37. THE DRAVIDIAN MOVEMENT – A TRIBUTE TO M KARUNANIDHI

In recent years sociologists and social anthropologists have started conducting enquiries into Indian political institutions. Many of these sociological studies, based on intensive fieldwork experience in specific areas in India, focus attention on the importance of social factors in the political processes of the country. These studies show, in particular, the role of caste affiliations in the politics of the country. However, there is no single comprehensive sociological work on the contemporary history of India. This is a great lacuna in our studies on modern India which needs to be urgently filled.

No study on contemporary Indian problems will be complete without any reference to the various socio-political movements which arose in the early years of this century as a protest against the domination of certain sections of population in different parts of India. The Dravida Kazagam (DK) and the Dravida Munnetra Kazagam (DMK) movement in Tamilnad are one such development in peninsular India.

Genesis of D M K

Today the DK and DMK play an important part in the social and political life of the people of Tamilnad. In recent years these two organisations have come to attract nation-wide attention as a result of their militant and separatist activities. To understand the present position of the DK and DMK movement in the country it is very necessary to trace its history. There are not very many authentic historical accounts on the DK and DMK movements in Tamilnad. The few that are available do not give a complete picture of the movement. Therefore, T M Parthasarathy's comprehensive book is very welcome.

The DK and DMK movement has its genesis in the Brahman—nonBrahman conflict. The Brahman—nonBrahman conflict in Tamilnad has been associated with three organisations, first the Justice Party, then the DK and now the DMK. It should be kept in mind that although the first two organisations were specifically created to assert the rights of non-Brahmans against the dominant position of the Brahmans, the DMK has not been explicitly anti-Brahmanical in its aims and programmes. Stated briefly then the history of the movement may be outlined in three phases largely corresponding to the development of the three organisations.

Justice Party

The call for the promotion of the interests of 'Dravidians' was given first by the Thenindeya Nala Urumai Sangam (South Indian Welfare Society or Party) which was founded in 1916. The move for establishing such a society was initiated by Sir P Thyagarayar. At the time of its establishment the Society consisted of such eminent non-Brahman leaders as Dr T M Nair, Dr C Natesa Mudaliar, Raja of Panagal and Sir A Ramasami Mudaliar. The Society started running three daily newspapers, one in English called Justice, another in Tamil called Dravidan and the third one in Telegu called Andera Prakashani. This Society was later on popularly called the 'Justice Party' after the title of its English newspaper. The Justice Party contested the 'election' in 1920 and formed the first-ever Indian 'cabinet' in Madras in 1921. The Justice Party had put up candidates again during the 1923 election and it formed the second cabinet in the following year. But in the elections held in 1926 the Justice Party could not secure a majority of seats in the State Legislature and lost the control of the State to the Swarajya Party. The Justice Party never completely recovered from the defeat of 1926, though it lingered on as a party till 1936. The general elections in 1936 gave the last blow to the Justice Party, for no member belonging to the party was elected to the State Legislature. The image of the Justice Party as the organisation of rich landlords and Western-educated upper-caste non-Brahman intellectuals of Tamilnad and Telegu country contributed, to a certain extent, to its downfall.

The Justice Party became a defunct organisation by 1940. However, the call for the promotion of the interests of 'Dravidians' did not end with the Justice Party, and that responsibility was taken over by the Dravida Kazagam. The DK, founded in 1942 by E V Ramasami Naicker (Who is popularly known as Periyar or 'the Elder') aimed at the organisation of 'Dravidians' towards the goal of 'self respect' (suyamariyathai). The establishment of the DK in itself should be considered as the culmination of the suyamariyathat movement which was set in motion right from the hayday of the Justice Party. Periyar, the founderleader of the DK, advocated that the non-Brahmans, i e, persons other than the Brahmans, in Tamilnad should oppose anybody calling them nonBrahmans but should consider themselves as belonging to the 'Dravidian race'. Periyar also propagated the positive identity of non-Brahmans as members of a 'Dravidian nation' entitled to sovereign independence from the Indian union. This ideology found expression in slogans such as 'thamezar nadu thamezarukke' (Tamilnad belongs to only Tamilians) and 'Dravida nadu Dravidarukke' (the land of the Dravidians belongs only to Dravidians). The hold of E V Ramasami Naicker on the movement did not last long. His influence was considerably curtailed by the establishment of the DMK.

