Dravidianist filmmaker Sudha Kongara’s bloated, agenda-soaked period drama promptly crashes like a big piece of donkey’s dump—splattering everywhere with the stench of failure that no one can ignore.

Let’s be honest—Parasakthi was never meant to be a film. It was engineered propaganda, assembled with all the subtlety of a party pamphlet.

From day one, the film was engineered as naked pro-DMK propaganda: timed for Pongal 2026 (conveniently ahead of assembly polls), produced by Dawn Pictures (tied to DMK ecosystem) and distributed by Red Giant Movies which is run by DMK scion Udhayanidhi Stalin’s son Inban Udhayanidhi.

And the subject? A carefully curated, sanctified retelling of the 1965 anti-Hindi agitations, scrubbed clean of complexity and rewritten as pure Dravidianist propaganda film which ends up showing Congress in bad light instead of BJP.

Though the film is based on “real-life events”, the fictional part is as cliche and boring it can get.

Sivakarthikeyan plays Chezhiyan “Che” (a blatant, heavy-handed homage to Che Guevara, because why not slap revolutionary iconography on a Tamil protagonist for extra virtue points?). He starts as an ordinary, peaceful guy (railway loco pilot or similar, minding his own business, even learning Hindi).

His younger brother Chinnadurai (Atharvaa, homage to Annadurai – because nothing says “subtle” like naming characters after political legends) is the fiery rebel diving headfirst into protests and social causes. Sivakarthikeyan initially dislikes the activism, wants no part of it. Enter the ruthless antagonist Thirunaadan (Ravi Mohan), a Delhi-sent intelligence officer/police brute who unleashes hell, leading to the brother’s tragic death in the agitation.

Cue the predictable transformation: the reluctant brother avenges the loss, stands up for the cause, becomes the hero of the movement, and delivers the triumphant message. It’s the classic reluctant-hero arc: peaceful man → family tragedy → righteous awakening → revenge/protest climax. We’ve seen this template in a dozen films – brother dies fighting injustice, sibling takes up the mantle, fights the system. Add the period setting, anti-imposition theme, forced romance (with Sreeleela as the token love interest/newsreader), and endless monologues, and you’ve got a paint-by-numbers propaganda piece masquerading as historical drama. No fresh twists, no depth – just recycled clichés dressed in 1960s costumes.

The love track is forced and cringy, zero chemistry, dragging like a bad college romance in a protest film. Period visuals look okay initially, but then it’s just repetitive slow scenes, lecture-heavy dialogues, and no grip.

Post-interval, the film is on a complete freefall. The plot stretches like stale chewing gum, and every supposed “emotional beat” is telegraphed from miles away. Atharvaa’s death? So predictable even a child could call it ten minutes earlier. The protest sequences are hollow – just loud speeches, raised fists, and thunderous background score trying desperately to manufacture emotion where none exists.

The only saving grace for the film is the acting of Sivakarthikeyan and Ravi Mohan.

If you are an agmark Oopi craving to simp for anti-Hindi rhetoric, save your money and listen to old Karunanidhi speeches on YouTube. At least that won’t cost you a ticket.

Sudha Kongara uses the same playbook as her earlier works: twist facts for ideological convenience, preach endlessly, and hope the message overrides the mess.

The film whitewashes the role of EV Ramasamy Naicker (hailed as ‘Periyar’ by his followers) who opposed the 1965 anti-Hindi agitations and insulted the protesting students as “hooligans”. Congress figures are converted into cartoon villains, while DMK icons are framed as flawless saviors.

This is Sudha Kongara’s trademark fraud. She has done it before. In Soorarai Pottru, she airbrushed Captain Gopinath’s Brahmin roots and magically reinvented him as a EVR-admiring crusader, who fights a north-Indian airline owner and the government system controlled by the powers at be in Delhi. Her separatist streak is visible in Parasakthi too, as Sudha Kongara plays to the DMK’s gallery of projecting ‘Tamil Nadu Vs Delhi’ politics.

This isn’t cinema—it’s regurgitated Dravidianist vomit prioritizing politics over originality or entertainment.

Theatres are already reporting empty screens, dull shows, and dead silence where applause was expected. Social media is flooded with viewers trashing the film, mocking its boredom, and openly abusing it – and frankly, it has earned every bit of that backlash.

While Telugu and Kannada industries are producing films like Kantara, Pushpa, and RRR—stories that travel globally on the strength of content – Dravidianwood remains stuck in in a cesspool crying Hindi imposition, oppression, suppression, depression.

Avoid this unoriginal flop. Sudha Kongara’s career low—lazy, clichéd, agenda-driver, cynical, preachy, boring mess.

The film’s hook line is “Thee Paravattum”.

But it is only Dravidianist stench that is spreading through this “P** padon”.

Vallavaraayan is a political writer. 

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Parasakthi Disaster: Sudha Kongara’s Anti-Hindi, Pro-DMK Propaganda Film Is Just Regurgitated Dravidianist Vomit That Is Rightfully Getting Trashed By Audience appeared first on The Commune.

Sudha Kongara, notorious for bending and distorting historical facts in her films, has once again traded historical truth for ideological convenience, mutilating the history of the 1965 anti-Hindi imposition agitation to peddle a present-day Dravidian political narrative.

In the trailer of the her latest film ‘Parasakthi’ produced by Udhayanidhi Stalin’s son Inban Udhayanidhi, there’s a scene in which protesting students are described as “kaali payaluga” (good-for-nothing chaps). The framing strongly implies that this contemptuous description came from Bhaktavatsalam and the Congress establishment.

However, historical records tell a different story.

EVR Called The Protesting Students “Hooligans”

Archives of DK’s own mouthpiece Viduthalai from the period show that it was EV Ramasamy (hailed as ‘Periyar’ by his followers) who openly criticised the protesting students, referring to them as hooligans and questioning the political motives behind the agitation.

EVR’s mouthpiece had said:

இன்றும் மாணவர்கள் காலித் தனம். பஸ்ஸை கொளுத்தினர். பச்சையப்பன் கல்லூரி மாணவர் ள் (விடுதலை, 26.01.1965).

“Today also students indulged in hooliganism. They burnt buses. Pachaiyappan College students” (Viduthalai, 26 January 1965)

திருச்சியில் மாணவர்கள் காலித்தனம் பஸ்க்கு தீ. தபால் நிலையம் கொள்ளை. (விடுதலை, 10.02.1965).

“In Trichy, students indulge in hooliganism. Bus set on fire. Post office looted.” (Viduthalai, 10 February 1965)

EVR, through his ‘Viduthalai’ newspaper, supported the brutal repression carried out by the police against the protestors.

He even went to the extent of instigating violence against the protestors saying “The hooliganism has increased. Comrades! Keep kerosene in your hands ready. Keep a matchbox. When I point, you light the fire.”

In the book “Kilarchiku Thayaaraavom! (Let’s Prepare For The Uprising)”, EVR wrote “The vandalism carried out in the name of anti-Hindi! Where is Hindi in Tamil Nadu? Which school mandated any student to study in Hindi? The newspaper scoundrels and crazy politicians who are peddling about ‘mandatory Hindi’, you people without thinking are being scared about imaginary ‘Hindi’ which doesn’t even exist!”

He further went on to say “If four hooligans had been shot in the beginning itself, all this vandalism and so much loss of life and property would not have occurred. Why is there a law? Why does police have lathis? Why do they have guns? Have they been given to kiss? What kind of a government is this!”

Bhaktavatsalam’s government,  officially treated the protests as a law-and-order issue. His administration repeatedly warned against violence, threatened “stern action,” and deployed police and paramilitary forces, while blaming opposition parties like the DMK and Left groups for large-scale destruction of public property.

