ev ramasamy naicker – The Commune https://thecommunemag.com Mainstreaming Alternate Sun, 12 Oct 2025 15:23:42 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3 https://thecommunemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/cropped-TC_SF-1-32x32.jpg ev ramasamy naicker – The Commune https://thecommunemag.com 32 32 Part-Time Politician Vijay Condemns UPSC For Mentioning EV Ramasamy Naicker’s Original Name In Prelims Question Paper, Dravidar Kazhagam’s Official Website Itself Uses Original Name https://thecommunemag.com/part-time-politician-vijay-condemns-upsc-for-mentioning-ev-ramasamy-naickers-original-name-in-prelims-question-paper-dravidar-kazhagams-official-website-itself-uses-original-name/ Fri, 30 May 2025 10:21:12 +0000 https://thecommunemag.com/?p=115930 At a recent event hosted by his political party, Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), actor-turned-part-time politician Vijay criticized the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) for including a question in a civil services exam that referred to E.V. Ramasamy Naicker (EVR) by his full name, including the caste-indicative suffix “Naicker.” Vijay described the inclusion as offensive and […]

The post Part-Time Politician Vijay Condemns UPSC For Mentioning EV Ramasamy Naicker’s Original Name In Prelims Question Paper, Dravidar Kazhagam’s Official Website Itself Uses Original Name appeared first on The Commune.

]]>

At a recent event hosted by his political party, Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), actor-turned-part-time politician Vijay criticized the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) for including a question in a civil services exam that referred to E.V. Ramasamy Naicker (EVR) by his full name, including the caste-indicative suffix “Naicker.” Vijay described the inclusion as offensive and deeply condemnable.

However, his outrage seems very hypocritic. The Dravidar Kazhagam (DK), the organization founded by EVR and currently run by his ideological successors, continues to publish his full name, including the caste suffix, in their official publication Viduthalai. Notably, as recently as 17 May, the magazine featured an editorial titled “Engum Ramasamy Naicker” (“Ramasamy Naicker Everywhere”).

It’s not just recent incidents — the Dravidar Kazhagam itself often appears to highlight caste identities. For instance, a 2023 article openly celebrated “Naidu–Naicker–Nadar unity,” despite the organization’s frequent claims of being anti-caste and its portrayal of E.V. Ramasamy Naicker as the one who abolished caste in Tamil Nadu. Now, Vijay has emerged as the latest voice buttressing this carefully constructed narrative.

Vijay’s criticism appears inconsistent, as he targets the use of a caste-based suffix by India’s premiere institutions while remaining ignorant about its continued use within ideologically aligned circles.

The irony died a thousand deaths when the Dravidar Kazhagam (DK) — EVR’s own ideological heirs — joined in condemning the UPSC on 26 May, despite having recently published content using the same caste-linked title.

This glaring contradiction has reignited debates around selective outrage and the lack of consistency in upholding anti-caste principles.

Speaking at the Chennai event honoring top-performing students from Classes 10 and 12, Vijay appealed to the youth to uphold democratic principles and reject societal divisions. “Democracy gives everyone equal opportunity,” he said. “Tell your families to vote responsibly—choose trustworthy, corruption-free leaders. Don’t allow caste or religion to influence your thinking.”

Drawing a parallel to nature, he said, “The sun and rain don’t discriminate by caste or religion. We must reject such divisions the same way we reject harmful substances.”

Vijay emphasized that democracy thrives on equality and freedom. “A democratic mindset is essential for true liberty in all aspects of life. Caste, religion, and creed should be shunned just like addictive drugs.”

On the UPSC controversy, he reiterated his disapproval, “Even in recent times, attempts are being made to associate casteist labels with Periyar. In the latest UPSC exam, a question was asked that framed him along caste lines. We strongly condemn this.”

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

The post Part-Time Politician Vijay Condemns UPSC For Mentioning EV Ramasamy Naicker’s Original Name In Prelims Question Paper, Dravidar Kazhagam’s Official Website Itself Uses Original Name appeared first on The Commune.

]]>
DMK-CPM Nexus and Distorted History: Glorifying EVR, Accused of Misusing Vaikom Satyagraha Funds, While Ignoring the Real Heroes https://thecommunemag.com/why-is-keralas-left-govt-celebrating-evr-who-stole-from-vaikom-satyagraha-fund-instead-of-sree-narayana-guru/ Tue, 01 Apr 2025 10:23:37 +0000 https://thecommunemag.com/?p=111565 It was not EV Ramaswamy Naicker but Sree Narayana Gurudevan who provided the most exemplary and practical model for eradicating caste discrimination. Kerala, rather than Tamil Nadu, stands as the most successful laboratory for this social experiment. Even so, what is the political agenda behind attributing the paternity of the Vaikom Satyagraha, inspired by Gurudevan, […]

The post DMK-CPM Nexus and Distorted History: Glorifying EVR, Accused of Misusing Vaikom Satyagraha Funds, While Ignoring the Real Heroes appeared first on The Commune.

]]>

It was not EV Ramaswamy Naicker but Sree Narayana Gurudevan who provided the most exemplary and practical model for eradicating caste discrimination. Kerala, rather than Tamil Nadu, stands as the most successful laboratory for this social experiment. Even so, what is the political agenda behind attributing the paternity of the Vaikom Satyagraha, inspired by Gurudevan, to the failed Naicker?

A century later, as we reflect on the Vaikom Satyagraha, which spanned from 1924 to 1925, it becomes clear that it was far more than a locally organized protest for mere temple entry. In truth, it was a natural extension of the great Hindu reawakening that had begun centuries earlier across Bharat. Beyond its immediate objectives, the Satyagraha carried a profound historical mission: to shape new social realities and drive the reformation of Hindu society that would unfold in post-independence Kerala nearly 25 years later.

The Hindu reawakening in modern Bharat, which began with Sri Adi Shankaracharya, clearly articulated the need to liberate society not just from caste discrimination but from the very system of caste itself. Sri Shankaracharya unequivocally emphasized this in his teachings, which called for the rejection of all societal constraints tied to caste.

In his Upadesa Sahasri (17-76), Adi Shankaracharya declares:

Hitvā jātyādi sambhandān vācho’nyāḥ sahakarmabhiḥ

Omityevaṁ sadātmānaṁ sarvaṁ tulyam prapadyatha

(“After abandoning all attachments to caste, including conversations and actions surrounding it, meditate upon the pure Self that embraces all in the form of Om.”)

The essence of this teaching is to renounce caste-related thoughts and focus on meditating upon the Supreme Being. In other words, without transcending caste consciousness, meditation on the divine cannot lead to self-realization. Shankaracharya’s profound message,Na mṛtyur na śoka na me jāti-bheda” (“There is no death, no sorrow, no distinction of caste for me”), further highlights this truth.

However, the orthodoxy of later generations, who claimed allegiance to Shankaracharya’s lineage, paradoxically misused interpolations such as the apashudrādhikaraṇa section in the Brahmasutra Bhashya, which scholars widely regard as a later addition, to justify caste-based discrimination and social inequalities. This contradiction did not escape the notice of Mahatma Gandhi, who critiqued such misinterpretations. In his dialogues with opponents of temple entry for marginalized communities, Gandhiji directly addressed this hypocrisy. What is particularly striking is that Gandhiji engaged with the orthodoxy by adopting a shruti-based argument, emphasizing that true adherence to the scriptures demands a rejection of caste-based exclusion and an embrace of inclusivity.

Can the history of the Vaikom Satyagraha be reduced to a mere value of one thousand rupees? If so, there is a chance for a comparison. The contribution made by Sree Narayana Guru to the Satyagraha fund and the subsequent misappropriation of those funds by E.V. Ramaswamy Naicker share the same value—one thousand rupees! By disregarding the leadership, intellectual, and financial support provided by Sree Narayana Guru to the Satyagraha, the CPI(M)-DMK alliance’sCutting Southagenda, which seeks to elevate the distorted image of Naicker, must not go unquestioned.

The Vaikom Satyagraha, thus, was not merely an isolated struggle but part of a larger philosophical and social evolution. It carried forward the transformative ideals of equality and justice rooted in India’s spiritual heritage, paving the way for a more inclusive society.

Whenever humanity strays from the authority of sacred scriptures and embraces practices not rooted in the traditions of the sages (anārṣa sampradāyas), history shows that it inevitably leads to social decline. This is always followed by an unavoidable internal, independent, and spiritual cleansing process. When this internal purification manifests as a social movement, it is invariably inspired by a great teacher deeply rooted in the authority of the Vedas. This is evident in the reformative efforts led by figures like Maharshi Dayananda Saraswati, Sree Narayana Gurudevan, and Swami Shraddhananda. Their contributions to such reawakenings reflect a natural and spontaneous process rather than one driven by external forces.

The grand movement that began with Sri Shankaracharya, found direction through Shri Ramanujacharya and reached fulfillment in Maharshi Dayananda Saraswati, saw its culmination in Kerala under the profound guidance of Sree Narayana Gurudevan. In the context of the Vaikom Satyagraha, the philosophical and historical significance of Gurudevan’s social interventions and his reinterpretation of dharma shastras, which laid the foundations of subsequent Hindu reform, remain underexplored by Malayalis.

