The year 2025 marks the centenary of the Self-Respect Movement founded by Periyar E.V. Ramasami. The term self-respect encapsulates the core ideals of the movement: abolition of distinctions between Paraya and Brahmin, rich and poor, and men and women—distinctions upheld by the hierarchical caste order with Brahminism as its ideological foundation.
Though the movement was centred in the Tamil-speaking areas of the Madras Presidency and Pondicherry, it reached the oppressed masses in Dharavi and Pune, the Travancore princely state, and the migrant Tamil communities in Malaya, Singapore, Ceylon and Burma.
Privileging self-respect as the birthright of every human being—over B.G. Tilak’s claim of Swaraj—Periyar argued that caste prevents the development of a healthy sense of self, and that to cultivate such a sense one must practise self-respect and learn to value oneself. This, he insisted, must precede all other goals, including freedom and self-rule—in short, even swaraj. Periyar defined self-respect in multiple ways, depending on the context and historical moment, aligning it at different times with socialism, Islam, and the Buddhist concept of samadharma. Periyar used samadharma as a counter to Manudharma and as an ethical complement to socialism: while socialism addressed just distribution, samadharma required a just and equal ethics that implicates all, built on a consensus to exercise rights and compassion in common.
Periyar’s criticism of Hinduism arose from his understanding of caste as both social system and ideology. Brahminical ideology, he argued, determined what Hindu men and women ate, how they dressed, whom they married, their choice of profession, their public behaviour, political choices, and modes of worship—in short, it pervaded every sphere of life. Hinduism, therefore, had to be viewed not merely in terms of belief or spiritual comfort but in its material, everyday functioning. His critique of Brahminical patriarchy drew sustenance from his rejection of the conventional ideal of chastity. Periyar asserted that child-rearing could be undertaken by men; by making parenthood, rather than motherhood, decisive in nurturing human life, he sought to liberate the female body and grant women autonomy and subjectivity. He attacked the fetishisation of the female body and urged women not to internalize oppressive notions of beauty or become mere pegs on which jewellery is hung.
The politics of the Self-Respect Movement was articulated as a critique of Congress nationalism and political Non-Brahminism. Self-Respecters understood Non-Brahminism as a creed that rejected hierarchical caste privileges, opposed Brahminical pride and social dominance, advocated the rights of the oppressed for equality and dignity, and affirmed women’s reproductive rights, education and independence. Even when Periyar supported governments sympathetic to social justice, he did not allow such support to dilute his civil and public criticism. He was consistently critical of electoral politics and legislative processes, which he viewed as limited in scope and corrupted by instrumental reasoning. Believing political participation could be morally compromising, he chose instead to remain a dissident and critical force in society.
The Self-Respect Movement drew inspiration from the Russian Revolution, though it rejected violence in all forms. Its only English weekly, Revolt, launched from Erode on 7 November 1928, was dedicated to “that memorable day in the history of nations, the day of the immortal Revolution in Russia.” The journals of the movement published hundreds of articles celebrating Soviet achievements, particularly regarding women’s progress. It admired King Amanullah Khan of Afghanistan and Mustafa Kemal Pasha of Turkey for overturning centuries-old dress codes imposed on women. Before leaving on what he called a “global tour”—a strategic attempt to reach Soviet territories—Periyar had the preamble and first section of The Communist Manifesto translated into Tamil and published in Kudi Arasu. After returning in late 1932, he and S. Ramanathan translated seven articles by Lenin on religion. Kudi Arasu later carried the first Tamil translation of Engels’ Principles of Communism, and during 1937-38 published a full-length biography of Karl Marx.
The movement enjoyed close and comradely relations with Babasaheb Dr B.R. Ambedkar. Its journals introduced Ambedkar to Tamil Nadu through reports on the Mahad Satyagraha and the Kalaram Temple entry movement, and mobilized support for the demand for separate electorates. From 1935 onwards, it supported Ambedkar’s decision to leave Hinduism. However, Periyar was unhappy with Ambedkar joining the Constituent Assembly, believing that his legislative work would be appropriated by “North Indian Aryans.” In independent India, Periyar differed with Ambedkar on the Kashmir question and on aligning with the United States, though their political disagreements did not prevent Periyar from supporting him on all other matters.
Periyar maintained that social inequalities rooted in birth would persist under any economic system and reproduce economic disparities unless caste was abolished first. Pointing out that caste allowed some to accumulate wealth and status, he argued that even the full implementation of Communist doctrine could not reform a hierarchically organized caste society. The first task of a socialist in India, he said, must therefore be the abolition of caste. His position was opposed by socialists (later Communists) within the movement, such as M. Singaravelu, who emphasized class struggle and left to join the Congress Socialist Party in 1936. Around this time, Periyar obtained Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste and serialized its Tamil translation in Kudi Arasu.
The complex relationship of cooperation and conflict between Self-Respecters and Communists continued after 1947.
Although there was sharp ideological struggle in 1946-47 over the nature of the independence granted by the British, the Dravidar Kazhagam (successor to the Self-Respect Movement) was the only party in Tamil-speaking regions that condemned the 1949 ban on the Communist Party of India by the Nehru government. It expressed solidarity with Communist prisoners and organized state-wide protests against the killing of 22 Communist prisoners in Salem Central Prison, who were protesting torture, poor food and denial of rights. In the first general election of 1952, Periyar supported Communist candidates in some constituencies and expected reciprocal support for a Dalit candidate he fielded. When the Communists violated the understanding, fielding their own candidate, Periyar ensured the victory of his nominee. Hostility between Communists and Self-Respecters continued for decades, though recently the Communists have recognized Periyar’s relevance in the face of aggressive Hindutva. The challenge before both movements is to unite anti-caste and class struggles.
The range of concerns represented in the Self-Respect journals was remarkable: scholarly critiques of the Ramayana, Mahabharata, Bhagavad Gita and Puranas; translations of anti-clerical writings from the West; essays of Voltaire, Rousseau, Thomas Paine and Ingersoll; writings of R.P. Paranjape, J. Krishnamurti and M. Singaravelu; atheist writings of Bertrand Russell and Bhagat Singh; translations of Boccaccio; and articles by Rahul Sankrityayan and Meghnad Saha. These were intended to cultivate rationalist thinking and critical inquiry among Self-Respecters and the wider public.
Periyar’s intellectual brilliance—for instance, his deep knowledge of Indian philosophical traditions—is evident in his article Materialism or Pragrridivad, written from what he called “the perspective of Nirvana”, and remains to be explored further by scholars of his anti-caste movement.
Despite Periyar’s radicalism and his selfless commitment over nearly 75 years, a strong anti-caste space in civil society remains elusive. The realpolitik of parties claiming his legacy has drawn them into the logic of the Westminster system, strengthening powerful intermediate castes whose pride fuels rising atrocities against Dalits. While Tamil Nadu has done better than many regions on several indicators, interpersonal caste relations are increasingly intolerant and violent when caste norms are challenged. This has led some younger Dalit intellectuals to reject the trajectory of the Self-Respect Movement. We also witness slanders and distortions of Periyar’s ideas, even at the risk of losing an important ally in the struggle for equality, fraternity and dignity.
---
*Veteran author, translator and activist based in Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu
Comments