There are no official documents to prove that at any point Bhaktavatsalam publicly used the language attributed to him in the trailer. Transferring EVR’s words onto a Congress leader is a clear attempt to sanitise and distort EVR’s actual position.

EVR’s Position In 1965: What The Film Omits

While Parasakthi highlights Anna’s role in opposing Hindi imposition, it omits a crucial and inconvenient historical fact: EVR did not lead or support the 1965 student agitation.

By 1965, EVR’s role in anti-Hindi movements had fundamentally changed. His active, street-level leadership belonged to earlier phases: 1937–40 and 1948. During the 1965 agitation, EVR maintained a distance from the student protests, viewing them primarily as a political battle against Congress rather than a pure language struggle.

Historical research notes that EVR criticised the agitation as politically motivated and driven by DMK’s electoral interests. He accused the DMK of “sacrificing innocent students” for political gain, reiterated calls for banning both the DMK and the Swatantra Party during the agitation, believed K Kamaraj’s assurances that compulsory Hindi would not be imposed, and also expressed the view that the “language problem was almost over,” making him sceptical of the student uprising.

EVR followed developments closely through his newspaper Viduthalai and remained ideologically opposed to compulsory Hindi, but he did not stand with the students on the streets nor endorse the agitation in the manner portrayed by contemporary Dravidian retellings.

None of this nuance finds place in Sudha Kongara’s trailer.

Tamil Brahmi As “Secret Code”: A Historical Impossibility

Another scene in the trailer has drawn ridicule from scholars: a moment showing Tamil Brāhmī being used as a secret code scribbled into a Hindi document, held by a character believed to represent Bhaktavatsalam.

Historians have called this claim historically untenable.

Tamil Brāhmī was barely known in 1964. While KV Subramanya Iyer conducted pioneering work in the 1930s, it was not pursued systematically. Serious academic focus began only in 1961, when K A Nilakanta Sastri encouraged Iravatham Mahadevan to take up the subject.

Mahadevan published his first major findings only in 1965–66, based on the Pugalur and Mangulam inscriptions. Even then, Tamil Brāhmī did not enter wider academic or public consciousness until the 1990s, when Mahadevan resumed extensive research.

The idea that Tamil Brāhmī was being widely understood,or covertly used as a “code” within government circles in 1964, has no historical basis. This scene exemplifies propaganda-driven storytelling, where symbolism is prioritised over facts.

When propaganda takes centre stage, facts tend to go missing. Tamil Brāhmī was barely known in 1964. Although K. V. Subramanya Iyer had carried out some pioneering work in the 1930s, it was not pursued systematically thereafter. It was only in 1961 that K. A. Nilakanta Sastri… https://t.co/uADqanxGna

— 𑀓𑀺𑀭𑀼𑀱𑁆𑀡𑀷𑁆 (@tskrishnan) January 5, 2026

The Kongara Pattern: Narrative Over Truth

This is not the first time Sudha Kongara has been accused of bending history to fit an ideological framework. Her approach reflects a troubling pattern where complex historical events are streamlined and often distorted to serve a present-day identity-driven narrative.

Kongara also directed the film Soorarai Potru which claimed to depict the life of Simplifly Deccan (Air Deccan) founder Captain GR Gopinath but cunningly inserted the Dravidianist ideology into the film – he was depicted as a Periyarist fighting for social justice and the villains in the film were all, no prizes for guessing, Brahmins!

Interestingly, the Hindi version of the film’s song in Soorarai Potru was released on 4 July 2024. Comparing it with the Dravidianist Tamil version featuring EVR’s picture and a black shirt-borne Suriya, the Hindi version had nothing revolutionary.

Hindi version of Soorarai Potru’s song just dropped.

Black shirt during wedding, EVR images in the background aren’t there in the Hindi version.
Maximum Puratchi is in signing the registration documents on site.

Maybe there are no takers for such Vadais outside Gummidipoondi. pic.twitter.com/Ec6M4afT3j

— Tamil Labs 2.0 (@labstamil) July 4, 2024

Creative freedom does not extend to manufacturing facts. With Parasakthi, Sudha Kongara has once again blurred the line between cinema and political propaganda, leaving viewers with a carefully curated narrative rather than an honest engagement with history.

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Serial Distorter Sudha Kongara Once Again Peddles Lies: Falsifies History To Whitewash EVR’s Role In 1965 Anti-Hindi Agitation And Peddle Pro-DMK Propaganda In Parasakthi Movie appeared first on The Commune.

The trailer for Jana Nayagan, Joseph Vijay’s final film before he plunges full time into politics with his Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), dropped on January 3, 2026, and it is an unapologetic display of Christian triumphalism wrapped in mass-hero packaging.

Directed by H. Vinoth and starring Bobby Deol as the villain, the film is the political launch vehicle for Joseph Vijay and has references to TVK scattered across. But we aren’t going to decode that.

The trailer brazenly portrays Vijay as a Christ-like redeemer while associating Hindu sacred symbols as instruments of evil. This is not subtle symbolism – it is a deliberate projection of “Christutva” politics, where Vijay leverages his Christian identity to position himself as the persecuted savior of Tamil Nadu.

As a practicing Christian with deep-rooted connections to evangelical networks, Vijay is using his reel life to signal his real-world agenda: consolidating Christian and minority votes while systematically undermining Hindu cultural dominance in the state.

The Villain’s ‘O-M’ Plan: Hindu Symbols Weaponized For Evil

Bobby Deol’s character reveals his diabolical “master plan” named ‘O-M’, sporting a prominent tattoo on the back of his neck— the letter M inside a circle O, which reads like OM, the most sacred syllable in Hinduism, representing the ultimate reality and divine sound.

The villain’s frames are drenched in saffron, the color central to Hindu spirituality and identity.

The trailer culminates with a humanoid robot glowing in saffron light, bearing an ‘O-M’ engraving on its armor as it charges to destroy Vijay’s hero.

This is no coincidence. The film deliberately takes O-M and saffron—and attaches them to a terrorist-like villain who seeks absolute domination.

The same villain then declares that Vijay’s hero “should be nailed on a cross with his life draining out gradually,” explicitly invoking the crucifixion of Jesus Christ and the agony of slow death on the cross, ensuring no resurrection.

The message is clear: Hindu forces want to crucify the Christian savior, but he will rise to defeat them.

Vijay As The Christ Redeemer

In one of the trailer’s most striking shots, a character (presumably Vijay) stands in silhouette with arms outstretched, sunlight streaming through windows and forming a halo of scattered rays around him—an exact visual replica of the Christ the Redeemer statue in Rio de Janeiro.

This pose, combined with the crucifixion dialogue, casts Vijay’s character as Jesus himself? The innocent, persecuted messiah who sacrifices for the people and will overcome death and evil?

Joseph Vijay is not just playing a hero—he is portraying himself as Tamil Nadu’s Christian redeemer, destined to suffer at the hands of “saffron” forces but ultimately triumph.

The Christutva Blueprint: From Cinema To Politics

Cloaked in the language of Dravidianist secularism, the project mirrors a familiar template—aggressive minority consolidation backed by evangelical networks and the entrenched “Loyola syndicate,” including Vijay’s Jesuit-connected uncles.

His identity playbook is unmistakably borrowed from Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy. His political attire—a white shirt and khaki pants—mirrors Jagan’s. Like Jagan, Vijay has deep Christian roots. His family, particularly his uncles. Xavier Alphonse and Xavier Britto, have strong ties to the Catholic Church and the Society of Jesus, a powerful religious order with significant influence in education and politics.

