On Raj Thackeray’s advises to Modi

Ahmedabad, 9 January 2014

The Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) president Raj Thackeray on Thursday advised the Bharatiya Janata Party’s prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi that he should leave the Gujarat Chief Minister post.

Thackeray said: “If you want to be the PM, then leave the CM post. Don’t just talk of Gujarat but the whole nation”

“You come to Maharashtra and speak about Sardar Patel’s statue. Why don’t you talk about Shivaji Maharaj,” asked the MNS chief.

Raj reiterated that he will not join hands with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) in the coming general elections.

“I personally have a high regard for (Narendra) Modi and his work in Gujarat but that doesn’t mean I will join hands with the BJP,” Thackeray told reporters.

Raj Thackeray has more than once said he wishes Narendrabhai to become PM. Raj visited Gujarat with Narendra Modi as host. He praised Modi like anything after visiting Gujarat.

So lets take Raj Thackeray’s advises positively, and lets assume that he actually intends genuine corrections in Modi’s campaign for Modi’s good so that Modi could become PM.

But then there’s counter suggestion for Raj Thackeray. Whether Modi continues to be CM or not is not likely to affect Modi’s chances to become PM much. More important is major correction in traditional political stand of Raj’s own party. In last few elections Raj has played limited-picture politics and divided Marathi votes to give away power to Congress-NCP.

Technically there’s no difference between Arvind Kejriwal, Chiranjivee, Keshubhai, Manprit Badal and Raj Thackeray. All of them function as vote-dividing-tool in their own capacity to benefit Congress.

If Raj Thackeray is Modi’s well-wisher, then merely advises are not enough. Raj should stop benefiting Congress-NCP through his MNS.

Raj wrongly brings Sardar Patel in political discussion. Sardar belongs to the nation, and not just Gujarat. If Sardar was not there, Maharashtra could have Pakistan on its border with Andhra Pradesh. Maharashtra was not in existence during Sardar’s time. It was bilingual Mumbai state at that time. Sardar had his last breath in Mumbai. His body converted to ashes in Mumbai. Like Raigad fort witnessed death of Shivaji Maharaj, Mumbai witnessed death of Sardar.

If we discuss Modi’s speech in Maharashtra, Raj is slightly correct. On Modi’s part it was incorrect to not to speak about Shivaji in Mumbai rally. To say that Gujarat is ahead of Maharshtra, and to allot lot of time to this subject in his speech was also not proper. If you speak about Shivaji in Maharashtra, the people there immediately gain josh. Shivaji is the best word to connect to someone in Maharashtra. Why Modi missed this point in Mumbai rally? Modi showering praises over Gujarat’s success in Maharashtra was also not correct. If I own a full-furnished four-bed room flat and start speaking about it loudly while visiting to someone living in one bedroom kitchen house, the person at other end may like it, or may not. It’s risky. Most probably, the other person would not like it.

Modi had however clearly said in his Mumbai speech, “some people don’t like if I speak about Gujarat, so let me speak about Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh.” Actually, Modi needs to do this only. He is PM candidate of NDA. He has to raise himself above Gujarat to speak about achievements in all NDA states. He has to speak more on national issues. He does do this at present, but not entirely.

When Congress questions Gujarat model, Modi in his speeches reacts to it by saying that upcoming one is the national election. The Gujarat elections were over last year, and all questions on Gujarat were replied there and then!

But then Modi only starts speaking about Gujarat examples in his speeches. Then why Congress would not react to it?

Coming back to Raj’s advise. Whatever is useful should be taken from it. At the same time, the factual situation is that Raj needs more advise than Modi.