Sree Narayana Guru And The Vaikom Satyagraha

The ideological roots of the Vaikom Satyagraha can be traced to Sree Narayana Guru’s disciple, T.K. Madhavan, who played a pivotal role in initiating the movement. Alongside the Guru and his chief disciple, leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, K.P. Kesava Menon, K. Kelappan, Swami Shraddhananda, Kurur Neelakandan Namboothiri, T.R. Krishnaswami Iyer, K. Velu Thampi Menon, and later figures like Krishnan Embranthiri (who became Swami Agamananda) and Mannath Padmanabhan led this historic struggle.

Despite this rich legacy, it is disheartening that the Kerala state government today insists on presenting the Vaikom Satyagraha primarily through the lens of E.V. Ramasamy Naicker (hailed as ‘Periyar’ by his followers) and M.K. Stalin, sidelining the crucial contributions of others. The government’s decision to ascribe exclusive leadership of the satyagraha to EVR while ignoring figures like Chittedath Shanku Pillai, the movement’s sole martyr, reflects an agenda rooted in divisive and sectarian motives. It is imperative that we recognize and address the historical distortions and sectarian narratives propagated through such actions.

The 100th-anniversary stage of the Vaikom Satyagraha has been transformed into a platform for political declarations by the Left-Islamic axis under the banner ofCutting South,orchestrated by the Left government. For generations of Malayalis, the mention of the Vaikom Satyagraha immediately evoked the name and image of Sree Narayana Guru, as it was deeply embedded in the collective social consciousness. The movement symbolized a monumental struggle for the fundamental rights of a vast section of the Hindu community labeled as Avarnas (the marginalized). These individuals, alongside non-Avarna communities of Travancore, bore the brunt of oppression, faced violence, and even sacrificed their lives. Today, however, the CPM and the Left government are making concerted efforts to erase these truths from history. This has led to the exclusion of heroes like Chittedath Shanku Pillai, the brave martyr of the Vaikom Satyagraha, from historical narratives.

The Vaikom Satyagraha was a shining example of Hindu brotherhood and unity, which stood as a testament to the inclusive social fabric of that time. The deliberate attempt to erase this history aligns with the shared political agendas of the CPM and DMK, which have increasingly adopted divisive, anti-Hindu policies as part of their strategies.

The Controversial History Of Travel Restrictions

The roots of the travel restrictions around the Vaikom temple trace back to the 19th century. In 1865, the Travancore government issued an order granting the right of public access to all roads. In July 1884, another order emphasized the seriousness of implementing the earlier directive.

However, when the matter came before the courts, the judiciary distinguished roads into raja veedhis (royal roads) and grama veedhis (village roads). It ruled that the 1865 order only applied to royal roads, declaring the pathways around the Vaikom temple as village roads. Consequently, despite the proclamations, these roads remained inaccessible to the marginalized for 65 years.

There had been efforts to address this issue at the legislative and political levels right from the beginning. The matter was raised in the Shri Moolam Popular Assembly in 1905 but yielded no results. In 1920-21, renowned poet and Gurudev’s dearest disciple Kumaran Asan, a member of the Assembly, raised the issue but failed to achieve a resolution. Later, T.K. Madhavan, a prominent leader of the SNDP (Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana) Yogam, presented the issue to Dewan Raghaviah, only to receive an unsympathetic response.

The Catalyst: An Incident Involving Sree Narayana Guru

A significant incident that served as the immediate provocation for the Satyagraha occurred when Sree Narayana Guru was traveling by rickshaw near the Vaikom temple. His journey was interrupted when someone pointed out a tīṇḍāppalaka (a board prohibiting the entry of untouchables), which read,From here onwards, entry is prohibited to Ezhavas and other untouchable castes.This incident reportedly disrupted his journey. Sarasakavi Muloor references this event in one of his poems.

Hearing about this, T.K. Madhavan visited Sivagiri to learn the story directly from the Guru. It is believed that this incident served as a turning point for Madhavan, leading him to embark on the organized struggle that culminated in the Vaikom Satyagraha.

On September 27, 1917, at the Tirunelveli Congress session, T.K. Madhavan first brought the plight of untouchability in Kerala to the national attention. Following this, at the Kakinada Congress session in December 1923, the Indian National Congress passed a resolution elevating the eradication of untouchability to a matter of national importance. This resolution marked the entry of the Kerala Pradesh Congress Committee into the forefront of the Vaikom Satyagraha.

The first Satyagraha, which began on March 30, 1924, featured participants from diverse communities, including Kunjuppi, a Pulaya youth; Bahuleyan, an Ezhava; and Govinda Panikkar, a Nair. The method of the protest was revolutionary for its time. Protesters from different communities walked together up to fifty feet from the prohibitory signboards. From there, only three representatives were chosen to move forward. When the police stopped them and inquired about their caste, the Satyagrahi from the upper caste declared that they would only proceed together with their non-upper-caste counterparts. This act of solidarity resulted in the arrest and imprisonment of all three individuals.

Under the direct inspiration of Sree Narayana Guru, T.K. Madhavan led the Vaikom Satyagraha with a team that included stalwarts like Mannath Padmanabhan, K. Kelappan, and K.P. Kesava Menon. Guru’s prominent disciples played a pivotal role in supporting the movement. The list of leaders includes luminaries such as Kumaran Asan, A.K. Govindadas, C.V. Kunhiraman, Satyavrata Swamikal, K.P. Kayyalaykkal, N. Kumaran, Kottukoyikkal Velayudhan, Sahodaran Ayyappan, and Panavalli Krishnan Vaidyar.

Sree Narayana Guru himself visited the Satyagraha Ashram on September 27, 1924, offering Rs. 1,000 to the Satyagraha fund and installed a Bhandaram (charitable collection) at the Sivagiri Ashram to raise funds. Devoted women supporters collected rice (Pidiyari) for the cause. Guru’s disciples, including Bodhananda Swami, Krishnananda Swami, Sree Narayana Teerthar Swami, and Ramananda Swami, contributed by providing Ayurvedic medicines and treating the Satyagrahis.

In February 1925, Mahatma Gandhi visited Vaikom and subsequently went to Sivagiri to meet Sree Narayana Guru. This visit epitomized the greatness of the Narayana Guru model of inclusivity, which underpinned the Vaikom Satyagraha. It showcased an unprecedented unity and social reform initiative, deeply rooted in the Guru’s philosophy and guided by his disciples’ unwavering dedication.

Arya Samaj And Vaikom Satyagraha

The influence and contributions of the Arya Samaj to the Vaikom Satyagraha are undeniable. The Arya Samaj’s efforts to establish a caste-free society had a significant impact on the movement. As a result of their efforts, some oppressed castes in Vaikom, who had been converted to Vedic Dharma through Arya Samaj’s initiatives, were initially granted the freedom to walk on the roads near the temple, which had been previously denied to them. However, this freedom was short-lived as the temple authorities reinstated the restrictions, questioning the legitimacy of the conversions initiated by the Arya Samaj. The caste elites made it clear that even becoming Arya Samajis could not guarantee freedom of movement for these individuals; instead, they suggested that only converting to Islam or Christianity would ensure such rights.

This discriminatory attitude prompted Swami Shraddhananda, a disciple of Maharshi Dayananda Saraswati, and Pandit Rishiram, an Arya Samaj preacher, to intervene. The Arya Samaj played a pivotal role in bringing the Vaikom Satyagraha to national attention. Swami Shraddhananda personally visited Vaikom to support the Satyagraha, not only offering his moral support but also contributing Rs. 2,000 to the movement’s fund. His involvement and contributions are documented throughout the records of the Satyagraha. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, while lauding Swami Shraddhananda’s work for the upliftment of the oppressed castes, described him as “the most loyal and great champion of the untouchables.”

One of the most historically significant aspects of the movement was Swami Shraddhananda’s interaction with Sree Narayana Guru. This meeting held profound historical and philosophical importance. As part of their discussion, Guru presented the famous Homa Mantram, composed in the style of Vedic mantras, to Swami Shraddhananda and the Arya Samaj sannyasis accompanying him. Guru asked them,Could this be used in your Homa rituals?This unique moment symbolized the shared vision of these two great reformers for an inclusive, caste-free Hindu society and underscored their mutual respect and collaboration in the fight for social equality.

“Our Sanatana Dharma must be preserved; Religious matters are greater than matters of the state”: E.V. Ramaswamy Naicker. 

In the context of the Vaikom Satyagraha, the contribution of Ramaswamy Naicker can be confined to a single line, as it is referenced in historical accounts of the movement. Ramaswamy participated in the struggle as a representative of Sanatana Dharma. His public speech at Vaikom was rooted in the fear that the Hindu religion was in decline, especially when compared to other faiths.

