Padma Subrahmanyam: A Brahmin Supremacist. Gandhi and Chadrasekharendra as Crutches

Padma Subrahmanyam, aged 77, uploaded a video called 'Food for thought' that is an unabashed call for Brahmin hegemony. To provide succor to her shameful arguments she brought in Gandhi and Chandrasekharendra, the Kanchi pontiff. Thanks to social media and her own sense of self-entitlement, that makes her think that every unfiltered nonsense swirling in between her ears is fit to be shared with the wide world, we now know what a bigot she is and how vacuous she is. If anyone wanted proof that being born a Brahmin is no guarantee of intelligence she has gladly provided it. Thank you madam.

Padma Subrahmanyam. Picture Credit 'The Hindu"

Padma's choice of individuals is striking. One was Gandhi, probably the most complex political leader of modern era and the greatest emancipator nonpareil. The other was Chandrasekharendra, pontiff of Kanchi mutt, a Hindu religious leader exclusively for Brahmins and a tireless advocate of literal interpretation of scriptures like any other fundamentalist. Padma is intellectually incapable of understanding the complexity of Gandhi and is spiritually incapable of truly following the pontiff. She reduces both to hatchets to be wielded in service of her shameful agenda.

Varnashrama: India's bloodless peace and the price

Indians of many stripes often think that the blood soaked history of Europe and the relatively bloodless history of India are not just accidents but due to very elemental differences that are intrinsic to Indian, to be specific Hindu, culture that Europe lacked. This is true only on the surface.

Historians like K.A.N Sastry have pointed out the lack of friction in ancient Indian society and, in my opinion, it could easily be attributed to varnashrama. Each section of a society in a place and each functioning accordingly. Sure, it has been called division of labor and its apologists have always pointed to the trade guilds of Germany. So, would Europe have escaped bloodshed if they too had, not just trade guilds but, a form of varnashrama? They might've but the world would've been poorer.

Historian Mary Beard in 'SPQR' identifies the revolt of the plebeians, in 499 BCE, against social exclusion and taxation as a watershed moment. Strikes and violence continued for two centuries. "One of the most famed plebeian victories came in 326 BCE, when the system of enslavement for debt was abolished, establishing the principle that the liberty of a Roman citizen was an inalienable right". By then another important victory was that plebeians could be elected consuls.

Take a leap to 14th century and rebellion stirs in England. Two centuries after Magna Carta, that great charter of liberty, "in the summer of 1381", writes Dan Jones, "a sudden and violent uprising against the country's richest and most powerful lords known as Peasants Revolt, was one of the most astonishing events of the Middle Ages".

India's varnashrama protected India from bloodshed but the price was literal wholesale enslavement of a large population for more than a millennia and a nation completely alien to the ideas of rebellion, revolt and rights until western educated Indian leaders arrived on the scene in 19th and 20th century. Note, this is not a concoction of my imagination. Many Brahmin speakers, from legal fraternity and elsewhere have drawn a distinction between India's 'Dharma' oriented society versus a Western society based on the notion of 'rights'.

Varnashrama did not just keep a people in servitude. What a man or woman can wear, how long can a dhoti be, what can they eat, where can they live, whether a man can carry an umbrella, whether a people can draw water using mud pot, what they can study were all within an iron framework that was not just invisible but did not need armies to be enforced. If any system qualifies to be called evil genius it is varnashrama and it'd take the prize too.

The Pariahs were denied not just education but access to healthcare and waterways amongst others was denied. The sheer human cost of such a draconian system over centuries would, if extrapolated with imagination, make the holocaust pale into background. The Pariah was prohibited from eating rice well into the twentieth century. Imagine the cost of lack of nutrition. 'Frictionless society'. My foot.

Very coolly Padma asserts that Brahmins are natural intellectuals forgetting the fact that for nearly two centuries the reputed institutions of learning in Chennai were the courtesy of Missionaries, colonial government, non-Brahmin philanthropists. She herself was a student of Ethiraj college, not some Brahmin educational institution. Brahmins really did not run educational institutions of repute or not on such scale. The Brahmin intellectuals were all products of western education. It was not only Brahmins who flocked to learn English. Practically all of India did. Gandhi and Nehru, a Bania and a Brahmin, were not stellar students and compared to Ambedkar were less educationally accomplished. It is easy to read Nehru and Gandhi whereas Ambedkar is highly academic and makes the reader sweat.

Gandhi and Varnashrama

Gandhi is best understood by Western academics, including Indians writing for Western universities and publications. My understanding of Gandhi is firmly rooted in the western tradition. America's founding fathers were slaveholders and at the same time emancipators. Abraham Lincoln ended slavery while holding on to the belief that Blacks were not intellectually equal to the Whites. Yet, within such inconsistencies they've nudged history. So too did Gandhi. And Gandhi, in turn, was nudged by Babasaheb Ambedkar.

Gandhi has undoubtedly praised Brahmins, called upon others to respect the Brahmin, he uncharitably compared the Dalits who converted to cows but was he just a sum of a few quotes? That he was not. Even if we went by quotes he was maddeningly tying himself in knots trying not to break Hinduism wholesale and provided fodder for both his detractors and others.

Invited by Gandhi to write for the first issue of Harijan, 1933, Ambedkar refuses but sends a terse message, "There will be outcastes as long as there are castes. And nothing can emancipate the outcaste except the destruction of the caste system". Publishing the letter Gandhi proceeds to answer him. "The moment untouchability goes, the caste system will itself be purified, that is to say, according to my dream, it will resolve itself into the true Varna dharma, the four divisions of the society, each complimentary of the other and none inferior or superior to any other".

Ambedkar was, in 1935, asked give an address to the "Annual conference of the Jat Pat Today Mandal of Lahore- an organization of caste Hindu reformers who wanted to do away with the caste system". Ambedkar's prepared remarks, titled "Annihilation of caste" alarmed the organizers for it called upon Dalits to leave Hinduism. The address was cancelled but Ambedkar published the speech. Gandhi responded in Harijan. Ambedkar responded back. An epistolary battle ensued.

Interestingly the Lahore organization now sent a message to Gandhi that he published in Harijan, August 1936. The message read, "Hindus are slaves of caste and do not want to destroy it. So when you advocate your ideal or imaginary varnavyayarastha they find justification for cling to caste. You are doing a great disservice to social reform".

