Tamil Brahmins Alert!

 This post is exclusively for Tamil Brahmins. One appalling observation about TN today. There are a lot of people, especially youngsters, who are very apprehensive about Dravidian movement, Periyar, Dravidian propaganda, etc. And who are attached towards Hinduism. Tamils were a semi-barbaric bunch of people until recently and the savage has the greatest need for culture. This infatuation for "Hinduism" was there even amongst the lords who built Dravidam and Brahmin hatred. That is understandable. What is appalling is...

There are a bunch of observations about 20th century TN that I have. I know them for a fact. I have searched and read, and seen videos. I have read between lines for long. I know it. I can see it. I, as a Tamil Brahmin. Other non-Brahmins need not be so interested, and will not be affected by it to the same degree to which I have been.

Now, in a normal scenario, if there is a highly vicious, heinous crime being committed, and one sees it, what is the further course of action? One cannot stop it at the source. The source is the power center of TN for centuries. Even Union of India, America, China can only bomb it. Nobody but tamil Brahmins really have the need to see and understand the game. Many people are trying to approach logically...

When one sees a crime, what is the further course of action? Complain to police? Tell a friend? Gather a crowd, tell them? Tell a powerful contact/goon who will counter attack? 

In all these cases, the prerequisite is ...? The other party has to "see" the crime. One century of Brahmin hatred in TN was one hundred percent non-violent. (Yet, the manner in which the hatred was radiated, it made violence look acceptable). That was the nature of comprehensive, all-encompassing institutionalized Brahmin hatred of tamils. Making the other person, non-tamil, or non-Brahmin "see" the crime itself is the problem. 

Second is..the narrative in TN today. There are the people who are the subscribers of dravidian thought-view, and they are vile creatures. Then, there are those people who veer towards Hinduism and attack Dravidian/periyarist propaganda for being anti-hindu, and a general fraud, and its the second gang I'm most scared of.

Because, like I said, the savage has the greatest need for culture, and tamils have come into contact with Indian mainstream like never before. They want to link with it. But they are casually passing through Brahmin hatred.

The way Brahmin hatred has been normalized in Tamil Nadu will make any sane human get shocked to the bones. Because it originates from the uppermost tamil castes- Chettiar, Mudaliar, Pillai, Balija Naidu. These are also the most hindu-ized, ritualized, brahminized tamil castes, and that is no dichotomy. Brahmin hatred was their handiwork. Dravidian politics was a legacy that they created, on orders of the British. 

Now, if a lay tamil is to question brahmin hatred in TN, he has to encounter those tamils who are closest to brahmins in caste hierarchy, and know about brahminical stuff way more than him. He will be shamed. "Do you know more about Brahmins than me?" The very fact the uppermost castes of Tamil Nadu have been at it for a century is the factor which normalizes hatred. 

Say there are 100 people. Tamil Brahmins count as 2. The circle from which Brahmin hatred radiates is 7 people. And these 7 people were the most powerful people, who had all the power, money, land, industry for centuries. Dravidian politics and Brahmin hatred were both from them, but they are deeply devout. They are most hinduest tamils. But the fire of hatred burns strong in their heart even today, and the amount of venom and malice Chettiar+mudaliar+pillai have spewed will deeply shock the most vilest villain. They make hitler and pol pot seem like cry babies. Tamil Nadu is a totally different place, and India has no idea what has been going on here. 

Now, who has to question Brahmin hatred, out of the remaining 91 people? One, it was fully non-violent. It is hatred without a reason. It might be hard to understand, but it is very very real. What propelled Dravidian ship for a century was the need of Vanniyar + Nadar + Konar for a political vehicle, and also...the hatred of Chettiar+Mudaliar+Pillai. Hatred without reason. It goes on and on and on. There is no point answering the accusations, allegations because the purpose is to vent out hatred. 

