Aimed at a Dravidian icon

The periyar followers insist that, but for him and his reformist movement, Tamil Nadu would not have advanced in several fields. | Photo credit: the Hindu

PEriyar Ev brancasamy, social reforming and founder of Dravidar Kazhagam, remains the central point of political discourse in Tamil Nadu decades after his death in 1973. It has become difficult to eliminate periyar from the ideological spectrum, so much so much that even one of Tamil Las Estrellas Greater in the cinema, C. Joseph Vijay, declared him one of the guide lights of his incipient party, Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam. Periyar followers insist that, but for him and his reformist movement, Tamil Nadu would not have advanced in several fields.

However, in recent weeks, Seeman, the main coordinator of Naam Tamilar Katchi, a Tamil nationalist party that surveyed more than 8% of the votes in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, has turned Periyar into the main objective of its attack . Mr. Seeman has selectively resurrected the forgotten comments of periyar against tamil language, literature and culture to portray it as “anti-tamilo.”

Tamile nationalists who seek to replace the Dravidian movement have begun to blame periyar and their ideology as the root cause of what they call the “evils that devastate the Tamil society.” They reject the term “Dravida” to collectively go to the people of Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, and are very critical of periyar’s comments that “Tamil is a barbaric language.” Often they say that the so -called periyar hate for tamile language and culture come from its origin as a Kannada Naicker. In fact, they are more vowels about their criticisms of periyar than Brahmins, who were consigned to the margins following the emergence of the Dravidian movement.

Periyar was never consistent with his views. He reconsidered them according to changing circumstances, with good intention. “His five decades of public life have seen several political storms and change positions. But through all this, it has remained unwavering in its fierce determination to “free” the tamiles of the Grilletes of superstition, religion and God, “wrote the communist leader, Mythili Sivaraman, in his article,” Relevance of periyar: caste or class struggle ‘, which is part of the book Fire tormented: rehearsals on caste, class, exploitation and emancipation.

As an iconoclasta, married to the idea of ​​rationalism, Periyar rejected all ideas that were incompatible with science and denigrated human dignity. Launched scathing attacks against tamile literary works, including Kambaramayam, SilapathikaramAnd even the Tirukkuralidolized by his disciples CN Annurai, M. Karunanidhi and others. He was furious when a Tamil scholar at the University of Pachaiyappa justified Kovalen’s decision, the hero of Silappathikaramto leave his wife Kannagi “because she was not attractive.” Sivaraman wrote: “periyar … defended the cause of widowed marriage, marriage based on consent, the right of women to divorce property, abortion and birth control. He … exposed male superiority inherent to the concepts of chastity such as Karpu and Pathivirathi that apply to women. “

Although Annurai left periyar to launch Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) as an antidote for unconditional atheism preached by his mentor, the principles of periyar remained a guide force for Dravidian parties. Both Annurai and Karunanidhi were at a time very critical of periyar and made him liquidate through their writings and cartoons, but they could not completely avoid their ideology.

Periyar believed that Tamil society could not free itself without breaking the spine of Brahminsim, rooted in the concept of hierarchy of castes by birth. The Bharatiya Janata party could not progress substantial in Tamil Nadu despite its campaign against Dravidian parties, since humanism is the basis of dravidianism. Mr. Seeman, who has an unparalleled talent for moving controversies, has attacked periyar even though he was once his admirer. Tamile nationalists seem to think that Dravidian parties can weaken only by undermining the principles of periyar.

Tamiles have protected their language and culture from the attack of Sanskrit and centuries of conquests by non -Tamile rulers. Tamil Nadu has had non -tamile ministers. Tamile nationalists argue that the Dravidian movement has not been able to guarantee a place for the Tamiles and has allowed the not Tamiles to dominate the public and political sphere. Such arguments are destined to present themselves since the identity policy has occupied the central scenario in Indian politics. It remains to be seen if people will take the bait of ‘periyar versus tamil nationalism’.