Dissecting Gandhi's evolution on caste and spirituality, researcher Arvind Sharma writes, "In relation to Hinduism, then, Gandhi valued the overall structure of the tradition but wrought cardinal changes within it by introducing ordinal changes into it, thus resolving the paradox of belonging to a tradition but also transforming it while following it. …his programs, often moderate, and even traditional in formulation, were often radical in their impact"

This is clearly borne out by the impact of Gandhi's tour against untouchability. As Gandhi toured the length and breadth of India beseeching the upper caste Hindus to repent he was met with cries of 'Death to Gandhi'. His cavalcade was attacked and on couple of occasions he was almost assassinated. The upper caste savarna Hindus would dare to do him what Lord Irwin or any Muslim or Christian would not even attempt to do. The savarna Hindus understood the impact Gandhi was having on their cherished customs. It should be noted that a good number of Brahmins and upper castes stood behind Gandhi too. Christ told he'd split homes and pit father against son. Here was a modern day Christ tearing apart an ancient society.

"Gandhi Collecting Donations for Harijan Fund. Picture credit Kanu Gandhi. Source  6ad11bd683584fc7ebb050ff18a08a5d.jpg"

Gandhi evolved, on every issue, till the day he was felled by a fanatical Chitpavan Brahmin. The issue of caste was no different. The Gandhi of 1920s and 1930s, historian William Coward points out, evolved to the Gandhi of 1945 who sort of accepted his defeat to make caste Hindus realize that they need to change and advocated, as Ambedkar did, the politicization of Dalits. When the Constituent Assembly voted to outlaw untouchability the members cheered, "victory to Mahatma Gandhi". The man who presided over the legal change, included in the cabinet on the advice of Gandhi, was Ambedkar.

An important meeting during Gandhi's tour in 1934 was one between him and the Kanchi pontiff in Kerala. The pontiff reportedly pleaded with Gandhi not to destroy Hinduism by destroying untouchability. While Padma cites some booklet written by Gandhi praising Varnashrama she, owing to intrinsic intellectual inability, fails to understand that Gandhi, beyond his cardinal faiths of truth and non-violence, was always a work in progress and more importantly his approach to the sacred texts was very unlike that of the pontiff's.

When Ambedkar burned copies of Manusmriti and Dalits vowed severance with Hinduism Gandhi responded in Harijan writing, "Caste has to go". Gandhi asserted that Varnashrama did not have room for untouchability and that there was no prohibition against inter-dining or inter-caste marriage and more importantly he adds that it is his liberty to interpret the texts.

Akeel Bilgrami, Rhodes scholar and holder of Johnsonian chair of philosophy at Columbia University, in a perceptive essay on Gandhi, writes that Gandhi said of his approach to religious texts, "I am not a literalist". Bilgrami adds, "I want to stress Gandhi's interpretative ideal of focusing on the spirit rather than on the letter of religious texts. So, for instance, he says that of all the versions of the Ramayana, the one to which he most turns is Tulsidas because "it is the spirit running through the book that holds me spellbound"". Gandhi, with such interpretative zeal completely gave a new reading to Bhagvad Gita, a text commonly thought to be an unabashed call to war.

"My belief in the Hindu scriptures", said Gandhi, "does not require me to accept every word and every verse as divinely inspired". Bilgrami points out that in "many writings, Gandhi opposed the prevalent interpretation of the varna system".

Gandhi interpreted, Gandhi evolved, Gandhi fashioned his own philosophy, Gandhi entertained his critics and always published their criticisms in his own newspaper. This was a man cut from a very different cloth. He was human, all too human. Padma has reduced him to a caricature. This takes us to the Kanchi pontiff who was a literalist and an avowed fundamentalist.

The Kanchi Pontiff

Even those who are disgusted by Padma's views approve the pontiff's views, which more faithfully resemble her views than that of Gandhi's. The excuse is that the pontiff, very reverentially called by devout Brahmins as 'Maha Periyavaa', was a religious head and was merely asserting what his scriptures told him. Varnashrama and support for caste are the most polite of the so called saint's causes unlike other causes that are practically repugnant.

Writing in 20th century Chandrasekharendra advocated child marriage as ideal to promote loyalty in the minds of women from childhood towards their husbands. To Gandhi varnashrama did not prohibit inter-dining but to the saint it did. In several writings he returns obsessively to not eating food served by everyone and even asked diners to be mindful of those who they ate alongside. Happily he compared ritual pollution of inter-dining to being infected by a disease. He abhorred women working.

Padma knows full well that if she just cited Chandrasekharendra she would've been brushed aside by non-Brahmins and therefore she used Gandhi as a Trojan horse to suggest, "here's the Father of the nation, a non-Brahmin and an emancipator speaking like my beloved Aacharyaa". What she lacks in honest understanding Padma compensates in deviousness. While Gandhi's views on varnashrama were superficially close to Chandrasekharendra it is the Aacharya who Padma really needed.

Chandrasekharendra Swamigal -- Maha Periyavaal

Building on her theme of differences she cites a shameful parable narrated by the Aacharya. The Aacharya, Padma says, ridiculed the idea of equality asking "if everything is equal can we replace sugar with salt in making a sweet". One has to specialize in Indian rules of logic to come up with such a stupid example to undermine the idea of equality. Recently another pontiff, oh there's no shortage of them, asked, how can we promote inter-caste marriage, is it not akin to two different animals marrying? Which school of logic do these guys attend?

It is the citing of that stupid parable that illustrates Padma's real intention and brings her closer to the Aacharya than to Gandhi. Padma, obviously does not and cannot practice everything that the Aacharya held dear. She's cherry picking much like how most of Tamil Nadu learned only one thing from E.V. Ramaswamy, passionately hating Brahmins.

When Padma bemoans Brahmins slipping from their ordained destiny she probably had in mind her bigamous father who was a movie director.

Why now? Why not ignore Padma?

The question why now, is easily answered. The current political climate is built on the bedrock of a revival of Brahminical hegemony. Turn wheresoever you may you'd find glorification of a fabled past, mostly with no truth or half-truth, that is invariably conflated with a Vedic age when Brahminical imperialism was at its apogee.