Most of the accusations are highly subjective opinion/narrative type, and not objective facts. A fact can be proved or disproved. An opinion, and interpretation, a narrative cannot be "answered". It goes into the minds of the listeners, and gives them certain notions about certain people/things. Its a world-view. Minus this world-view, Dravidian movement/DMK/DK is just like any other political party anywhere in the world.

Who will question this hatred? Out of 100, 2 are the victims, 7 are the perpetrators, 20 are dalits. Out of approx 70 remaining ppl, 50 are not aware of it. A huge chuck of the population everywhere don't care much about politics. They just know their circle, and they decide whom to vote for, often on loose grounds. Who will be the crowd which will see what Nagarathar-Vellalar have been doing to Brahmins, and who will get shocked? If that X is an upper-ish caste person, he will himself have a grudge on the brahmins that all non-brahmins generally have. In TN, the higher the person is, the greater the hatred. If it's a lower caste person, it is likely that that person doesn't even fully appreciate the propaganda. This is a world-view. Nobody other than Brahmins have the need to understand and see the truths. Others dont even take in the worldview fully, let alone see the factual/logical lapses.

When Dravidian movement and Periyar are blamed for being "anti-hindu", what happens is...that becomes the only thing that was wrong with it. Because Brahmin hatred has been normal-ised. Nobody talks about it. And the format in which Chettiar-Mudaliar-Pillai have been doing brahmin hatred in TN is such that..it cannot be answered, it cannot be stopped, it cannot be disproved, it cannot be countered, it cannot be opposed. Its a podcast which goes straight into tamil public psyche. And it becomes the crowd's voice, and thought, too. In TN, you can either drink it, or ignore it. You cannot fight it. You cannot question it. There's no point. That's why karu palaniappan, kryes, PTR, etc block so many people. They don't care about whether they are legit or not. Their goal is to infect as many people as possible. People who will drink in their worldview and act as channels for their propaganda. Even Periyar used to say "I want only fools".

Nattukottai Nagarathar + Mudaliar + Pillai + Balija Naidu are together the tamil elites. Their influence is centuries old. They know tamils and can influence them like nobody else. Thats why I said India, China, America, Russia can bomb TN, but they cannot influence tamil crowd like nagarathar-vellalar did. That is the factor which makes them elites. The ability to feed their narrative to the crowd. They know this crowd like nobody else.

When Dravidian propaganda is blamed for being anti-hindu, that fills the public narrative. That is my issue. There are very few people talking meaningful politics. Few ever know real facts, and fewer still can put it up all together. All developed minds have a world-view. Its not a bad word. The problem is nagarathar-vellalar worldview which is distorted, and filled with opinions designed to feed hatred and venom.

Very few people talk serious politics, and know the continuity.

When you call them "anti-hindu", which they are not, you are filling the debate with meaningless stuff. Thats what those 7 people want, too!! Out of the remaining 91 people, anywhere between 30-50 are vanniyar, nadar, konar, etc. The staple crowd, the foot soldiers of the Dravidian movement. The elites had power, these groups provided numbers. Dravidam itself was a pact between these two. 

So, for Nagarathar-vellalar (dravidian) propaganda, Brahmin hatred, Brahmin/Non-Brahmin was the real agenda. Hindu/Anti-hindu, anti-caste were the euphemisms, the facades. India will be shocked to know that they made anti-caste as a euphemism for anti-Brahmin. By inflicting pain to Brahmins, you are attacking caste system itself.

This was dravidian movement. This was basically the uppermost tamil castes telling tamils "bash the brahmins, and I will not be casteist towards you." quid pro quo. But see, casteism was reduced, voila! That's the net result. Bash the Brahmins, and casteism in society was reduced. Because the topmost tamils adjusted their own domino of casteism, in order to make the claims of their politics true. Dravidian politics was theirs.

What is happening today, is...Hindu vs anti-Hindu from outside is attacking Brahmin vs. non-Brahmin of TN. Hindu/anti-hindu, RW/LW, Hindutva/Liberal polarisation is completely different from the monstrosity that has been going on in TN. 

