Why Dravidianism is Needed in a Hindutva Polarising Society?

Across the world, the fundamental conflict is labour versus capital. Do the capitalists swindle profits and amass wealth? Yes. Do they exploit labour? Definitely!

In India, this capital primarily propagates through existing caste structures (Brahminical hegemony), linguistic supremacy (Hindi imposition), and religious nationalism (Hindu Rashtra). ‘Hindutva’ ideology - being the intersection of all the three-oppression forming a cultural hegemony. B.R. Ambedkar rightly identified ‘Brahminism and Capitalism’ as the two enemies for the Indian society and gave frameworks to fight them. Periyar E.V Ramasamy, precisely coined this oppression as 'Hindu-Hindi-India'. Both giants worked tirelessly building movements to fight against it. Of them, Dravidian movement, spearheaded by Periyar who had mutual respect and approval from Ambedkar, was built with a shared mission to collectively oppose Brahminism - the caste hierarchy.

Dravidianism as ‘Social Mobility’

Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam or DMK, the electoral brainchild of the Dravidian movement, was founded in 1949 by CN Annadurai along with his brethren after having differences with Periyar, has consistently worked to weaken these structures of oppression systemically. The recent example being ‘naan mudhalvan’, the dream scheme of the former Chief minister MK Stalin, which enables marginalised to become civil service officers that renders them political power to frame policies for social upliftment. Periyar Ninaivu Samathuvapuram, a scheme introduced in 1998 by the then DMK President and Tamil Nadu CM M Karunanidhi that gives the social experience for integrated living as neighbours from diverse social location (including castes, and differently abled people) and share basic civic amenities.

The Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam or ADMK, the split away populist faction from DMK, founded in 1972 by MG Ramachandran, despite flaunting Hindutva tendencies, has also contributed to expanding the schemes for marginalised emancipation. Latest example, implemented in 2020 by the then CM and ADMK Chief Edappadi K Palanisamy, being 7.5% reservation (affirmative action) in higher education for the predominantly socially backward government school students.

There is a long trail of social-democratic schemes on the reservation policies by Dravidian electoral majors, more specifically DMK, ever since the first communal government order in 1921 that was passed by the ‘Justice party’(SILF) in the then Madras Presidency. Most notably to include the most marginalised within the classification:

Arundhatiyars among Scheduled Castes (2009), Most Backward Castes (1989) and Muslims and Christians (2007) among Backward Castes, through internal affirmative action apart from obtaining constitutional validity (1993) on the scale of reservation up to 69% - a record high among the large Indian states. The first three are credited to M Karunanidhi’s chief ministership tenure and the last in 1993 to J Jayalalithaa’s administration.

Dravidian majors have made continuous efforts in building essential shared living spaces that facilitated social mobility. For instance, hostels for the marginalised students (ST, SC, MBC, BC), when they venture out of their home for higher studies. The first initiative in Tamil Nadu transcends ever since 1923, to the Justice party times, the ‘precursor’ Dravidian electoral organisation that Annadurai, founder of the DMK fondly calls as Pattanaar katchi. The recent addition to such shared living space is the Thozhi hostels launched by DMK president and the then CM MK Stalin in July 2023, catering to the housing needs of working-class women moving to a city. He launched similar scheme called Thozhiyar hostel, a dedicated hostel for the trans-community.   

These are seen as the continuation of the DMK’s long list of women emancipation policies with the landmark legislation in 1989 by M Karunanidhi implemented (Equal Property Rights for Women - the Hindu Succession Tamil Nadu Amendment Act), granting women equal rights to ancestral property, a cause championed by Ambedkar and Periyar.

This all looks merrily social-democratic and less challenging to the existing Hindutva cultural dominance. Where has it threatened the hegemony the most? To know, one must understand what Dravidianism means!

Dravidianism as ‘Cultural agency’

According to Periyar, Dravidianism is a revolutionary social, political and philosophical framework to liberate the marginalised and build an egalitarian (oppression free) society.[1]

First, Dravidian ideologues initiated cultural reclamation as a fundamental project to instil ‘self-respect’ and rational thought. Self-respect is the fundamental philosophical pillar of Dravidianism, which means recognizing one’s own agency, rejecting subordination, and actively fighting for one's own rights and self-worth.

Periyar conceptualised ‘Self-respect’ marriages, an egalitarian marriage legalised by CN Annadurai through self-respect marriage act in 1967, that involves no Brahminical priestly intervention and religious rituals to weaken caste hierarchy and reject linguistic imposition (Sanskrit if you wonder what language).