He expressed his concern by saying, In Hinduism, the population is dwindling, while in other religions, the numbers are increasing. This worried him deeply and said that if religious conversions due to untouchability and caste issues continued, even the termHinduism (Sanatana Dharma)might eventually disappear. Ramaswamy Naicker articulated a clear belief that Hinduism (Sanatana Dharma) was in a state of decline, with Christianity and Islam witnessing population increases, while Hinduism itself faced a decrease. He argued that religion was more important than politics, emphasizing that devotion to religion was superior to devotion to the state. He claimed that despite Hinduism’s ancient roots, it was now one of the most degraded religions. In his view, the significant Christian population in Kerala was primarily due to religious conversions driven by caste-based oppression.

“We shall consider that our present-day Hinduism has declined. The Christian population has increased by 22%, the Muslim population by 52%, and the Hindu population has decreased by 5%. Are we not marrying? Are our women not giving birth? … Religious matters are greater than matters of the state. Compared to religious devotion, allegiance to the state is insignificant. Even though Hinduism is ancient, today it is the weakest religion. The reason why Christians are more numerous in Travancore compared to other parts of India is due to religious conversions resulting from the practice of untouchability here. Vaikom Satyagraha is not aimed at abolishing caste. It was initiated to establish freedom of movement for a section of Hindu believers. Mahatmaji has never said that caste should be abolished entirely, but that the distinction between ‘upper’ and ‘lower’ castes should be eradicated, said Ramaswamy at Vaikom.

Ramaswamy clarified that the Vaikom Satyagraha was not aimed at destroying caste but was an effort to grant the oppressed sections of Hindu society the right to access public spaces. He insisted that the goal was not to abolish caste per se but to eliminate the practices of untouchability and caste-based discrimination. Endorsing Mahatma Gandhi, he said the aim was about removing the barriers of high and low castes, not eliminating caste altogether!

(Source: News reports quoted in the Vaikom Satyagraha Rekhakal)

A few years later, in 1933, at a conference held in Thrissur, it is reported in Kudi Arasu, a publication of E.V. Ramaswamy Naicker (which he established after his imprisonment and did not have his own newspaper during the time of the movement), that Naicker criticized K. Kelappan, the leader of the Vaikom Satyagraha. In his speech, Naicker reflected openly on the self-deception he felt regarding his role in the Satyagraha. He expressed that temple entry was meaningless and stated: “Dear friend K. Kelappan has expressed his doubt about whether God exists or not. How much suffering and hardship have we endured for something that we are unsure about? How much time have we wasted? Think about it… Only by abandoning the concepts of God, religion, and the Vedas can humanity achieve true freedom. The belief that liberation can be obtained through belief in God is absurd. Such belief in God enslaves humanity, turning them into religious fundamentalists, pushing them into temples to worship stones, and that is a very unfortunate thing. (Kudi Arasu, February 26, 1933).

The ‘Vaikom Veerar’ Who Embezzled The Satyagraha Fund

The name of the noble person who donated one thousand rupees to the Vaikom Satyagraha Fund is a common question in Kerala PSC exams. The answer, of course, is Sree Narayana Guru. However, what would the answer be to the question: Who embezzled one thousand rupees from the Vaikom Satyagraha Fund? The answer to that question is none other than E. V. Ramaswamy Naicker.

When Congress decided that Ramaswamy should travel to Vaikom, the Tamil Nadu Congress Committee sent him off with a donation of one thousand rupees to the Satyagraha Fund. However, these one thousand rupees never reached the fund. This scandalous act of embezzlement made headline news in Tamil newspapers. The controversy didn’t just remain confined to Tamil Nadu; it reached the ears of the national leadership of Congress, who asked EVR for an explanation. However, EVR failed to provide any satisfactory explanation. This incident might have played a significant role in Naicker’s eventual departure from the Congress.

To address the accusations, EVR issued two clarifications. Only the Dravida Kazhagam version of his defense remains before us today. The flaws in his justifications are evident in his fragile arguments. The controversy, as posed in question-answer format, is included below. (Source: Vaikom Satyagraham by P. Athiyamaan).

Question: The Dinamani newspaper accused Periyar of misappropriating the funds received for the freedom struggle. Based on this news, it has been alleged that the Congress Committee’s allocation of 1000 rupees for the Vaikom Satyagraha was not accounted for properly. What do you have to say about this?

Answer: The exact account of how the one thousand rupees were spent was submitted at that time. If anyone needs further clarification, I am ready to provide the detailed accounts if they visit Erode.” (Kudi Arasu, August 2, 1935)

This controversy, which began in August, remained unresolved for three months. During this time, several accusations were leveled against EVR, some of which are as follows: Isn’t it necessary for our friend Ramaswami Naicker to provide a proper account regarding the Vaikom Satyagraha Fund? Is it right to respond to those questioning with the counter-question, are you even worthy to question this? Similarly, is it appropriate to say that there is no time to respond to this while handling other important matters? Shouldn’t the ones questioning be the self-sacrificing individuals who have devoted themselves to the nation? And so on. Is it right not to give a clear response?

EVR indeed received 1000 rupees for the expenses of the Vaikom Satyagraha. He provided an account twice for this, and there is evidence of it. “Earlier, I submitted the accounts twice. The documents, including receipts, that I first submitted were lost from the Congress office. When I was asked for the accounts a second time, I responded that I had already submitted the accounts, including vouchers. Following that, Muthurangam Muthaliyar came to the office for an inquiry. It was during this time that I was strongly criticizing the functioning of the Congress. Muthaliyar came with a clear objective to corner me. He went through all the documents using a magnifying glass but found no evidence against me. Frustrated, he urgently sent me a registered notice demanding the 1000 rupees’ account. The letter even included a threat to inform the press if I did not provide a satisfactory response. Upon receiving this letter, I promptly sent the detailed accounts back by registered post,” EVR is quoted as saying.

This is the legacy of EVR in relation to the Vaikom Satyagraha. Overstating his involvement in the movement serves a political agenda, aimed at undermining the contributions of Sree Narayana Guru and his followers, as it challenges therenaissance narrativepromoted by the CPM.

1486: A Precedent For The Temple Entry Proclamation

Nearly five centuries before the Vaikom Satyagraha, a similar situation prevailed in Perayantherru in Nagercoil in 1486, where the ruler of Venad (later known as Travancore), King Jayasimha Devan, implemented a reform that remains noteworthy in this context. Traditionally, those who dyed cloth at Perantheru were the beneficiaries of this reform. These individuals, who had settled there from distant lands, were victims of extreme caste discrimination. Unlike the higher castes, they were not allowed the freedom to worship the village deities. In every way, they were burdened with taxes and had restrictions on approaching the king. They were also subject to punishments, being exiled from the village and prohibited from drawing water from public wells.

When King Jayasimha Devan visited Vadassery, those unfortunate people informed him of their plight. Moved by compassion and sensitivity, the king issued the following decrees:

  • If these individuals have any grievances, they could bring them to the king while he attends the public.
  • All taxes, except those necessary for the maintenance and protection of the military and navy, are to be canceled.
  • Higher castes are forbidden from interfering with their religious practices or festivals.
  • No one is allowed to subject them to unfair treatment.
  • Without any restrictions, they are allowed to use public wells and bathing places.
  • Any interference in their affairs by Brahmins, higher caste individuals, or others would invite the wrath of the king and punishment.

In the fifteenth century, King Jayasimha Devan issued such a decree, demonstrating his sense of Dharma in eliminating caste discrimination and the denial of rights. He needed no negotiations or consensus to make this decision, as his understanding of Dharma was clear and resolute. 

Upper-Caste Women Demanded For Dalits’ Temple Entry Through Public Vote

Regarding the support provided by the upper-caste sections to the Vaikom Satyagraha, the records of the movement describe the events as follows: “A procession of only upper-caste individuals, led by the Nair community leader Mannath Padmanabhan, reached the capital of Travancore, Thiruvananthapuram, where they demonstrated unity with the lower-caste members and expressed their support for their demands, as Gandhi had suggested. A 500-member procession began from Vaikom on November 1, 1924, and made its way to Thiruvananthapuram. The reception upon their arrival was overwhelming. The group swelled in size as more people joined along the way. The travelers paused at Shivagiri, where they received the blessings of Sree Narayana Guru. By the time they reached Thiruvananthapuram, the procession had grown to about 10,000 people. On the same day, another similar procession, led by Perumal Naidu from Shucheendran, consisting of 1,000 people, also reached Thiruvananthapuram. A public meeting was held there as well.”

Furthermore, on November 13, 1924, a representative group led by Changanassery Parameswaran Pillai met with the Regent Maharani Sethu Lakshmi Bayi and presented a memorandum signed by 25,000 upper-caste individuals. The content of the memorandum called for the opening of the Vaikom Temple and the surrounding roads to all people, regardless of caste or religion. Notably, in his speech on March 10, 1925, at Vaikom, Mahatma Gandhi introduced himself asa Sanatana Hindu. 

Formation Of The Temple Entry Committee In November 1932 And The Response To The Vaikom Satyagraha

In November 1932, a nine-member ‘Temple Entry Committeewas formed to investigate and report on how marginalized and oppressed communities, especially those affected by caste discrimination, approached the emotional issue of temple entry. The majority of the committee members were from the upper-caste community. The committee’s chairman was Shri V.S. Subrahmanyan Ayyar (former Dewan of Travancore), and the other members included Shri C.K. Parameswaran Pillai (High Court Judge), Shri S.K. Mahadevan Ayyar, Shri M. Govindan (former Dewan Peshkars), Shri T.K. Veluppilla (High Court Advocate), Shri T. Keshavan Shastri (representative of the Pulaya community), Shri Punnasseri Nambi Neelakandan Sharma (Principal of Pattambi Sanskrit College), and Shri Narayan Bhattathiripad (from Thiruvallakkara).

The committee traveled extensively throughout the region to gather public opinion. As part of this process, they prepared questionnaires and sent them to 5774 people, including village leaders, organizational representatives, numerous upper-caste individuals, and women. Of the 3122 responses received, 8 were from women and 2867 were from upper-caste individuals. The committee conducted a detailed study analyzing the pros and cons of this bold and revolutionary action. They held comprehensive discussions with Brahmins, particularly the Namboothiris, scholars, religious leaders, and other learned individuals. Rituals, ceremonies, and laws were all subject to scrutiny and study.

At one stage, the committee concluded that there was a strong opinion in favor of permitting temple entry among the upper-caste community. This was the prevailing mindset within the Hindu consciousness of that time. The history of similar opinion surveys conducted during that period will help us understand that the majority of the upper caste population, especially women expressed solidarity with the Dalit population. The women belonging to the so-called upper castes voted in favour of Dalits’ temple entry and strongly advocated for their right to worship.  

Cutting South Agenda: The Betrayal Of Sree Narayana Guru And The Rise Of The Revolutionary Discourse

During the centenary celebrations of the Vaikom Satyagraha, along with the commemoration of the 200th anniversary of the Resistance Movement in Tamil Nadu, Kerala’s Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan was invited as a distinguished guest. It was at this event that theCutting Southagenda, which aligns the CPM with the PFI and DMK, became evident. This is a political alignment that we must critically assess.

In March 2023, during the conference held in Kanyakumari, Kerala’s Chief Minister was invited to the podium with the following introduction: “The leader who uprooted Sanatana Dharma from the soil of Kerala…” No Malayalam media outlet reported on that hate speech. The speech delivered by Pinarayi Vijayan at the event was fiercely anti-Hindu, harping on the divisive agenda of DMK. In fact, his address was a direct breach of the oath he had taken. In his speech, he stated that the source of all social evils was Sanatana Dharma and the rulers who followed it, particularly the rulers of Travancore. It is astonishing that this vehemently anti-Hindu speech did not trigger a discussion in Kerala. The political implications of the Vaikom-Kanyakumari transactions must be understood and debated by patriotic citizens of this region. Later in Vaikom, during the centenary celebrations of the Vaikom Satyagraha, the Kerala chief minister repeatedly relaunched his fierce attack on Sanatana Dharma in the presence of Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. K. Stalin. A key element of this strategy is to alienate Sree Narayana Gurudevan from Sanatana Dharma, attempting to degrade him as a Kerala counterpart to E.V. Ramaswamy Naicker. 

This brings us to a key issue: the legacy of the Vaikom Satyagraha, organized entirely under Hindu leadership long before the rise of Communism, cannot be seamlessly integrated into the CPM’sRenaissancenarrative. A proper historical account must acknowledge the contributions of organizations like the SNDP, NSS, and Arya Samaj, which played pivotal roles in this movement. To navigate this inconvenient truth, the CPM introduced E.V. Ramasamy (EVR) into the discourse, forging an alliance with the DMK based on a mutually beneficial policy ofyou scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours.” 

The DMK’s conspiracy to elevate revolutionary figures like Ram Swami Naicker in place of the revered figure of Sree Narayana Guru, who is seen as the face of Bharat’s progressive discourse, is a betrayal of the values that both Kerala and the entire Sree Narayana movement. When the CPM aligns with this effort, it is a grave betrayal of both Kerala’s traditions and the legacy of Sree Narayana Guru. Unfortunately, no social or political organization has yet raised its voice to challenge this historical distortion. The crux of this issue is the deliberate erasure and distortion of historical narratives. It is not just an ideological challenge, but a full-scale manipulation of history, which is to be thwarted at any cost. 

Failed Naicker Vs Invincible Gurudev 

The Dravida ideology, which was initially shaped by E.V. Ramasamy Naicker in the fight against the caste system, ultimately lost its depth and substance, devolving into mere political theatrics. His movement miserably failed to offer a viable solution to the fundamental social issues in Tamil Nadu. Instead, it turned into a divisive and hate-driven ideology, promoting regionalism, and hatred towards other communities, and often leading to violence and conflict. Naicker’s path, marked by antagonism and utter denial of Hindu dharma, never provided the true answer to Bharat’s social challenges.

On the other hand, Sree Narayana Guru’s approach to caste discrimination was both profound and practical, providing a true solution to the caste problem. The struggle against caste inequality that he led became a shining example of a genuine and non-violent approach to social reform. In Kerala, under the guidance of the Guru, the concept of social unity, transcending caste barriers, took root. Guru’s philosophy was based on the fundamental principles of Sanatana Dharma, non-violence (Ahimsa), and brotherhood (Sahodaryam), emphasizing the importance of unity and harmony in society. His path exemplified the universal values of human dignity and equality, representing an authentic vision for a just society.

Sree Narayana Guru’s inclusive Dharmic vision for society was the embodiment of a timeless and unified vision of humanity that transcended caste, religion, and social divisions. His teachings continue to guide us toward a harmonious coexistence rooted in universal human values, in stark contrast to the divisive rhetoric of modern political ideologies that propagate hatred and conflict.

The example set by the Vaikom Satyagraha, which was not merely a political protest but a social and spiritual movement for equality and inclusion, remains a powerful reminder of the true path of unity and social justice. Kerala, through the efforts of Sree Narayana Guru, set a historical precedent in social reform by combating caste oppression in a non-violent, constructive manner.

Now, as we face the resurgence of divisive forces in the form of theCutting Southagenda, spearheaded by political forces like the CPM and its allies, society must remain vigilant. These forces, who attempt to revive old British narratives of fanaticism, regionalism, and separatism, cannot provide the solution to India’s social issues. The legacy of the Vaikom Satyagraha and the visionary work of Sree Narayana Guru stand as a stark contrast to these attempts at societal fragmentation. Bharat’s future lies in following the path of social harmony, as envisioned by the Guru and rejecting divisive and destructive ideologies that seek to tear apart the fabric of society.

In this regard, future movements based on the ideals of unity and equality, like those inspired by the Vaikom Satyagraha, will continue to challenge and overcome the divisive forces that threaten to undo the social and spiritual progress we have made. The wisdom of Sree Narayana Guru’s teachings is more relevant than ever, and it is through following his principles that Bharat will triumph over attempts to divide and rule.

References:

1.Vaikom Satyagraha Rekhakal, editor: Adv. P. K. Harikumar (Malayalam)

2. History Liberated: The Shri Chithira Thirunal Saga

3. Keralavum Swathanthrya Samaravum by A Sreedharan Menon (Malayalam)

4. Agamananda Swamikal: Nilakkatha Veeravani (Malayalam)

5. The Epic of Travancore by Mahadev Desai

6. Vaikom Satyagraham by Pazha Athiyaman (Malayalam)

7. Vaikom Satyagraha: The Non-violent Struggle led by the Sree Narayana Movement – Sachidananda Swami (Malayalam)

8. Maattuvin Chattangale by Shri Ranga Hari Ji

Ganesh Radhakrishnan is a journalist and author with over a decade of experience, specializing in politics, national security, Hindu Darshana, history, and culture.

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

The post DMK-CPM Nexus and Distorted History: Glorifying EVR, Accused of Misusing Vaikom Satyagraha Funds, While Ignoring the Real Heroes appeared first on The Commune.

]]>
This Is How Dravidianist Ideologue EVR Disgustingly Described The Birth Of Tamil Hindu God Murugan https://thecommunemag.com/this-is-how-dravidianist-ideologue-evr-disgustingly-described-the-birth-of-tamil-hindu-god-murugan/ Sat, 28 Sep 2024 10:07:11 +0000 https://thecommunemag.com/?p=89331 It is quite ironical that the Dravidian Model DMK government that swears by thoughts and ideals of EVR Ramasamy Naicker (hailed as ‘Periyar’ by his followers) held a World ‘Murugan’ Conference at Palani “to unite the Murugan devotees and thinkers all around the world.” And apparently a Tamil film titled ‘Meiyyazhagan’ has a frame that has […]

The post This Is How Dravidianist Ideologue EVR Disgustingly Described The Birth Of Tamil Hindu God Murugan appeared first on The Commune.

]]>

It is quite ironical that the Dravidian Model DMK government that swears by thoughts and ideals of EVR Ramasamy Naicker (hailed as ‘Periyar’ by his followers) held a World ‘Murugan’ Conference at Palani “to unite the Murugan devotees and thinkers all around the world.”

And apparently a Tamil film titled ‘Meiyyazhagan’ has a frame that has both Lord Murugan and the Dravidian demagogue side by side which has made the Dravidianists claim how “rational” Tamil people are.