Hindutva/Liberal is a horizontal line on vertical classes of people. Brahmin/Non-Brahmin (in narrative) was a vertical division itself! There are just so many games they played. All with similar template:- first defy/decry something, spew venom on the Brahmins, then step back, say "no no, we are not evil. we are not against anything".

"we are not against brahmins, we are against Brahminism"

"we are not against Hinduism, we are against caste system"

"we are not against rituals/customs, we are against blinding superstitions"

"We didn't just really do what we just did : spew hatred on Brahmins. That's not the intention. Neither are we against Hinduism"

Like slapping a guy, all the while saying "No, I'm not slapping you. I have no problem with you". Then, when you walk away, a guy asks you "did you slap him?", and you say, "see, I told him, and I tell you, I don't have a problem with him. I'm not against anybody. I'm just against oppression".

The Indian/BJP narrative is Hindu, anti-hindu. The 100 year old narrative in TN was Brahmin/Non-Brahmin. They are equating Non-Brahmin, anti-Brahmin with anti-Hindu, which is absurd. Even in India, with 80% hindus, we can see that Hindutva/Liberal discourse is more nuanced. Its closer to a proper left-right debate. A horizontal division. Equating 'anti-Brahmin' with anti-hindu is an act of subversion, (when done by non-Brahmins, in TN). But very few know and talk politics. If the ones who talk, talk irrelevant stuff, deliberately or unknowingly, it drowns the voice of truth.

Now, if DMK is defeated, dravidian movement is vanquished, what will that be? A victory of Hinduism over missionary/anti-hindu forces? Victory of good hindus against bad hindus? If you think so, you have absolutely no idea what went on in TN, and you drown the voice of truth. After it goes down, nobody will bother to re-examine it. So, if it is dismissed for the wrong reason, that means the truth is lost forever. One hundred yrs of institutionalized brahmin hatred, limitless malice of Nattukottai Nagarathar, Sengundhar, Tuluva Vellala Mudaliar, Saiva Pillai, Balija Naidus, will be lost forever.

The polarisation of India is hindu/anti-hindu, Hindutva/Secular.

The polarisation in TN, for a century, has been Brahmin/Non-Brahmin. Don't mix the two. Enter TN framework, which is unlikely. Or, advertise ur framework. Dont see past from within your framework. You dont know what tamils are, what Tamil Brahmins have had to endure.

Dont take up all the space of the debate. Don't dismiss dravidian movement for the wrong reasons. Truth will be gone forever. Most of the people in TN BJP today were the groups that grew in the shade of the Nagarathar-Vellalar (Dravidian) politics, and acted as channels and supporters for their hate campaign. They are deliberately applying Hindutva/Secular to TN's Brahmin/Non-Brahmin narrative. Because they want to bury the truth. They were in it.

After a Hundred Years of Dravidam...

Annamalai K has joined TN BJP, and emphatically states that BJP will win in TN, and will purge it.

Dravidian Politics began with introduction of Dyarchy via Government of India Act, 1919. The etymological break up of the word 'dyarchy' is 

Di   - two

Arkhia - rule (greek)

Di-archy, as opposed to mono-archy. 

20th century saw the system of monarchy collapse all over the world. Stirrings of this happened right from 1905 Russian revolution. The first world war led to collapse of monarchical systems in both Russia and Germany, leading to formation of the USSR, and the Weimar Republic, respectively. Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler were both dictators, but the clear fact was that power could no longer remain concentrated in a few hands. The British Empire, which brought India under direct rule of the crown only in 1858, was quick to realize that its already excellent stroke of luck in Human history could not last very long. It had been only taking advantage of the disorganized state of a vast region full of "a beastly people with a beastly religion" with a sprinkling of white European men. It only ruled via the existing local power structures. A colonial remote rule is different from a monarch ruling over his/her land. The ratio of population of Britishers to Indians in India during colonial rule was typically 1:3000. They only took advantage of existing power structures, benefiting from the lack of unity, and the incapacity of those weak powers to revolt or break free. 

