Whenever the Dravidianist ecosystem comes together under one roof, one thing becomes glaringly obvious – truth takes a backseat to propaganda. Their so-called intellectual gatherings often become echo chambers of revisionism, where facts are bent to suit an ideological narrative. The recent Abolition of Caste conference hosted by the YouTube channel The Debate was a textbook example.
Instead of honest engagement with the realities of caste, what unfolded was an ideological theatre. Periyarists and Dravidianists who participated had little meaningful to say about caste realities – only rehashed fables, conspiracy theories, and anti-Hindu diatribes. Leading the charge was VCK State Deputy General Secretary Vanni Arasu, who, in typical fashion, took every detour possible to avoid grounded caste analysis and instead peddled a cocktail of mythology, misinformation, and political scapegoating.
He began his talk on a serious note, narrating the tragic story of a man named Pachamalai Devar, who, due to societal pressure, murdered his own daughter in Madurai for marrying outside her caste. Arasu linked this incident to the case of Kavin Selvaganesh, a Scheduled Caste youth murdered in Tirunelveli, and rightly noted how societal norms often push people to commit such heinous acts even when they internally accept the relationship.
But any intellectual honesty ended there.
Rather than expanding on real solutions or structural issues, Arasu quickly pivoted to pure fiction and ideological sermonizing. He bizarrely claimed that the roots of honor killings lie in the Ramayana, particularly in the story of Shambuka, where Lord Rama allegedly kills a lower-caste man for performing penance. This narrative already discredited and widely understood as a later interpolation was served up as historical truth, used to indict Hinduism itself as the foundational cause of caste-based violence.
Vanni Arasu said, “A very important story in the Ramayana, where is Ram is his palace hall, and let we keep the King is in the palace. A Brahmin from outside brings his child and lays him outside, saying, ‘Ram, injustice is happening in your rule.’ Ram comes out and asks what the injustice is. He says, ‘The era has become corrupt; people are fully working against our Varnasrama.’ ‘What is it?’ he asks. ‘A man is performing penance. He is not of the caste to perform penance.’ Ram asks, ‘Oh, who is he?’ The Brahmin says, ‘Go and see.’ ‘Because of that, my son died,’ he said. What he said was this: ‘A man is doing penance against the Varna and caste rules. This is against Varnasrama. Therefore, the era has become corrupt, and my son died because of that,’ he said.
As soon as he said that, Ram got on his horse and searched. The readers of Ramayana know that a man was upside down. The revolutionary Ambedkar has written about this extensively in his book, ‘Riddles in Hinduism.’ ‘Who are you?’ Ram asks. ‘My name is Shambuka,’ he replies. ‘What is your caste?’ ‘I am from a different community, a tribal community,’ he says. ‘You are doing penance. Is performing penance a principle of your caste? Is this what you should be doing?’ he asks. ‘I am doing it,’ Shambuka says. ‘It is wrong for you to do this against the principles of Varna and caste. It is unacceptable for you to act like a different caste, based on Varnasrama.’ With that, he takes his sword and cuts off his head. The story told in the Ramayana is that the blood from that cut splashed on the child, and the child came back to life.
Now, why did Ram cut off Shambuka’s head? Today, people say ‘Jai Shri Ram.’ They build such big temples for Ram. They worship Ram so much. From Modi to Amit Shah, they put forth the slogan ‘Jai Shri Ram’ all over India. As educated people, how can we listen to this story of Rama and justify such an act? So, to protect Varnasrama, whose Varnasrama? For whose benefit does Ram commit murder? He commits murder for the benefit of a Brahmin. This is what we have to understand from all this. So, if he commits murder for someone performing penance against caste to protect Varnasrama, justifying that is why honor killings for inter-caste marriages happen all through history even today. This is the continuation of the Ramayana that is happening today. The Ramayana is celebrated today. If you take any television channel, there are news stories about the Ramayana. There are movies. Big directors like Rajamouli say he is making the Ramayana in different forms. The stance of protecting Varnasrama or protecting Sanatana Dharma is being attempted to be established today on cultural, political, and judicial fronts. A government is in power to sit and decide how all this should be done. Even in movies, many films that talk about caste pride and community pride have come out today.”
