(Link to Rajdeep Sardesai's open letter to Raj Thackeray: http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/rajdeepsardesai/1/52784/an-open-letter-to-raj-thackeray.html )
Comments: I guess being an expat Mumbaikar/Mumbai-ite would allow me to talk about Mumbai. Raj Thackeray's (he originally of the Shiv Sena founded by his uncle Bal Thackeray, and now the leader of the breakaway Maharasthra Navnirman Sena) anti-North Indian campaign has ignited a lot of mindless violence, reactions (both violent and non-violent), and several debates.
What's important to know though is that the latest Raj Thackeray-initiated melee is not necessarily unique or unprecedented. It has happened in Mumbai before - being, as it is, a regular feature of the Thackeray family/Shiv Sena strategy. The idea is to get enough Maharashtrians worked up about them somehow having ceded "control" of Mumbai away to non-Maharashtrians/outsiders and then voting for the Shiv Sena to take back control on their behalf thereby banishing all that which ails the city, the state and its people (which people?). Never mind that Mumbai is neither the heart of Maharashtra nor has it become what it is today solely because of Maharashtrians. Through the last 50 years and more, the Sena and their offshoots have gone about targeting Gujaratis, south Indians, Muslims and most recently north Indians as those aforementioned outsiders.
But the human drama that continues to unfold is not just the Thackeray's being up to their usual shenanigans. There's more to it. Rajdeep Sardesai of CNN-IBN in the above linked open letter to Raj isn't really informing Raj of something he wouldn't already know. But he's probably making an effort to also educate the Indian public on the political machinations/endgames taking place behind the scenes - most beyond Raj's control.
Rajdeep's piece also just reinforced the feeling that it seems to require a Maharashtrian (or several of them) of some stature to take an anti-Raj Thackeray stance in this matter, to make an impact. Never mind that those stances are few and far between; these days its the familiar, insecure, "yes (he's wrong), but (there's some validity to his point of view)" argument (Rajdeep being one of the few exceptions) that other prominent Maharashtrians have been spouting. They're just riding both directions of traffic on the political highway.
The sad/crazy aspect to all this is that - by Raj's (and by extension the larger Thackeray family) definition, with the tacit approval of the 'yes-but' arguers, a Mumbaikar who is not a Maharashtrian by last name, but was born, and has lived in Mumbai now for several decades is an "outsider" and a new born Maharashtrian baby in a remote corner of Maharashtra is an "insider". That is so convoluted that even Raj cannot obviously believe in it.
I pity those Maharashtrians and non-Maharashtrians who actually do believe it.