Dyarchy was one step away from monarchy, and one step towards democracy. Instead of a Mono-archia from London, there was to be an additional 'archia' now. A lower, local one. An elected one. The most important change that introduction of dyarchy implied was - introduction of democratic elections.

The root of the word 'caste' is 'casta', meaning - lineage, in Spanish. Before Dyarchy, it was the Kings and Queens of Britain ruling India, but the various 'casta's of India knew their own history very well. The ones among them which had probable history of having been the rulers of their home regions remembered it very well indeed. As a whole, tamilnadu has not been under an empire of any sort for many centuries now. But, periyar's casta, Balija Naidus, were supposed to have been the Naickers who ruled Tamilagam. British entered India as traders, and other groups had long associations with the British through trade.

Now, Dravidian Politics starts with Dyarchy. Formation of an elected government of sorts. Even though both the franchise, and the powers of the elected politicians were limited, it was a fundamental change. It was that paradigm shift that the British calculated would keep their empire from collapsing like German or Russian empires. But of course it was not just Dyarchy. They had other tricks up their sleeve. Many, many tricks. India was very unlike the lands that the German or Russian empires ruled, and the British had vast knowledge and experience in India. Much more so than Indians themselves. This period also saw the rise of a new consciousness in India. This was the consciousness of another class of elites and middle classes that would agitate for freedom struggle. As can be expected of attitudes and behavior typical of the bourgeois, the freedom struggle of this new consciousness eulogized 'non-violence' and 'non-cooperation'. There was no 'India' at that time. There was no common thing each group could fight for.

So, IMO, Dravidam happened at the confluence of these two forces. One, that clamored against the British, in what way it could. And the other, was the group that sold a certain fisher-village to Sir Francis Day in 1639, and was hugely benefiting from British Trade (Exports, Industry). These are the two main, broad lines. Brahmins in Congress on one hand, and the Elites, the "Sat-Shudras", who tended to be from the castes of Balija Naidus, Nairs, Sengundhar/Kaikolar/Tuluva Mudaliars, Beri/Nattukottai Chettis and elite vellalars, on the other hand.

Ironically, Brahmins were aplenty in British Administration, and Dravidam "fought for" places in Government for non-brahmins. Nobody wonders "If Brahmins/Congress were fighting AGAINST British, they were fighting against the owner of that very government that they were employed in". The Madras Province Swarajya Party (a Branch of the main Congress) refused to form government in 1926 and 1934, despite winning the elections!!! (3rd Communal G.O. for reservations was brought in 1927/28, not in JP rule. Why?)

The Congress Brahmins probably realized that only their jobs would be lost if they quit their government jobs and hit the streets. Nobody would join them. The elites were making huge sums of money through British trade. The chettiars, for instance, were carrying out lucrative trade everywhere in the British Empire. This was the reason why the non-cooperation movement failed, as well. There needed to be a force strong enough to paralyze the empire. The most fundamental ingredient for this jolt to happen was - the feeling of 'swarajya'. Without developing that feeling, it was impossible to gather everybody for the freedom struggle. That simple feeling of Swarajya had to developed as an intellectual abstraction first, then passed on to people. Or rather, people were to be invited onto its boat. It failed to gather momentum because it was led by the bourgeois and a few elites.

One strategy of the British was to isolate the enemies, and focus their attacks on them. As mentioned, they had vast knowledge and experience of the land. The had been drawing big, translucent circles for a long time. It was time to draw smaller, opaquer circles and carry out pin pointed attacks. They realized that the Brahmins of Madras State *had* to be dealt with. Even though Brahmins of Bombay state and Savarnas in Bengal were much more militant in action, there were many other factors which made Madras State special. In Madras, Brahmins were the ones pressing freedom struggle. Plotting against the crown. The British had already been studying and talking and writing about 'casta's for a long time. This was a pan-european phenomenon. Every one studied India and formed theories about Indian society. Dr. Ambedkar already drew from a huge body of colonial writers. 