This ideological positioning did not emerge overnight. When Mersal landed in controversy for peddling demonstrably false claims about GST, Vijay did not respond as a neutral citizen or artiste. He issued a statement under the name “C. Joseph Vijay,” beginning with the invocation “Jesus Saves.” That moment marked a clear shift—from ambiguity to assertion.

What followed was even more telling. His subsequent films—Theri, Bigil, Master, and Leo—were peppered with increasingly explicit visual and symbolic glorification of Christianity, most notably the recurring use of the Cross, framed not as personal faith but as moral authority.

In Theri directed by Atlee, a telling exchange unfolds when Amy Jackson’s character asks, “What does the Bible preach?” Vijay, playing Joseph Kuruvilla, responds evasively—“The Bible preaches many things; what are you referring to?”—prompting her to underline the point herself: “Love your enemies.” The scene is framed less as character development and more as theological messaging.

In Leo there are many scenes where Vijay visibly flaunts the cross to assert his identity and Christian symbolism.

And then you have Bigil, again directed by Atlee.

This Christhutva playbook extends to his political rhetoric, as seen in a December 22, 2025, Christmas event organized by TVK, where Vijay recounted a “kutty story” from the Bible about betrayal and victory—referencing the story of Joseph from Genesis 47. He painted Joseph as a benevolent savior who, after being betrayed, rose to power and saved his betrayers and the nation through God’s will. However, the actual biblical account reveals Joseph coercively collecting Egyptians’ money, livestock, land, and even enslaving them during a famine in exchange for grain, imposing a permanent 20% tax and reducing the people to servitude under Pharaoh. Vijay’s cherry-picked version ignores these exploitative elements, turning a tale of state consolidation and loss of autonomy into a triumphant narrative of protection—mirroring his own promises of “secular ideology” and safeguarding minorities while quietly advancing Christian institutional power.

His ideological enemy, as defined by him, is the BJP-RSS, aligning perfectly with the philosophies of Christian missionaries and followers of Robert Caldwell and G.U. Pope, who historically sought to fracture Indian unity by promoting divisive Dravidian narratives.

The Jana Nayagan trailer is Vijay’s cinematic manifesto: Hindu symbols represent tyranny and terror; the Christian figure, even when threatened with crucifixion, is the true people’s hero who will redeem Tamil society.

Vallavaraayan is a political writer.

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Jana Nayagan Trailer Decoded: Villain Has A Plan Called ‘O-M’, Calls For Nailing Hero On A ‘Cross’ – The Christutva Politics Of Joseph Vijay appeared first on The Commune.

The saga at Thirupparankundram Hill in Madurai represents far more than a dispute over where a lamp should be lit during the Karthigai Deepam festival. It is a textbook case of how a self-proclaimed ‘secular’ government can systematically dismantle constitutional governance, weaponize state machinery against one community and orchestrate defiance of judicial orders in the name of “communal harmony” and “secularism”, all while parading itself as protector of pluralism.

The Court’s Clear Mandate

On 1 December 2025, Justice GR Swaminathan of the Madras High Court issued an unambiguous order: the Karthigai Deepam ritual must be performed at the ancient Deepathoon (stone pillar) atop Thirupparankundram Hill, not at the Uchipillaiyar temple mandapam where the DMK-aligned temple administration had attempted to confine it.

The judge’s reasoning was legally sound and grounded in documented history: a 1923 civil decree affirmed the temple’s title over the hill, upheld subsequently by the Privy Council. Justice Swaminathan observed that the Deepathoon stood on unoccupied temple property, outside the dargah precinct, and that not allowing the lighting would render hollow the ritual rights and heritage-linked property of the temple and its devotees.

Defiance As System

When the temple administration and state officials refused to comply by 3 December 2025, the actual date of Karthigai Deepam, Justice Swaminathan escalated appropriately. He issued a contempt order permitting the petitioner, Rama Ravikumar, to ascend the hill with ten others and light the lamp, directing the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) attached to the Madurai Bench to provide protection.

This was a judicial acknowledgment that the state’s own police machinery had been compromised by political direction to obstruct a Hindu religious practice mandated by the courts.

The response? The DMK government moved heaven and earth, literally and legislatively, to thwart this order. Madurai District Collector issued a Section 144 prohibitory order under the Criminal Procedure Code (now Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita), citing “law and order concerns.” The state filed a letter patent appeal before a Division Bench, alleging that allowing Hindus to perform their ritual would incite communal violence. The HR&CE Department, theoretically responsible for managing Hindu temples, worked openly to prevent compliance with the court order.

When the Division Bench dismissed this appeal on 4 December 2025, finding that the state had “wilfully decided” not to implement the judicial direction, it was scathing in its observation. The judges noted that the state’s appeal appeared to have been filed “as a pre-emptive step” to avoid contempt proceedings rather than to contest factual or legal issues.

Worse still, the court suggested that the prohibitory orders had either been passed beforehand or “manipulated after this Court called for the original file.” In other words: the government was manufacturing orders to justify its predetermined political outcome.indianexpress​

The DMK’s Playbook: Minority Appeasement Over Constitutional Duty

Throughout this entire episode, the DMK’s position has been consistent: that permitting Hindus to perform an ancient ritual at a heritage site would somehow endanger “communal harmony” and the “600-year-old mosque” on the hill. This framing is a masterclass in weaponized secularism.

Consider the logical structure of this claim:

The court has ruled the site belongs to the Hindu temple.
The court has ordered a Hindu ritual to be performed there.
The DMK government says allowing this would endanger minorities.

The implicit message is inescapable: Hindu rights must be sacrificed to protect Muslim sensibilities, even when courts have ruled against those Muslim claims. This is not pluralism. This is institutionalized Hindu subjugation masquerading as secular governance.

They claimed they were safeguarding a century-old practice of lighting the lamp at the Uchipillaiyar temple, a practice that, as Justice Swaminathan himself noted, has no historical or religious basis superior to the original Deepathoon location, which has far deeper antiquity and religious significance.

The Contempt Of Democracy

What happened next crystallizes the fundamental assault on democratic governance. Despite a Division Bench judgment, despite a fresh contempt order from Justice Swaminathan, despite CISF personnel being readied to provide protection, the Deepam was not lit at Deepathoon on 3 December 2025. Police continued to prevent devotees from ascending the hill even on 4 December 2025 despite another order by the judge that day. Till the time of publishing this article, nobody is even allowed to go the Kasi Viswanathar temple at the top to pray.

The state then moved the Supreme Court challenging even the Division Bench’s dismissal of its appeal.

This sequence of events demonstrates something unprecedented in independent India’s judicial history: a state government systematically violating not one, not two, but multiple High Court orders to prevent Hindus access to their own heritage and religious practice.

The DMK did not merely appeal; it obstructed implementation while appeals were pending. It did not accept adverse judicial orders; it went to delay and deny the right of Hindus by taking the matter to the Supreme Court. It did not respect judicial authority; it weaponized administrative machinery to circumvent it.

During the hearing, the HR&CE Department is said to have submitted multiple letters from priests to argue that the Deepam ritual cannot be performed on any date other than Karthigai Deepam.

Among the documents was one attributed to Sivasri Pitchai Gurukkal, which claimed that “Sivagamams” prescribe the lighting of the Deepam exclusively on the Karthigai Deepam day.

But once this so-called letter began appearing in the media, Pitchai Gurukkal released a note asserting that he had never made such a statement. He accused the department of misusing his name and position, saying that details he never provided were submitted as if they came from him.

The DMK’s actions have triggered a full-blown constitutional crisis, pitting the executive against the judiciary by deploying the District Collector to misuse Section 163 and sidestep a clear court order. In doing so, the DMK government has not just defied the law — it has blatantly disrespected the judiciary itself.

