Periyar and Dalit failures

True, Periyar was impatient with certain aspects of Islam, and sometimes he sought to exclude them from the ambit of Tamil society. But at no time was he hostile to the Muslims. If anything he found in them a useful ally in his crusade against the Brahmin-dominated Hinduism and Muslim speakers regularly shared a platform with him. Periyar was among the first south Indian leaders to extend unqualified support to Jinnah8217;s demand for Pakistan. He said in a statement in 1940, 8220;Two years of Congress regime, which was so Aryan-ridden, could not but create a sense of despair in the minds of all non-Aryans8230;It is but a natural desire on the part of the Muslims to live as a separate nation8230;8221;

In fact it was his reluctance to take on Islam and Christianity as aggressively as he did Hindu orthodoxy that could be said to have prevented the more god-fearing among the non-Brahmins from joining him in the anti-Brahmin crusade. As for the Dalits, he did not have much use for them as his core constituency was the vast non-brahmin community. He wished to mobilise all non-Brahmin castes.

In the process he went to the extent of defining a Dravidian or a Tamil as someone who was neither Brahmin, Muslim, Christian nor Dalit. He also did say that Indian Independence should be mourned as it would bring minority religious groups special privileges and Dalits would get quotas, but the non-Brahmins would get nothing.

At the same time it should not be forgotten that on many occasions he had protested against the injustices heaped on the Dalits and had once remarked angrily that the non-Brahmins would not be able to shake off the 8216;shudra8217; tag without enabling Dalits to cast off their own 8216;untouchable8217; status.

He was inconsistent though on the issue, obviously unwilling to alienate his non-Dalit non-Brahmin followers. Clearly he did not want his anti-Brahmin project to be derailed.

The crucial question is how serious was Periyar about his declared objective of overthrowing the Brahminical social order. Right before his eyes he could see his professed followers becoming corrupt and getting co-opted by the system.

But what did he do to counter such trends? Nothing beyond sneering at them and unleashing tirades from various fora. Periyar apologists dip into his oeuvre and claim, he said this on women8217;s liberation, he said that on the Dalit situation, he said something else on the social inequalities and so on.

Notwithstanding his soap-box oratory, the bitter truth is he seemed to have become content with having the Brahmins thrown out of all centres of power. The rest he left to be sorted out by future generations.

These were Periyar8217;s limitations. Yet the self-appointed champions of the Dalits are totally oblivious to ground realities and worse, insufferably sectarian. When Gujarat was burning, a Dalit writer had the cheek to counsel the Muslims to introspect and figure out why they had alienated the tribals. Ravikumar, who is so solicitous about Mayavati8217;s 8220;misunderstanding8221; of EVR, has little to say on her forging an alliance with the BJP or the manner in which she has made a mockery of all canons of democratic governance. Today the Jats can unleash violence against Dalits in Haryana or the OBCs can target the Muslims in Gujarat and still get away with it all, such are the brutal dynamics of majority rule. In such circumstances it would perhaps be more sensible to fashion a rainbow coalition than lose onself in the heady potion of sectarianism. But then the Dalit intellectuals have rarely been able to rise above themselves and opt for a pragmatic approach.