However, this is how the rabid anti-Hindu bigot EVR described the birth of Lord Murugan:

The birth of Kandhan (another name for Murugan’s) has been explained in Ramayanam, Kanchi Puranam and (S)Kandha Puranam. Apparently Devas asked Siva “Oh Lord Siva! The atrocities of demons has increased. We’re not able to bear it. You’ve to give birth to a son who is valiant to slay them” and prayed to him. Accordingly, Lord Siva married Parvathi and started having sex with her to get a child. Sivan and Parvathi kept having sex for a thousand years. The Devas after seeing that the child has not been born despite having sex for a thousand years, feared that ‘If a child is born now, the world can’t handle. It will be that strong. It might destroy the world’, and went to Siva and prayed to him to stop having sex. Siva responded to them saying “As per your wish, I don’t have a problem in stopping. But what do I do with the sperm that comes out?”. Immediately the Devas cupped their hands and asked him to release the sperm in there. Accordingly Siva released his sperms in their hands and asked them to drink it. Devas drank it. Siva released the remaining sperms in the Ganga. Ganga couldn’t bear it and started boiling. The Devas who drank it got pregnant. They went to Siva, prayed and asked him for a remedy for this pregnancy problem. Siva apparently told them if they took a bath in Suragareeswarar Pond in Kancheepuram their pregnancy would get resolved. Devas accordingly took a dip in the pond and relieved themselves of the pregnancy. The sperms of Siva which was flowing in the earth got split into 6 branches and became 6 babies. Those 6 babies were fed milk by 6 ladies. Since it was difficult to give milk to 6 babies they made the 6 babies into 1. Because of this the body became 1 and heads became 6. That’s the story of ‘Arumugam’ (another name for Lord Murugan). Since he emerged from a ‘Skalam’ hence the name ‘Skandha’. Brahma made his daughter as his wife. Lakshmi had sex with horse. These are the qualities of the Gods we have!“, EVR had said as per the book Thoughts of Periyar EVR and was originally cited from “Kadavul Oru Karpanaye – 1971“.

Dravidianists And Their Contempt For Lord Murugan

Karuppar Koottam, a YouTube channel that was run by a group of ‘Periyarists’, Communist ideologues and DMK sympathizers had published a video in 2020 where they abuse Lord Murugan revered in Tamil Nadu as the Tamil God, by making derogatory references to Kandhasashti Kavasam, a hymn dedicated to Lord Muruga that echoes in every Hindu’s home and temples in Tamil Nadu. After massive outrage he was jailed under Goondas Act by the then AIADMK government but was subsequently released after the DMK came to power.

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

The post This Is How Dravidianist Ideologue EVR Disgustingly Described The Birth Of Tamil Hindu God Murugan appeared first on The Commune.

]]>
The Forgotten Legacy Of GS Lakshmana Iyer: A Tireless Crusader Who Outshone EV Ramasamy In Uplifting Dalits In Tamil Nadu https://thecommunemag.com/the-forgotten-legacy-of-gs-lakshmana-iyer-a-tireless-crusader-who-outshone-ev-ramasamy-in-uplifting-dalits-in-tamil-nadu/ Tue, 18 Jun 2024 04:08:35 +0000 https://thecommunemag.com/?p=78727 Another unsung hero in Tamil Nadu’s history is GS Lakshmana Iyer, whose omission was deliberate due to his divergence from Dravidian ideology. Despite his significant achievements in advancing Dalit rights, surpassing even EV Ramasamy Naicker, his Brahmin background led to the suppression of his entire legacy, despite his lifelong contributions to society through philanthropy. GS […]

The post The Forgotten Legacy Of GS Lakshmana Iyer: A Tireless Crusader Who Outshone EV Ramasamy In Uplifting Dalits In Tamil Nadu appeared first on The Commune.

]]>

Another unsung hero in Tamil Nadu’s history is GS Lakshmana Iyer, whose omission was deliberate due to his divergence from Dravidian ideology. Despite his significant achievements in advancing Dalit rights, surpassing even EV Ramasamy Naicker, his Brahmin background led to the suppression of his entire legacy, despite his lifelong contributions to society through philanthropy.

GS Lakshmana Iyer was born on 22 February 1919 in Gobichettypalayam, Erode district, Tamil Nadu, to T. Srinivasa Iyer and Swarnammal. His father, Srinivasa Iyer, a staunch freedom fighter and member of the Indian National Congress, actively participated in the Simon Commission boycott of 1928 and later served as a member of the Madras State Legislative Assembly in 1937. Following his father’s footsteps, Lakshmana Iyer began his involvement in the freedom movement at a young age, speaking about it at just ten years of age.

Despite belonging to a wealthy landlord family, he dedicated himself to promoting Khadi by working in a Khadi shop. He faced several arrests for his activism: first in the Trivandrum conspiracy case in 1938, then for individual Civil Disobedience in 1941, and later for participating in the Quit India movement in 1942, which resulted in a cumulative imprisonment of two years. His wife, Lakshmi Ammal, also actively participated alongside him in Satyagraha. Both were sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment and fined ₹3000. Lakshmi Ammal was released after several weeks on the grounds of being under eighteen years old at the time of her arrest.

Furthermore, Lakshmana Iyer is widely acknowledged for his extensive efforts to uplift the poor and oppressed, generously donating most of his wealth to these causes. He distributed land valued at hundreds of crores in today’s currency to build homes for marginalized communities. Under his leadership, Gobichettipalayam became the first city in India to outlaw the manual scavenging system. His life and contributions have been extensively documented, including in Subi Thalapathi’s book “The Last Vestige of Gandhianism” and the documentary “Oyaa Maari” directed by advocate S. Balamurugan, which chronicles Lakshmana Iyer’s dedication to improving the lives of the underprivileged.

Lakshmana Iyer liberated Dalits burdened by debt, providing them with comfortable homes in clean, spacious streets. He also tirelessly campaigned for underprivileged students, establishing hostels with free meals and accommodation, which Mahatma Gandhi had ordered. Known as Raman Viduthi for boys and T.S. Rama Sarojinidevi Vidudhi for girls, these hostels began in a rented building in 1935. Regardless of circumstances, Lakshmana Iyer ensured students received their meals, often sacrificing personal items like his ring to fulfil their needs. Many students who benefited from these hostels have since achieved remarkable success.

Unlike EV Ramasamy Naicker, who merely advocated for Dalit rights, Lakshmana Iyer lived his principles. He bridged the gap between Dalits and himself by inviting them into his home in the agraharam near the Sivan temple. Despite social customs dictating that Dalits stand outside while Iyer’s relatives gathered inside, Lakshmana Iyer challenged this norm. He invited a Dalit inside and instructed him to fetch water from a well traditionally used by Iyer households. Despite initial hesitation, the Dalit followed his directive, poured the water for Iyer to drink, and declared neither the water nor the Dalit was considered impure. This act led to Lakshmana Iyer’s ostracization from his community by other members.

Similar to Vaidyanatha Iyer’s efforts for Dalit temple entry in Madurai, Lakshmana Iyer and his associate Sri Kannapa, also Brahmins, orchestrated a temple entry movement at the Siva temple in Gobichettypalayam on the same day. Despite facing attacks from caste Hindus and Brahmins throwing stones, they successfully achieved their objective. Such a man who generously donated 635 acres of land, including the sites of present government offices and schools, is being erased from history simply because of his Brahmin heritage—a tragic reality in Tamil Nadu. Efforts to commemorate him, such as erecting a statue at the bus stand, are consistently thwarted by the administration, citing trivial reasons like an actual incident in Iyer’s life, interactions with EV Ramasamy Naicker, where Naicker shared refreshments in Iyer’s home but later criticized the Brahmin community on the next street. This pattern reflects how society has benefited from his contributions yet neglected his legacy.

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

The post The Forgotten Legacy Of GS Lakshmana Iyer: A Tireless Crusader Who Outshone EV Ramasamy In Uplifting Dalits In Tamil Nadu appeared first on The Commune.

]]>
Yes, EVR Called For A Genocide Of Tamil Brahmins! Here’s The Proof https://thecommunemag.com/yes-evr-called-for-a-genocide-of-tamil-brahmins-heres-the-proof/ Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:10:06 +0000 https://thecommunemag.com/?p=72851 Over the past couple of days, advocates of the Periyarist and Dravidian ideologies have been consistently claiming that their leader E.V. Ramasamy Naicker (EVR) is a respectable figure who never incited violence or promoted hatred against Brahmins, nor did he speak disrespectfully about women. However, this attempt to portray EVR positively while casting Brahmins in […]

The post Yes, EVR Called For A Genocide Of Tamil Brahmins! Here’s The Proof appeared first on The Commune.

]]>

Over the past couple of days, advocates of the Periyarist and Dravidian ideologies have been consistently claiming that their leader E.V. Ramasamy Naicker (EVR) is a respectable figure who never incited violence or promoted hatred against Brahmins, nor did he speak disrespectfully about women. However, this attempt to portray EVR positively while casting Brahmins in a negative light has been debunked. Below are several instances where he openly expressed his animosity towards Brahmins.

