Pin It

Part 7: The Reason Behind the Exit of Socialists From Periyar’s League

MCPI(U) Marxist party has given a controversial statement that Marxists in Tamil Nadu did not perceive Periyarism properly. Following this, the party has announced its policies, and it cites that “the party has felt the complete need of Periyar and Ambedkar significantly in the present where caste and religious divisions are strengthening.” This symposium was organized based on this. The discourse of Kolathur Mani is as follows:

periyar 452Periyar spoke about a new type of capitalism. Periyar criticized communists that they were speaking only about capitalists who invest their capital but not about capitalists by birth. He said that ‘even they have invested something as capital, but these capitalists by birth do not have any capital other than their birth. He is enjoying all the privileges because of his birth. We people should be the ones to decide who can enjoy all the privileges we get out of labor in this country. It is significant to think about who experience the benefit of this labor whether it is capitalists or it is divided among laborers, or it belongs to Proletarians.

But you aren’t speaking about the capitalists who enjoy the surplus unlimitedly without any procurement. Capitalists by birth are here. Even immobile stone capitalists do exist here, and they are receiving a large sum of money. Nobody is thinking about that.

Communists are speaking about only one capitalist leaving these two. He would be standing alone, but these two are continuously protecting him.’ Periyar told a difference that why weren’t the communists considering them.

‘A true capitalist would reinvest his surplus profit in his business. But what people are doing in our country? He will build a temple. Nobody would have built an expensive house spending so much money like Mukesh Ambani in our country. At least he built a house. But capitalists here would build a temple. Temple will be built in all institutions. But all the capitalists are paying for it as it safeguards them.

Why isn’t he reinvesting in his business but investing in building temples? Because he knows that it would be safer than investing in a business.’ That is what Periyar is trying to pinpoint that capitalists in other countries are investing their profit in business but why people here alone investing in a temple? Because he thinks that it is a bulwark that protects him from revolts and revolution.

Shashi Joshi, in his book Struggle for Hegemony in India, stated that all India communist party meet which was held in Chennai on December 30th, 1927 notified Joglekar, who was there in the Indian communist party since its birth, to restrain himself from Brahmana Sangh. Only after this, he withdrew his membership from Brahmana Sabha.

In 1928, a strike happened in Bombay. In that strike, Mirajkar, another leader of the communist party and he had also taken part in many strikes along with Joglekar. He stated not to worry about food as food would be prepared by cooks belonging to the Brahmin caste in one of the protests held in Bombay in 1928. Joglekar expressed his disagreement and said that “he belongs to high class among the brahmin society so he won’t be eating foods prepared by common brahmins rather he would eat only if brahmins of his class cooked the food else he asked them to give him rice and he would cook for himself”.

So, Periyar was citing this to explain what kind of leaders were there in the communist party and how they would have led the party and protests.

In 2006, another communist leader, Subash Chakravarthy, who held office as minister of transport services in West Bengal, went to Kali temple, offered flowers and chanted hymns and even donated rupees 501 in Birbhum district on 14/09/2006.

As soon as this news came out, former chief minister Jothibasu criticized that how can he do such iniquity being a communist. For this, Subash Chakravarthy answered to media that, ‘fundamentally I am a Hindu and brahmin and only then I am a communist’.

Addressing this issue, the secretary of the West Bengal communist party, Biman Bose told that, ‘everybody has weakness being human beings and there is no rule in the party to take action on those who go to the temple.’ Jothibasu criticized this.

Following this, renowned leader Vinay Konar said that ‘not even a single Hindu would exist with such liberal policy as said by Subash Chakravarthy’.

Jothibasu asked, “to whom he prayed? Did he saw Kali? How can poojas be performed for something which does not exist? It would have been good if he had paid his respect to mankind rather than paying respect to stone.”

Subash Chakravarthy had replied, “I am a Hindu and belong to the brahmin community, and I cannot overrule some customs. Why one has to raise his fist mandatorily in Lenin’s memorial in Moscow? Same way, I am worshipping”. He concluded his argument by saying that ‘our behaviors were determined by the society around us. Jothibasu says there is no God, but he is my God and so I don’t wish to criticize his opinion.’

Periyar’s revolution which left Hiren Mukherjee in wonder

Hiren Mukherjee was a brilliant parliamentarian. He had seen a marriage happening without brahmin when he came to Tamil Nadu. When EVK Sambath served as a member of parliament, he had asked that how you people manage to conduct marriages without a brahmin. EVK Sambath had replied that it has been happening since 1927. Hiren had acknowledged by saying that ‘your uncle is a great man as he manages to conduct marriages without brahmins’. It appears plain and simple for us, but it appears to be a vital revolution even for big revolutionists.

Somnath Chatterjee invited all the members of parliament to his grandson’s poonol wedding (Upanayanam). This was quoted by DMK MP in his interview for a magazine. It created rucks when this interview came out as news in the magazine. This is not to ridicule them but to give a broader vision of the scenario there. Whereas here, we are conducting functions without any rituals.

Furthermore, here ASK Iyengar became ASK, but there were no such changes happened. And they felt happy as we failed to think about those things, and they were satisfied that there would not be any possibility of risk for their dominance.

C P Ramaswamy Iyer once said that the birth of communism must be curtailed. He served as a member of the viceroy council and also assumed many designations then. Gandhi said that if he had not performed salt satyagraha, communism would have sprouted.

C.P. Ramaswamy had said that ‘as far as Hindu religion and even half a centimeter stone statue of God exists, communism cannot step here’.

From this, we can understand how far they have perceived. Brahmins have understood well that as far as they have this brahminic religion, their privileges would not be shaken. The thing is, we took much time to understand this, and that is the intricacy which we are talking about now.

(To be continued)

Kolathur Mani, the leader of Dravidar Viduthalai Kazhagam

Translated by Maruvarthini P.

 You can send your articles to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Pin It
Add comment