Second, Dravidian leaders principally deployed philosophical deconstruction of the Hindu mythological texts like ‘Periyapuranam’ and ‘Kamba Ramayanam’ for invoking rationality in the society. Thee Paravattum – Let the fire spread (published in 1953) is the compilation of Annadurai’s public debate that happened in 1943, where he exposes how hegemonic dominance propagates through art, devotion, and mythology.

Dravidian ideologues utilised popular mediums like cinema, theatre and music Sabha turning them into a cultural space where ideas are pitched, debated and taken home among the working class to their reading rooms, tea shops, and hair salons. To illustrate, a dialogue in the movie Parasakthi (1952) penned by M Karunanidhi, “When did Ambal (the Goddess) speak?” captured the cultural nerve to invoke rationality among the audience. Later in 2007, during the Sethusamuduram canal project, he brought similar logical arguments - "Who is this Ram? Which engineering college did he graduate from to become a civil engineer?", that nudged the minds of people including the detractors. 

Third, inclusive identity creation was part of the mechanism for affirmative social recognition and to reclaim indigenous roots. In fact, the word ‘Dravidian’ was coined by Pandit Iyothee Dass to build a distinct, non-Hindu, and casteless identity for marginalized communities. In public addresses, Dravidian leaders attribute egalitarianism quoting the Sangam era, a primitive commune period in Tamil history where the society had the then advancements in technology, art, literature and established trade relationship with the Roman society. In recent times there are material evidence to substantiate it in the archaeological excavation sites of Keeladi, Porunai.

More specifically to cater contemporary needs, for inclusive identity creation, M Karunanidhi has continually updated the Tamil glossary for widowed women as ‘Kaimpen’, transgenders as ‘Thirunar’, differently abled as ‘maatru-thiranaali’ (differently skilled) that gave affirmative social recognition. During M K Stalin’s chief ministership tenure 2021-26, his convention for naming social transformation projects embodied inclusivity and affirmative social recognition. To name a few: he named his universal basic income scheme as Kalaignar Magalir urimai thogai - Women’s rightful entitlement, his skill development program as naan mudhalvan - I am the first that helps students to build leadership and excellence in their chosen field, his free public transport for women and transpeople as Vidiyal Payanam – Journey to Dawn (emancipation), incentive for university students as Puthumai pen - modern women, and Tamil Puthalvan -Tamil’s son to emphasise being educated is the core of Tamil modernity.

Of all, the Hindutva forces fear the most, is the cultural agency that Dravidianism brings into the social discourse as it is not just diametrically opposite to their cultural project but detrimental to their hegemony. Since assimilation of the Dravidian ideology is a herculean project, as it offers social mobility and cultural agency (read as equality, liberty and fraternity) to the marginalised, Hindutva forces try to attenuate, counter by creating and appropriating multiple variants of right-populist proxy organisation. Notably, Naam Tamilar Katchi and Tamilaga Vetri Kazhagam are the latest electoral parties to join the right-populist proxy club.

In short, cultural reclamation, inclusive identity creation, affirmative social recognition for the marginalised along with social transformation policies are challenging the hegemonic dominance.

Key Takeaway – ‘Being Dravidian’

Periyar chose rationalism, and self-respect as an agency for fighting the oppressive caste system and for the very same reason, Ambedkar adopted Navayana Buddhism.

Just like how farce is to reduce Ambedkarite liberation movement as a mere ‘Dalit Identity politics or to Buddhist spiritualism’, so is to reduce Dravidian Movement as mere ‘politics of governance’. Both the movements are radical giants of its own and together, in comparison - two sides of the same coin.

To best put in Periyar’s words, reminiscing his tour of north Indian states addressing the working class, “all those who are oppressed throughout the Indian sub-continent are Dravidians and Adi Dravidians.” In Viduthalai, the official organ of the Dravidar Kazhagam, when Palestine was bifurcated to deprive livelihoods and basic rights of the Arabs, he addresses them as ‘Arab Dravidians.’[2] In corollary, Dravidian Identity is never a given based on birth (like the varna system) nor just determined based on the language that one speaks, it is more of a conscious contention of working towards social liberation. So, the subaltern intellectuals, practitioners and activists in political movements, electoral organisations, independent progressives must ruminate and employ methods, engage popular mediums to ignite rational thoughts actively work towards marginalised liberation.

FYI – CN Annadurai deconstructed Hindu canonical texts two decades earlier than it was found as a philosophical method in 1960s by French Philosopher Jacques Derrida. Like Annadurai, he radically critiqued Western metaphysics, language, and meaning deeply transformed literary theory, philosophy, law, and architecture. On hindsight, if one must name what Annadurai and other Dravidian Ideologues did for cultural reclamation and inclusive identity creation, it can be termed as philosophical deconstruction.

The writer is an independent political observer who happens to be an engineer. The views are personal.