Madras and Bombay, were the two main centers of Congress Activity. Bombay was the first, main one. And Bal Gangadhar Tilal, the father of the Indian Unrest, was one of the main figures in it. The pin-pointed attack of the British on the enemies of the crown happened in Bombay first and much later, in Madras. Satya Shodak Samaj was started by Jyotirao Phule in 1873. And unlike the Dravidarrrrr Kazhagam, it included Brahmins too. Phule died in 1890, and even in his time, SSS didn't cause much of a practical impact. However, the SSS that Shahu Maharaj took over in 20th century was a totally different one, for a totally different cause. The freedom movement was growing stronger in Bombay. Bombay was the center of the congress. Pin pointed attack. The center, or source for both the Congress, as well as anti-brahmin propaganda, was Bombay. As mentioned, the very purpose of this British project was to attack Brahmins, and weaken them. Individually. Personally. To thwart the congress. The source for the anti-brahmin propaganda in Madras State was Bombay. 

Dyarchy lasted 15 years. GOI Act 1935 brought a provincial government, and this time, the Congress won and formed government. British had to gear up their act. War was also coming. They needed India's support. They sensed that the freedom-organizers sensed that this was their time to pressurize the british. This was around the time Ramasamy Naicker was named "Periyar" by Saminathan Dharmambal Chettiar, in 1938. This "Periyar" would mold politics in Tamilnadu till he died in 1973, and his legacy would live on for 80+ years after this naming event.

These are the larger forces that caused dravidam. The major tectonic plates. Im worried about the minor/micro plates. One hundred years of institutionalized visceral, vitriolic, venomous hatred and propaganda against the brahmins in Tamil Nadu. Let me be clear. I think the Dravidian Movement is unique in world history. In intensity and tenacity of propagandizing about a select bunch of people, and duration.

That hatred was not a natural uprising. It was a deliberate, targeted hatred rising from certain powerful, most powerful quarters of the society. It was institutionalized by them as Dravidian Politics + Propaganda. DK states that in 1910's the Madras United League had brahmin-opposition as its only purpose. They simply wanted to call themselves the 'Non-Brahmin Association'. But, they did not want to give Brahmins so much importance so as to name themselves such. So, they called themselves the 'Madras Dravidian Association' or something. Point is... "Dravidam" is all about Brahmin. Anti-Brahmin, to be precise. Period. Like Sisupala of Mahabharata, they have been consumed by their hatred for the brahmin, and the USP or identity of their politics was simply the institutionalized form of this hatred.

What made me investigate their politics and history was this hatred that I had to encounter wherever i turned my head. The vitriol of hatred that seeps into you no matter how much tightly you close your eyes and ears to it. No matter how much you laugh it off, and sometimes secretly feel pride in being an object of attention, + or - vely. The fact that Brahmins have never been summoned to provide their POV and their answers to the questions, was so by design. It was meant to be so. DK and its ideologues cant afford to encounter actual facts and logic. Their castle would crumble. The castle of dravidam was simply the worldview of those lords in whom the British placed trust. The ones who sold their villages to them, the ones who acted as their trusted bankers wherever they went, the ones who exported leather and textiles to them. That worldview was a very precious thing. There are very few ones who carry that scent. To me, the most important change post dravidam would be the absence of this scent of dravidam, the vitriol of hatred. Absence of the hatred itself, but the very much present, harrowing, and real sense of pain. What I am most scared of is the fact that when we tell our side of the story, the real events, nobody would be interested in them!!! Its already happening. 