Do I believe every Brahmin cheers Padma and every Brahmin wants a return of varnashrama? Absolutely no. From the days of Gandhi till today there are Brahmins who also stand up to the forces of atavism and regressiveness. It is complete nonsense to tar all Brahmins with the same brush or to assume every Brahmin will only act like Padma does.

This is where Ambedkar and E.V. Ramaswamy adopted an implacable stance of animosity and committed the same sin they said they were fighting, meaning reducing a person to nothing beyond his or her birth. "The Bania", wrote Ambedkar, "is the worst parasitic class known to history....He is like an undertaker who prospers when there is an epidemic. The only difference between the undertaker and the Bania is that the undertaker does not create an epidemic while the Bania does".

Thousands of Brahmins, at great personal cost, rallied behind the world's most famous Bania, to fight untouchability. To the one Bania that Ambedkar loathed most, a fearsome Afghan Pathan was capable of non-violence as much as anyone else. The Mahatma never lacked for faults and he was wrong on several important questions but what he never lacked was an abiding faith in a fellow human being to surmount hate.

Why not ignore Padma? Padma is a force to reckon with in the Bharatanatyam field and, according to a friend, was the ultimate authority in awarding Ph.D's for most researchers in the field. As a prominent artiste in a field already plagued by casteism and bigotry she occupies a position of immense influence. Who knows how many students and researchers, possibly better than her, she ensured did not get the due because of who they are?

In any other decent society Padma would've become a persona-non-grata and would be shunned by institutions promptly, any apology notwithstanding. But, this is India. She has unleashed her poodles who are now flooding sanctimonious stories about how egalitarian she is. Universities, colleges and Sabhas will continue to honor her. When the grim reaper does come, we can be sure we'll be flooded with articles reminding us what a doyen she was and all this would be rarely spoken of.

It is stunning that a Brahmin lady practicing an art that never belonged to her ancestors happily talks of varnashrama. Lady, thou art the definition of the word, chutzpah. Shame on you.

References:

1. The Cambridge Companion to Gandhi - Ed. Judith Brown & Anthony Parel
2. Gandhi: A spiritual Biography - Arvind Sharma
3. Indian Critiques Gandhi - Ed. Harold Coward
4. Mahatma (Vol. 3 & 4) - D.G. Tendulkar
5. Missionaries and a Hindu State: Travancore 1858-1936 - Koji Kawashima
6. The Pariah Problem: Caste, Religion, and the Social in Modern India - Rupa Viswanath.
7. The Essential Ambedkar - Ed. Valerian Rodrigues
8.  Kanchi Acharya on Inter-Dining
9. Who can we eat with - Acharya
10. Acharya on child marriage
11. Can women work
12. தெய்வத்தின் குரல்: "ஸ்த்ரீ ஆண் மாதிரி பதவி, உத்யோகம் என்று வெளியுலக விஷயங்களில் ஈடுபடாமல் வீட்டு நிர்வாகத்தை எந்தவித குறையும் இல்லாமல் கவனித்துக் கொள்வதையே தன்னுடைய பிறவிப் பணியாகவும், நல்ல ஸாதனா மார்கமாகவும் வைத்து கொள்ள வேண்டும். வீட்டையும் கவனித்துக் கொண்டு வேலைக்கும் போகிறோம் என்றால் இரண்டிலுமே அர்ப்பணிப்பு குறைந்து போகும். ஒருவேளை இரண்டையும் சரியாக செய்ய முடிந்தாலும் அது அவளுக்கு தர்மமாகாது. ஏனென்றால், பலதரப்பட்ட பிரச்சனைகளை அவள் சமாளித்தாக வேண்டும். இந்த இன்னல்களுக்கு ஆளாகாமல், ஸ்த்ரீயானவள் தன் தார்மீகப் பொறுப்பான குடும்பப் பொறுப்பை ஏற்று சிறப்பாக குடும்பத்தை வழி நடத்திட வேண்டும்"
13. Padma Subrahmanyam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padma_Subrahmanyam
14. K. Subramanyam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K._Subramanyam

E.V.R. To 'Kaduvetti' Guru : A Saga Of Hatred, Selective Outrage and Hypocrisies

"Why did clothing prices increase?", "because Dalit women have started wearing blouses". "Why did unemployment rise?", "because Dalits are applying for jobs". "Why is rice costing more?", "those arrack drinking guys have started eating rice". If anyone thought it was Kaduvetti Guru who spoke those despicable words, think again. It is Tamil Nadu's patron saint E.V.Ramasamy Naicker, referred honorifically as 'Periyaar'. I've actually toned down his crude language. Karunanidhi's Murasoli ran a set of cartoons in their 1962 Pongal issue (see below) that has the colorful language verbatim. Please enlarge and read it, holding your noses:

E.V.Ramasamy Naicker's despicable rhetoric about Dalits.

In a fiery speech laden with blatant caste baiting Guru and his party have thrown Tamil Nadu into a cauldron of hatred. Guru, the speech shows, is E.V.R's intellectual heir.

EVR is seen as one who challenged Brahmin hegemony and brought about social justice with his crusade against religion over many decades. EVR's rhetoric was designed to shock and chill. 'If a Brahmin and a snake come together, hit the Brahmin first' said EVR. The non-Brahmin majority reveled in seeing such a challenge being flung at a powerful minority group. It is unarguable that Brahmins did control the corridors of power and were seen as originators of an unspeakable horror, 'untouchability'. The very sight of a lower caste was seen as polluting to the upper caste. There was a time when knowledge of Sanskrit was considered essential to enroll in Medical college in Tamil Nadu, where almost no one spoke Sanskrit. While all that is true that is not all there is to truth.

EVR saw the Brahmin lurking behind anything that he thought was the cause for non-Brahmins to be dominated over. Not given to nuances or graces EVR saw nothing but evil in every Brahmin. How much of what EVR said and did was justifiable 'counter-reaction'. Was EVR, like ABC News called Malcolm-X in USA, the 'hate that hate produced'? Did Brahmins create the Frankenstein that EVR became? Castes and the interplay of hegemony was more complex than what an illiterate EVR understood. Untouchability and racial discrimination existed in many corners of the world where the Brahmin had never set foot or where Manu Shasthra never existed. Even in India the much maligned Manu smriti was not as pervasive as was propagated by EVR. Most of India was ruled by the Mughals for over 6 centuries where the Brahman was seen as an infidel along with others.