To verify the credibility of the article, let’s begin with Suba Veerapandian, a prominent advocate of EVR’s ideology, who addressed the audience (specific event name not clear). He elaborated on the reasons behind advocating for the annihilation of Brahmins, “After Anna (Annadurai) parted with Periyar, he began saying, “We are not against Brahmins, but Brahminism” stating this when we inquired if Ayya (EVR) agreed with this statement, EVR responded “it’s right sir, It’s right. I’m also not against the mosquito, Sir. I’m only against the mosquito bite, but how can you get rid of mosquito bite without killing the the mosquito? The reason why I oppose Brahmins is, Brahminism coming from them only, no? Nowadays, many people say things without understanding. You always talk about their Brahminism, but never talk about other castes, Yes, I am not denying that. There is Brahminism alive in other castes too. But what we have to see is, what is the source of both Brahmanism? The Brahmin is the source of both Brahminism, who benefits from both Brahmanism? This comes from ignorance, that Brahminism comes from the arrogance . We should not see both of these as same, but we have to oppose both. I’m not saying both Brahmins should not be opposed, both should be opposed, but both should not be seen as equal.”  

In another instance, Viduthalai magazine published an article regarding a speech delivered by EV Ramasamy Naicker (EVR) on 31 August 1959, in Chidambaram. In this speech, EVR espoused sentiments of hatred, advocating for the removal of Brahmins from society. EVR said, “Do you hate Brahmins? Or Brahminism? Or what is Brahminism? What is the answer to the question? Brahminism came from Brahmins themselves, right? Therefore, I say that the Brahmins should be eradicated. It is because one is a thief, one indulges in thievery. When someone says he hates thievery, it means he hates the thief, too, doesn’t it? Thus, Brahminism grew out of the Brahmins and I am striving to annihilate the root.”

The book “Periyar Thought Collection Part 1” records a speech by EVR where he advocated for the killing of Brahmin men and women if the Rajaji government failed to withdraw the Madras scheme of elementary education (Kulakalvi Thittam) in 1953.

EVR says, “If Kulakalvi scheme is not withdrawn in a month, I asked (people) to stab every and any paapaan and [aapaathi (Tambram man and woman). Buy petrol and matchsticks and set fire to all Agraharams. In our protest, if we shoot 10, 20 people and are hung for it, what’s wrong with it?”

That’s why we took this effort. It materialized somewhat. All Tamil Brahmins got afraid and complained to Rajaji that ‘Because of your bad decision, all our Agraharams are in danger. We are afraid to go for our jobs alone. Our women are scared to walk the streets alone’ Which is why Rajaji resigned in 1954 (as CM) and ran away.

In another incident, EVR made a direct comparison between Brahmins and Jews, suggesting that Brahmins should be forcibly removed from India. This statement was made in 1938, coinciding with the rise of persecution against Jews in Germany. It is evident that EVR’s intention behind this comparison was to incite prejudice and discrimination against Brahmins. Additionally, he expressed the belief that in order to eliminate caste in India, it was necessary to eradicate God, religion, scriptures, and Brahmins. This rhetoric raises concerns about the promotion of genocide-like sentiments. He states, “The people in India are in a situation where they have to expel the Aryans, just like they expel them saying that they have no right to be in Germany. It is worth noting that the reasons given by the Germans for expelling the Jews fit the Indians for expelling the Aryans.”

In a separate address by EVR in Virudhunagar in 1944, he offered guidance to students, proposing that just as the Germans persecuted Jews and rose to power, why shouldn’t we do the same to Aryans?

He stated, “The Germans asked, why should Jews remain in our land? Why should the Jew exploit our country? What business does an alien have in our land? Why should a outsider oppress us? With such passion, they got excited and protested. Because of that Germany today is a super power and other countries are afraid of it. Why should we also not be like that (Germany)? We should think like this.” 

K. Veeramani, the current president of Dravidar Kazhagam, warned Thughlak editor S. Gurumurthy in an article published in Viduthalai in 2022 about the incidents following MK Gandhi’s assassination. After MK Gandhi was killed, Brahmins (Chitpavan Brahmins) were targeted and their homes were raided in Maharashtra. He speculated on what might have happened if EVR had given a signal, suggesting that EVR should be praised for not inciting such actions. Veeramani also remarked in the article that it wouldn’t take Dravidar Kazhagam more than a minute to provoke non-Brahmins against Brahmins, cautioning against provoking individuals like himself. This statement could be interpreted as a veiled threat, hinting at the potential for instigating conflict between different groups. It indicates the kind of considerations that might have been entertained in 1948 but were ultimately not pursued due to practical constraints.

In another instance, during his speech in Karaikudi, EVR openly encouraged non-Brahmins to kill Brahmins. EVR said, “They are celebrating festival it seems , he is celebrating Soora Samhaaram, what is it? He (Soorapadman the demon) was someone who said there is no god, they killed him, therefore now we can kill those buggers… that won’t be wrong (if we kill them) may be legally it will be wrong, that legal offence and all are bullshit we cant be bothered that it is legally wrong. We have to come to the conclusion, wherever we see a temple we must go inside and break all the idols inside, wherever we find Paapan (Brahmins) we must kill and destroy him. He has done like this to us, after all he (Tamil Brahmin) has done things like this only to come to this position. We must also do to the him, whatever he has done, what, a few of us have to die, if one Tamil dies for one paapan, means only three of us will die out of every hundreds, balance 94% will still remain.”  

The Kudiyarasu magazine of 1948 contained a disturbing article attributed to EVR, in which he speculated about the motives behind Ambedkar’s second marriage. According to him, Ambedkar’s wife, Lakshmi, was purportedly a Brahmin who attempted to poison him by lacing his drink. Ambedkar did not consume the poison, and she was subsequently apprehended by authorities. Hence he says, “Do not fall for Brahmin woman’s eye.”

So, no matter how much the Dravidianists, leftists and the woke Brahmins try to hail EVR as a social reformer, the fact that he instigated violence and annihilation of a community is undisputable.

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

The post Yes, EVR Called For A Genocide Of Tamil Brahmins! Here’s The Proof appeared first on The Commune.

]]>
What Ranjani-Gayatri Said Is True – EVR Called For Brahmin Genocide & Used Profanity Against Women – Here’s The Proof https://thecommunemag.com/what-ranjani-gayatri-said-is-true-evr-called-for-brahmin-genocide-used-profanity-against-women-heres-the-proof/ Thu, 21 Mar 2024 12:13:56 +0000 https://thecommunemag.com/?p=72689 Following Madras Music Academy’s announcement of conferring ‘Sangita Kalanidhi’ award to controversial singer TM Krishna, Carnatic vocalist duo Ranjani and Gayatri announced their decision to withdraw from participating in the Music Academy’s conference slated for 2024, This independent decision taken by the due Ranjani-Gayatri cited their reason for withdrawal. The stance taken by Carnatic musician […]

The post What Ranjani-Gayatri Said Is True – EVR Called For Brahmin Genocide & Used Profanity Against Women – Here’s The Proof appeared first on The Commune.

]]>

Following Madras Music Academy’s announcement of conferring ‘Sangita Kalanidhi’ award to controversial singer TM Krishna, Carnatic vocalist duo Ranjani and Gayatri announced their decision to withdraw from participating in the Music Academy’s conference slated for 2024, This independent decision taken by the due Ranjani-Gayatri cited their reason for withdrawal. The stance taken by Carnatic musician duo Ranjani Gayatri led to a massive meltdown in the leftist ecosystem.

In their official statement released on the social media platform X, the duo, Ranjani Gayatri, criticized TM Krishna for causing significant harm to the Carnatic music community by disrespecting its sentiments and revered figures like Tyagaraja and MS Subbulakshmi. They accused Krishna of undermining the spirituality inherent in Carnatic music and attempting to instill shame in being a Carnatic musician. Moreover, they condemned his admiration for EV Ramasamy Naicker, also known as ‘Periyar,’ highlighting Periyar’s advocacy for violence against Brahmins, derogatory treatment of women, and promotion of vulgar language in social discourse. Ranjani Gayatri affirmed their dedication to upholding a value system that respects art, artists, and Carnatic music’s cultural heritage. They asserted that participating in events involving Krishna would compromise these values.

The major controversy arose when the statements made by the duo significantly impacted the Dravidian Stocks “Its dangerous to overlook Mr TM Krishna’s glorification of a figure like EVR who

  1. Openly proposed a genocide of ‘brahmins’
  2. Repeatedly called/abused every woman of this community with vile profanity
  3. Relentlessly worked to normalize filthy language in social discourse”

D-Stocks swiftly intervened and made statements positively about EV Ramasamy Naicker, without possessing adequate knowledge about him, “Where did Periyar propose a genocide of Brahmins? – Please cite instances of Periyar using profanity against women? You are so petty, so jealous, that you’ll even taken up the Goebbels enterprise of fake facts manufacture than just COPING that @tmkrishnawas honoured.”

Immediately netizens took this as challenge to break the Periyarists claim and shared threads of instances where EV Ramasamy Naicker (EVR) called for genocide of Brahmins and used profanity against women.

On 28 March 1971, during a wedding ceremony in Madurai, EVR made a statement that, “From now on our women should cut their hair short up to their shoulders. Should wear shirt. Should wear Lungi. Our women are spending half of their time in make-up. Why do they wear make-up? besides, the only reason is to make others (men) take a look at them, the makeup worn by our women arouses desires in others. They are dressing up provocatively such that their body parts are visible. How does this not arouse others?”

In another instance, during a widely celebrated speech revered by followers of Periyarists and D-Stocks, EVR crudely asserted that women visit temples to be groped, “Husbands usually don’t go to temple, but at least to have fun they go. The women who are tied (Married) can go only during festival season. Only by going there, she can rub with four men; If she stays at home ‘Husband will threaten asking ‘what work; If she goes there… ‘Come’ will say the husband; She will say ‘Can’t come they are crushing’; He will say ‘Come, come through them’, She gets all that pleasure only when she is taken to the temple; He is habituated to this because everyone else’s wife is also subject to the same, hence no one will ridicule it. Only because of this, she is holding her life. If we make different arrangements for this, women would not go to temples.”

In another incident, EVR made a direct comparison between Brahmins and Jews, suggesting that Brahmins should be forcibly removed from India. This statement was made in 1938, coinciding with the rise of persecution against Jews in Germany. It is evident that EVR’s intention behind this comparison was to incite prejudice and discrimination against Brahmins. Additionally, he expressed the belief that in order to eliminate caste in India, it was necessary to eradicate God, religion, scriptures, and Brahmins. This rhetoric raises concerns about the promotion of genocide-like sentiments.

3. On Genozide of Bs:
EVR directly compared TBs to Jews & suggested for their forced emigration out of India. This was in 1938, when atrocities against Jews were beginning to take root in Germany.Its clear what was his intent behind the call for more research comparing Jews… pic.twitter.com/lnMEznZrwK— Tamil Labs 2.0 (@labstamil) March 21, 2024

In another instance, during his speech in Karaikudi, EVR openly encouraged non-Brahmins to kill Brahmins. EVR said, “They are celebrating festival it seems , he is celebrating Soora Samhaaram, what is it? He (Soorapathman the demon) was someone who said there is no god, they killed him, therefore now we can kill those buggers… that won’t be wrong (if we kill them) may be legally it will be wrong, that legal offence and all are bullshit we cant be bothered that it is legally wrong. We have to come to the conclusion, wherever we see a temple we must go inside and break all the idols inside, wherever we find Paapan (Brahmins) we must kill and destroy him. He has done like this to us, after all he (Tamil Brahmin) has done things like this only to come to this position. We must also do to the him, whatever he has done, What, a few of us have to die If one tamil dies for one paapan, means only three of us will die out of every hundreds, balance 94% will still remain.”  

The individuals posing these inquiries are well acquainted with the responses beforehand. These seemingly “innocent” inquiries serve merely as a guise, masking pretentiousness and insincerity aimed at preserving the reputation of their ideological mentor, EVR. Presenting a plethora of sources will not sway their stance. When ideology blinds the mind, discerning the truth becomes an arduous task. Alternatively, they may deliberately overlook the truth to advance their own self-serving agenda.

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

The post What Ranjani-Gayatri Said Is True – EVR Called For Brahmin Genocide & Used Profanity Against Women – Here’s The Proof appeared first on The Commune.

]]>
FYI Justices Joseph and Nagarathna, This is How EVR Spewed Venom Against Brahmins and Called for Their Genocide https://thecommunemag.com/fyi-justice-joseph-and-nagarathna-this-is-how-evr-spewed-venom-against-brahmins-and-called-for-their-genocide/ Mon, 03 Apr 2023 02:35:50 +0000 https://thecommunemag.com/?p=53954 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 […]

The post FYI Justices Joseph and Nagarathna, This is How EVR Spewed Venom Against Brahmins and Called for Their Genocide appeared first on The Commune.

]]>

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:

  1. Ten Things About Periyar Dravidian Parties Don’t Want You To Know, Swarajya
  2. Periyar’s Hindutva, Outlook
  3. How Muslims made Periyar bend a knee, while he continued to abuse Hindus despite protests, OpIndia
  4. When E.V. Ramasamy aka ‘Periyar’ called for Nazi-style genocide of Brahmin Hindus, HinduPost
  5. 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.

The post FYI Justices Joseph and Nagarathna, This is How EVR Spewed Venom Against Brahmins and Called for Their Genocide appeared first on The Commune.

]]>
Justice Joseph Allegedly “Smiles” At SG’s Reference To Brahmin Genocide Calls Made By DMK Leader https://thecommunemag.com/justice-joseph-allegedly-smiles-at-sgs-reference-to-brahmin-genocide-calls-made-by-dmk-leader/ Wed, 29 Mar 2023 15:02:20 +0000 https://thecommunemag.com/?p=53733 Feature Image: Left - Justice, Right - Representative The Supreme Court on Wednesday (29 March 2023) was hearing a plea regarding alleged hate speech made against Muslims in rallies across Maharashtra. Reports noted that the hearing saw a heated exchange between Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta appearing for the Centre and judges Joseph and Nagarathna. […]

The post Justice Joseph Allegedly “Smiles” At SG’s Reference To Brahmin Genocide Calls Made By DMK Leader appeared first on The Commune.

]]>
Feature Image: Left - Justice, Right - Representative

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (29 March 2023) was hearing a plea regarding alleged hate speech made against Muslims in rallies across Maharashtra.

Reports noted that the hearing saw a heated exchange between Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta appearing for the Centre and judges Joseph and Nagarathna.

SG Tushar Mehta wanted to include other instances of hate speech to this petition.

Bar and Bench which reported the proceedings stated that when SG Tushar Mehta mentioned about a DMK leader calling for the butchering of Brahmins, Justice Joseph apparently smiled to which the SG retorted saying that it is not a matter to be laughed at. The SG was reportedly making a reference to the speech made by DMK spokesperson Rajiv Gandhi who had said that Tamil Brahmins should have been killed as per the directions of EV.

Justice Nagarathna asked the SG what made the DMK leader say so.

“Do you know who is Periyar?”, Justice Joseph reportedly asked the SG to which the latter noted that just because a hate speech is said by someone famous, it cannot be pardoned.

When the SG urged the justices to take a look at te video of a child in a PFI rally in Kerala raising slogans calling for preparation for the last rites of Hindus and Christians, Justice Joseph said “yes yes we know..”.

“Then you should have taken suo Motu cognisance” said the SG to which Justice Nagarathna responded “there are cracks in the idea of fraternity”.

Click here to subscribe to The Commune on Telegram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

 

 

The post Justice Joseph Allegedly “Smiles” At SG’s Reference To Brahmin Genocide Calls Made By DMK Leader appeared first on The Commune.

]]>
When EVR Fell At The Feet Of Jinnah And But Got Snubbed In Return https://thecommunemag.com/how-evr-prostrated-before-jinnah-and-got-himself-kicked-in-return/ Sat, 22 Oct 2022 08:02:13 +0000 https://thecommunemag.com/?p=48156 E.V. Ramasamy Naicker (hailed as ‘Periyar’ by his followers) was someone who opposed the very idea of India and was dead against the Indian National Congress and Mahatma Gandhi. He had called for a Dravidistan along the lines of Pakistan and also tried to collude with Muhammad Ali Jinnah for the same. EVR had met […]

The post When EVR Fell At The Feet Of Jinnah And But Got Snubbed In Return appeared first on The Commune.

]]>

E.V. Ramasamy Naicker (hailed as ‘Periyar’ by his followers) was someone who opposed the very idea of India and was dead against the Indian National Congress and Mahatma Gandhi.

He had called for a Dravidistan along the lines of Pakistan and also tried to collude with Muhammad Ali Jinnah for the same.

EVR had met Jinnah four times – once at Bombay, twice at Madras and once at Delhi.

EVR’s Demand For Dravida Nadu

EVR with his anti-Hindu tirade was able to closely move with Muslim leaders which increased considerably during 1930-40.

When the third Majilissul Ulema Conference was held in Erode, Islamist leaders like  Maulana Mohammed Ali, Maulana Shaukat Ali (aka the Ali Brothers of Khilafat Movement), Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad, Hakim Hajmal Khan, Chuadhrikali Kussaman reportedly stayed at EVR’s house.

In December 1938, EVR made the demand for a separate Dravida Nadu in his presidential address at the 14th Confederation of S.I.L.F. He met Sir Stafford Cripps and put forward the demand of Dravidanad in 1939.

Jinnah declared that the Muslims should observe December 22, 1939 as “Day of Deliverance” to mark the cessation of Congress Governments, which was supported by EVR who called upon his party cadres to mark the Day of Deliverance on a “grand scale” to rid the country of the “menace of the Congress”.

A separatist conference was held in June 1940 at Kanchipuram when EVR released the map of the proposed Dravida Nadu which comprised of the Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam and Kannada areas.

A meeting of EVR, Ambedkar and Jinnah took place on January 8, 1940 in which the leaders had apparently discussed about humiliating Congress and Congress leaders by urging Muslims, Scheduled Caste and non-Brahmins to leave Congress and join non-Congress parties. All of the agreed to create more problems for Congress while EVR extended his full support to Jinnah for the Muslim cause.