It has murdered democracy at the Deepathoon for its votebank politics.

And throughout, it framed this contempt as “protecting communal harmony” and blamed external “Hindu outfits” for attempting to “disrupt public unity” and “stoke communal tensions.”

The Anti-Hindu Administrative Machinery

This episode must be understood within the DMK’s broader institutional pattern. The HR&CE Department, which manages Hindu temples across Tamil Nadu, has systematically deprioritized Hindu concerns while granting accommodations to Muslim claims over temple properties.

For a second one wondered if they are HR&CE or MR&CE – as its actions reflect like they’re a fully owned subsidiary of the Waqf Board.

The police administration operates under implicit political direction to prioritize “minority sentiments” over constitutional rights. The bureaucracy coordinates to manufacture legal justifications for political outcomes decided in advance.

The Thirupparankundram episode is not an aberration; it is the system functioning exactly as designed.

When HR&CE Minister P.K. Sekarbabu declared that “people of Thirupparankundram have lived in total harmony,” he was not describing a conflict, he was describing a hierarchy. That hierarchy places Hindu ritual subordinate to Muslim sensibilities, Hindu property claims secondary to Muslim occupation, and Hindu constitutional rights tertiary to electoral calculations about “minority appeasement.”

The same DMK government that never saw a “law and order problem” when Islamist groups consumed non-veg food at the foothills of a sacred Hindu hill, and the very same regime that eagerly razed down temples claiming it was simply obeying court directions, is now suddenly allergic to following a court order that allows Hindus to light a traditional lamp at their own sacred site. The irony couldn’t be more stark: court orders are invoked to demolish temples, but conveniently ignored when they protect Hindu practices.

Judicial Resistance And Its Limits

To the judiciary’s credit, at least the Madras High Court has resisted. Justice Swaminathan’s orders have been consistent, unambiguous, and grounded in law. He has explicitly rejected the temple administration’s claim that allowing the Deepam at Deepathoon would endanger “communal harmony.” He has held that a court cannot allow religious rights to be rendered hollow by executive non-compliance.

He has directed CISF to file detailed reports on the state’s obstruction. As of 5 December 2025, the counsel for the contempt petitioner told the court that despite complying with its December 3 order, police blocked their ascent to the hill, surrounded them with nearly 200 personnel, and detained or arrested several devotees in violation of the court’s directions. Justice GR Swaminathan sought a report from the CISF commandant but deferred the matter to Tuesday, noting that the State’s writ appeals and its SLP before the Supreme Court were already listed for hearing.

But the judiciary’s reach has limits when the executive refuses to cooperate. The DMK government’s strategy is calculated: delay, appeal, obstruct, and rely on the fact that by the time courts exhaust all remedies, the Karthigai Deepam festival season will have passed for another year. The ritual cannot be performed six months later. The government need only hold out until December 25th or so, long enough for the moment to be lost, the political storm to pass, and the narrative to shift.

The DMK is holding democracy and the Constitution in hostage for its votebank politics

The Supreme Court’s Next Move

The Supreme Court now must decide whether Indian federalism permits state governments to systematically violate High Court orders regarding religious practices and minority rights. The political stakes could not be higher. The irony, of course, is bitter: if the “minority” in question were Muslim, Christian, or Sikh, no secular government would dream of using “communal harmony” as justification for preventing them from accessing their religious sites or performing their rituals. The exception carved out for Hindus reveals the hollow core of India’s secular-appeasement apparatus.

DMK: A Party That Is A Menace To People And Constitution

Thirupparankundram is no longer a ritual dispute or an archaeological quibble. It has become the clearest, most alarming demonstration of what happens when a ruling party decides that court orders matter less than its vote-bank arithmetic. It is a referendum on whether “secularism” in Tamil Nadu is still a promise of equal religious rights or a political weapon deployed selectively to keep Hindus in a state of permanent compliance.

The DMK government has delivered its verdict: law is optional, court orders are negotiable, and Hindu rights are expendable. Every action on the hill, from suppressing a lawful religious practice to manipulating prohibitory orders, reveals a regime willing to bulldoze constitutional equality the moment it clashes with its project of minority appeasement.

What the DMK government is doing is systematically hollowing out democracy, wrapped in the language of secularism and executed through a bureaucracy that has forgotten its allegiance to the Constitution.

In the coming days, India’s courts will not merely decide on a lamp at Deepathoon, they will decide whether a state government can openly defy judicial authority, sabotage religious freedoms, and still claim the legitimacy of constitutional rule. If courts do not draw a line now, they may never draw one again.

The Deepam at Thirupparankundram remains unlit. But what should alarm every citizen is this: the DMK has already snuffed out the flame of Hindu constitutional rights and it did so with full political intent and zero accountability.

Vallavaraayan is a political writer. 

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post How The DMK Is Holding Constitutional Democracy Hostage At Thirupparankundram With Its Anti-Hindu Politics appeared first on The Commune.

In a stunning display of judicial overreach and political manipulation, the recent proceedings in the Madras High Court surrounding the Karur stampede tragedy have raised troubling questions about fairness, impartiality, and the misuse of institutions for political vendetta. What unfolded on October 3, 2025 was not just a courtroom hearing—it was a meticulously staged political drama scripted to vilify Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) and its leader, Vijay, without even giving them a chance to be heard.

TVK Silenced Before It Could Speak

Shockingly, TVK was not even made a party to the case. The petition—filed by one PH Dinesh from Villivakkam—was heard without including the very party being accused.

No representative from TVK was present, no notice was issued, and no opportunity for defense was granted. Yet, Justice N. Senthilkumar went on to make scathing personal remarks about Vijay’s leadership and mental state—comments that have no place in judicial proceedings. How can a judge, who is expected to uphold neutrality, comment on the “mental state” or “leadership quality” of an individual who isn’t even before the court to defend himself?

A Judicial Free Pass For DMK Propaganda

Within hours of the oral observations, DMK’s media ecosystem sprang into action. Television debates, social media influencers, and Dravidianist propaganda outlets ran coordinated stories amplifying the judge’s remarks—clearly designed to tarnish TVK’s image in the public eye. It appeared less like a coincidence and more like a choreographed operation where the judiciary’s words became political weapons.

The Curious Case

Even more curious is the timing. The Madurai Bench of the High Court was already hearing the anticipatory bail pleas of TVK leaders Nirmal Kumar and Bussy Anand regarding the same Karur incident. So, how did another PIL suddenly make its way to the Madras High Court within days? Enter the DMK—experts in backdoor politics, adept at manipulating institutions to target opponents while maintaining a façade of legality.

The PIL was filed on September 30, and mysteriously, it was listed within just days—a level of judicial efficiency rarely seen for ordinary citizens. Unsurprisingly, the only advocates present were those representing the DMK-led Tamil Nadu government. Why was Vijay not made a respondent, when the entire proceeding revolved around his event and party?

Justice Or Bias?

The judge’s remarks were more political than judicial. Questions such as “What kind of party is this?”, “The leader fled,” and “This shows the mental state of the leader” reflect not a search for truth, but an underlying prejudice. On what legal basis or metric does a judge assess a politician’s leadership quality or mental state?

The judge even referred to a “hit-and-run” case based on YouTube videos and accused the organisers of negligence—without TVK’s side being present to offer context. Ironically, the same video also shows Vijay cautioning bikers to be careful. But without representation, that crucial detail never made it into the record.

A Mockery Of Natural Justice

At the heart of this controversy lies a grave question: has the principle of natural justice been thrown out of the window? The two pillars of natural justice—the rule against bias and the right to be heard—exist to prevent precisely such miscarriages. No one should be a judge in their own cause, and no person should be condemned without an opportunity to present their case. Yet, in this instance, both these foundational principles were violated with impunity.