D K and DMK :

The Differences The DMK was formed in 1949 by some of the ambitious followers of Periyar under the leadership of C N Annadurai (who is popularly known as Aringar Anna or Learned Elder Brother), when Periyar—at that time a man of 72—married a girl of 28 years. Though the followers of Anna had differences with Periyar on the marriage question, the differences were more deep-rooted. The DMK as an organisation differed from DK in its principles and objectives. In the first place, DK under the control of a single person, the Periyar, was not a wellknit organisation. The DMK. on the other hand, from its inception believed in facing the problems it confronted as a single organisation. In the second place, Periyar at no time gave any serious thought to the question of making DK a political party interested in capturing a place for itself in the political institutions of the country. The DMK, on the other hand, has been taking an active part in the political field and it has been putting up candidates for municipal, State and parliamentary elections.

Anti-North Orientation

The DK and DMK movement, started initially as a protest against the domination of the Brahmans in Tamilnad, was given a new dimension after India's Independence when the attack was directed against the alleged domination of North India. It found expression in the slogan 'therku thaikerathu, vadaku valarkerathu', i e, the South is receding and the North is progressing. Opposition to 'Aryan' domination is the common reason for the movement's antipathy to the Brahmans and the North. In order to escape the alleged domination of the North, the DMK started the agitation for an independent 'Dravida nadu' or 'Dravidasthan'. It seems, from the book under review, that though the DMK has because of legal and constitutional compulsions given up recently its demand for an independent Gravida nadu', it has not lost faith in the ideal. Along with the movement against the Brahmans and the North, a host of other activities were initiated, primarily directed against the use of Hindi language in schools and colleges in Tamilnad and the use of Sanskrit in temple worship and against idol worship.

xxx

HISTORICAL & SOCIAL BACKGROUND

The formation of Justice Party was another important event which mobilized backward castes politically in Tamil Nadu. The basic idea behind its formation was that the non-Brahmins realized the importance of literacy as a base of Brahmins’ virtual monopoly of government offices. Dr. T.M. Nair, P. Thyagaraja Chetty, and C.N. Mudaliar were the founding fathers of justice party. The proclaimed objective of justice party was to provide justice to all Dravidians through the establishment of a separate state under the auspices of the British government (Mukhopadhyay 2012). During the second quarter of the 20th century, the Self Respect movement introduced a programme of non-Brahmin uplift in Tamil Nadu that consisted of a radical critique of social, political and economic relations. Periyar E.V. Ramaswamy was the leader of this movement. It was a popular movement, which occurred in Tamil Nadu in 1925. Its main aim was to improve upon the socio-economic conditions of the low castes Tamils. Later it had profound implications.

Self Respect was not only a set of arguments, but also a set of practical strategies for transforming everyday and ritual life into revolutionary propaganda through choice of dress, names, home décor and domestic ritual, as well as through attending public meetings and reading newspapers. In particular, ‘modern, Self Respecting Tamil couples’ were projected as a resolution to what the Self Respect movement high-lighted as the social, political and economic problems perpetuated by the traditional joint family. Yet, over the course of the 20th century in Tamil Nadu, marriage and family proved to be unstable vehicles for the revolutionary transformation of socio-political domains (Hodges 2005). According to Mukhopadhyay (2012) this movement suffered split with Annadurai forming the Dravid Munnetra Kazagam with active support from Karunanidhi, Natarajan, and Sampth. The Dravidian movement which has started out as a movement for the upliftment of Adi-Dravida and the Dalits, later got involved in active politics, and DMK became a political entity with a massive following of backward classes and Dalits in Tamil Nadu.

Xxx

EMERGENCE OF DMK AS A POLITICAL FORCE AND FORMATION OF AIADMK

The political plunge bore fruit in 1967, when the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, an offshoot of the Dravidar Kazhagam, swept the Assembly elections. CN Annadurai became the Chief Minister and remained in office until his death in February 1969. He was succeeded by M Karunanidhi – the incumbent president of the party. The first government legalised “self-respect marriage”, implemented pro-poor schemes like providing subsidised rice and promoted the Tamil language. The party won its second consecutive election in 1971. By then, however, inner-party rivalry and allegations of corruption weakened the ideological bearings. A year later, actor MGR left the party to form his own – All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam. This split the Dravidian movement into two and the rivalry between them continues till date.

XXX

TIMELINE

The Beginnings: The Dravidian Movement emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries as the response of non-Brahmin communities to Brahmin dominance in public life, especially government. The South Indian Liberal Federation (popularly called the Justice Party) was the first organised platform of non-Brahmins in Madras presidency. The Party won elections in 1920 on an anti-Brahmin, anti-Congress platform. Its anti-Brahmin manifesto, while complaining about Brahmin domination in jobs, did not, however, challenge the ritual status of Brahmins. The Self Respect Movement begun by Periyar E V Ramasami (left), who had left the Congress over its conservative approach to caste, provided the radical edge to the Movement. Periyar was anti-caste and anti-religion.

1944: Dravidar Kazhagam (DK): In 1938, Justice Party (1916) and Self Respect Movement (1925) came together under Periyar’s leadership. In 1944, the new outfit was renamed Dravidar Kazhagam. DK was anti-Brahmin, anti-Congress and anti-Aryan (read North Indian). In 1938, when Rajagopalachari’s Congress ministry imposed Hindi in the state, DK launched protests that became a movement for an independent Dravida nation. DK is today led by K Veeramani (right).

1949: Annadurai Forms DMK: DK did not accept Indian independence and continued the demand for Dravida Nadu. Periyar also refused to contest elections. In 1949, the DK split and Periyar’s charismatic lieutenant, C N Annadurai, walked away with supporters to form the DMK. Annadurai joined the electoral process, with social democracy and Tamil cultural nationalism defining his politics. He was silent on Dravida Nadu. In 1967, DMK won office; Annadurai became Chief Minister.

1972: DMK Splits, MGR Walks: In 1969, Annadurai died and M Karunanidhi (left) took control of DMK. In 1972, differences between Karunanidhi and M G Ramachandran (right), actor and charismatic campaigner, split the party. MGR formed the AIADMK, with associations of his fans as the organisation’s bedrock. In 1977, MGR came to power, and remained undefeated until his death in 1987. He diluted the rationalist and anti-Brahmin agenda, and opted for welfarism as party ideology.

The Dravidian Movement Today: It is represented by DK, DMK, AIADMK and MDMK. DK does not contest polls; propagates Periyar’s ideals including atheism and rationalist practices.

GK: Understanding History of Left Politics in India - Part 1 (HISTORY)

Left-wing politics supports social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition to social hierarchy. It typically involves a concern for those in society whom its adherents perceive as disadvantaged relative to others as well as a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished (by advocating for social justice). The term left-wing can also refer to "the radical, reforming, or socialist section of a political party or system"

It was the tenth anniversary of the historic revolution in Russia that shook the world by establishing that the real power lay in the hands of common people who could rise up to overthrow their exploiters. The future prime minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru paid his first ever visit to the land of socialism that he had been studying minutely since the earliest days of the revolution. In Russia, Nehru strove to find a solution to the struggles of a colonised India. He studied the works of Marx and Lenin and admitted that he was greatly influenced by their ideologies of development. “We began a new phase in our struggle for freedom in India at about the same time as the October Revolution led by the great Lenin. We admired Lenin whose example influenced us greatly,” he wrote later.

By the second decade of the twentieth century, Indians were slowly but steadily acquainting themselves with the Gandhian philosophy of peaceful confrontation as a means to overpower their colonial rulers. The Russian revolution, however, set in a new course in the trajectory of nationalist struggle. The Marxist ideology of the working class, overthrowing the propertied exploiter, by sheer force, struck a chord deep within the hearts of the agitators of nationalism. The appeal was almost uniform among all those looking for an alternative to the Gandhian mode of peaceful demonstration, and in fact, inspired even a staunch Gandhian like Nehru. The aggressive revolutionary, Bhagat Singh, is noted to have studied in detail the life of Lenin and the Communist Manifesto during his time in jail. So deep was his attachment to the Russian philosophy, that his last wish was to complete reading the life of Lenin. Down South, on the other hand, the social activist Periyar, who started the ‘self-respect movement’ and also the Dravida Kazhagham, is known to have drawn inspiration from the Russian Communist method of bringing social justice, which he thought was best applicable to the plight of the lower castes in India. But, of course, it was M N Roy, the founder of the Communist Party of India(CPI), who was personally mentored by Lenin in Russia to prepare Indian soil for revolution against the foreign colonisers.

The history of Left politics in India runs deep into the very heart of the freedom struggle. It can hardly be denied that both the freedom struggle and the political landscape of free India was for the longest period of time hued in various shades of red. “It is very difficult to conceptualise Leftism in terms of one country of India as a whole. You need to think of the cultural specificity of the context in which you are talking about ideology. For instance, Periyar drew on empowerment of underprivileged. Now this is leftist ideology, but this is also the ideology of Jyotirao Phule, of Hinduism, of Jainism,” explains political scientist Bidyut Chakrabarty speaking about the unique way in which Leftism in India developed in close ties with the culture in which it was rooted.

A party is born

Despite the broad appeal of Left ideology though, it was MN Roy’s CPI and its later offshoots that went on to become the face of Left politics in India. During its initial days, the CPI focused on mobilising peasants and workers towards a revolutionary cause, while at the same time influencing the Congress in developing a sturdy Left leaning ideology.

