AIADMK and the BJP can no longer be separated from the Bharatiya Janata Party, with no meaningful ideological distinction between them
The BJP has struggled to make electoral inroads in Tamil Nadu because its more aggressive, masculine articulation of Hindutva is seen as incompatible with the state’s cultural ethos.
Union government is weaponising public funds to settle political scores against states.
Palanivel Thiaga Rajan Interview: AIADMK Has Abandoned Its ideology; Actor Vijay’s TVK Is Trying To Occupy Its Space
PTR, reflected on key themes shaping the election—from the evolving discourse on federalism to the emergence of new political forces such as TVK, and their potential impact on Tamil Nadu’s political landscape
Summary
Palanivel Thiaga Rajan, Tamil Nadu’s Minister for Information Technology and Digital Services, has become one of the most recognisable faces of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) government. He is contesting from the Madurai Central constituency for a third consecutive term and is once again at the heart of a closely watched electoral contest.
In the midst of an intense campaign season marked by scorching summer heat, Rajan has been limiting his public engagements to the early mornings and late evenings. Despite the gruelling schedule, he took time out to speak with Outlook, offering insights into the political climate in the state.
Many observers have pointed out that this election could be a game changer in Tamil Nadu’s electoral history. Do you subscribe to this view, and what makes this election significant?
I am not sure I would describe it as a game changer. I don’t really see why it should be viewed that way. But yes, there are certainly new entrants in the political space this time, and that in itself is significant.
Your party, the DMK, has framed this election as a contest between Tamil Nadu and the NDA. Given that state politics has long been dominated by a bipolar Dravidian contest, are you suggesting that the BJP has now become the principal opposition, reducing AIADMK to a secondary player?
I don’t think that. You can’t separate the AIADMK from the BJP anymore. It is not a question of whether one is second or third.
During the time of J. Jayalalithaa, the AIADMK was a distinct political force, and the contest was clearly between the DMK and the AIADMK. After her passing, for various reasons, the AIADMK aligned itself with the BJP on a more permanent basis—sometimes contesting together, sometimes separately.
Today, there is no meaningful ideological separation between the BJP and the AIADMK. So, effectively, they function as part of the National Democratic Alliance.
So you are saying that the AIADMK has jettisoned Dravidian ideology altogether—that it is no longer a Dravidian party?
Advertisement
No, I wouldn’t put it that way. There is an internal contradiction. At the time of elections, they are aligned, and that is the reality. It is not very rational to separate them in that context—people largely see that convergence.
The BJP, the Union government, and the NDA support policies like the three-language formula and the National Education Policy. The AIADMK at least on paper, has opposed these, but it has not done so vehemently.
When people assess which party can truly protect the interests of Tamil Nadu and resist a “one nation, one kind of homogenisation, the DMK is seen much more favourably, whereas the AIADMK tends to have a negative perception on that front.
So, is it for electoral purposes that they are abandoning their ideology?
At least, that is how many people seem to perceive it—that they no longer have the capacity, independence, or the courage to sustain their ideology in the way it was during the time of J. Jayalalithaa.
Advertisement
Your government has consistently positioned itself as a defender of federalism, often opposing the Union government. What costs, if any, has Tamil Nadu faced because of this stance?
There is no cost as such. In a constitutional democracy, once elections are over, the Union government should not use taxpayers’ money to settle political scores. However, that is what we are seeing being done with some states.
There is a perception that public funds—much of which come from southern states —are being used in ways that disadvantage them. This is often linked to the fact that these states do not align with a Hindi-Hindutva homogenisation agenda.
In a federal system, such an approach would be inconsistent with constitutional principles.
With delimitation on the horizon and discussions around constitutional amendments such as women’s reservation, there are concerns that southern states may lose political weight. How do you view this and what steps should be taken to safeguard regional representation?
Advertisement
Our party, the DMK, has already made its position very clear on this subject. I am not senior enough in the party structure to add anything beyond that. The Chief Minister, M.K. Stalin, has articulated the party’s stand clearly. I don’t have a separate or unique position to add to what has already been stated.
Do you think this is going to affect the southern states detrimentally?
Yes, of course. I have been saying this for a long time—even 15 years ago. If this process is not frozen at the current level, any alternative will be negative; the only question is the extent of that impact.
This is not a new concern—we have been explaining it for a very long time. It is clear that the southern states will be adversely affected.
This year’s Tamil Nadu election is unique with realignments and the presence of actor Vijay’s party. How do you assess the impact of TVK, especially since it says its fight is against the DMK?
Advertisement
Yes, that is true—but its actual impact will be determined only by the election outcome.
