People's Democracy

Periyar And The Relevance Of His Thought

K Varadharajan

THANTHAI Periyar. Why do many in the last century and also in the present century frequently pronounce these words? For what cause do the leaders of various political parties in Tamilnadu use the name of Periyar and hail him as their pioneer? For what reason, even today, the policies of Periyar figure as the central theme of the discussions among his followers and also his critics. To answer these questions, we should search for the central point of the continuous campaign of Periyar, before and after independence, in Tamilnadu.

In Tamilnadu as well as in India, many social reformers before the advent of Periyar, fought against the brahminical chauvinism in education, employment and politics, etc. In 1917, in a manifesto released by Justice Party, it has been mentioned that out of 171 persons who had been selected for Madras provincial civil service, 100 were brahmins. In the same way, out of 273 persons who had been selected for Madras members of subordinate service, 165 were brahmins. In jail department, the persons selected were 277 out of which 190 were brahmins. In education department, the total persons selected were 515, out of which 365 were brahmins.

In 1920, 16 persons had been selected in a competitive examination for civil service out of which 15 were brahmins. Five High Court judges were appointed and all of them were brahmins. Out of 128 district munsifs appointed, 93 were brahmins.

Dr Ambedkar in northern states and Jothirao Phule in Maharashtra vehemently fought against the caste oppression. In South India, Ayothi Dasar, Rettaimalai Srinivasan, Narayana Guru and other personalities fought against caste oppression.

ON HIS CONTRIBUTION

While we evaluate political and ideological contributions of Periyar, we may see so many contradictions. For example, from 1952 to 1967, Periyar had supported Congress rule in Tamilnadu. But when DMK captured power, after defeating Congress in 1967, he began to support it. Later on he supported the AIADMK government headed by M G Ramachandran, who had defeated the DMK at the hustings.

What is the reason for these contradictions? Periyar’s answer to this question was as follows: “My own Dravidar Kazhagam (DK) never fought for power. Only campaigning among people and to change their mindset is our aim. But then I have no hesitation to fight against caste oppression, by using the politicians who come to power.”

Periyar followed this stand throughout his lifetime. He outlined the theme of his ideology in 1920s. On January 1, 1924 in a conference of Tamilnadu Congress committee at Thiruvannamalai, Periyar delivered a speech, which revealed his political ideology. “Though the harmony among Hindus and Muslims is intact in South India, the unity among Hindus is diminishing. First, let us analyse the status of brahmins vis-à-vis non-brahmins. Though both of them belong to same religion, parochialism is prevalent among them. There are basic reasons for these differences. Patriots should come forward to rectify these contradictions.”

Brahmins held more than 60 per cent of seats in education and employment. Only a small per cent of the dalits and backward class people were enjoying educational and job opportunities.

The point here is that even 80 years ago, Periyar called on the patriots to work to remove the basic differences in the Hindu society. The search to find an answer to this basic question of contradictions between brahmins and non-brahmins, moulded Erode V Ramaswamy as ‘Periyar’. 

BECOMING A RATIONALIST

This search led Periyar from Congress to Justice Party and then to start Dravidar Kazhagam separately. This search about the caste differences also led him against Hindu religion and to contest the existence of God. Finally, Periyar came to the conclusion that there is no God, there is no God at all. He concluded that those who invented God are fools, those who preached God are scoundrels and those who worshipped God are barbarians. He stuck to his philosophy throughout his lifetime.

He started the Rational movement against brahminical chauvinism. Basically it was a movement of non-brahmins. This movement not only raised its voice against Hindu religion, which advocates the caste system but also against the theory of God and religious ideology in general. 

In the early thirties after returning from Soviet Union, Periyar’s attachment to the socialist ideology strengthened and he made extensive campaign about it.

The British imperialism, which used Periyar’s earlier campaign against brahminism and also Congress for its own interests, attacked Periyar vehemently when he started to champion socialist ideas. At that time, Periyar was very attached to Comrade Jeevanandham, the notable communist leader in South India, in 1934. Comrade Jeeva translated Bhagat Singh’s booklet “Why I am an Atheist?” into Tamil. Following this, the British Raj arrested Jeeva and the publisher of the book, Comrade E V Krishnaswamy, and also seized some of Periyar’s campaigning materials.

After such incidents, his campaign stopped for a while. Fear was not the reason but he reasoned with himself on the question of whether to fight for socialism or to fight against brahminism? Which is important? He preferred the anti-brahminical campaign. He strongly believed that caste system is the first enemy in Indian society. He said that casteism is the basic reason for the suppressed position of the downtrodden people in the country. Periyar said that caste system is prevalent everywhere and so the fight against casteism should be given prominence.

Starting from 1934, the Rational movement of Periyar advocated and campaigned for these ideas. According to him, “the demolition of caste and class oppression must proceed simultaneously.” But the Left movement earlier had given priority only to the class struggle and the fight against economic exploitation. Meanwhile, the socialist movements raised their voice against the incidents of caste oppression and Periyar also voiced against the brutal attacks on the working class struggles –– the two movements travelled on same road for some time.

PRESENT DAY REALITY

But what does our experience show? What will be the answer to these questions? Caste oppression? Or Class oppression? Which is to be crushed first?

Our answer is that, both of them should be demolished and for this the fight against class oppression and the fight against casteism should be integrated. In Tamilnadu, where Periyar led an uncompromising struggle against casteism, where his followers ruled the state for the last 37 years since 1967, the bitter truth is that casteism has still not been rooted out. The cruelty of untouchability exists in the state and even certain followers of Periyar are supporting the brutality of caste system. Even today, in the rural villages of Tamilnadu, clashes are frequent between dalits and backward people.

What do these things show? Why are some of the followers of Periyar supporting untouchability? Why are they shamelessly and easily identifying themselves with fascist Hindutva forces? What is the meaning of the alliance? On the other side the socialist movement is not able to retain its base in places where it led only class struggles.

On the contrary, even to this day, Kerala, West Bengal, Nagapattinam and Tiruvarur districts of Tamilnadu are still the strong bases for the Left movement, because in these bases the class struggles for the economic emancipation and the struggle against the caste oppression were integrated.

Only in Kerala, Bengal and Tripura, and in some pockets in Andhra and Tamilnadu, caste oppression has been demolished today. And also only in these states, the oppressed and suppressed people of the society are empowered economically and socially to some extent.

So, this is the present day reality. We can adopt the thoughts of Periyar that the caste oppression should be cremated. Yes, the struggle against the economic oppression and the struggle against the caste oppression should be continued simultaneously.