Why Tamil Nadu, Periyar, and the Dravidian model aren't just regional phenomena

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat* 

The election campaign in Tamil Nadu this season is strikingly different. The alliance led by the DMK is consistently referred to as the “DMK alliance,” not the “INDIA alliance.” This distinction is unsurprising given the state’s history: Tamil Nadu remains the only state to decisively reject “national” parties. The AIADMK’s surrender to the BJP after J. Jayalalithaa’s death represents, in many ways, a betrayal of the politics of Tamil identity—an identity Periyar envisioned as Dravidian, not narrowly Tamil.

Chief Minister M.K. Stalin has been categorical about his Dravidian model and the legacy of Thanthai Periyar. Over the past five years, his government has invested in cultural spaces, museums, and libraries to promote Tamil culture and the Dravidian ethos. On the campaign trail in Chennai, Stalin has been joined by leaders from across India: Arvind Kejriwal, Tejashwi Yadav, Asaduddin Owaisi, Rahul Gandhi, and Mallikarjun Kharge have all expressed solidarity with the DMK alliance.

A recent clip of Tejashwi Yadav’s speech at a DMK rally caught attention. He praised Tamil Nadu’s greatness, invoked the legacy of C.N. Annadurai and “Kalaignar” Karunanidhi, and highlighted the historic ties between Karunanidhi and Lalu Prasad Yadav. Yet, conspicuously absent was any mention of Periyar. For a leader of a social justice party from Bihar, this omission was telling. Tamil Nadu’s political identity is inseparable from Periyar’s Self-Respect Movement. To erase him from memory is to misunderstand the foundation of Dravidian politics. Periyar was not merely a rabble-rouser; he was a philosopher, a guide, and a visionary who spoke of self-respect, not just social justice.

The silence is troubling. In Bihar, parties claiming the mantle of social justice have done little to promote Periyar, Phule, or even Ambedkar. One wonders who scripted Tejashwi’s speech. When brahmanical intellectuals are tasked with writing for social justice platforms, the result is often dilution, if not distortion.

It is worth urging Tejashwi to visit Periyar Thidal, pick up a few books, and acquaint himself with the history of the Self-Respect Movement. His speech would have been unremarkable had he not claimed to represent social justice. Tamil Nadu’s political culture is built on self-respect and social justice, and no party can hope to succeed here by ignoring Periyar. The Dravidian model—focused on health, education, and representation—is the living embodiment of Periyar’s vision. While unfinished, it remains the most action-oriented program of social transformation in India.

Tamil Nadu, Periyar, and the Dravidian model are not just regional phenomena. They are poised to shape India’s democratic future.

---

*Human rights defender