It is not an accident that India's freedom struggle, the greatest the world had ever seen, was dominated by upper caste Brahmins, Patels and of course the most famous Bania, Gandhi. The upper caste having arrogated to themselves the privilege of education were, naturally, the first to rebel against foreign rule. It is from within Brahmins that reformers arose to rid Hinduism of its shameful Sati and Child marriage practices. It is within the paradigm of freedom movement that centuries old prejudices against women and lower caste were shaken.

Abdul Kalam, former President and a Muslim, recounts an interesting anecdote in his auto-biography. One of Kalam's teacher was a Brahmin. The teacher asked Kalam to come to his house for lunch. The Brahmin teacher's wife would refuse to serve food for a Muslim. The teacher would take it upon himself to serve the food. The teacher would insist that Kalam visit every week for lunch. Kalam, naturally, was not thrilled. Seeing his hesitation the teacher told him "don't worry about my wife. She has to learn".

A question to ponder is why Ambedkar, a Dalit, who had suffered more at the hands of upper caste never adopted EVR's poisonous rhetoric? Not even Malcolm X advocated violence against whites who were lynching his fellow blacks. One could point to an insult that EVR had suffered like not being fed at a Brahmin run mutt in Kasi. Nursing a grudge to ask for violence against every caste member of that community is why EVR remains a rabid rabble rouser and would never join the ranks of Gandhi and MLK Jr. Gandhi stitched a pair of slippers for General Smuts who had imprisoned him. Gandhi was thrown out of a train in a cold night in a foreign country by a white man and yet he never said "if a white man and a snake came together hit the white man first".

It is not a matter of just alleging that EVR was anti-Dalit by quoting him. No. EVR taught a people to hate a community. Having taught hatred it is difficult to keep it focused on just the initial target. Class hatred entered the body politic of the Tamil and is now an inseparable feature of most Tamils. Hating Brahmins was a universal sport in Tamil Nadu. This fanning of anti-Brahmin hatred yielded a more sinister corollary.

While EVR was busy teaching everyone to hate Brahmins little note was taken of the fact that practically every caste was guilty of casteism towards every other caste they deemed beneath them. Several years ago Dalit students in Chennai's Adi-Dravida hostel organized a road blockade to draw attention to the pathetic state of their hostel. Adi-Dravida hostels are government run to house Dalit students. The hostels were not fit even for animals to stay and the food was something no human being would eat. Yet, none other than Brahmin owned Frontline magazine ran stories about the hostel. EVR's party organ, now run by Veeramani, behaved as if no such thing happened.

If one takes a cursory reading of EVR's party organ, Viduthalai, one would think that but for Brahmins the world would be a paradise of equality and justice. Just two weeks back Viduthalai proudly reported a remark by 3rd rate lyric writer Arivumathi "கவிஞர் அறிவுமதி தன்னுடைய கவிதை ஒன்றைச் சொல்லி எல்லோருக்கும் விபத்து மயிரி ழையில் நடக்கும், தமிழனுக்கும் மட்டும் நூலிழையில் நடக்கும் என்று பலத்த கைதட்டலுடன் தொடங்கினார்". Celebrating the disputed 100th year of founding of Dravidian party M.Karunanidhi, 5 times elected as CM, wrote 'this occasion reminds of our undertaking to make Brahmins shiver in their boots'.  It is ironical for THAT Karunanidhi to advise Ramadoss to speak decently. Or did indecent speech become defined as to  exclude hatred against Brahmins. At least Kaduvetti Guru only 'hinted' at a caste derisively. 

Even today when one talks of caste hatred and untouchability the image that comes to most Tamil minds is that of the Brahmin. Forced to negotiate on the same table with Dalit leader Immanuel the Thevar community patriarch Muthuramalingam fumed and engineered a fatal attack on Immanuel. Even today when Madurai celebrates Guru Pooja, in honor of Muthuramalingam, the entire district would be seething ready to burst into an orgy of violence.

In the 90's Karunanidhi named a bus fleet after a lower caste warrior. Madurai burned for several days. Vaasanthi, editor of Tamil magazine 'India Today', later wrote quoting a 10 year old boy who cursed "do they think we will step inside a bus named after a lower caste". Madurai is still home to the grotesque system called 'two-tumbler system'. Even today Dalits cannot ride a cycle or wear a towel on the shoulder in some streets. Breaking that taboo will invite riots. Many Dalit colonies were walled off. It is not an accident that the Dravidian parties, owing fealty to EVR, dominated by so called Backward Castes did not bother to remove such iniquities. Recently Madras Law college saw brutal attack of a Thevar student by Dalit students who had felt insulted in an earlier fracas. I am sure no one would call that as 'you reap as you sow' as one would justify EVR's actions against Brahmins.

Dalit commentator Ravikumar, later an MLA too, in an op-ed titled 'Periyar's Hindutva', wryly observed, "it would not be an exaggeration to say that the bases of the electoral alliances of today's Dravidian parties can be found in Periyar. The spread of an anti-dalit mentality and the reasons for the backwardness of dalits in the last three decades can be traced back to Periyar". EVR, stung by how minority Brahmin's wielded power, saw evil in any minority section of the population. It did not matter if the minority was an oppressed community. Given his blatantly indefensible quotes I'd allege he did suffer from anti-Dalit bias. 

A.Marx, EVR's hagiographer, in a book about EVR exults how EVR saw a conspiracy in society's ideas of 'morals'. Marx, unsurprisingly, often cites Nietzsche when he talks of EVR. EVR saw that morals were a conspiracy by Brahmins to keep the rest of the society pinned now. What Nietzsche saw as the conspiracy of the weak EVR saw as conspiracy of the Brahmin. His loathing of Brahmins was so complete that he rejected Tamil literature, including Kural and even the much admired texts of Tamil grammar, as a stooge of Brahmins that encourages casteism. 

To all the above add, what has now become the most pernicious system of social justice, the quota based 'reservation system'. 'Reservation' as practiced by India is not the same as its milder cousin affirmative action practiced in USA. They differ by a key metric. The Indian system is aptly called 'reservation' because it is quota based. As with the separate electorate system the reservation system too started with just a 10 year period of implementation and is now in its 60th year.

