Dravida Mafiosi to End


Even though it is easily predictable that a Dravida — in the absence of a non-Dravida — will be the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister in 2016 like always — as far as memories go back — it is clear that none of the Dravida parties will be voted this time in the wake of ending “Dravidian Mafiosi”. Result: DMK, AIDMK etc will easily lose. Their decades old fixed cadres will vote for BJP etc this time. They are refusing to be obsequious slaves, janitors any further. They want to be on their own, by their own, for their own, of their own. They thus this time will vote for the BJP to be in the mainstream of the country like elsewhere. They are dog tired with the hypocrisies of the Karunanidhis, Jayalalithas etc. Masses en masse in the state want to be Dravida no more but want to be Indians by all standards and be with national parties like the BJP. Mentionably, temperamentally, they are now more than convinced that they are more well placed than the Brahmins because of whom they were lifted by the Dravida founder. After decades, Brahmins today are only 2.75% of Tamil Nadu population. Iyer, Iyenger etc are now out and gone. Dravidas or the non-Brahmins today are any way more powerful, parvenu, pragmatic, python, panacea…
Tamil Nadu is home to one of the oldest anti-Brahmin movements in India. Tamil Brahmins (Iyers and Iyengars) are often held responsible by some sections of the Tamil politicians and media for alleged direct or indirect oppression of lower-caste people. The self-respect movement, a Dravidian Nationalist movement, was started by Periyar based incidents of Brahmin oppression towards lower castes. The legacy of the anti-Brahmanism of the self-respect movement was taken over by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK). Growing anti-Brahmanism in Chennai provided a rationale for polarization of the lower castes in the DMK movement.
Dravida Nadu, also known as Dravidistan or Dravidadesa, was the name of a proposed sovereign state demanded by Justice Party led by E. V. Ramasamyand the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) led by C. N. Annadurai for the speakers of the Dravidian languages in South Asia.
Initially, the demand of Dravida Nadu proponents was limited to Tamil-speaking region, but later, it was expanded to include other Indian states with Dravidian speakers in majority (i.e. Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Karnataka).) Some of the proponents also included parts of Ceylon (Sri Lanka), Orissa andMaharashtra. Other names for the proposed sovereign state included “South India”, “Deccan Federation” and “Dakshinapath”.
The movement for Dravida Nadu was at its height from the 1940s to 1960s, but due to fears of Tamil hegemony, it failed to find any support outside Tamil Nadu. The States Reorganisation Act 1956, which created linguistic States, weakened the demand further. In 1960, the DMK leaders decided to delete the demand of Dravida Nadu from the party programme at a meeting held in absence of Annadurai. In 1963, the Government of India led by Jawaharlal Nehru, declared secessionism as an illegal act. Subsequently, Annadurai abandoned the claim for Dravida Nadu – now geographically limited to modern Tamil Nadu – completely in 1963.
The concept of Dravida Nadu had its root in the anti-Brahminism movement in Tamil Nadu, whose aim was to end the alleged Brahmin dominance in the Tamil society and government. The early demands of this movement were social equality, and greater power and control.However, over the time, it came to include a separatist movement, demanding a sovereign state for the Tamil people. The major political party backing this movement was the Justice Party, which came to power in theMadras Presidency in 1921.
Since the late 19th century, the anti-Brahmin Tamil leaders had stated that the non-Brahmin Tamils were the original inhabitants of the Tamil-speaking region.The Brahmins, on the other hand, were described not only as oppressors, but even as a foreign power, on par with the British colonial rulers.
The prominent Tamil leader, E. V. Ramasami (popularly known as “Periyar”) stated that the Tamil society was free of any societal divisions before the arrival of Brahmins, whom he described as Aryan invaders. Periyar was an atheist, and considered the Indian nationalism as “an atavistic desire to endow the Hindu past on a more durable and contemporary basis”.
The proponents of Dravida Nadu constructed elaborate historical anthropologies to support their theory that the Dravidian-speaking areas once had a great non-Brahmin polity and civilisation, which had been destroyed by the Aryan conquest and Brahmin hegemony.This led to an idealisation of the ancient Tamil society before its contact with the “Aryan race”, and led to a surge in the Tamil nationalism.Periyar expounded the Hindu epic Ramayana as a disguised historical account of how the Aryans subjugated the Tamils ruled by Ravana. Some of the separatists also posed Saivism as an indigenous, even non-Hindu religion.
The Indian National Congress, a majority of whose leaders were Brahmins, came to be identified as a Brahmin party.Periyar, who had joined Congress in 1919, became disillusioned with what he considered as the Brahminic leadership of the party. The link between Brahmins and Congress became a target of the growing Tamil nationalism.
In 1925, Periyar launched the Self-respect movement, and by 1930, he was formulating the most radical “anti-Aryanism”.The rapport between the Justice Party and the Self-Respect movement of Periyar (who joined the party in 1935) strengthened the anti-Brahmin and anti-North sentiment. In 1937–38, Hindi and Hindustani were introduced as new subjects in the schools, when C. Rajagopalachari of Congress became the Chief Minister of Madras Presidency. This led to widespread protests in the Tamil-speaking region, which had a strong independent linguistic identity. Periyar saw the Congress imposition of Hindi in government schools as further proof of an Aryan conspiracy.
At the 14th Confederation of the Justice Party held in Madras in 1938, rules and regulations, or precursors of a Dravida Nadu were adopted. The objectives were defined as: to attain Purna Swaraj and complete control for Dravida Nadu in social, economic and industrial, and commercial fields; to liberate Dravida Nadu and Dravidians from exploitation and domination bynon-Dravidian foreigners; to acquire for the citizens of Dravida Nadu without discrimination on account of caste and class and inequalities arising there from, in law and society, equal rights and equal opportunities; to remove from the Dravidian people the sense of difference and superstitious beliefs existing in the name of religion, customs, and traditions and unite them as a society of people with a liberal outlook and intellectual development, and to get proportionate representation in all fields till the achievement of these objectives and until the people who have a sense of caste, religious and class differences cooperate with the party in full confidence and goodwill. Thus, Periyar also stated that “Self Respect should come before self-rule”.d
The characteristics of the separate Dravida Nadu was described by Periyar as: the area then comprising Madras Presidency; system of passport to enter the state; duty on goods from other provinces and entry with permit; demarcation of boundaries according to the needs and convenience of Dravida Nadu; and continuing an existing system of defence till grant of full independence. He also assured religious freedom to Muslims, Christians, Buddhists and others within this area. On the same accord, the separation of religion and politics was a part of this leaving religion as a matter of individual belief. It was made clear that the political movement should not be used for religious propaganda.
…2016 will thus be of non-Dravida Party Government. Primarily of the BJP, now being associated with Nationalism led by internationally acclaimed Anna Narendra Modi. He is seen to be contributing immensely to the nationalistic perspective of the entire Tamil Nadu state. What’s more? Modi’s a Dravidan.

Leave A Reply