Had the judge even summoned TVK, condemned the incident, and sought an explanation the next day—it would have been a fair exercise. Instead, he delivered sweeping condemnations that have now become talking points for the DMK’s political propaganda machine.

The Larger Conspiracy: DMK’s Fascism Through Judicial Facade

The entire sequence of events bears the hallmark of an orchestrated DMK operation—using the judiciary’s shoulder to fire its political gun. A tragedy that demanded sober introspection and accountability has been converted into a political weapon to delegitimise Vijay’s nascent political movement. The DMK, afraid of TVK’s rapid rise and mass appeal, is now resorting to cowardly, anti-democratic tactics—targeting opponents through proxies in the courtroom rather than through public mandate.

This move is not just aimed at TVK; it strikes at all opposition parties. This order comes at a time when BJP Tamil Nadu President Nainar Nagenthiran is set to launch a state-wide tour to expose the DMK government’s failure. AIADMK leader Edappadi K. Palaniswami has already been drawing massive crowd for his “Makkalai Kaapom, Thamizhagathai Meetpom” campaign.

The court has effectively ordered that no permission for the conduct of public meetings on State Highways or National Highways will be granted until a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) regarding public gatherings is framed by the State Government and approved by the Court. So, until the DMK government submits an SOP and gets it approved from the court no party can organize rallies and public meetings which is a brazen attempt at trampling the democratic rights of opposition parties and stifling political dissent with judicial sanction.

A Word Of Advice For Vijay

Vijay, welcome to Politics 101. Do not be disheartened by orchestrated attacks, courtroom theatrics, or propaganda campaigns targeting you and TVK. Politics is a rough, dirty arena, and the challenges you face today will only intensify with time. If your goal is to truly challenge and eventually eradicate the DMK, you must be strategic: join hands with like-minded political actors, build alliances, and surround yourself with advisers who are impartial, wise, and committed to your cause—not clouded by prejudice or personal bias against a party or its leader. Only with preparation, patience, and a clear political vision can TVK navigate these storms and emerge stronger.

Vallavaraayan is a political writer. 

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post DMK’s Courtroom Drama, Mockery Of Natural Justice: How Vijay And His Party TVK Were Wronged Without A Fair Hearing And The Larger Conspiracy Against DMK’s Political Enemies appeared first on The Commune.

Mr. Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai — oh, the irony in your name! You bear “Ram” and “Krishna” in your very identity, yet your sharpest contempt is reserved for Lord Vishnu himself — the very deity Hindus revere as the protector and sustainer of the universe.

You are the Chief Justice of India, not a politician chasing vote banks. Your words should reflect the dignity of your office, not the tired habit of mocking Hindus that every so-called secular zealot indulges in.

When a petitioner sought the restoration of a mutilated idol of Lord Vishnu at the historic Javari temple in Khajuraho, your duty as the highest custodian of justice was to address the matter with dignity, restraint, and respect. Instead, you chose to mock the faith of devotees by sarcastically saying:

“Go and ask the deity itself to do something now. You say you are a staunch devotee of Lord Vishnu. So go and pray now.”

These words were not just unnecessary; they were unbecoming of the Chief Justice of India. They were not judicial observations but derisive taunts—statements that trivialize Hindu belief and reduce centuries of devotion to the level of ridicule.

A Judge’s Duty Is To Uphold Dignity, Not Belittle Faith

No one disputes that the technical jurisdiction may lie with the Archaeological Survey of India. But there was no need to lace your verdict with disdain. A simple direction could have sufficed: refer the matter to the ASI, and let them decide. Instead, you turned the courtroom into a pulpit for mockery. In doing so, you crossed the line from judicial restraint to personal bias.

It appears that your Neo-Buddhist identity is clouding your judgment, with personal prejudice against Hinduism seeping into your words. The chair you occupy is far too sacred to be tainted by the impulses of a zealot.

Why Gavai’s Remarks Amount To Hate Speech

In constitutional terms, hate speech is not merely about calling for violence — it is also about speech that denigrates, mocks, or humiliates an entire community for its faith. When the Chief Justice of India tells a devotee to “go and ask the deity itself to do something,” he is not making a legal point; he is ridiculing the very foundation of a believer’s right under Article 25 of the Constitution — the freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion.

By dismissing the plea with derision instead of dignity, Justice Gavai crossed from judicial restraint into active disparagement. This was not just an insult to one petitioner; it was an institutional slight to every Hindu who reveres Lord Vishnu. If such words were spoken about a Prophet or a Christ figure, they would have instantly been condemned as hate speech. Why then should Hindus be forced to accept mockery of their gods as “casual remarks”?

When prejudice is uttered from the highest bench, it legitimizes Hinduphobia in society. That is why these remarks cannot be brushed aside as harmless wit — they must be recognized for what they are: hate speech against Hindus.

The Poisonous Mindset Behind The Mockery

Mr. Gavai’s insensitive remark is no different from the centuries-old vilification of Hindus as “kafirs” or “heathens” for worshipping idols. It reeks of the same poisonous Abrahamic superiority complex, the same contempt that Islamist radicals express when they mock Hindus with gomutra jibes.

Delegitimising the faith of Hindus is not essential to the interpretation of law. Normalising violence against consecrated idols — living deities for devotees — is not essential to the interpretation of law. Mainstreaming hate speech against Hindus is not a requirement for dispensing justice.

Upholding the Constitution and due process should never translate into the naked display of religious prejudice.

The Right To Worship Is Not A Joke

The petitioner did not ask the court to invoke divine powers. He asked for a mutilated idol, desecrated during Mughal invasions, to be restored. This is about history, heritage, and the fundamental right to worship. Dismissing the plea with a smirk only adds insult to injury, suggesting that Hindu concerns are unworthy of even serious legal scrutiny.

Mi Lord, You Are Not God

With all due respect, Mr. Gavai, the robes of the Chief Justice do not grant you the authority to mock the gods of millions. Your power lies in upholding the Constitution—not in ridiculing the faith of the people who look to you for justice. Your words have consequences. They embolden those who deride Hindu beliefs as backward and fan the flames of Hinduphobia in elite circles.

It is time you remember: the dignity of your office is not measured by the sharpness of your sarcasm but by the fairness of your conduct.

Mi Lord, don’t think of yourself as God.

Vallavaraayan is a political writer.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Mi Lord, You’re Not The Lord: An Open Letter To Chief Justice Gavai Calling Out His Comments On Lord Vishnu For What It Is – Hate Speech appeared first on The Commune.

The DMK government’s freshly released Tamil Nadu State Education Policy 2025 is being touted as a “future-ready” blueprint by the Dravidian Stocks. But a closer reading reveals it to be an ideologically loaded, poorly conceived, and dangerous recipe for disaster that will worsen learning outcomes for lakhs of children.

Beneath the lofty talk of “equity” and “holistic learning” lies a toxic combination of failed experiments and recycled ideas from the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 — ideas which the DMK has selectively borrowed while rejecting its workable solutions. The policy’s most glaring blunders are its retention of the No Detention Policy (NDP) up to Class 8, the scrapping of the Class 11 public examinations, and its obsession with political symbolism over academic rigour.

The Ghost Of Samacheer Kalvi Still Haunts TN

This is not the first time the DMK has pushed a sweeping education overhaul without considering ground realities. The Samacheer Kalvi (Uniform School Education) system introduced under the late M. Karunanidhi was sold as a measure to bring “quality” education to all. In reality, it diluted syllabus content to the lowest common denominator, eroding competitiveness and widening the gap between Tamil Nadu’s students and their peers from other states in national-level exams.