However, having its roots in the international Communist movement meant that the CPI struggled hard to keep its feet rooted in the nationalist movement. Trouble arose when in the 1940s Gandhi launched the Quit India movement against the British almost at the same time when the Soviet Union urged the CPI to back the British war efforts in the fight against Fascism. In their efforts to please the Russians, they alienated themselves from the nationalist struggle.

Part 2: Post independence history of Left Politics in India (HISTORY)

Credit: Indian Express Research

GK: E V Ramasamy ‘Periyar’ (HISTORY)

Born in 1879, Periyar is remembered for the Self Respect Movement to redeem the identity and self-respect of Tamils. He envisaged a Dravida homeland of Dravida Nadu, and launched a political party, Dravidar Kazhagam (DK).

Periyar started his political career as a Congress worker in his hometown Erode. He quarrelled with Gandhi over the question of separate dining for Brahmin and non-Brahmin students at Gurukkulam, a Congress-sponsored school owned by nationalist leader V V S Iyer in Cheranmahadevi near Tirunelveli. At the request of parents, Iyer had provided separate dining for Brahmin students, which Periyar opposed. Gandhi proposed a compromise, arguing that while it may not be a sin for a person not to dine with another, he would rather respect their scruples. After failing to bend the Congress to his view, Periyar resigned from the party in 1925, and associated himself with the Justice Party and the Self Respect Movement, which opposed the dominance of Brahmins in social life, especially the bureaucracy. The Justice Party had a decade earlier advocated reservation for non-Brahmins in the bureaucracy and, after coming to power in the Madras Presidency, issued an order to implement it.

Periyar’s fame spread beyond the Tamil region during the Vaikom Satyagraha of 1924, a mass movement to demand that lower caste persons be given the right to use a public path in front of the famous Vaikom temple. Periyar took part in the agitation with his wife, and was arrested twice. He would later be referred to as Vaikom Veerar (Hero of Vaikom).

During the 1920s and 30s, Periyar combined social and political reform, and challenged the conservatism of the Congress and the mainstream national movement in the Tamil region. He reconstructed the Tamil identity as an egalitarian ideal that was originally unpolluted by the caste system, and counterposed it against the Indian identity championed by the Congress. He argued that caste was imported to the Tamil region by Aryan Brahmins, who spoke Sanskrit and came from Northern India. In the 1930s, when the Congress ministry imposed Hindi, he drew a parallel with the Aryanisation process, and claimed it was an attack on Tamil identity and self-respect. Under him, the Dravidian Movement became a struggle against caste and an assertion of Tamil national identity.

In the 1940s, Periyar launched Dravidar Kazhagam, which espoused an independent Dravida Nadu comprising Tamil, Malayalam, Telugu, and Kannada speakers. The Dravidian linguistic family was the foundation on which he based his idea of a Dravida national identity. These ideas had a seminal influence on the shaping of the political identity and culture of the Tamil speaking areas of Madras Presidency, and continue to resonate in present-day Tamil Nadu.

Periyar died in 1973 at the age of 94.

His work and his legacy

For the average Tamil, Periyar today is an ideology. He stands for a politics that foregrounded social equality, self-respect, and linguistic pride. As a social reformer, he focused on social, cultural and gender inequalities, and his reform agenda questioned matters of faith, gender and tradition. He asked people to be rational in their life choices. He argued that women needed to be independent, not mere child-bearers, and insisted that they be allowed a equal share in employment. The Self Respect Movement he led promoted weddings without rituals, and sanctioned property as well as divorce rights for women. He appealed to people to give up the caste suffix in their names, and to not mention caste. He instituted inter-dining with food cooked by Dalits in public conferences in the 1930s.

C N Annadurai, who was Periyar’s dearest pupil at one time, broke with him, split the DK, and formed the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) in 1949. Anna, a man of the masses, recognised the value of electoral democracy and accepted that Tamil separatism had no future. He used the new medium of cinema to spread the ideals of the Dravidian Movement and established himself as the successor to Periyar.

If Periyar was an iconoclast, Anna was a moderate reformist. On the pedestal of one of Periyar’s many statues in Tamil Nadu is the inscription: “There is no god, and no god at all. He who created god was a fool, he who propagates god is a scoundrel and he who worships god is a barbarian.” His successors moderated this radicalism — R Kannan recounts in Anna: The Life and Times of C N Annadurai, that Anna, who under the influence of his atheist mentor once broke Ganesha figures, would later say, “I would neither break the Ganesha idol nor the coconut (the offering).”