To suggest that modern honor killings are a direct consequence of a disputed mythological occurrence is not only ahistorical and absurd, but also deeply intellectually dishonest. This is not activism it’s narrative building, tailor-made to appease anti-Hindu sympathizers who treat mythology as a convenient punching bag while ignoring present-day social reform within Hindu society.
As if equating Lord Ram to a symbol of caste violence wasn’t enough, Arasu escalated the rhetoric into a full-blown anti-Brahmin tirade. He dragged in the Gandhi assassination, claiming that the entire plot was orchestrated by Brahmins, and even attempted to indict Veer Savarkar, despite his acquittal. The narrative was stitched together with old tropes: Brahmins as oppressors, RSS as murderers, and Sanatana Dharma as a violent, supremacist ideology.
What followed was a long, revisionist retelling of Nathuram Godse’s trial, presented not for historical understanding, but to paint Hindutva as inherently violent. Arasu insinuated that the judiciary was complicit in letting Savarkar off, selectively quoting Godse’s 93-page courtroom statement as though it were a holy text conveniently ignoring the complexities of the case and the absence of legal proof against Savarkar.
His broader point? That there is an ongoing conspiracy to turn India into a Hindu Rashtra, driven by a supposed Brahminical class and RSS ideology. Ironically, while crying wolf about oppression, Arasu himself seemed quite comfortable promoting communal stereotyping and collective guilt precisely the kind of thinking that has fueled violence throughout history.
Then came the predictable Muslim appeasement. Arasu claimed that Muslims are essentially Hindus who rejected Varnasrama Dharma in search of equality, and that is why they are now “targeted.” He tied Dalit and Muslim oppression together in a sweeping generalization, asserting that both communities are attacked because they reject caste and Sanatana Dharma. No nuance, no room for discussion just ideological binaries and manufactured victimhood.
Vanni Arasu said, “People who left Hinduism by rejecting the four varnas and opposing Sanatana Dharma were Muslims. They went to Islam saying, “We do not accept these four varnas. We do not accept this discrimination. We will accept equality and social justice.”
“Revolutionary Ambedkar also said the same thing. “We do not accept these four varnas. We are not within these four varnas. Because the one born from the head is a Brahmin, the one from the shoulder is a Kshatriya, the one from the thigh is a Vaishya, and the one from the feet is a Shudra. But we are not in that. Those who oppose all these four varnas are Dalits.’ ‘We will not accept these four varnas. We are not Hindus,’ said the revolutionary Ambedkar. We are not bound by these four varnas. We are not the fifth caste.'”
He added, “Muslims left because they did not accept Varnasrama. Dalits did not accept it either. It is Sanatana Dharma that targets and oppresses these two communities with murders. The rulers today are doing the work of upholding Sanatana Dharma. Why are Muslims being targeted? Why is hate politics being used against them? Because they did not accept Sanatana Dharma. Why are honor killings being committed against Dalits? Why are their settlements being burned? Why are they being chased, killed, and kept outside the village? Because they did not accept these four varnas.”
He then quoted Ambedkar, cherry-picking lines to fit his agenda conveniently ignoring Ambedkar’s own complex views on religion, reform, and social progress finally he accepted Buddhism not Islam. Vanni Arasu conveniently quoted another person Athavan Thiruchani to say, Hinduism itself is a compilation of castes, and if you remove caste, there would be nothing left of Hinduism.
This is the Dravidianist playbook in action, erase nuance, distort history, demonize Hindu symbols, and wrap it all up in the language of social justice. The real goal isn’t caste abolition it’s ideological domination, cloaked in the garb of activism. It’s not about reform, it’s about revenge politics waged not just against Brahmins or the RSS, but against the very civilizational fabric of India.
It is baffling how this group, operating within its tightly sealed echo chamber, constantly recycles old lies as if repetition makes them truer. Like a Goebbelsian propaganda machine, they tell each other what they want to hear and mistake their confirmation bias for reality then seek to impose this worldview on everyone else.
If this is the intellectual standard of the so-called abolitionist movement in Tamil Nadu, then it’s no wonder serious discourse on caste reform is stuck in ideological quicksand. When anti-caste activism becomes a mask for anti-Hindu propaganda, it loses all moral and intellectual credibility.
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
