtful mind also asks me to be fair in evaluating the issue that is the problems caused by migrants in any State. I believe Raj raised the issue, which irrespective who raised it, needs a thorough discussion.

It would be unfair to close eyes and mind to the main issue—the unregulated migration and its ramifications.

It is true that local Mumbaiite are today faced with a serious problem due to migration from across the country. I believe they must get their first right to their native place and its opportunities. But this right cannot be expected to be absolute.

Be it anyone, all citizens of the country must enjoy equal right to work, live and practice religion and culture at the place of their choice in THEIR country. But the natives do deserve to have the first right.

In Delhi, the scenario is nothing different. The pain of Delhiites also got its voice in Delhi's Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit and Lt. Governor Tajinder Khanna who failed to garner adequate support from meek Delhiites. It was interesting that both of them were not original natives (born and brought up) of Delhi. But still they cried for its present condition when they could.

Delhi is crippled because of being a Union Territory. Most of the people from other States provoke hatred of the locals by enjoying to criticize the very place which has given them shelter and a place to earn livelihood. Most of the people despite coming from rural or comparatively backward areas of the country find fault in everything they find here.

I wonder when anyone from the north-east, one of the most backward and militant affected region, criticizes Delhi for ‘security’ and conservative lifestyle.

Isn't it a fact that the Kashmir gives preference to Kashmiris, Punjab gives preference to Sikhs and West Bengal gives preference to Bengali speaking individuals, Biharis embrace Biharis in all jobs and the southern States prefer their natives for opportunities available in their respective State.

If that is true to even little extent, Thackeray was not absolutely wrong in encashing public support in the disguise of Marathi manoos' social cause. He did what any professional or politician would do to enjoy the best of opportunity in the disguise of social cause.