EVR's followers often exult that Tamil Nadu was the front runner in reservation system since the early 20th century, essentially conceding that the system is in place for a 100 years. I don't want to go into the claims of whether a 100 years is enough etc. Excluding all together any economic criterion and pegging a key benefit, education and jobs, to caste ensures the perpetuation of caste. As economic prospects improved and those benefiting under the quota regime became doctors and engineers and moved to urban centers they did escape the yoke of casteism. Not acknowledging that or even making room for that, a system, based on caste only, has made it every one's interest never to forget their caste. 

In a premium private school in Chennai Brahmin and non-Brahmin students taunt each other. The non-Brahmin says "thanks to quota I shall sail into MBBS". To which the Brahmin student retorts "shudra" (actually they say a cruder form 'soothies'). When MBBS list comes out with 9 out top 10 students being BC's Veeramani exults that the happiest day for him shall be the day there is no Brahmin in any medical college. Hitler could not have been clearer. I've heard friends support Karunanidhi's policy of not recommending Brahmin authors for Sahitya Akademi. And then there is the Brahmin guy who tells a non-Brahmin friend "your daughter will not be as good in math as my Brahmin boy". It was said, nonchalantly without malice as a matter of fact statement. 

The quota system also provides an incentive to castes maintaining their 'purity' and 'numbers'. Thanks to proliferating private media we get to hear caste leaders say they will punish their girl children if they fall in love. Is Ramadoss a fool to talk about love marriages? No. He is trying to preserve his flock. To be sure, there are other sociological reasons like considering women folk as 'property' that fuels such talk. Tamil film director Bhagyaraj could easily make a movie about a Brahmin girl marrying a boy from the barber caste. If he had made the girl to be from any other caste his movie would have been burned and probably he too would have been harmed. The Brahmins should thank Ramadoss's men for having the courage to ask Dravidian party leaders "would any of you consent for your children to marry a Dalit?" 

PMK, formerly Vanniar Sangam, came to limelight for their tree-felling agitation clamoring for an exclusive quota. The BC's who had enjoyed the fruits of quotas for nearly 4 decades had come to form a 'creamy layer' where well educated and convent going kids continued to hog the quota seats. Naturally the benefits of quota did not percolate below the 'creamy layer' to other backward castes who now called themselves 'Most Backward Class'. Vanniyars trace their lineage, like every other caste, to an ancient ruling community. They called themselves the sons of Pallavas, of course with no proof. Barring the Brahmin it appears every community, when talking of how great they were, likes  to call themselves 'erstwhile rulers of the land'. At this rate its the poor Brahmin who looks like the powerless.

It is laughable that those who write "Ramadoss's quota agitation yielded fruits for Vanniyars" and then feign indignation at the blatant caste oriented rhetoric. If Vanniyars enjoyed the fruit of a violent agitation that was launched with a singular aim of garnering caste based benefits then its kind of facetious to now say "Ramadoss is overtly communal".  

Losing elections successively, seeing his domination eroding, desirous of achieving absolute political power Ramadoss has begun to show his fangs in plain sight. The only concession I'd give him is that its unfair for most Tamils to scold him. A blogger, who now disavows PMK, writes soothingly that Guru was wrong to divide Tamils into Telugu's, Naickers, etc and speak of the latter groups as 'immigrants' forgetting how they were part of Tamil Nadu for many centuries. Guru learned that from EVR and the Dravidian political ilk. The blogger, intentionally and maliciously, did not include Brahmins in the list of people who should be considered Tamil by virtue of being in Tamil Nadu for centuries. So much for his pose of humanism. That blogger, an avowed admirer of Prabakaran, blamed the Brahmin-Bania press for claiming that Prabakaran was dead. Never mind that the entire world press was claiming that. These are not tit-bits. These are windows into a soul.

Politically incorrect rhetoric and derogatory remarks about other ethnic groups are par for the course in Tamil Nadu. There are proverbs about Malayalees, Vanniyars, Brahmins, Mudaliars, all in unflattering manner, of course. While Ghandhi strove to exhibit acceptance of diversity as virtue EVR reveled in being offensive. EVR called for physically assaulting Brahmins and to cut their sacred thread. I personally know of such an incident in Tanjore. EVR, propagating atheism, took a procession of slipper garlanded picture of Rama. To show that Ganesha is nothing but an idol EVR broke Ganesh statues in the streets. At one level I marvel at how Tamils have accommodated such rhetoric. Of course all that was possible only because EVR chose to offend Hindus, a very accepting lot. The Hindu's rightly judged that EVR's come and go faith in gods will remain. EVR's divisive rhetoric about non-Brahmins being Dravidian and Brahmins being 'invaders' took root in Dravidian party rhetoric. Repeatedly denied office Karunanidhi would bemoan that only Tamils would allow a Malayalee to rule over them. It is, that, Karunanidhi, a blogger wrote about as 'the last refuge of Dravidian ideals' and today bemoans divisiveness. 

EVR had his redemptive sides too. He was mostly a nihilist and anarchist who believed any collective identity was a contrived 'artificial' one in as much as we are not born with any identity except our gender. A. Marx says EVR considered linguistic and nationalist identities too as artificial as they were 'learned'. In a marked departure from this key aspect Karunanidhi and Annathurai, claiming to be EVR's proteges, cultivated militant linguistic and ethnic chauvinism as a tool to gain elected office. My favorite Tamil blogger admonishing divisions amongst Tamils along caste lines exhorts all Tamils to unite under the banner of 'Tamil race' and he helpfully has, as banner on FB, a picture of an LTTE regiment walking by with guns slung on their shoulders. Greedy for elected office the first principle that Annathurai jettisoned was his separatism. Tamils have repeatedly rejected such rhetoric at the ballot box.

In the Tamil Nadu I grew up I've rarely heard anyone speak openly of their caste or of going to caste meetings. Today its common to hear, of all people, Tamils abroad in US say "I went to XYZ caste meetings". Those meetings are replete with caste pride laced talks of course. Children are even taught blatant lies as history with a view to making them feel proud of their caste lineage. Despite living in a pluralistic society that prides itself in being open a Brahmin music teacher feels its ok to drop innuendos about a non-Brahmin child's abilities to pick up Carnatic music because her parents have no familiarity with music. The same child studies Western Classical with an American teacher who calls the child a 'prodigy'. A Chetttiar American gleefully says that he would rather go to a Chettiar Sangam than to Tamil Sangam. He also added, for good measure, how he frowns on inter-caste marriage. A chauvinistic strain runs through everything that a Tamil does whether it is a Tamil Sangam or Caste Association. The impulses are the same. One might point to American being proud of, well, being an American. When pride is tied to a larger heterogenous groups its more diffuse. When pride gets tied to a narrow slice it often becomes militant and racist. 

EVR's biggest failure was in propagating atheism. In 1950 Karunanidhi mocked on screen that a Hindu goddess was nothing but stone. Guru, in 2013, declares unabashedly that Vishnu, Siva, Murugan etc are the beloved deities of Vanniyars. Not even Brahmins had dared to do this. For this I congratulate Guru. Unlike Gandhi and MLK Jr EVR lacked the intellectual finesses to see value in religion. Not seeing value in religion EVR was only interested in tearing it down. Where Gandhi tried to foster dialogue amongst various religions EVR found himself like a bull in a china shop. This robbed Tamils of any paradigm of political correctness. Innuendos about Muslims, particularly, abound amongst Hindus and Christians. The converse was true too. Karunanidhi took vicarious pleasure in mocking Hindus (when he was not mocking Brahmins). Seeing a party man with a vermillion mark on the forehead Karunanidhi quipped 'is that blood on your forehead'. Today thanks to social media people give back as good as they get it. When Karuninidhi's wife, a devout Hindu, applied Vermillion on her son's forehead a FB guy quipped "நாங்க பூசினா நெத்தில ரத்தம் ஆனா நீங்க பூசினா டிராஃபிக் சிக்னலா".

I am not sure about Manu smriti oppressing people but I am very certain that Dravidian politics is hypocritical and deprives people of opportunities. The Hindu carried an article( http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/for-dalit-students-its-a-nightmarish-leap-from-tamil-medium-to-english/article4686735.ece) about how Dalit students struggle in college because most come from Tamil medium schools. In a very ironical combination Dalit leader Thirumavalavan joined hands with PMK's Ramadoss to promote Tamil. Thiruma never understood that EVR wanted to promote English as a language of learning simply because it creates opportunities. That is also why EVR was against Tamil linguistic chauvinism. Annathurai and particularly Karunanidhi made a fetish out of educating large sections of people in Tamil while sending their children to top English convents in Chennai. My PMK sympathizing blogger has an aversion for Guru and remarks "Guru was after all a guy selling illegal liquor and was not educated like Anbumani who studied in Montfort at Yercaud". The blogger did not pause for a minute to reflect on the hypocrisy of Ramadoss. After all Montfort educated Anbumani was still asking Vanniyars to vote for him because he was Vanniyar. Montfort educated and even doctor Anbumani was the one encouraging Guru to be what he can be, a fiery speaker stoking caste feelings. In fact I view Guru, as a lesser danger compared to Anbumani. Guru does not know better. Anbumani knows better and indulges in caste bashing. Education is of no use.

In an earlier blog I had written how Thiruma adopted stances like prohibiting Navodaya schools which were inimical to Dalit progress. By falling prey to Tamil chauvinism and not demanding convent style education for his brethren Thiruma is the first enemy of Dalits. I'd tell every Dalit to run away from any Dravidian leader who even utters the word "Manu Smriti". While Karunanidhi prattles about 'அவாள்' to Dalits he is busy educating his children in convents while prohibiting, using government orders, opening more English medium sections in Government run schools. While Dalits are taught about Brahminical conspiracies the real conspiracy is a third rate politician who bribes voters with free color TV program costing Rs 7,000 crores instead of spending it on schools. While Rs 500 crores was spent of Tamil Semmozhi conference Dalit hostels were left to become dilapidated and unfit for even animals to stay ("Hellhole hostels"   See picture at end of blog). 

There is a certain romance for violence, worldwide and Tamils are no exception. Bhagat Singh and Malcolm X are fancied more than Gandhi and MLK Jr. Asking people to abrogate their caste self styled 'Tamil enthusiasts' exhort people to call themselves Tamils and the associated picture (see below at the end of the blog) is a troop of gun toting LTTE soldiers. What's the message here? "I am Tamil, let all other Indians beware of me since I've a gun". Vanniars on FB use very derogatory and militant images on FB. One such post had Thiruma apologising and begging for his life. 

What can we make out of all this? To be blunt Tamils (and in general Indians) are very racist. Every caste harbors chauvinistic pride and unmitigated contempt towards others they see, even, as peers and worse towards those seen as below. In the place of Brahmin hegemony a non-Brahmin hegemony exists today. The incessant focus on Brahmins has allowed everybody else to practice racism, even its violent forms, with impunity. For the number of times that Veeramani and Karunanidhi speak of Rajaji's 'குல கல்வி திட்டம்' it is not an accident that they do not speak of Keezhvenmani massacre. Reservation policy, as it is structured today, is the prime culprit in preserving casteism. The caste based policy badly needs reforms. I do not envisage abrogation of caste as a criteria overnight. In fact that may not be desirable too. But a reform to include economic criterion and excluding creamy layer is urgent. A culture of respecting religion by constitutional functionaries is essential. It is unpardonable when a state's CM ridicules a faith. A climate of respecting diverse ethnicities, an abrogation of chauvinism, a refusal to classify those living amongst Tamils for centuries as immigrants and a culture of political correctness is all a crying need. I'll add a caveat to political correctness, it does not mean stifling free speech. Let us not forget that hatred takes root more easily than sensible ideas. Tamil Nadu eagerly learned hatred from EVR forgetting or ignoring some valuable ideas he had. 

To all the above I'll add lets bury the culture of selective outrage.

Do I harbor hopes? Nay. Not a bit. The poison has run too deep. 

"I am Tamil" poster found on FB.

"நாங்க பூசினா நெத்தில ரத்தம் ஆனா நீங்க பூசினா டிராஃபிக் சிக்னலா".

Dalit Hostel Dining Hall - Courtesy Frontline Issue Jan 15th - 28th 2011
                                

Thiruma and Ramadoss: Perils of Caste Politics.

This is a distasteful topic to write and will be even more distasteful to read. I ask the forbearance of the reader. As much as it might be disgusting to write in a certain vein using certain terms (caste based) I am convinced that anything less would be dishonest. Better to be disgusting than dishonest.

A month back when the Tamil Nadu election shenanigans started Tamils in USA started dividing along caste lines disguised under ideology. If somebody supported a party, his/her (usually 'his', Tamil women are silent on politics) caste would be cited as the reason by others who did not agree. Amongst friends charges of casteism flew thick and fast. One blogger tarnished another for the latter's support of DMK as thinly disguised Mudaliar casteism. The latter challenged the blogger to apply to Ramadoss the yard stick the blogger had applied to criticizing DMK. Needless  to say the blogger was Vanniyar. Amongst friends, most are now US citizens and well educated, knowledge of who belonged to what caste is common place. NJ has caste based organizations which draw quite a crowd.

It is a common trope that lack of education is the root cause of casteism. I am disappointed to say that nothing is further from truth. Education, exposure to wider world, being part of a mature democracy in USA/UK etc etc have done absolutely nothing to mitigate caste impulses of most Tamils. Some Tamils in UK, I hear, are very particular about marrying off their children on caste lines, social ostracism akin to what is practiced in villages is not unheard of in UK.

I am no sociologist, nor do I aspire to be one. Many might find what I say is unfair or skimming the surface. However I'd ask the reader to pause, digest and THEN criticize.

I ran a cursory glance on the list of DMK alliance. One fact struck me. DMK had practically ceded contesting in most reserved constituencies to VCK (Thiruma). VCK in turn cheerfully says that even if DMK falls short of absolute majority they (VCK) would support it unconditionally from outside without asking for any share in the ministry. Of course then down the line the same VCK would then decry how Dalits are not represented in the corridors of power and for good measure would concoct conspiracy theories spun around the usual suspects, Brahmins.

VCK, in its website, laments "காலமெல்லாம் காடு கழனிகளில் உழைப்பதற்காகவும் தேர்தல் காலத்தில் வரிசையில் காத்திருந்து வாக்களிப்பதற்காகவும் மட்டுமே பிறந்தவர்கள் என நெடுங்காலமாய் வஞ்சிக்கப்பட்ட மக்களை அமைப்பாக்கவும், அரசியல் சக்தியாகவும் வளர்த்தெடுக்க வேண்டும் என்கிற அடிப்படையில் விடுதலைச் சிறுத்தைகள் கட்சி இயங்கி வருகிறது". If something passes for sleight of hand that passage gets the prize. Since 1930's, the much debated Poona pact, reserved constituencies where ONLY Dalits could contest have been in existence for 82 years. Here is VCK claiming that Dalits were only used as vote banks and lacked political power. DMK, the party that endlessly calls itself pro-backward, has been in power on and off for 45 years, with brief interludes by its ideological twin ADMK. (Staunch DMK sympathizers might cringe at that characterization). Here is VCK's chance to stake a claim to some plum ministry and leverage it to further the interests of their community yet they choose to "enthrone Kalaignar", in the words of Thiruma.


Thiruma, as part of ADMK alliance in 2006, called MK as traitor to Tamil race and challenged MK to prove if he had done anything of consequence for Tamil. He then called forth his people to vote for ADMK. Today, 5 years later, in 2011 he is singing MK's praises and is calling forth his people to vote for DMK. For 2004 what does VCK list as Thirumaa's accomplishment, "நாடாளுமன்ற பொதுத் தேர்தலில் தி.மு.க அணியில் தாழ்தப்பட்ட சமுகத்தினருக்கு உரிய 'அரசியல் மதிப்பு' மறுககப்பட்டதாக சட்டமன்ற உறுப்பினர் பதவியிலிருந்து விலகல்.(3.2.2004)." (http://vck.in/vck/pages/suvadukal/suvadukal.html) Incidentally in 2006 VCK got 9 seats from ADMK, in 2011 they got 10 seats from DMK. Probably the one extra seat is what they refer as " உரிய 'அரசியல் மதிப்பு'".


In the page that lists Thirumaa's achievements what struck me was how few issues were Dalit centric. Let's take two very recent issues that really affected Dalit community. First, the Ambedkar law college incident where one group of students (Dalits) beat another student (Thevar) mercilessly. The fracas had a larger background of Thevar students pointedly refusing to add the name of "Ambedkar" to a college function notice. One can guess why and easily trace the arc of hatred. Thiruma was missing. More recently tens of Adi-Dravida students blocked Mount Road in Chennai causing a gridlock. THe issue was the deplorable condition of Adi-Dravida hostels. Frontline (as DK/DMK people endlessly point out, 'Brahmin' owned) ran a detailed story that laid bare the gross decrepit state of those hostels. The food served was such that no human being could eat, rooms were no better than toilets, gangs controlled occupancy of the rooms and much more. Thiruma's voice was conspicuously absent. His beloved Kalaignar was the CM, hundreds of crores were being spent on these hostels. Needless to say who ran the mafia that controlled room occupancies. The achievements page has ZERO mention of any struggle to uplift access to quality education, access to hospitals in Dalit villages, no agitation for ending two-tumbler systems, no policy paper by educated Dalits on challenges faced by Dalit graduates, one could go on. Thirumaa as MP has posed only six questions in 2+ years since he became MP, not one of them pertained  to any burning issue of Dalitsonly six times in the parliament, only 3 of those speeches have anything to do with Dalits and even then they were not of any substance. 


Reservation quota is a pet topic of Ramadoss and Thiruma. Quota are presented as cure-all panacea for any ills that may plague their societies. Its not out of place to note that nearly 50% of PMK candidates are crorepathis, as  per their own election affidavit, including a history sheeter, Guru. Nearly 50% of all candidates are crorepathis (not one of them is Forward Community, all are BC/MBC). 


Whether its Ramadoss or Thirumaa or any caste leader they all do serve a constructive purpose when they start out. Ramadoss made it possible for many in his community get ahead thanks to his tree-felling agitation that garnered a seperate quota for MBC's. The bane of reservation is that the first few years or a decade only benefits the applicants there after the creamy layer corner all the seats. Today if one analyzed the so called backwardness of many students admitted, especially in MBBS, it would be difficult to point to any student and say "he is a true beneficiary as intended". Put simply Ramadoss' grandchildren, studying in premium convents in Delhi, are eligible for quota just like any dispossessed Vanniyar. It is anybody's guess as to which child would ace the +2 exams and really enjoy the fruits of that quota. 


Ramadoss and Thirumaa have done gross injustice by treating their communities as voting blocks. Its sad that the  people too, by giving their loyalty, do injustice to themselves. Does it matter to a Dalit or Vanniyar that KamalHassan named his picture as "Mumbai Express" or that Khushbu advocated safe sex? Yet both Thirumaa and Ramadoss, aided by their goons, caused havoc to both Kamal and Khushbu.Khusbu ironically is campaigning for Thiruma's alliance. (Another irony is a North Indian girls with a HIndi tattoo campaigning for DMK, a party that once tarred any Hindi hoarding in TN)


Ramadoss sets the standard for unscrupulous politics. The man who vowed that neither he nor his family will seek power shamelessly barters for his son's Rajya Sabha seat. This man, who Thirumaa exults as "thamizh kudi thaaangi", sent his son to Montfort school. My cousin, a die hard admirer of Ayya Ramadoss, was transfixed by how eloquently Anbumani spoke at Johns Hopkins University. The same cousin, like other Ayya followers, then cheers Ayya for fighting for Tamil medium education. 


Both Thiruma and Ramadoss cheer the "heroine" of the election, DMK's manifesto. Veeramani, enthused that the DMK manifesto for 2011 is a heroine just as 2006 manifesto (promising color TV's) was a hero. Veeramani then proceeded to sternly tell tamils that voting for DMK is the only way to stave off Arya rule that is waiting to take over and spoil Tamils. While Kalaignar TV and Tasmac spoiled Tamils Veeramani went missing. The DMK manifesto is totally silent on funding better schools, providing good teachers, more schools, student accessories etc. Ramadoss, now wants exclusive quota and Karunanidhi cheerfully says "I've never said no to him, I'll gladly concede this". A friend commented, with no compassion, "now FC students will have to study even harder, this is good". Today FC's need to score 99.5% to get MBBS or Anna University. I don't know what that friend meant by "study harder". Hitler treated the Jews no worse. 


Thirumaa would shriek every now and then on Eelam. He met Prabakaran and started thinking he was one himself after all did not his party's logo sport a tiger too. Incidentally a descendant of a member who was murdered in Keezhvenmani, the most notorious caste conflagration, is contesting the election. There is no support for her from any so-called Dalit enthusiasts. DMK government, supposedly friends of Dalits, was then blamed for in its inaction leading to Keezhvenmani. If Rajaji had been CM, Veeramani and his ilk would be croaking till today ad nauseum about Aryan conspiracy. Even today this conflict is not spoken of in bold unvarnished terms without raising the shackles of many 'caste' hindus (euphemism for non-brahmins who practice casteism).


Politics makes strange bed-fellows. VCK being part of ADMK, a Thevar dominated party, was an irony given the number of fatal clashes between both communities going back all the way to 1957 Immanuel murder. ADMK enshrined Muthuramalinga Thevar as a demi-god, renamed Chamiers Road in Chennai as 'MuthuRamalinga Thevar road'. "Guru Poojai', celebrating Muthuramalingam, became a huge affair during Jaya's first tenure, Madurai would be tense and paramilitary forces would be needed to keep the peace. When MK named a bus corporation after a Dalit, Madurai burned. Journalist Vasanthi who went to Madurai recorded how even 10 year olds swore death to anybody who boarded those buses. Whether its a ten year old or Facebook group moderator casteism is alive and kicking. Education, age etc are nothing when it comes to such animal instincts.


Today VCK and PMK are bed-fellows. Vanniyars are instrumental in preventing Dalits entry into temples, notably the Draupadi temple. Burial grounds are still separate for Dalits. Pappapatti and keeripatti panchayat elections are bywords for anti-Dalit violence. Only the communist party fights for desegrating Dalits who live behind walls in some towns. No wonder Thirumaa is not vocal on any of that. Instead he is vocal on Tamil, Eelam, Babri Masjid etc that are of no concern to a Dalit villager. He claims that his friendship with Ramadoss has prevented caste clashes in the south. Is this is how one has to maintain peace one wonders?


Thiruma's politics has been counter productive, misleading, and of no use to Dalits. His failure to speak out on issue owing to political compulsions is inexcusable and questions the very need of his party's existence. Ramadoss's politics while yielding fruits in the short run has proved to be inimical and again, of no use, to vanniyars. 


Politicians focus on short term gains and even by that standard both of these leaders, especially Ramadoss, have torn into the fabric of the state. Today TN stands divided along caste lines as never before. While it was a practice of political parties to field candidates along caste lines today that is the first criteria. Every election analysis by individual or vernacular magazine starts without mentioning what caste is dominant in a constituency. Only then does the analysis go into the needs of the constituents. Reservation quota politics is largely to blame for this state of affairs. India has enshrined casteism in an iron framework. 


DMK which came to power having as its main cause the upending of Brahminical hold on power (a questionable trope by itself) has much to answer for why caste parties exist despite having had access to untrammeled brute power for 50 years. That each caste, every one of them listed as backward or 'most-backward', feels they need to have their own political outfit despite the fact that the dominant political parties paid homage to uplifting each supposedly backward community. What is the rationale for PMK's existence? Why did DMK fail  to address that community's need within its political framework? Why VCK? Where did DMK and ADMK fail to give expression to the aspirations of Dalits? That castes felt the need to organize exclusive political outfits to further their interests show cases the failure of the polity. 


Another dimension I see to the rise of caste parties is that such exclusive organizations nurture a confrontational attitude. When Vanniyar, Thevar, Dalit, Chettiar etc all jostle within one political outfit there would be a tendency to be more accommodative. The diversity of a political party brings an ideological sheen that passes purely sectarian concerns. Caste parties take sectarianism to a level that tarnishes its members and creates schisms that are more permanent.

The election results on May 14th will hold the key to the future of TN.