Why Tamil Nadu’s Self-Respect Legacy Continues to Checkmate the Rise of Hindutva Politics

The year 1925 is significant because it gave birth to two directly opposite and contested ideologically driven political movements. In Tamil Nadu, Periyar (E. V. Ramasamy) established the Self-Respect Movement and in Maharashtra, inspired by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s emotionally charged Hindu supremacist ideas, Keshav Baliram Hedgewar founded the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). The reason for taking two diametrically opposite political trajectories is to provide the historical context for why Tamil Nadu is not reflecting the national trend when it comes to religious identity, despite the fact that the rest of the nation has moved to the religious right since the December 6, 1992 demolition of the Babri Mosque at Ayodhya.

How do we understand the constant rejection of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) under Narendra Modi in three consecutive general elections: 2014, 2019 and 2024? How do we understand the cautious acceptance of A. B. Vajpayee in two consecutive elections: 1998 and 1999? To understand this, we need a historical perspective. Tamil Nadu, like other parts of India, has its own fault lines and illiberal tendencies. At the same time, the century-old Self-Respect Movement gives the state the necessary social and political will to understand the importance of a vibrant polyphony as its social fabric. It recognises the need for plural compact between people from diverse backgrounds where one does not subsume the other.

For a moment, let us pause and try to decipher the essential characteristics of the RSS and how each narrow interpretation was given an anti-colonial and nationalistic gloss. We need to understand how a twisted reading of nationalism, which Rabindranath Tagore abhorred, was given middle-class sanction in post-liberalised India. It was the phase in which we witnessed a liberal economic outlook but a stifling social and religious reality. In a sense, the RSS-BJP vision of India represents the “holding together” model of a modern state. In the ‘holding together’, armed forces have to be venerated, the centralising of power should be seen a natural political path, and monochromatic imagination is seen as a powerful unifying force.

On the other hand, the Self-Respect trajectory is a “coming together” model. In this model, agency and power are with the people and not with the state apparatus. The multiple aspirations of the people are accorded due democratic space and not seen as a revolt or threat. The linguistic right, the demand for affordable quality education and public health infrastructure, gender justice and various elements that make up the social justice are not seen as a concession given to people, but as fulfilling their rights in a systematic manner.

Tamil Nadu never reduced social justice to reservation alone. Its composite basket for marrying welfare and rapid growth has eight components: (1) Access to education (2) Narrowing the quality gap between urban centres and the rural facilities (3) Managing fertility rate through women empowerment rather than through coercive methods (4) Maternal benefits that are in tune with the contemporary requirements (5) Women in the workforce—it is pertinent to note that Tamil Nadu’s industries not only employ a large female workforce, but nearly half of all women working in factories across India. This data is not from the state government, but from the Union Government’s Annual Survey of Industries. (6) Increased mobility by investing in the connectivity and even offering free bus facilities to women (7) The state of Tamil Nadu also has established itself as a leader in skill development within India, thanks to its strong commitment to empowering its people through innovative programmes. Initiatives like Naan Mudhalvan and Tamil Nadu Skill Development Corporation have played a crucial role in narrowing the skills gap and creating an environment that promotes both economic progress and social advancement in the state. (8) A state which understands that welfare spending is a huge investment for a better future and not to be trapped in the neo-liberal idea of reducing empowerment to freebies.

These are the elements of the larger canvas to understand Tamil Nadu’s approach to both confront and contain the RSS and its inherent anti-minorities position. When scholars write about containing the RSS, it does not mean there are no Hindu supremacists in Tamil Nadu. Right from the late 19th century, a formidable Hindu right has been part of the anti-colonial movement in Tamil Nadu. Two important struggles—the 1923 Cheranmadevi Gurukulam Agitation and the 1924-25 Vaikom Satyagraha, where the struggle was not about temple entry, but freedom for people from the backward classes to walk through the streets adjoining the temple—make it clear that there were feudal and caste supremacists forces in Tamil Nadu and its adjoining areas, but Periyar gave the tools to fight against bigotry and discrimination. The issue we have to keep in mind is that unlike many other parts of India, Tamil Nadu’s orthodoxy did not have a separate lineage—RSS, Hindu Mahasabha, Jan Sangh and BJP—but was folded with the Congress. This, at some level, blurs the reading. The difference in character between Rahul Gandhi’s Congress and the Congress of Tamil is very significant and it needs a book to map the two trajectories of Congress in Tamil Nadu: orthodoxy/bigotry versus progressive/inclusiveness.

Hindutva leaders soon realised that despite the strong presence of religious faith in Tamil Nadu, they also have an entrenched sense of Agham (interior) and Puram (exterior). In this classification, which has been integral from the days of Sangam literature 2,000 years ago, faith, like love, is Agham or interior and politicising that is a violation of their inner space. The first front organisation of the RSS to gain some foothold in Tamil Nadu was the Hindu Munnani (The Hindu Front) and its founder president was P. Thanulinga Nadar, who entered Parliament as a Congress Lok Sabha MP from Nagercoil in 1957. The legislative entry of a Hindutva activist from the same region took place in the Tamil Nadu assembly elections of 1984. Since then, they have a marginal presence in Tamil Nadu assembly whenever the BJP ties up with either of the Dravidian majors—the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) or the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK).

The most difficult lesson for the RSS was to learn that their pan-Indian presentation fails to lure most Tamils into their fold. When the Ayodhya movement gained traction in many states, it did not have a major impact in Tamil Nadu as people here worshiped Shiva, Vishnu and various Ammans (Goddesses) and Lord Rama was not a part of the worshipping pantheon. When the all-India singular icon mobilisation was not working in early the 1990s, they moved to valorise Lord Ganesh. Lord Ganesh, known in Tamil Nadu as Pillaiyar, is a beloved icon for many as he is known for is playfulness and kindness in granting instant boons. The attempt to weaponise him failed. Then, they moved towards Lord Muruga, who is popularly known as the Tamil God. The RSS-supported groups, including the Union Minister of State L. Murugan, tried to pit Lord Muruga against the Muslims in what is known as “Thiruparankundram communal flashpoint”. But despite having a huge funding, the Union Government and mobilisation through inducement, it refused to ignite.

The RSS has to learn that despite the Hindu-Christian riots in Mandaikadu and the anti-Muslim mobilisation following the mass conversion of Dalits from Hinduism to Islam in Meenakshipuram, Tamil Nadu—which has more temples than any other state in India—refuses to endorse a single religion supremacy. It knows that the supremacy is really the hatred towards the minority. And this is the rationale for the RSS to be checkmated.

(Views expressed are personal)

A. S. Panneerselvan is the director general of the Chennai institute of journalism. He has more than four decades of experience in journalism.

This story appeared as One Hundred Years Of...Being Checkmated in the print edition of Outlook magazine’s October 21 issue titled Who is an Indian?, which offers a bird's-eye view of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), testimonies of exclusion and inclusion, organisational complexities, and regional challenges faced by the organisation.