Two things seem fairly clear. On the political spectrum the TVK appears to be trying to occupy the space once held by the AIADMK . I hadn’t framed it that way earlier, but as you pointed out, they are positioning themselves as a non-national party opposing the DMK
At the same time, the AIADMK, in my view, is gradually being subsumed by the ideology of the BJP. TVK, on the other hand, presents itself as a party that stands for state rights and opposes the BJP.
It is an interesting development—let us wait and see how it plays out.
So, is this essentially a fight for second place?
Most polls suggest that the DMK will return to power, so in that sense the contest is significant in determining who comes next. The NDA is likely to be second in terms of seats, but what really matters is the vote share.
After the election, if we are in a situation where TVK secures a double-digit vote share—say around 15 per cent —and the AIADMK ends up with around 50–55 seats, then it becomes a very interesting scenario. But these are still hypothetical scenarios. Until the results are out, any such assessment is like shooting in the dark.
In that case, there may be very little room left for the NDA. The BJP would be facing a third round of anti-incumbency at the Centre, while the AIADMK would have been out of power for two terms and already weakened by internal splits.
Many pre-poll surveys suggest that the DMK front will be voted back to power. If that is the case, what do you think is the primary reason for that?
All elections are, in effect, a referendum on the incumbent government. In that sense, factors like the quality of governance, delivery of programmes, and effective targeting of sections that need support become crucial.
Overall, I would say this has been, by far, one of the better five-year periods in recent decades in terms of governance and delivery in Tamil Nadu.
You are saying this performance has come despite an antagonistic approach from the Union government?
Yes, that is precisely the point. There is a narrative about “double engine” governments being the only way to ensure growth. But if you actually look at the data, you often see the opposite.
If a state has a principled and focused administration that delivers on its promises, it can perform better than a so-called double engine government, even if the latter has access to more resources. Money is not everything—though double engine governments receive greater financial support.
The issue is that the allocation of funds can become politically influenced. And in becoming a “double engine” government, there is often a trade-off—you may gain financially, but you risk becoming subservient to a national agenda. In the process, what you gain in resources, you may lose in autonomy and the ability to execute policies effectively.
Some states, for example Andhra Pradesh and Bihar, are receiving more central funds—how do you see that?
Yes, that is exactly my point. Andhra Pradesh will be an interesting case to watch. It is receiving significantly more funds now compared to when it was governed by a party not aligned with the NDA
The real question is how this will translate into growth. Many of the so-called “double engine” governments in northern states have not performed as well as southern states in terms of development indicators. In that sense, Andhra Pradesh is unique—this is perhaps the first time a southern state is receiving such strong financial backing from the Centre.
Even when the BJP was in power in Karnataka, the level of support was not seen as comparable. So, Andhra Pradesh becomes an important test case.
I wouldn’t say I am sceptical, but it is something we will have to watch closely.
Your government has been accused by some economists of engaging in populism, while you describe it as welfarism. How do you differentiate between the two?
There are many ways to look at it. Often, it becomes subjective, what one side calls “populism”, the other calls “welfarism”. If one government implements a scheme, it may be criticised, but when another does something similar, it is justified—that reflects a certain level of political hypocrisy.
For example, when welfare measures were implemented by the Aam Aadmi Party government, they were criticised by PM, yet Modi presided over the cash transfer scheme in Bihar. So it is important to move beyond the politics of labelling.
At a deeper level, there are different kinds of schemes. Some are about social protection or risk management, while others can actively support economic growth. The real questions should be: can the state afford these measures? Is the fiscal position sustainable? And do these schemes help accelerate growth?
In the case of Tamil Nadu, the evidence suggests that growth has accelerated, with welfare measures creating a multiplier effect in the economy.
Tamil Nadu is predominantly a Hindu state, with more than 80 per cent of the population identifying as Hindu, many of them practicing. Yet the BJP has not gained electorally in the state. What do you think is the primary reason?
It is because the notion of Hinduism here is very different from the kind of Hindutva promoted by the BJP.
In Tamil Nadu, religious practice is deeply rooted, but it is also largely harmonious and inclusive. The society is outwardly devout, yet it is based on coexistence and social balance.
That is why the more aggressive, masculine articulation of Hindutva does not resonate here. It is seen as incompatible with the local ethos, which is grounded more in values of harmony, love, and mutual respect.
This is the third time you are contesting from Madurai. Last time you won by more than 30,000 votes. What is your expectation now?
There are two key differences this time. When I last faced the electorate in Madurai, we were in the opposition. Now, I have the advantage of being part of the government, and many projects have been implemented.
Also, our alliance has expanded, with several new parties joining us. So, I would be happy if we are able to secure at least 55 per cent of the votes.
Published At: