On March 29, 2023, the Supreme Court heard a plea concerning alleged hate speech at rallies in Maharashtra against Muslims. During the hearing, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, had a heated exchange with judges Joseph and Nagarathna. Mehta wanted to include other instances of hate speech in the petition and referred to a DMK leader who had called for the killing of Brahmins. Justice Joseph reportedly smiled, to which Mehta retorted that it was not a laughing matter. The DMK leader’s speech was a reference to Rajiv Gandhi’s statement that Tamil Brahmins should have been killed as per the directions of EVR. Justice Nagarathna asked Mehta about the reason behind the DMK leader’s statement and Justice Joseph questioned if Mehta knew who EVR was. Mehta noted that hate speech cannot be excused just because it was made by someone famous. Mehta urged the justices to watch a video of a child in a PFI rally in Kerala calling for preparation for the last rites of Hindus and Christians. Justice Joseph acknowledged knowing about it in a rather casual manner, and Mehta suggested they should have taken suo-motu cognizance which the Lordships ignored. The Hon’ble Court while taking cognizance of hate speech against minority communities smirked when SG asked about hate speech conducted by minorities against majority communities and callously stated that “action has an equal reaction” justifying actions by the minority community.
Apart from shaking the conscience of the people of the nation, the apex court of the land brushed aside concerns of the majority in a bone-chilling manner. The Lordships also seemed to be justifying the ‘slaughter of Brahmins’ as Lordships tried to trivialize it in the name of EVR. So, the question is that your Lordships justify the slaughtering of Brahmins just because it was said by EVR? And your Lordships be willing to sacrifice the lives of Brahmins and members of the majority community just because the court thinks that there is a justification for it? FYI Justice Joseph and Justice Nagarathna, every word uttered by people in power speak can have a positive or disastrous impact on the nation. Keeping this in mind, we will look into how EVR, for whom Lordships has high regard, spewed venom against Brahmins calling for their genocide.
E.V. Ramasamy, was a controversial figure in 20th-century India. He founded the Dravidian Movement and was the President of the anti-Brahmin Justice Party, which he later renamed as Dravidar Kazhagam (DK) or “Dravidian Association” in 1944. Although the DK split, with one group led by C. N. Annadurai forming the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), DMK still maintained ideological connections with the parent DK. EVR was born in Erode to a Kannada Balija merchant family, but he later dropped his family surname Naicker. His followers referred to him as ‘Periyar’, meaning ‘respected one’ or ‘elder’ in Tamil. But if one is to know the real facets behind this so-called ‘great leader’ one will soon realize that he was an anti-Hindu bigot who wanted to spew venom against Brahmins and Hindus.
EVR is praised by his supporters but is a demagogue who utilized social issues for his propaganda. He was neither a nationalist nor great personality as propounded by Dravidian parties and ‘Left-Liberal’ circles.
Several EVR apologists currently propagate the myth that EVR never promoted racial hatred towards Brahmins. Nonetheless, EVR made his intentions clear. The publication he ran featured pieces applauding Adolf Hitler’s ascension and warning Tamil Nadu Brahmins to learn from the tragedy of Jews in Nazi Germany and choose a different path. Ve Aanaimuthu, an EVR comrade, disclosed in his book that EVR instructed their cadre to rudely push away Brahmin reporters who arrived to his residence. In his hagiography of EVR titled Tamizhar Thalaivar (“The Leader of the Tamizhs”), Sami Chidambaranar writes: “To eliminate caste inequality, burn images of Nehru and Gandhi, as well as the Indian Constitution. If all these approaches fail to produce results, we should begin beating and killing Brahmins, as well as destroying their homes. Without sacrificing content.” The hatred spewed by EVR is reminiscent of ‘crimes against humanity’ and if he would have given a free hand India would have witnessed Kristallnacht or Night of Long Knives.
Apart from this, the revered EVR would clearly distinguish between SC and non-SC non-Brahmins. He also stated unequivocally that he connected with the welfare of non-SC non-Brahmins. In 1950, he manically stated that, “Currently, society is divided into three major groups: Brahmins, Shudras, and Panchamas. Because they are upper castes, the Brahmins benefit from these exemptions. Because they are low castes, the Panchamas are granted the necessary exemptions. The Shudras are caught in the middle, suffering from a lack of compromises. (Viduthalai) (16 April 1950). Because of his disdain for the Brahmin community, he frequently said things that would make any ordinary person wince. According to Marxist and liberal historians, EVR was a social crusader who sought to “dissolve India of the tyrannies of Brahmanism, caste dominance, and women’s tyranny.” While the concept appears to be wonderfully utopian on paper, the reality was far from it. EVR’s stance had not been to reform or eliminate the caste system; his vendetta had been against Brahmins as a society. Simply put, EVR was a racist slob who simply desired the annihilation of Hindus, particularly Brahmins.
EVR, at the height of his racist movement, insisted that Brahmins are irredeemable by virtue of their birth. In one interview, the question was posed, “Do you want to argue that Brahmins, by virtue of their birth, can never have honest intentions?” EVR replied, “I do. They will never have good intentions.”
“We have to eliminate the gods who are responsible for the institution that presents us as Sudras, people of low birth, and certain others as Brahmins of high birth,” EVR said in 1953.
While organising agitations for the burning of Ganesha idols, he said, “While the former continues to toil without receiving an education, the latter can remain idle. We must destroy these gods’ idols. I begin with Ganesha since he is revered before beginning any task.”
EVR has attacked epics such as Ramayana also. All his lies were aimed at slandering Hindu gods and beliefs. His deceptions varied from accusing Shri Rama of being casteist to claiming he murdered and disfigured women. The Ramayana and Mahabharata, he claims, were authored by “cunning Aryans” in order to obliterate the “Dravidian identity.” Thus, EVR was also a bigot who bought into the colonialist idea of Aryan invasion theory.
EVR’s attempts at spreading hatred against Hindus and Brahmins weren’t finished there, he once disgustingly stated that “Had the British continued for another ten years, more than half of the Brahmin women would have been ours and Tamils would have been their husbands, and the dominating caste would have been destroyed by more than half,” he writes in Viduthala newspaper. He further stated that “Only after Brahmin ladies began chasing our sons did the Brahmin males turn on the Brits.” The entire Dravidian movement is predicated on hatred for a single community and faith. It was initially extreme enough to demand a split of India and separate statehood for the southern states. Yet, because it did not work out, the radical part has mellowed, but the EVRites remain a hysterical and intolerant bunch. But the great EVR never ever showed his courage to criticize the Muslim community though. For example, EVR previously described the Hijab as a “visual jail in the name of religion.” After receiving a major outcry from the community, he altered his tune and stated, “If in order to avoid the religion that imposes untouchability on them, Ambedkar and his followers turn to Islam for succor rather than atheism, we would have no objections to it.”
The fact that the Dravidian brand of rationalism only attacks Hindu beliefs and icons while never criticizing other religions’ beliefs and practices is striking, and EVR was a pioneer of this attitude, spewing frequent venom against Brahmins and Hindus.
The people of India look at Supreme Court as an upholder of truth and justice and expect the Lordships to uphold the morality and ethics that holds the nation together. By asking “What made him say that?”, Justice Nagarathna has essentially gaslighted the victims. The alleged ‘smiling’ of Justice Joseph at the mention of a DMK leader’s hate speech trivializes and emboldens the lumpen Dravidoids to continue to spew hatred on a daily basis.
References:
- Ten Things About Periyar Dravidian Parties Don’t Want You To Know, Swarajya
- Periyar’s Hindutva, Outlook
- How Muslims made Periyar bend a knee, while he continued to abuse Hindus despite protests, OpIndia
- When E.V. Ramasamy aka ‘Periyar’ called for Nazi-style genocide of Brahmin Hindus, HinduPost
- Understanding complex legacy of Periyar, Times Of India
Click here to subscribe to The Commune on Telegram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
FYI Justices Joseph and Nagarathna, This is How EVR Spewed Venom Against Brahmins and Called for Their Genocide
On March 29, 2023, the Supreme Court heard a plea concerning alleged hate speech at rallies in Maharashtra against Muslims. During the hearing, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, had a heated exchange with judges Joseph and Nagarathna. Mehta wanted to include other instances of hate speech in the petition and referred to a DMK leader who had called for the killing of Brahmins. Justice Joseph reportedly smiled, to which Mehta retorted that it was not a laughing matter. The DMK leader’s speech was a reference to Rajiv Gandhi’s statement that Tamil Brahmins should have been killed as per the directions of EVR. Justice Nagarathna asked Mehta about the reason behind the DMK leader’s statement and Justice Joseph questioned if Mehta knew who EVR was. Mehta noted that hate speech cannot be excused just because it was made by someone famous. Mehta urged the justices to watch a video of a child in a PFI rally in Kerala calling for preparation for the last rites of Hindus and Christians. Justice Joseph acknowledged knowing about it in a rather casual manner, and Mehta suggested they should have taken suo-motu cognizance which the Lordships ignored. The Hon’ble Court while taking cognizance of hate speech against minority communities smirked when SG asked about hate speech conducted by minorities against majority communities and callously stated that “action has an equal reaction” justifying actions by the minority community.
Apart from shaking the conscience of the people of the nation, the apex court of the land brushed aside concerns of the majority in a bone-chilling manner. The Lordships also seemed to be justifying the ‘slaughter of Brahmins’ as Lordships tried to trivialize it in the name of EVR. So, the question is that your Lordships justify the slaughtering of Brahmins just because it was said by EVR? And your Lordships be willing to sacrifice the lives of Brahmins and members of the majority community just because the court thinks that there is a justification for it? FYI Justice Joseph and Justice Nagarathna, every word uttered by people in power speak can have a positive or disastrous impact on the nation. Keeping this in mind, we will look into how EVR, for whom Lordships has high regard, spewed venom against Brahmins calling for their genocide.
E.V. Ramasamy, was a controversial figure in 20th-century India. He founded the Dravidian Movement and was the President of the anti-Brahmin Justice Party, which he later renamed as Dravidar Kazhagam (DK) or “Dravidian Association” in 1944. Although the DK split, with one group led by C. N. Annadurai forming the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), DMK still maintained ideological connections with the parent DK. EVR was born in Erode to a Kannada Balija merchant family, but he later dropped his family surname Naicker. His followers referred to him as ‘Periyar’, meaning ‘respected one’ or ‘elder’ in Tamil. But if one is to know the real facets behind this so-called ‘great leader’ one will soon realize that he was an anti-Hindu bigot who wanted to spew venom against Brahmins and Hindus.
EVR is praised by his supporters but is a demagogue who utilized social issues for his propaganda. He was neither a nationalist nor great personality as propounded by Dravidian parties and ‘Left-Liberal’ circles.
Several EVR apologists currently propagate the myth that EVR never promoted racial hatred towards Brahmins. Nonetheless, EVR made his intentions clear. The publication he ran featured pieces applauding Adolf Hitler’s ascension and warning Tamil Nadu Brahmins to learn from the tragedy of Jews in Nazi Germany and choose a different path. Ve Aanaimuthu, an EVR comrade, disclosed in his book that EVR instructed their cadre to rudely push away Brahmin reporters who arrived to his residence. In his hagiography of EVR titled Tamizhar Thalaivar (“The Leader of the Tamizhs”), Sami Chidambaranar writes: “To eliminate caste inequality, burn images of Nehru and Gandhi, as well as the Indian Constitution. If all these approaches fail to produce results, we should begin beating and killing Brahmins, as well as destroying their homes. Without sacrificing content.” The hatred spewed by EVR is reminiscent of ‘crimes against humanity’ and if he would have given a free hand India would have witnessed Kristallnacht or Night of Long Knives.
Apart from this, the revered EVR would clearly distinguish between SC and non-SC non-Brahmins. He also stated unequivocally that he connected with the welfare of non-SC non-Brahmins. In 1950, he manically stated that, “Currently, society is divided into three major groups: Brahmins, Shudras, and Panchamas. Because they are upper castes, the Brahmins benefit from these exemptions. Because they are low castes, the Panchamas are granted the necessary exemptions. The Shudras are caught in the middle, suffering from a lack of compromises. (Viduthalai) (16 April 1950). Because of his disdain for the Brahmin community, he frequently said things that would make any ordinary person wince. According to Marxist and liberal historians, EVR was a social crusader who sought to “dissolve India of the tyrannies of Brahmanism, caste dominance, and women’s tyranny.” While the concept appears to be wonderfully utopian on paper, the reality was far from it. EVR’s stance had not been to reform or eliminate the caste system; his vendetta had been against Brahmins as a society. Simply put, EVR was a racist slob who simply desired the annihilation of Hindus, particularly Brahmins.
EVR, at the height of his racist movement, insisted that Brahmins are irredeemable by virtue of their birth. In one interview, the question was posed, “Do you want to argue that Brahmins, by virtue of their birth, can never have honest intentions?” EVR replied, “I do. They will never have good intentions.”
“We have to eliminate the gods who are responsible for the institution that presents us as Sudras, people of low birth, and certain others as Brahmins of high birth,” EVR said in 1953.
While organising agitations for the burning of Ganesha idols, he said, “While the former continues to toil without receiving an education, the latter can remain idle. We must destroy these gods’ idols. I begin with Ganesha since he is revered before beginning any task.”
EVR has attacked epics such as Ramayana also. All his lies were aimed at slandering Hindu gods and beliefs. His deceptions varied from accusing Shri Rama of being casteist to claiming he murdered and disfigured women. The Ramayana and Mahabharata, he claims, were authored by “cunning Aryans” in order to obliterate the “Dravidian identity.” Thus, EVR was also a bigot who bought into the colonialist idea of Aryan invasion theory.
EVR’s attempts at spreading hatred against Hindus and Brahmins weren’t finished there, he once disgustingly stated that “Had the British continued for another ten years, more than half of the Brahmin women would have been ours and Tamils would have been their husbands, and the dominating caste would have been destroyed by more than half,” he writes in Viduthala newspaper. He further stated that “Only after Brahmin ladies began chasing our sons did the Brahmin males turn on the Brits.” The entire Dravidian movement is predicated on hatred for a single community and faith. It was initially extreme enough to demand a split of India and separate statehood for the southern states. Yet, because it did not work out, the radical part has mellowed, but the EVRites remain a hysterical and intolerant bunch. But the great EVR never ever showed his courage to criticize the Muslim community though. For example, EVR previously described the Hijab as a “visual jail in the name of religion.” After receiving a major outcry from the community, he altered his tune and stated, “If in order to avoid the religion that imposes untouchability on them, Ambedkar and his followers turn to Islam for succor rather than atheism, we would have no objections to it.”
The fact that the Dravidian brand of rationalism only attacks Hindu beliefs and icons while never criticizing other religions’ beliefs and practices is striking, and EVR was a pioneer of this attitude, spewing frequent venom against Brahmins and Hindus.
The people of India look at Supreme Court as an upholder of truth and justice and expect the Lordships to uphold the morality and ethics that holds the nation together. By asking “What made him say that?”, Justice Nagarathna has essentially gaslighted the victims. The alleged ‘smiling’ of Justice Joseph at the mention of a DMK leader’s hate speech trivializes and emboldens the lumpen Dravidoids to continue to spew hatred on a daily basis.
References:
Click here to subscribe to The Commune on Telegram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
Share this: