[ad_1]
THE TIMING of DMK Lok Sabha MP D N V Senthilkumar S’s remarks, which were expunged from Parliament records, could not have been worse. They followed a disheartening loss for the Congress in the Hindi heartland states, where the BJP kept bringing up the Sanatan Dharma row triggered by another DMK leader.
However, that was not the only reason the DMK rushed to distance itself from Senthilkumar’s statement, even as it had stood by Udhayanidhi Stalin when he called for “eradication of Sanatan Dharma”.
The latter hewed close to the Dravidian ideology that derives from the egalitarian ideals of Periyar and C N Annadurai; the former, party leaders say, made an off-the-cuff, throwaway statement that the party would have found hard to justify – not the least to its INDIA partners, which have been sent back to the drawing board after Sunday’s results and which have been bruised time and again by the BJP on this tricky territory.
The Dravidian movement has always grappled with this challenge, of balancing its rationalist, secular ethos with the demands of the democratic process. This challenge is even tougher now that the DMK is seeking to be part of a national umbrella that has to cater to a broader, diverse electorate, which has not been exposed to these Dravidian principles.
So, no sooner had the BJP picked on Senthilkumar’s remarks and said that they showed the Opposition’s “divisive” agenda – this time along North-South lines – swift intervention came from DMK president and Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M K Stalin.
A senior leader said that it was a decisive moment for Stalin, who had steadfastly stayed away when son Udhayanidhi’s remarks were flayed by the BJP, leaving the defending to other DMK leaders. “This time, Stalin immediately asked DMK organisational secretary R S Bharathi to thoroughly look at Senthilkumar’s speech. After receiving a detailed briefing, he personally called the MP, reprimanded him for his choice of words, and demanded an immediate public apology,” the leader said.
The DMK leader said Stalin wanted to send “a clear message” to all party members and leaders to measure their words, keeping in mind their responsibility and sensitivity, particularly when in the public arena. Senthilkumar was speaking in the Lok Sabha.
“Young DMK leaders are strong in their opinions. But a distinction between ideologically driven statements and offhand remarks should be recognised by a Member of Parliament,” another DMK leader said.
Udhayanidhi, the Tamil Nadu Sports Minister, had made his Sanatan Dharma remarks at a conference organised in Chennai by the Tamil Nadu Progressive Writers and Artists Association, where he said a few things could not be opposed but had to be eradicated. “Just like dengue, mosquitoes, malaria, or Coronavirus need to be eradicated, we have to eradicate Sanatan,” he said.
The second DMK leader, who is close to the Stalin family, pointed out that the interpretation of his remarks might have set off a controversy, but what Udhayanidhi spoke was “rooted in the party’s ideology”, referring to the DMK’s well-known stance against Sanatan Dharma – or rather, organised Hinduism, with all its trappings of rituals and castes.
Senthilkumar had earlier too courted controversy when, in July 2022, he objected to ‘bhumi puja’ being performed at a government event. Even then, while the MP’s argument stemmed from the DMK’s intrinsically atheist position, the party leadership did not appreciate the way he did it, sharing his exchange with government officials over the issue on social media.
At the ideological level, Senthilkumar’s outburst was seen as lost in translation. At a more practical level, the party did not appreciate the row as it has itself travelled a long way from its traditional atheism, with leaders now known to visit temples.
A senior DMK MP pointed out that it is foolish for Opposition leaders to seek to fight Modi and the RSS on their turf, plus deploying their language. “What is the point of fighting fascism if our language is no different from the fascists’ language? The language and tone used can be as critical as the message itself. The BJP will undoubtedly use this incident to its advantage, portraying it as indicative of the DMK’s ‘divisive’ politics,” he said.
V Arasu, a political observer and retired teacher of political science, who closely follows Dravidian politics, said the divide between the South and the North has been there from prehistoric times. “There is even a perception that Tamils may be compelled to fight against fascism in India in the recent future. When there is subtle as well as significant difference between the way people perceive these two regions, it is may be wise to apologise when such rows emerge.”
[ad_2]