Or, it would be a relic of the past. People would detachedly listen to it like listening to a piece of history or some folklore. The vitriol of dravidam was a very real thing, and lasted a hundred years. It roused real hatred in a section of listeners every time the 'parappurai' (big or small) was done. But the explanations and the truth of that hundred years of hate will not 'move' anybody. It wouldnt rouse any emotion. It wouldnt cause anybody (least of all, all tamils. Never) to feel any little feeling of guilt. That's what scares me the most. That one hundred years of pain and hatred would be totally forgotten. Or, given a proxy-label, like having been an "anti-hindu/missionary conspiracy". That's even more dangerous than indifference/ignorance because that seals off any little chance of the real, full story coming out. 

To be continued...

The Dravidian Maze. One simplified way of looking at it.

 Presenting... 'The Dravidian Maze'. How Dravidian politics leads us into a maze, and keeps us going round in circles. And how we never ever questioned it. This is the art of fighting against caste system, untouchability, and other evils without actually doing anything! Without being, in any way, responsible for our own actions and attitudes. 

When they say "I am like this (casteist) because of X", and that statement is unquestioned, they can wash their hands off any wrongdoings on their part. They become immune to being scrutinized. They can follow the very thing they claim oppose, and still get away with it. They can be casteist. No problem.They are casteist because of Hinduism, and that's what they are fighting!!!

So, whats the timeline for what they oppose?? They say they are against hinduism because, apparently, it was Hinduism which "created caste system". Lets, for a second, agree to that. Ok. So what next? Whats the plan? Are they claiming they are going to "destroy caste system" through awareness? Is that possible? Do they even understand caste system? 

What they will do is...they will say 

"We tried our level best. But Periyar and dravidian movement operated only for 50-100 years, but caste system is 2000 yrs old, and brahmins' cunning is very deep. No matter how great Periyar is, no matter how critically dravidian movement analysed caste system and inequality, 70-100 yrs of it cannot undo 2000 years of caste. So, alas, we are slipping back into old times. But just remember, the greatest blow to the brahminical tyranny, and the deep rooted prejudices and inequality and caste system came from the dravidian movement. Came from a man called thanthai periyar."

This is what they will say. That 100 years of drav cant uproot 2000 years of caste system. Very smart. Dravidian propaganda is the stuff that tamil people created and believed, to fool themselves. First and foremost, I have a problem with "caste evil entered into society AGAIN". They always used these wordings in their public speeches. "sadhi ulley nuzhaindhu vidum...". What the fish? Did dravidian movement and periyar hold caste system in abeyance, for 100 years? Was there extensive intermarriage between upper caste women and lower caste men? 

Its futile to expect sense and logic in this because there is none. First, the propaganda that tamils believed, to fool themselves. Caste is not a thing that can be "created", or destroyed. You dont need Dr.Ambedkar to tell you this. Your own common sense ought to be enough. But Dr. Ambedkar, in the midst of all his rain of arrows on brahmins, has mentioned this conclusively...

