which was the movement to fight against the domination of the Brahmans.
Answers
Answered by
5
It is said that in about 60% of the government jobs , there were Brahmins in Tamilnadu at the turn of the twentieth century., even though they constituted only 3% of the population. This continued almost till independence. Periyar understood that it is their education that makes Brahmins seek positions and power in the government, fought for reservation for the backward communities in education and jobs. While other states acceded to the supreme court judgment to peg the reservation to less than 50%, DMK with its Periyarist roots increased it to 69%. DMK pursued Periyar’s policy of anti-Brahminism by covertly ensuring that the balance 31% is not dominated by Brahmins.
The main reason why Periyar left Congress in thirties was the dominance of Brahmins in the party. Even after leaving the party, he actively pursued the agenda of opposing Brahmin leadership in Congress. Despite their friendship, Periyar projected Rajaji, a liberal, as a Brahmin leader and opposed every one of his policies. Even Bharathiyar, known for his virulent stand against caste and Brahminism, was reviled by Periyar. Even while actively supporting Kamaraj, Periyar was continuously critical of his industries minsiter R. Venkataraman, a Brahmin in spite of the fact that it was under Venkatraman the the then Madras state achieved industrialization. While Periyar took an ambivalent stand against Tiruvalluvar, his disciples in DMK revered Tiruvalluvar but despised the leading commentator of Thirukkural, Parimelazhagar, because he was a Brahmin.
To isolate Brahmins, Periyar branded them as Aryans (“outsiders who came into India through Khyber pass”) and positioned them as enemy of Dravidians. This provided him and his followers - particularly DMK - rich political dividends. Brahmin political leaders did not find much support and their representation in legislature was reduced to almost nil. That a Brahmin woman turned a powerful chief minister through the leadership of a Draviadian party and ruled the state for more than a decade is truly ironical and a post-Periyarist phenomenon - meaning by that time Periyar’s influence in politics had declined considerably. Jaya and her mentor MGR had no emotional connect with Periyar and paid only lip services to his principles.
Periyar projected Hindu religion as Aryan and thus propagated virulently against God and Religion in general , Hindu religion in particular. That the religion provided a higher social status to Brahmins and also livelihood for many of them was also a reason for this. He fought for the appointment of non-brahmins as priests in temples.
What were the consequences of his movements? Brahmins may be down, but they are not out. Proportion of Brahmins in Government jobs declined substantially. Brahmin presence in politics vanished almost totally. However Brahmins continued to thrive in private sector and in theatre. Quite a few Silicon Valley start-ups are by TamBrahms. They still hold monopoly in Carnatic classical music and cricket. In films they are fairly well represented .
With OBCs assuming dominant position in politics and society, anti-Brahminism has lost its sting.
The main reason why Periyar left Congress in thirties was the dominance of Brahmins in the party. Even after leaving the party, he actively pursued the agenda of opposing Brahmin leadership in Congress. Despite their friendship, Periyar projected Rajaji, a liberal, as a Brahmin leader and opposed every one of his policies. Even Bharathiyar, known for his virulent stand against caste and Brahminism, was reviled by Periyar. Even while actively supporting Kamaraj, Periyar was continuously critical of his industries minsiter R. Venkataraman, a Brahmin in spite of the fact that it was under Venkatraman the the then Madras state achieved industrialization. While Periyar took an ambivalent stand against Tiruvalluvar, his disciples in DMK revered Tiruvalluvar but despised the leading commentator of Thirukkural, Parimelazhagar, because he was a Brahmin.
To isolate Brahmins, Periyar branded them as Aryans (“outsiders who came into India through Khyber pass”) and positioned them as enemy of Dravidians. This provided him and his followers - particularly DMK - rich political dividends. Brahmin political leaders did not find much support and their representation in legislature was reduced to almost nil. That a Brahmin woman turned a powerful chief minister through the leadership of a Draviadian party and ruled the state for more than a decade is truly ironical and a post-Periyarist phenomenon - meaning by that time Periyar’s influence in politics had declined considerably. Jaya and her mentor MGR had no emotional connect with Periyar and paid only lip services to his principles.
Periyar projected Hindu religion as Aryan and thus propagated virulently against God and Religion in general , Hindu religion in particular. That the religion provided a higher social status to Brahmins and also livelihood for many of them was also a reason for this. He fought for the appointment of non-brahmins as priests in temples.
What were the consequences of his movements? Brahmins may be down, but they are not out. Proportion of Brahmins in Government jobs declined substantially. Brahmin presence in politics vanished almost totally. However Brahmins continued to thrive in private sector and in theatre. Quite a few Silicon Valley start-ups are by TamBrahms. They still hold monopoly in Carnatic classical music and cricket. In films they are fairly well represented .
With OBCs assuming dominant position in politics and society, anti-Brahminism has lost its sting.
Similar questions