A decade later, survey data shows that the state is still struggling with poor foundational skills, especially in Mathematics and even in reading basic Tamil. Instead of learning from the Samacheer Kalvi debacle, the new SEP doubles down on similar “feel-good” policies that sound progressive on paper but sabotage rigour.

No Detention Policy: Proven Failure, Yet Retained

The No Detention Policy, retained for Classes 1–8, has been widely discredited. While the SEP dresses it up as “child-friendly” and “supportive,” the reality is that automatic promotion without mastery has devastated learning levels across India.

ASER 2024 found that only 43% of Class 5 children in Tamil Nadu could read a Class 2-level text; just 35% could do simple division.

NAS 2024 showed Grade 8 students in Tamil Nadu scoring below the national average in Mathematics and Science.

PARAKH’s latest competency data for TN reveals that in Class 8, only 40% achieved minimum proficiency in Mathematics, with rural and disadvantaged groups faring far worse.

Promoting students without holding them accountable for learning milestones has not “reduced stress” — it has locked them into a cycle of ignorance, making later remediation nearly impossible.

Scrapping Class 11 Boards: One More Nail In The Coffin

The decision to abolish the Class 11 public exam is another catastrophic move. The SEP calls Class 11 a “preparatory year” for Class 12, but in practice, it will encourage both students and teachers to skip serious learning in this crucial phase as the syllabus of Class 11 is crucial for competitive exams like NEET, JEE, etc.

With only Class 10 and 12 as “high-stakes” checkpoints, much of the Class 11 syllabus will be sidelined in favour of last-minute rote cramming for the Class 12 boards. This undermines subject depth, critical thinking, and analytical ability — skills already in short supply, as evidenced by Tamil Nadu’s Grade 9 NAS scores (Math: 32%, Science: 36%, Social Science: 35%).

High On Ideology, Low On Innovation

The policy repeatedly invokes “social justice” and “equity” — ideals worth upholding — but in practice, this rhetoric is used to justify watering down academic benchmarks. In fact, the so-called “innovations” in the policy are almost entirely lifted from NEP 2020: competency-based assessment, digital integration, vocational exposure.

What the DMK has added is a political framing that prioritises linguistic imposition (mandatory Tamil even for non-Tamil students) and ideological content over proven, evidence-based strategies to improve quality. Instead of addressing teacher accountability, classroom effectiveness, and syllabus standards, the SEP is preoccupied with cosmetic changes.

The Looming Disaster

The data is unambiguous: Tamil Nadu’s students are already slipping in national proficiency indicators. By retaining failed policies like NDP, removing critical exams, and focusing on political posturing instead of pedagogy, the DMK government is laying the groundwork for a generation of underprepared graduates.

If Samacheer Kalvi was the first major blow to Tamil Nadu’s academic competitiveness, this State Education Policy is poised to be the final, crushing hit. The state risks producing students with high pass percentages on paper, but woefully inadequate skills for higher education, employment, or national-level competition.

In short, the SEP is not a roadmap for educational excellence — it’s a recipe for disaster. And unless the government course-corrects, the real losers will be Tamil Nadu’s children, condemned to an education system that values optics over outcomes.

Vallavaraayan is a political writer.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post DMK Govt’s New State Education Policy Is A Recipe For Disaster Spelling Doom For Students appeared first on The Commune.

Rahul Gandhi isn’t just a political failure. He is a spectacular, generational embarrassment—a privileged princeling with the intellect of a troll and the credibility of a conman. Born into India’s most powerful dynasty, he has squandered every ounce of inherited capital on lies, gaffes, and foreign tours. In a country of 1.4 billion, he stands out not for his leadership but for his historic mediocrity wrapped in arrogance.

He cannot win elections. He cannot build alliances. He cannot lead his party. And yet, with the shamelessness of a parasite and the smugness of an Instagram influencer, he clings to relevance by manufacturing lies, insulting institutions, and defaming patriots. Every word he utters is either a distortion, a delusion, or a desperate cry for attention.

If incompetence had a face, it would be Rahul Gandhi’s. If political irrelevance had a voice, it would be his whining. And if betrayal of truth were an art form, he’d be Picasso.

Let’s now break down exactly how this dynastic disaster continues to drag Indian democracy through the dirt—one lie at a time.

1. Dragged The Dead Who Can’t Defend

Rahul Gandhi claimed that late Finance Minister Arun Jaitley “threatened” him for opposing the farm laws that were introduced in 2020. However, Arun Jaitley passed away in 2019 way before the farm laws were even introduced—making the allegation chronologically impossible.

This wasn’t just a gaffe; it was a calculated lie told at a public rally, dragging a respected statesman’s name into a political mud-fight when he is no longer alive to refute it. Dragging the name of the dead into his political fiction for cheap applause is the lowest form of politics. But then again, Rahul Gandhi’s entire career has been built on lies, confusion, and zero accountability.

2. Liar Who Lied About Someone In Their Deathbed

He did a similar cheap stunt with Manohar Parrikar’s name but thankfully he was alive to give it back in kind.

In 2019, Rahul Gandhi claimed that then Goa CM Manohar Parrikar had admitted during a private meeting that PM Modi “bypassed procedures” in the Rafale deal. Parrikar, battling cancer at the time, personally refuted the claim the next day, saying no such conversation took place and that Rahul had “stooped to a new low.” Using a dying man to push a lie is not just shameless—it’s morally bankrupt.

3. A Shameless Liar Who Can’t Stand His Ground

In 2019, during the peak of the Rafale controversy, Rahul Gandhi brazenly claimed that the Supreme Court had “said Chowkidar Chor Hai”—directly attributing a political slogan to the apex court. The Supreme Court immediately rebuked him for misrepresentation, and Rahul was forced to apologize in writing, like a typical shameless Gandhi.

And this pathetic moronic disgraceful man has the audacity to defame freedom fighter Veer Savarkar.

4. A Coward Commenting On Courageous Veer Savarkar

Rahul Gandhi repeatedly accuses Savarkar of “begging the British for mercy,” mocking him with the line: “My name is not Savarkar, I won’t apologise.” What he fails to mention is that Savarkar’s clemency petitions were a standard legal process, employed even by leaders like Nehru. Moreover, Rahul’s selective outrage ignores Savarkar’s decades of sacrifice and incarceration—a legacy that is incomparable to his great grandfather who sat at the feet of Edwina. And Rahul who doesn’t have the guts but surrenders and secures bail within minutes has no moral right to even utter Savarkar’s name.

3. A Loser Crying Foul

Rahul Gandhi has once again shown that he thrives on reckless accusations, not responsibility. In the aftermath of the 2024 elections, he loudly accused the Election Commission of being “compromised,” alleging vote theft in Maharashtra and Bihar. He claimed to possess an “atom bomb of evidence.” But when the Commission asked him to back it up, he vanished. Not a single formal complaint. Not a shred of documentation. Nothing.

For someone who screams about saving democracy, Rahul Gandhi has no problem undermining democratic institutions with baseless, theatrical allegations, while refusing to engage with due process. The Election Commission rightfully called his claims an insult to their work—and instructed its officials to ignore such politically motivated noise. This isn’t dissent—it’s sabotage, aimed at sowing distrust and weakening public faith in India’s electoral system just because he keeps losing.

A Man With A Deep Inferiority Complex Reeking Of Cowardice And A Pathetic Loser

From declaring India a “dead economy” while quietly profiting off top Indian stocks, to gaslighting the public by calling the Muslim League a “secular” party, from cozying up to China to offering cover fire for Pakistan—Rahul Gandhi has perfected the art of political duplicity. If hypocrisy were an Olympic sport, he’d be a gold medalist.

