Former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa’s death on December 5, while a significant loss, has also opened up the possibility of course correction in state politics. In particular, it has signalled a time for Dravidian parties, who have ruled Tamil Nadu for almost half a century since 1967, to change their approach.

The humility and simplicity of politicians seen in the time of K Kamaraj, three-term chief minister of Tamil Nadu and a Congress veteran, disappeared after the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam assumed power in 1967, with founder CN Annadurai at its helm. No longer was it necessary to earn the support of the masses by remaining in close contact with the people and understanding their difficulties. The new method was to astonish them with grandeur and theatrical oratory and capture their support rather than earn it.

Politics and cinema got intertwined. The Dravidian parties were atheistic in their principles, but they did not hesitate to feed the people with the opium of cinema and stardom. Cinemas replaced temples and actors replaced gods. By exploiting this “politics of spectacle” that a culture of festivity readily embraced, the Dravidian parties reaped huge electoral gains.

Having recognised that glamour was more powerful than a principle like atheism, iconic film star MG Ramachandran broke away from the DMK, after a nearly two-decade long association, in 1972 to launch his own party, the Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam.

While the DMK had replaced the worship of god with the worship of individuals, seen in the massive following the likes of Annadurai had, MGR integrated gods and the glamour of cinema and introduced an even more potent strategy.

The Dravidian movement had its roots in the self-respect movement begun by social reformer Thanthai Periyar. The movement initially professed atheism and rationalism, but this did not percolate to the masses, sections of which were in fact hurt by atheistic propaganda. They thus found solace in the figure of MGR, who did not hide his theistic traits.

Dalits marginalised

Though the Dravidian movement emerged as a counter to Brahmin domination, under the DMK, political power was concentrated in the hands of Other Backward Classes. This strengthened the caste system in the rural areas and victimised Dalits. Thus, the glamour of cinema was not the only reason for Dalits backing MGR. An anti-DMK sentiment contributed in equal measure.

When the AIADMK split into two after MGR’s death in 1987 – one led by his mentee, Jayalalithaa, and the other by his wife Janaki – the DMK was jubilant. They thought that the propaganda against the Brahmin roots of Jayalalithaa alone was enough to halt her rise. This led to a resurgence of the Brahmin-Non Brahmin rhetoric, which had been pushed to the background with Periyar’s death in 1974. This was further accentuated in the late 1980s by the implementation of Mandal commission’s recommendations on OBC reservations. In Tamil Nadu, support and opposition for Mandal was constructed on the bipolar rhetoric of Brahmin and non-Brahmin.

Jayalalithaa called herself the political heir of MGR when she took over reins of the AIADMK, but she created her own political strategies. When power came to her hands in 1991, after an AIADMK-Congress alliance came to power following the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, it helped legitimise authoritarian functioning. She let loose violence on her adversaries. Further, to wipe away the disadvantage of being dubbed a Brahmin, she concentrated power in the hands of the OBC Thevar community at all levels.

Populism, a strategy that MGR introduced to Tamil Nadu, was expanded by Jayalalithaa. This broadened her appeal to all sections of the society. However, Brahmins continued to see her as their political representative. She also recognised this by talking openly about her caste in the Tamil Nadu Assembly.

Clear cut task

Jayalalithaa’s death has raised the question of whether Tamil Nadu will ever see a Brahmin chief minister again. This is a precarious situation not just for Brahmins but also for those whose politics was anchored in anti-Brahmin sentiment.

Though adversaries, the politics of Brahmins and non-Brahmins shared a similarity – both presented themselves as “voices of victims”, the former because they had been sidelined with the rise of Dravidian politics. This fight for political supremacy between the two groups drowned out the voices of Dalits and religious minorities in Tamil Nadu.

Having been sidelined from political power (but not from the executive or the judiciary) to the emergence of Dravidian politics, Brahmins approached policies like reservations, and cultural elements like Tamil pride, with hatred. This provided a tool for the opposition to legitimise anti-Brahmin politics, leading to an atmosphere of hate.

But Jayalalithaa’s death has provided Brahmins (who constitute less than 2% of the population) a golden opportunity to effect a course correction, give up hate politics and embrace a more democratic approach. Instead, if they choose to shift their support to the Bharatiya Janata Party, it would be a monumental blunder. They may end up with the burden of being the group that helped fan communal politics in the state. We can cite many from the community who had dedicated their lives for the betterment of Tamil and helped progressive ideologies like Marxism take root in Tamil Nadu. The learned among the community should come forward to continue this tradition.

On the other hand, the non-Brahmin politics, which has dominated the state for five decades, is at a crossroads. With the death of Jayalalithaa, the dilemma of whom to project as the enemy has come up.

The strategy of making anti-Brahmin politics synonymous with anti-Hindutva has glossed over the non-Brahmin communities that have benefitted from Hindutva’s legitimisation of caste. It has done little, therefore, to root out casteism and tackle the problems with Hindutva at their root. This strategy may no longer work and it is essential that the Dravidian movement try to analyse Hindutva beyond the tenets of anti-Brahmin politics.

With the elevation of Jayalithaa’s aide Sasikala Natarajan, a non-Brahmin, to the post of AIADMK general secretary, the Dravidian party seems to have lapsed back into the caste prism.

However, given the larger context of expanding right-wing politics in the country, it is important that Brahmins and non-Brahmins in Tamil Nadu give up the selfish strategy of looking at society through the mirror of caste alone. They should also allow the marginalised sections, including Dalits, become active participants in power.

The writer is a former legislator and the general secretary of the Viduthala Chiruthaigal Katchi, the largest Dalit party in Tamil Nadu.