"[34] I first propose to handle the law-giver of India. Every country has its law-giver, who arises as an incarnation (avatar) in times of emergency to set right a sinning humanity and give it the laws of justice and morality. Manu, the law-giver of India, if he did exist, was certainly an audacious person. If the story that he gave the law of caste be credited, then Manu must have been a dare-devil fellow and the humanity that accepted his dispensation must be a humanity quite different from the one we are acquainted with. It is unimaginable that the law of caste was given. It is hardly an exaggeration to say that Manu could not have outlived his law, for what is that class that can submit to be degraded to the status of brutes by the pen of a man, and suffer him to raise another class to the pinnacle? Unless he was a tyrant who held all the population in subjection it cannot be imagined that he could have been allowed to dispense his patronage in this grossly unjust manner, as may be easily seen by a mere glance at his "Institutes." I may seem hard on Manu, but I am sure my force is not strong enough to kill his ghost. He lives like a disembodied spirit and is appealed to, and I am afraid will yet live long. One thing I want to impress upon you is that Manu did not give the law of Caste and that he could not do so. Caste existed long before Manu. He was an upholder of it and therefore philosophised about it, but certainly he did not and could not ordain the present order of Hindu Society. His work ended with the codification of existing caste rules and the preaching of Caste Dharma. The spread and growth of the Caste system is too gigantic a task to be achieved by the power or cunning of an individual or of a class. Similar in argument is the theory that the Brahmins created the Caste. After what I have said regarding Manu, I need hardly say anything more, except to point out that it is incorrect in thought and malicious in intent. The Brahmins may have been guilty of many things, and I dare say they were, but the imposing of the caste system on the non-Brahmin population was beyond their mettle. They may have helped the process by their glib philosophy, but they certainly could not have pushed their scheme beyond their own confines. To fashion society after one's own pattern! How glorious! How hard! One can take pleasure and eulogize its furtherance; but cannot further it very far. The vehemence of my attack may seem to be unnecessary; but I can assure you that it is not uncalled for. There is a strong belief in the mind of orthodox Hindus that the Hindu Society was somehow moulded into the framework of the Caste System and that it is an organization consciously created by the Shastras. Not only does this belief exist, but it is being justified on the ground that it cannot but be good, because it is ordained by the Shastras and the Shastras cannot be wrong. I have urged so much on the adverse side of this attitude, not because the religious sanctity is grounded on scientific basis, nor to help those reformers who are preaching against it. Preaching did not make the caste system; neither will it unmake it. My aim is to show the falsity of the attitude that has exalted religious sanction to the position of a scientific explanation."

   - CASTES IN INDIA:

Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development

by B. R. Ambedkar

Paper presented at an Anthropology Seminar

taught by Dr. A. A. Goldenweizer

Columbia University

9th May 1916

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/txt_ambedkar_castes.html

"Preaching did not make the caste system; neither will it unmake it."

That is all we need. But there are multiple layers in this. This is made so complex not because caste system is complex, but because of the deception and trickery of dravidian movement. It will suffice to say that what they (dravidian idealogues) are currently doing will NOT DESTROY CASTE. Their strategy was wrong from day#1, and we have to see that it was never their intention to destroy caste. Their intention was different. Politics. We will look into this further...

அப்படி என்ன செய்தது திமுக (what has DMK done so far)??

Come September 17, DMK turns 70. It's important to ask questions. This year is crucial because of the magnitude of changes at home and also at the national level. And also because all the heroes have finally died and we are allowed to face reality as it is. The personalities have left us, even though we cling to them.

Hero (nayaka) worship has always had a tight grip on tamils. Maybe it stems from people's need. Need to look upon a single person as a saviour (from what?) and build more than a cult around him/her. To pour one's aspirations and fears and reactions onto an image. Or maybe out of fear, to feel secure under a person's protection. Tamizhagam's first nayaka in recent times was a nayakar in reality too. Erode Venkatappa Ramasamy Naicker, the last Scion of the glorious clan of the balija naidus, the clan that led the nayakas of madurai. Chennai derives it's name from Damarla Chennappa Naicker, who, in all probabilities was a balija too. Wikipedia says that erode came under British EIC influence in 1799. The importance of balija's can therefore not be ignored in Tamil Nadu's history books. Not just from 1920's, but much long before that.

Strangely, not much has been passed on about periyar's ancestors or line, even though it is fairly certain that the family influence played no mean role in enabling him do what he did, or act as a channel. He has said this himself. He could afford to say a lot of things which others could not express, on account of being balija. King, after all. However, this fact of family/caste equation is rarely pointed out when discussing periyar even the details are scarce. Maybe he knew that it is easy to keep tamils busy for centuries discussing and fighting about inessentials and irrelevant stuff. Maybe the common man picks up topics and attitudes and ideas only from his higher ups, and the higher ups all tend to cluster near the influential people, who tend to be placed near the king. Basically the king radiates his orders and ideas via channels, which are time tested.

Anyways, this Tamil weakness for idol worship has created a பெரியார்,அறிஞர்,மக்கள் திலகம், கலைஞர் and a புரட்சி தலைவி. Joseph Stalin would be ashamed. We are at the moment of silence between two waves and this is the time to be awake. DMK's தாரக மந்திரங்கள்- சமூக நீதி, சாதி ஒழிப்பு. Apparently, like they nowadays say, they don't do கடவுள் மறுப்பு and மூட நம்பிக்கை ஒழிப்பு seriously because they don't want to scare people. If people choose to be fooled, they don't mind. அதெல்லாம் தி.க. காரங்க பாத்துப்பாங்களாம்‌. திமுக தேருதலில் போட்டியிடும் வெகுஜன கட்சியாம். சமரசங்கள் செய்தால்தான் மக்களை சென்றடைய முடியுமாம். ஆயிரம் பொய் சொல்லி ஒரு கல்யாணத்தை செய்யலாம் என்று சொல்லுவார்களே, அது போல தி.க., பேரியார் கொள்கைகளிலிருந்து இரங்கி வந்து மக்களை சந்திக்குமாம். பிறகு வெற்றி பெற்று 5 ஆண்டுகள் மக்களுக்கு சுய மரியாதை, சமூக நீதி, சாதி ஒழிப்பு பற்றி சொல்லி குடுப்பாங்ளாம். This is what they say. We need to ask "what has DMK done"? Has சாதி ஒழிப்பு happened? Has கடவுள் நம்பிக்கை reduced? பார்ப்பனரல்லாதாரிடம் இருக்கும் பார்ப்பனீயம் குறைந்து விட்டதா? பெரியாரும் திமுக வும் இல்லையென்றால் இன்னைக்கு யாருமே சட்ட போட்டிருக்க மாட்டாற்களா? படிப்பறிவு இல்லாமல் இருந்திருப்பார்களா? Or was it all a natural result of democracy and modernization that happened with time?? After all, last century saw more prolific changes in human life than ever before. Technology, medicine, population, information...

1. DMK bought amendment for inheritance laws. Women got equal rights over "ancestral" property only, and this has been enacted by 2 other South Indian states before TN. Besides, men were generally the breadwinners and naturally inherited more, so the cycle could repeat.

2. Justice party asked for non Brahmin representation for 5 groups:- balija naidus (!!!), chettiyars, pillai's, mudhaliyars, and harijans. They were greatly helped by indo-british association, who had business interests, and T.M.Nair did a lot of தில்லாலங்கடி in UK. So, இட ஒதுக்கீடு was strictly speaking not a dravidian movement initiative. Dr. Ambedkar's reservation policy was different. Even Edwin montagu noted that the people clamoring for adequate representation could in no way deemed to be "backward".

3. Nobody gives a hoot about samathuvapuram.

4. Hand pulled rickshaws, ok.

என்ன தான் செய்தது திமுக???

திமுக பெரியாரிய கொள்கைகள் (அப்புடீன்னு ஒன்னு இருக்குன்னே வெச்சுப்போம்) லிரிந்து நிறய சமரசம் செய்து தான் செயல்படுகிறது என்றால், திமுக வுக்கும் மற்ற சராசரியாக சாதி பார்க்கும் கட்சிகளுக்கும் என்ன வித்தியாசம்????

It's hard to make the new generation question the *big people* because, after all, tamilnadu is in brilliant shape today. Education, industries, IT, GDP, infant mortality, etc. It has to be seen whether this was all because of சமூக நீதி or because the Indian government favoured investments in the south, or, more possibly, whether the presence of the British government has led to all these changes. They entered India via north Madras. The foundation forTN's culture, education, modernization and medicine was laid by the British.

Point is, for the noise that they make, and for all the brahmins-are-the-reason-for-everything that they talk, have they delivered? Brahmin bashing was done by the balija because he was the king. The subjects are still fighting the Kings' war, after 100 years. Wow!! As responsible citizens, and as the awakened people witnessing reality in it's pure form in the silence between two waves, we have to read history. Read about justice party. About the madurai nayaka rule. Ask questions. Discuss.

என்ன செய்தது திமுக...
தொடரும்.