At his core, Rahul Gandhi is a man burdened by a deep inferiority complex—constantly seeking validation abroad, mocking his own country at international forums, and attacking institutions he neither understands nor respects. His political life is a series of stumbles, soundbites, and self-goals. He peddles victimhood, but refuses accountability. He claims to fight for truth, yet thrives on misinformation. His cowardice lies not just in dodging responsibility, but in hiding behind the legacy of others while tearing down the nation’s pride.

In a country full of capable young leaders, Rahul Gandhi stands as a national shame and as a tragic case study in entitlement and incompetence.

Vallavaraayan is a political writer.

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Why Rahul Gandhi Is a Useless, Shameless, Pathetic Loser, Who Reeks Of Cowardice And Suffers From Deep Inferiority Complex appeared first on The Commune.

Beef in India is a political food. It is not a question of individual rights over what they have in the plate. It is about whether what they have in the plate is offensive to the Hindus or not. That is why you have people on social media you like to taunt Hindus with pictures of them eating beef. That is why you have streets of Bengal flooded with cow’s blood.

Across India, beef is often framed as synonymous with the cultural milieu of Dalits and Islam. In the case of Dalits it is understandable about how beef became part of their cuisine. Beef was often a cheap and accessible source of protein for Dalits, who faced exclusion and significant economic hardship. They didn’t have a choice over their dietary habits.

In the case of Muslims, it is different as beef is not rooted in Islamic doctrine alone, and is not universal. In fact, in places like Saudi Arabia — the birthplace of Islam — cows are not even plentiful, and beef has never played a central cultural or religious role.

According to Statista, as of 2022, Saudi Arabia had approximately 17.5 million sheep, 6.8 million goats, 2.2 million camels, and 312,000 cows on farms

So why, then, has beef become so tightly linked with Muslim identity in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh?

Islamic Law And The Permissibility Of Beef

The festival of Eid al-Adha, known as the “Festival of Sacrifice,” involves slaughtering livestock, typically sheep, goats and camel. Islam, as a religion, does not place any spiritual importance on cows — unlike Hinduism. According to Islamic dietary rules (halal), the consumption of beef is permitted, so long as the animal is slaughtered following prescribed guidelines. The Qur’an mentions cattle among the animals created by God for human use — for food, transport, and trade.

However, Islam does not single out beef consumption as a religious obligation or preference. In most parts of the Islamic world — including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Iran — the most commonly consumed meats are goat, lamb, and camel, owing to ecological factors. Cattle were historically scarce in the arid Arabian peninsula, which lacked sufficient grazing pastures to sustain large bovine populations.

Hinduism And The Sacred Cow

In stark contrast, the cow holds a sacred place in Hinduism, symbolizing purity, fertility, and non-violence. Hindus associate cows with the goddess Kamadhenu and regard the animal as the giver of sustenance, especially in agrarian societies.

Although evidence suggests that beef consumption may have existed in early Vedic times, by the early Common Era, cow slaughter had become taboo for many orthodox Hindus. Thus, any association with beef consumption became culturally and morally charged — particularly when it involved non-Hindus.

Mission: Humiliate Hindus

The arrival of Islamic rulers in the Indian subcontinent, starting with the Delhi Sultanate (13th century) and later the Mughal Empire, introduced new food practices and preferences. While not all Muslim rulers encouraged cow slaughter — emperors like Akbar even discouraged it out of respect for Hindu sentiments — the act of beef consumption nevertheless became a symbolic line of difference. Some rulers permitted or patronized cattle slaughter during religious festivals like Eid al-Adha, leading to tensions with Hindu communities.

Romila Thapar notes that during medieval Islamic rule, cow slaughter was occasionally employed to undermine Hindu socio-religious structures, particularly during conquests. Specific examples include Aurangzeb’s desecration of the Chintamani Parshvanath Jain temple by killing a cow inside and converting it into a mosque, called the “Might of Islam”. Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti’s followers brought a cow daily to a temple, slaughtered it, and cooked kebabs to humiliate local Hindus.

Over time, beef consumption evolved from a mundane dietary practice into a marker of Muslim identity to establish their supremacy over Hindus and humiliate them. Beef became symbolically tied to Islam, particularly during conversions. For some converts, eating beef marked a break from Hindu practices, where the cow is revered.

In contemporary India, public beef consumption, such as at “beef parties” is also to counter Hindus. In 2017, challenging the central government’s attempt to impose a ban on cow slaughter, Rijil Makkutty and his associates forcefully brought a calf into the street and killed it in a violent public display. In 2015, the then Jammu & Kashmir MLA Engineer Rashid organized a beef party. A beef fest was organized in Sree Kerala Varma college by ‘activists’ of Students Federation of India (SFI), a body aligned with the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M). A student group in IIT Madras too organized a beef party. These beef parties and cow slaughter events is done to provoke and humiliate Hindus.

So, when blood of cows inundate the streets of Bengal, it is not an event. It is a statement. An act of desecration. They want you to wade through the cow’s blood with disgust so that they can satiate their sadistic itch.

When calves are dragged onto streets and butchered in full public view, it’s not a stand for dietary freedom — it’s a brutal spectacle designed to spit on the faith of millions. These so-called “beef parties” aren’t expressions of dissent; they are political blood rituals meant to provoke, offend, and degrade. In a land where the cow is venerated by the majority, such acts cross the line from cultural expression to calculated cultural warfare. They do not demand respect — they demand submission. And when cow slaughter becomes a tool of ideological vengeance, it’s not just tradition that is under attack. They attack your existence.

Vallavaraayan is a political writer. 

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Despite Cows Not Being Plenty In Arabia, How And Why Cow Slaughter Became Part Of Bakrid In India? appeared first on The Commune.

The past few years have exposed a dramatic shift in South Indian cinema—Telugu and Kannada films are conquering pan-India audiences with record-breaking hits, while even A-list Tamil stars are facing shocking rejections in their own backyard. Blockbusters like Hanu Man, Pushpa 2, and KGF dominated screens across India, whereas Tamil cinema’s biggest bets—Indian 2, Lal Salaam, Vettaiyan, and Kanguva—have crashed spectacularly.

What explains this growing divide? Is it purely about content, or is there a deeper political backlash at play? This analysis dives into:

• Tamil cinema’s shocking flop streak—why star power alone isn’t working anymore
• Telugu & Kannada’s winning formula—how universal emotions and rooted storytelling beats propaganda films
• The DMK factor—are audiences rejecting films from politically aligned stars or is it a jinx?
• The future of Tamil cinema—can it recover lost ground, or will Malayalam, Telugu & Kannada keep leading?

The numbers don’t lie—this isn’t just a slump, but a seismic shift in South Indian cinema’s power dynamics. Let’s break it down.

Tamil Cinema’s Dismal Performance Over The Past Few Years

The Tamil film industry has experienced one of its most challenging years in 2024, with staggering financial losses and an alarming number of box office failures. Producers incurred ₹1,000 crore in losses from ₹3,000 crore spent on film production. There’s abysmal success rate as only 18 out of 241 released films succeeded, marking a 7% success rate with 223 flops.

Big-Budget Disasters Due To Dravidian Model Curse

High-profile films with major stars failed spectacularly:

1. Indian 2 – Hyped for reunion of Kamal-Shankar combo, the film tried to peddle DMK rhetoric and ended up as a disaster

2. Kanguva – DMK simp Suriya’s alleged 3D film turned out to be trash

3. Vettaiyan – Made by two-bit Dravidian propagandist TJ Gnanavel against NEET became another consecutive flop Rajinikanth

4. Lal Salaam – Another Dravidian Model propaganda on secularism turned out to be the worst film ever in Rajini’s career, courtesy his daughter

5. Thangalaan – A wannabe KGF turned into typical Dravidianist diarrhoea — with a pathetic storyline and worse visuals, it peddled anti-Brahmin stereotypes, de-Hinduised village deities, distorted Varna and Vishnu references, misused Buddha and Ramanuja, and glorified Christianity and Islamist tyrant Tipu Sultan

6. Viduthalai 2 – The communist-themed movie directed by the Dravidianist filmmaker Vetrimaaran, ended up as epic bore that glorifies Maoist violence and forces ideological propaganda through lectures

7. Retro – Overrated director and another Dravidianist propagandist Karthik Subbaraj gave another flop for DMK simp Suriya

8. Thug Life – DMK stooge Kamal Haasan’s outing with Mani Ratnam turned out be torture that is not even worth an OTT watch

These are just a few P** films of famous stars that ended up as disasters. There are so many nondescript heavily ideological indoctrinating films that have come and gone.

Kollywood seems cursed by the Dravidian Model — actors and directors who simp for the DMK dynasty are watching their careers nosedive. If you trace the common thread running through these cinematic disasters, the pattern is as clear as daylight — either the actor, the director, or the film itself was neck-deep in Dravidianist, DMK propaganda. And Tamil audiences have had enough.

Take Suriya, for instance — who shamelessly morphed into a DMK lapdog ahead of the 2021 Assembly elections. In Soorarai Pottru, he distorted the real-life story of Captain Gopinath — a proud Kannada Brahmin — by portraying him as a follower of E.V. Ramasamy Naicker. Facts were twisted to fit a toxic ideological narrative.

Then came Jai Bhim, directed by the ever-consistent Dravidianist propagandist T.J. Gnanavel. Again based on a real incident, the film not only vilified Brahmins but went a step further by maligning the Vanniyar community. The villain, SI Anthony Sami, is shown alongside the sacred Agni motif — a clear nod to the Vanniyars. But in reality, the actual sub-inspector who brutalised Rajakannu was named Anthony Sami and was not Vanniyar, but a converted Christian. Truth, once again, took a backseat to ideological storytelling.

Gnanavel doubled down with Vettaiyan, where he glorified British colonialists — a classic Dravidianist move — and launched a full-scale propaganda war against NEET, with Rajinikanth parroting the script. No surprise that Rajini’s films, ever since Kabali and Kaala, have struggled to recreate the magic. When you replace substance with sermon, the audience tunes out.

Pa. Ranjith’s Natchathiram Nagargiradhu and Thangalaan? Box office duds. Vetri Maaran, another loud leftist-Dravidianist voice, faced a serious setback with Viduthalai Part 2. And Kamal Haasan — now reduced to a DMK mascot — has delivered back-to-back disappointments with Indian 2 and Thug Life.

The message from Tamil people is unmissable: stop selling us political trash dressed up as cinema. We go to the theatre to be inspired, entertained, and told stories — not to be preached at, stereotyped, or subjected to ideological indoctrination.

When filmmakers trade creativity for caste-baiting, Hindu-bashing, and dynasty worship, the people respond the only way they know how — by staying home. And the box office shows no mercy to those who mistake propaganda for art.

The Telugu-Kannada Domination: How They’re Rewriting Pan-Indian Cinema

While Tamil films flounder, Telugu and Kannada cinema are setting new benchmarks, proving that content—not just star power—drives success. Their winning streak isn’t accidental; it’s a masterclass in modern filmmaking.

• Lucky Bhaskar (Dulquer Salmaan) didn’t just earn ₹111.9 crore—it swept state awards, proving mass appeal and critical acclaim can coexist.
• Pushpa and RRR aren’t just films—they’re cultural phenomena, with global fandom and Oscar-level recognition for RRR.
• Even mid-budget films like Hanu Man explode beyond expectations, thanks to visionary storytelling.
• KGF didn’t just break records—it redefined what regional cinema could achieve, with a pan-India frenzy rarely seen before.
• Kantara became more than a film—it sparked a nationwide revival of South Indian folklore, grossing ₹400+ crore while turning the ancient Bhoota Kola ritual into a cultural talking point. Its raw authenticity and mystical storytelling resonated globally, earning a National Award and setting the stage for a highly anticipated prequel

The Tamil Film Crisis: A Perfect Storm Of Failures

The recent string of high-profile Tamil flops reveals deeper issues plaguing the industry. Kamal Haasan’s much-anticipated Thug Life, reuniting with legendary director Mani Ratnam, was panned as a “bloated, incoherent gangster drama” filled with political undertones and cringe-worthy monologues. Similarly, Indian 2—despite Shankar’s direction and Kamal’s star power—was criticized for its “hollow script, absurd action sequences, and virtue-signaling narrative.”

Suriya’s Kanguva became a national laughingstock, with audiences mocking its “repetitive 3D visuals and disastrous screenplay.” Even Rajinikanth couldn’t save Vettaiyan, which saw a sharp drop after its opening weekend due to accusations of ideological propaganda and weak storytelling.

Industry analysts point to several key reasons for this downturn:

Overdependence On Star Power – Tamil cinema has long relied on its megastars to carry films, but audiences are now rejecting hollow scripts masked by big names.

Political Fatigue – Films perceived as promoting Dravidianist (DMK)-aligned narratives, such as Lal Salaam and Vettaiyan, are facing backlash from viewers who prefer entertainment over propaganda.

Weak Scripts & Recycled Tropes – Many recent Tamil films suffer from outdated storytelling, poor character development, and forced messaging, while Telugu and Kannada cinema invest in fresh, universal narratives.

Telugu-Kannada’s Winning Streak: What Are They Doing Right?

In stark contrast, Telugu and Kannada industries are thriving by focusing on strong content, innovative marketing, and pan-Indian appeal.

Kantara’s Success Story – Rishab Shetty’s Kantara became a cultural phenomenon by blending Karnataka’s tradition with a gripping, universally relatable conflict. Unlike Tamil films burdened with political baggage, Kantara stayed true to its roots while appealing to a national audience.

Pushpa & KGF’s Mass Appeal – Both franchises transcended regional boundaries with raw, high-energy storytelling, proving that strong scripts and bold execution matter more than star power alone.

Hanu Man’s Surprise Win – The Telugu superhero film Hanu Man outperformed expectations by delivering a visually stunning experience without leaning on political or ideological crutches.

The Road Ahead For Tamil Cinema

For Tamil films to regain lost ground, industry insiders suggest a return to basics:

Depoliticize – Stop alienating audiences with politically (Dravidianist)-aligned messaging. Cut your service to the DMK first family. Enough is enough. Don’t push an industry into abyss for your political virtue-signalling.

Innovate – Move beyond star vehicles and formulaic scripts. Big stars who are past their heydays should either gracefully retire or do character roles or atleast act their age. Rajiinkanth and Kamal can learn a thing or two from Mohanlal and Amitabh Bachchan.

Think Bigger – Craft universal but rooted stories, not just focus on propaganda.

With major Tamil releases like Coolie (Rajinikanth), Idly Kadai (Dhanush), Dhruva Natchathiram (Vikram), etc lined up for 2025, the industry has a chance to course-correct. But unless it learns from Telugu and Kannada cinema’s success, the decline may only deepen.

Vallavaraayan is a political writer. 

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post Kollywood P** Film Factory: Dravidian Model Curse Is Sinking Tamil Cinema Into A Propaganda Pit Of Flops While Mollywood, Tollywood And Sandalwood Shines appeared first on The Commune.