On March 25, 1940 at Lahore session of Muslim League, Jinnah gave a clarion call for a separate Pakistan and and within seven months, on 24 August 1940, the EVR at the Tiruvarur Provincial Conference called for a separate Dravida Nadu.

EVR and Jinnah met in Madras atleast twice (once during the Madras session of the Muslim League in April 1941) and discussed about Dravidastan and Pakistan. It is said that Mohammed Ismail, the convenor of Muslim League in Madras had arranged for the meeting between Jinnah and EVR.

EVR supported Jinnah’s demand for a separate Pakistan, salivating for support from him in return. However, Jinnah saw him as a threat to his own plans and showed EVR the finger.

How Jinnah Treated EVR

Initially, Jinnah had extended his sympathies to EVR’s cause. In fact, when he had come to attend the 1941 Madras session of Muslim Leage Jinnah propounded three nations – Hindustan, Pakistan and Dravidastan for Hindus, Muslims and Dravidians respectively.

However, Jinnah had to separate himself from the separatist movement of Dravidians because of pressure from Ulema as according to them, anybody who was not a Muslim was a kafir, thereby watering down the cause of a Muslim nation.

From then on, Jinnah’s reply to EVR indicates a luke warm reaction and lack of sufficient interest in the objectives of EVR’s Dravidian Movement.

On 9 August 1944, EVR wrote to Jinnah to take up the issue of Dravidastan along with Pakistan.

In his letter to Jinnah, EVR wrote “My dear Jinnah, I have been watching carefully the proceedings of Mr Rajagopalacghariar’s formula towards solving the dead-lock and your desire to receive Mr Gandhi at your residence in Bombay on your return which will probably be about the middle of August. It is welcomed in political circles. Though I have no full hope, there are signs of change as our opponents have come forward to settle the Hindu-Muslim questions, especially in relation to Cripp’s offer.

He said that “Congressites are experts in twisting words” and that “they can say anything and give meaning in whatever manner they think”.

Kindly excuse me for reminding you about our discussions relating to Pakistan and Dravidasthan while we were at Madras and Delhi and your assurance that you would plead for both as one. Here in South India, I considered the questions as one and done my best to solve the problem as far as possible.“, EVR prostratingly wrote to Jinnah.

Replying to this letter on 17 August 1944, Jinnah scathingly wrote to EVR calling him “undecisive”.

I have always had much sympathy or the people of Madras 90 percent of whom are Non-Brahmins, and if they desire to establish their Dravidasthan it is entirely for your people to decide on this matter. I can say no more, and I cannot speak on your behalf.“, he said.

I have made the position clear to you and your colleagues when I was in Madras more than once, but hitherto I have noticed that in your activities you have been undecisive. If the people of your province really desire Dravidasthan, then it is for them to assert themselves.“, Jinnah replied to EVR.

The Takeaway From The Episode

The letter is reflective of the personalities of the two people, their extent of inclusiveness of the other’s community and their support of each other’s divisive and separatist objectives.

The letter is reflective of Jinnah and the Muslim League’s attitude towards the request of Hindu leaders and Hindus in general. While EVR’s support for Jinnah, the Muslim League and India’s muslims, was straight forward, open, unconditional and unwavering, Jinnah’s support of EVR’s Dravidian Hindu cause was quite the opposite – Jinnah makes it clear that his sole interest is his objective of Muslim welfare and muslim statehood.

Jinnah is blunt and makes it clear that, EVR’s fight (the Dravidian Movement, social equality for the Hindus and a separate Dravidian statehood) is not his fight and that he would not be extending the kind of support that EVR expects from him.

On a lighter vein, one can appreciate Jinnah’s straight forwardness but it is important to note that he prefers to keep the Muslim cause separate from the Hindu cause, in spite of EVR’s unconditional, inclusive support for the Muslim cause. Jinnah keeps his Muslim cause separate even though EVR’s Dravidian statehood cause and the equal opportunity and social equality Hindu cause, is one that is inclusive of Dravidian Muslims. EVR does not exclude Muslims from his Dravidian causes but Jinnah does not hesitate to promptly disassociate himself from the Dravidian cause which incidentally is non-Muslim.

EVR and his likes, solidly supported the Muslim cause. Jinnah rode on the support of a divided Hindu, “secularist” vote and achieved his objective of a separate Muslim homeland. On the other hand, EVR and his secularist/atheist gang did not garner significant support from the Muslims, did not accomplish their objectives and continue to struggle with meeting their goals, to this day.

Jinnah as well as the British had identified an opportunity in the consistent pattern of a lack of unity among the Hindu communities and took advantage of it, in every possible manner. They rode on the back of misguided or supposedly “aggrieved” Hindus, accomplished their goals and secured significant wins at the expense of the larger Hindu community.

E.V Ramaswamy’s obsession with dividing the Hindu community across caste lines, rather than staying united while addressing social injustices within the community had worked to the advantage of non-Hindu leaders and their communities.

Click here to subscribe to The Commune on Telegram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post When EVR Fell At The Feet Of Jinnah And But Got Snubbed In Return appeared first on The Commune.

]]>
“Criminal, Lunatic, Perverted Mind”: How Nehru Described EVR https://thecommunemag.com/criminal-lunatic-perverted-mind-how-nehru-described-evr/ Sat, 17 Sep 2022 15:05:42 +0000 https://thecommunemag.com/?p=47295 The Congress party and its leaders have co-opted E.V. Ramasamy Naicker (known as ‘Periyar’ by his followers) as one of their icons. However, the Congress party and EVR shared a great deal of animosity during their times. EVR had once said “The first would be the destruction of the Congress party, the second the destruction […]

The post “Criminal, Lunatic, Perverted Mind”: How Nehru Described EVR appeared first on The Commune.

]]>

The Congress party and its leaders have co-opted E.V. Ramasamy Naicker (known as ‘Periyar’ by his followers) as one of their icons.

However, the Congress party and EVR shared a great deal of animosity during their times.

EVR had once said “The first would be the destruction of the Congress party, the second the destruction of Hindu religion and the third the destruction of the domination of Brahmins. The third would automatically happen when the first two tasks were completed. Gandhi’s response was not to our satisfaction.”

EVR had called for the ‘annihilation of Gandhi’ and ‘annihilation of Congress’ along with the ‘annihilation of Brahmins’. He even threatened to burn Mahatma Gandhi’s photos and raze down his statues.

Be that as it may.

In stark contrast to how the Congress of today is venerating this anti-Hindu bigot, the party under Nehru did not take EVR’s obscenities and absurdities lying down. In fact, Jawaharlal Nehru did not take kind to EVR’s eccentricity when he had given a clarion call for the genocide of Tamil Brahmins.

On 4 November 1957, a ‘caste eradication conference’ was organized in Thanjavur, days before EVR and his comrades burnt the Indian Constitution. Around 2 lakh ‘spears’ (that’s how the Dravidian Stockists identified themselves back then), had attended that meeting during which silver rupees were collected equivalent to EVR’s weight, just like how bundles of cash were collected in the name of ‘subscriptions’ by Dravida Kazhagam members by having their head K. Veeramani sit on one side of the weigh balance.

“Periyar did not get pacified upon seeing the silver coins. This is where he gave a new war cry like a roaring tiger.”, his biography notes.

EVR gave a genocidical call to kill 1000 Tamil Brahmins to ‘eradicate caste’.

He said “If to eradicate caste we need to burn the agraharams (Tamizh Brahmin house colonies) and murder atleast 1000 Tamizh Brahmins then we will do exactly that” declaring the date of genocide as 26th November 1957, the Constitution Day.

Reacting to this genocidical call, Nehru had written a letter to then Chief Minister of Madras K. Kamaraj saying that EVR’s call might lead to strong communal feeling which could even lead to murders. “I do hope that you will take adequate notice of this”, Nehru wrote in his letter to Kamaraj.

Source: Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru, Second Series, Volume 39, Page 383

Anguished by the virulent vitriol spewed by EVR, Nehru shot off another letter to Kamaraj on 5 November 1957 in which he asked EVR to “be put in a lunatic asylum” and let his “perveted mind be treated there”.

Source: Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru, Second Series, Volume 40, Page 387

Madras Legislative Councile Member A. Sreenivasan on 3 December 1957 had once again brought the attention of EVR’s genocide call to Nehru. Acknowledging his letter, he wrote back to him saying “I have seldom come across anything more primitive and barbarous in any country presuming to be civilized” adding that EVR and his group had to be dealt with an iron hand.

Source: Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru, Second Series, Volume 40, Page 388

It was against this backdrop to deal with the menace of EVR that the Madras Legislative Assembly passed the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Bill, 1957 on 11 November 1957 which sought to prevent insults to national symbols like the Indian Flag, Constitution, etc.

Nehru once again wrote to Kamaraj on 4 December 1957, stating that EVR’s activities was the most barbarous thing that he had come across in a civilized country.

It is this EVR who loathed Congress and was equally loathed by Nehru that the Congress is idolizing today.

Click here to subscribe to The Commune on Telegram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

The post “Criminal, Lunatic, Perverted Mind”: How Nehru Described EVR appeared first on The Commune.

]]>