Uddhav Thackeray: ‘Thackeray Is Maharashtra’s Soul’

Introduction

In a politically charged atmosphere, Maharashtra continues to witness a fierce contest over its ideological legacy. At the heart of this debate stands a powerful statement made by Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray: “Thackeray is Maharashtra’s soul.” This declaration carries more than just emotional weight—it seeks to reclaim a historical and cultural identity deeply entrenched in the state’s politics.

Uddhav Thackeray’s assertion came at a time when the original Shiv Sena party, founded by his father Balasaheb Thackeray, has splintered into factions. The dispute over who truly represents the “real Shiv Sena” is more than a matter of party symbols or legal decisions—it’s a battle for the ideological inheritance and emotional connection with millions of Maharashtrians.

In this article, we delve deep into the significance of Uddhav Thackeray’s statement, the political context behind it, the legacy of Balasaheb Thackeray, and the larger implications on Maharashtra’s identity and politics.

The Legacy of Balasaheb Thackeray

To understand Uddhav’s statement, one must first revisit the legacy of Balasaheb Thackeray, the charismatic founder of Shiv Sena. Established in 1966 to fight for the rights of the “Marathi manoos” (Marathi-speaking people), Shiv Sena began as a regional movement. Balasaheb was not just a political leader—he was a cultural icon, social commentator, and satirist whose words stirred the emotions of lakhs.

His speeches, marked by bluntness and fiery oratory, turned him into a cult figure. While his politics were controversial—ranging from support for Hindutva to aggressive nativism—Balasaheb undeniably became synonymous with Maharashtrian pride. His larger-than-life persona resonated with the working-class population in Mumbai and other urban centers.

Over decades, Shiv Sena transitioned from a regional force to a powerful political party in Maharashtra, eventually aligning with the BJP and sharing power. Balasaheb remained its unquestioned leader till his death in 2012. His demise created a vacuum—emotional and ideological—that Maharashtra still feels today.

Uddhav Thackeray’s Political Journey

Uddhav Thackeray, once seen as a reluctant politician, gradually assumed leadership after his father’s passing. Unlike his father, Uddhav projected a calmer, more composed political image. His ascent within the party wasn’t without challenges, including familial disputes and opposition from senior leaders.

However, Uddhav surprised many by leading the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) coalition government in 2019, comprising Shiv Sena (UBT), Congress, and the NCP, after severing ties with the BJP. It was a radical shift in the party’s ideological alignment, and critics questioned whether Uddhav had deviated from his father’s legacy.

Yet, Uddhav maintained that the essence of Balasaheb’s teachings was standing up for justice, Maharashtra’s pride, and people’s welfare. He repeatedly emphasized that his political choices were based on these principles.

The Split Within Shiv Sena

The political landscape dramatically changed in 2022 when Eknath Shinde, a senior Shiv Sena leader, rebelled and took away a large number of MLAs. The rebellion led to the collapse of the MVA government, and Eknath Shinde, with BJP’s support, formed a new government. The Election Commission later awarded the Shiv Sena name and symbol to Shinde’s faction, a major blow to Uddhav.

This schism wasn’t just an organizational split—it was a psychological and emotional fracture for the party and its supporters. Uddhav’s supporters claimed that the betrayal was not just political but ideological. In the face of this challenge, Uddhav began a grassroots campaign to rebuild Shiv Sena (UBT) and reassert his connection with the masses.

“Thackeray Is Maharashtra’s Soul”: Meaning and Context

In a powerful rally in 2025, Uddhav Thackeray thundered, “Thackeray is Maharashtra’s soul,” directly challenging the legitimacy of the Shinde-led Shiv Sena. The statement was meant to convey that beyond party names and legal ownership, it is the emotional and cultural bond with the people that defines true leadership.

By invoking the “soul” of Maharashtra, Uddhav positioned his family name as a symbol of Marathi pride, integrity, and resistance. He aimed to remind people that Shiv Sena was born out of cultural rebellion—not bureaucratic politics—and that this spirit still resides with those who respect its original ideals.

This emotional appeal was strategic. It sought to tap into the nostalgia associated with Balasaheb while framing the political split as a betrayal of legacy. Uddhav’s claim wasn’t merely about winning votes—it was about reclaiming identity.

