The state of Tamil Nadu has long been associated with a unique political and cultural movement known as ‘Dravidian Ideology’. Three influential leaders are at the helm of the Aryan-Dravidian Divisive Politics that are still in play in India’s southern states. Periyar, Anna, and Kalaignar gave Tamil Nadu its so-called ‘Dravidian Legacy’. These stalwarts of the Great Dravidian Divide of India used this ideologue to garner immense political support to reshape Tamil Nadu’s political landscape. In light of the recent political statements calling for Sanatana Dharma’s extermination, a critical examination of their Dravidian legacy to the South is essential for all Sanatanis of Bharat.
Periyar: The Iconoclast
Periyar was the name given to E.V. Ramasamy. He is revered as the pioneer of the Dravidian movement in the southern states. His radical views penned in Tamil and translated into English, challenge the traditional norms of Sanatana Dharma. Analysts state that his writings reflect his deep hate for Brahmans and Vedic concepts of Varnas. Periyar vehemently opposed the misinterpreted Varna system of the Vedas. His opposition to the British interpretation of Varna as the caste hierarchical system found ardent and staunch followers in Tamil Nadu.
Ideological Extremism: Periyar’s views were presented as a groundbreaking ideology. However, a deeper review of his writing shows that it bordered on extremism. He called for the eradication of all religions. He did not just want Hinduism or Sanatana Dharma out of the state, he preached against Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, and all other prevalent religions of the southern states. His statement was:
“He who created god is a fool, he who propagates god is a scoundrel, and he who worships god is a barbarian.”
Lack of Inclusivity: While advocating for social justice, Periyar’s movement often overlooked the need for inclusivity. His atheistic ideology and anti-Brahmin stance led him to equate Hindu idols with stone worthy only to wash dirty linen. His post-independence statements would be labeled as ‘Hate-speech’ today. He incited anti-Hindu emotions in the people of Tamil Nadu. His personality mesmerized many followers and gave birth to the Dravida Kazhagam (DK). Periyar’s autocratic rule of the DK was later despised by his party members. His support of the British and their rule in India was evident in his policies and speeches. Ultimately, his marriage to a 26-year-old woman at the age of 72 led to the defection of his family and followers.
Anna: The Dissenter
N. Annadurai was affectionately known as Anna by his followers. He was a prominent Dravidian leader who was betrayed by his ‘Political Father’ Periyar. Originally, Periyar’s legacy was to be continued by his ‘Political Son’ Annadurai. Anna had been a staunch follower of Periyar and his anti-Brahman ideologue since 1935. However, the marriage of Periyar to his young wife after independence drove a wedge between the two leaders. Consequently, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam party was born. Anna used his political might against his teacher. He repeatedly campaigned against those leaders that were favored by Periyar. Soon, Anna led his party to electoral victory against DK’s chosen champion. He became the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu in the 1960s. Thereafter, he continued his agenda of Aryan-Dravidian divide and anti-Hindi policies. His leadership marked a shift towards regional autonomy for Tamil Nadu.
The Rhetoric of Tamil Nationalism: Anna thoroughly championed Tamil nationalism. This popular narrative fueled divisive sentiments in the local society. Moreover, he fully accepted the Aryan-Dravidian narrative peddled by the British. Thus, his sole focus became the ‘Tamil Identity.’ His fanatical approach to the superiority of the Tamil language, customs, and society coupled with his anti-Brahmin zeal overshadowed the need for a cohesive, multicultural society in India.
Cult of Personality: Anna’s magnetic personality and oratory skills often led to a cult-like following. This reverence clouded his followers’ judgment of right from wrong. Thus, there was never any acceptance of a critical assessment of his policies or beliefs. His Tamil-centric vision drove DMK to new heights. It also defeated Periyar’s DK on several occasions. From Political Son to Ideological Enemy, the transition of the two leaders of Tamil Nadu gave birth to the divisive narratives still prevalent in the region.
Kalaignar: The Dynast
M. Karunanidhi, fondly known as Kalaignar, was a DMK leader who excelled in statecraft. His contribution to both literature and politics in Tamil Nadu marked him as a ‘Learned Politician.’ He was originally a follower of Periyar but separated from the leader after the defection of Anna. He fervently hated the Congress and its ideology. He managed to balance DMK’s anti-Congress and anti-Hindu narrative with social reforms in Tamil Nadu. Although he preached equality for all, in the end, he was a dynastic politician. He passed the baton of the DMK party head to his son Stalin. Stalin and his son, Udhayanidhi, continue to press forward the anti-Hindu narrative but without any understanding of the religion or its roots. They represent the true evil of vote-bank politics and divisive narratives hidden in modern Indian politics.
Dynastic Politics: Kalaignar’s endorsement of dynastic politics showcases the presence of political nepotism. He continued to suppress local leaders and promoted family members to prominent positions. While many tried to challenge his policies, the heavy use of Anna and Periyar’s names by this statesman suppressed all dissenters.
Policy of Ambiguity: While trying to incorporate realism as its philosophy, DMK ambiguously practices anti-Hindu agendas in Tamil Nadu. These actions are a direct consequence of the propagation of the Fake Aryan-Dravidian narrative peddled by M. Karunanidhi and his stooges. Under Kalaignar’s guidance, the ‘North Indian-South Indian’ division of Bharat was never allowed to heal. Kalaignar’s policies always displayed ambiguity, leaving room for interpretation by the masses. He cleverly used this lack of clarity to mirror public sentiments.
The Dravidian Legacy
The Dravidian trio of Periyar, Anna, and Kalaignar undeniably left an indelible mark on Tamil Nadu’s socio-political landscape. While they championed social justice and regional identity, history must acknowledge their shortcomings and ideological extremities. Their effective use of divisive politics and convenient narratives to malign Sanatana Dharma should also be part of their Dravidian Legacy.
These stalwarts who dreamt up the Dravida Nadu ideology must be remembered as the knife that cleaved the southern states from the rest of Bharat.
Their hate-speeches and anti-Dharma policies have suppressed Hindus for decades. The legacy of Periyar, Anna, and Kalaignar is the ‘anti-Hindu politics’ that has led to the rise of evangelists and conversion enthusiasts in the southern part of India.
Currently, the Hindus of the southern Bharat live under constant suppression for their beliefs. They are forced to treat their religion of birth with contempt or hang their heads in shame at instances where social concerns are center-stage. While the South of Bharat is facing furious conversion rates, the ideology of these three men is still being used to suppress the rise of Hindus. Consequently, many political leaders still use their words/speeches to support a contorted view of Sanatana Dharma. As Tamil Nadu heads into elections soon, may the Hindus of the region unite to choose a righteous leader to walk the path of Dharma with pride.