The Role of Emotional Politics in Maharashtra

Maharashtra has a long tradition of emotional and cultural politics. From the movements for a separate Marathi-speaking state to the Samyukta Maharashtra movement, identity has always played a central role.

Leaders like Balasaheb Thackeray understood the power of emotion in mass mobilization. Uddhav seems to be following a similar path, though with a softer tone. His use of terms like “atma” (soul) taps into the deep respect that many Maharashtrians have for the Thackeray name.

Emotional politics, while often criticized for being manipulative, cannot be dismissed in a democracy where symbols and sentiments matter. Uddhav’s appeal is, in many ways, an attempt to remind voters of Shiv Sena’s roots—and by extension, to reclaim the narrative.

Ideology vs Power: What Defines Real Leadership?

A key element in the ongoing battle is the question: What defines real leadership? Is it ideological loyalty or numerical majority?

Shinde’s faction may have the numbers and recognition from the Election Commission, but Uddhav’s faction claims the moral high ground. By saying “Thackeray is Maharashtra’s soul,” Uddhav makes the case that numbers alone don’t determine legitimacy. It’s about vision, conviction, and the ability to connect with people on a deeper level.

This raises critical questions about Indian democracy: Should party symbols be awarded based on who controls more MLAs, or on who preserves the spirit and philosophy of the party?

Public Sentiment and Political Capital

Early surveys and ground reports suggest that while Shinde holds administrative power, Uddhav retains emotional capital—especially in urban areas like Mumbai and Pune. Many old Sena loyalists, youth activists, and even neutral voters see Uddhav as more aligned with Balasaheb’s original ideology.

His governance during the COVID-19 pandemic also earned him goodwill. He was praised for his communication style, crisis management, and focus on public health. This has strengthened his image as a people-centric leader.

By emphasizing his family’s legacy and invoking Maharashtra’s pride, Uddhav is effectively converting emotional capital into political momentum for upcoming elections.

Impact on Maha Politics and 2024–25 Elections

Uddhav’s “soul of Maharashtra” comment is not just a personal defense—it’s an electoral strategy. As Maharashtra heads toward the 2024 general elections and the 2025 assembly elections, identity politics will be central to the campaign narrative.

With the MVA alliance still alive, Uddhav has a broader base. His challenge will be to unite voters across castes, classes, and regions under the “Thackeray identity” umbrella. Meanwhile, Shinde’s faction, backed by the BJP, will continue to focus on development, Hindutva, and governance.

This clash of narratives—identity vs performance, legacy vs legality—will shape the future of Maharashtra’s political landscape.

Reactions from Political Rivals

Unsurprisingly, Uddhav’s statement received sharp reactions. Eknath Shinde dismissed it as “emotional blackmail,” asserting that his government represents real Shiv Sena workers. BJP leaders, including Deputy CM Devendra Fadnavis, accused Uddhav of exploiting sentiments and lacking development-oriented vision.

On the other hand, Congress and NCP leaders supported Uddhav’s claim, with some even calling Balasaheb “a symbol of Maharashtra’s cultural revolution.” The opposition unity in Maharashtra hinges on such emotional coherence, and Uddhav’s narrative could be the glue holding it together.

Media and Public Discourse

Television debates, newspaper columns, and social media were flooded with interpretations of Uddhav’s remark. While some hailed it as a stirring reminder of Maharashtra’s roots, others criticized it as backward-looking and emotionally charged.

Yet, one thing is clear: the statement struck a chord. Political observers believe that this kind of symbolic messaging can make a decisive impact in a state where identity is intertwined with pride, language, and culture.

Conclusion

Uddhav Thackeray’s declaration that “Thackeray is Maharashtra’s soul” is more than a political slogan—it is a profound statement aimed at reclaiming legacy, emotion, and ideology in a fractured political space.

In a state known for its historical movements, pride in language, and cultural assertiveness, the battle for emotional connection is as important as policy-making. As elections near, Uddhav’s ability to harness this sentiment could determine whether the Shiv Sena (UBT) emerges as a revived force or fades into a symbol of nostalgia.

Whatever the outcome, one thing remains certain: the name Thackeray still holds immense power in Maharashtra’s collective consciousness. Whether as a political brand, cultural identity, or emotional anchor, it continues to shape the destiny of one of India’s most important states.