Impasses in Political Non-brahminism: Caste and Representation
Separate Electorates
Mr. E. V. Ramasami Naicker has issued the following statement to the press:
I am surprised to read the statement that Mr A. Ramasami Mudaliar has issued on the question of separate electorate. The statement is obviously made by Mr.Mudaliar in his personal capacity and not as a representative of the Non Brahmin party, though the “Hindu” and other Madras journals have utilized it under such headlines as “Non-Brahmin Leader’s views”.
Communal representation in all matters is still the creed of the Non Brahmin party. The party was nourished and brought up on this principle. The party has gained a large adherence among the masses owing to the steadfastness shown in the realization of this principle. It remains to be seen how far the party would maintain its strength among the people if, according to the advice of Mr. Ramasami Mudaliar, it throws to the four winds the demand for separate electorates as well as for reservation of seats in joint constituencies.
The case for separate electorates, says Mr.Mudaliar, was negatived once and for ever by the Joint Parliamentary Committee in 1919. The question cannot be reopened because, Mr.Mudaliar remembers, the Non-Brahmins tolerated the decision of the Joint Parliamentary Committee. The Non-Brahmin party which was in its infancy at that time, had not the strength to resist the decision and had therefore to make the best of the bad situation in which it found itself. But now that the party has grown in strength and the people at large have realized the evils of the decision of 1919, it would be absurd to impose the decision of two years ago as the laws of Medes and the Persians (a biblical phrase that denotes unchanging laws – editors). Again, in Mr.Mudaliar’s opinion, the question cannot be reopened unless an extraordinarily strong case has been made out for doing so. I would like to know, what, according to Mr.Mudaliar, would constitute “an extraordinarily strong case”. To say that no point has been made out for reopening this all important question is to give away the whole case for Non Brahmins. Mr. Ramasami Mudaliar has himself drawn vivid pictures in the columns of the “Justice” of the grievous wrongs that the Non Brahmin community is still suffering as regards both official and non official representation. The monopolists still hold undisputed sway in all walks of life. After ten years of “toleration” of the decision of the Joint Parliamentary Committee, the position of the Depressed classes, the Mussalmans, the Christians, and other Non Brahmin Communities has not only not improved but has visibly deteriorated.
In view of the retrograde recommendations of the Nehru Committee and in view of the reactionary evidence that the Bombay government tendered through Messers Turner and Griffiths, I see grave danger ahead of the Non Brahmin cause being lost not only before the Simon Commission but before the bar of public opinion. I therefore appeal to all Non Brahmins particularly leaders like Mr.Ramasami Mudaliar to bestir themselves and educate the public in favour of separate electorates and proportionate representation in the services.
– Revolt, 7 November 1928
No Brahmin Please
We publish elsewhere the news of the decision of the Non-Brahmin party of Bombay to “shed its ‘communalist appellation’ and to call itself “a peasants party” with “Dominion Status for the present as its goal”. This drastic change in the very name of the party itself indicates the broad outlook of the Non-Brahmins of Bombay. ‘The Peasants’ Party’, is indeed a wise decision, for we are sure that more than ninety percent of the peasants come under the ‘communalist appellation’. If, again, instead of ‘peasants’, it is termed as the ‘labourers party’; a greater percentage, why, even cent per cent will be seen to belong to the ‘communalist appppellation’. If the Non-brahmins of Bombay, (we hope to be excused for using this term) really attach much importance to the name of the party, and if they are so serious about having a more embracing name to it, we shall most joyfully invite such a noble spirit.
When once the Brahmins become either peasants or labourers, and begin to be one with either of them, that moment, they naturally cease to be Brahmins. For, it is in that spirit the Brahmins are found fault with. We condemn Brahminism, for nothing else than its exploitation of the masses, in the names of god and religion. Brahminism, as it exists lives to eat, and not eats to live. Brahminism and Labour are poles asunder. It earns its living, for the most part, not by any physical or intellectual labour, but by the six inches kusha grass and other religious books.
It is a matter for gratification that the party, whether it sheds its old name or not has as its cardinal principle, “the protection of agriculturist India from social, religious and economic exploitation by Mullahs, Moulvis, Priests or usurpers”. The Non Brahmins of Bombay have fully realised the futility of wasting their energy wholly on political issues and have come to understand the root causes of the disease, from which the society is suffering. The political Brahmin, we are aware, is not in any way more poisonous than the social Brahmin. The peasants and other labourers are daily falling prey to the priestly class. Years of strenuous work in our province have taught us the severe lesson that politics is a game not worth the candle. Eminent men among the Non Brahmin community, as a result of their unflinching attempts have successfully transplanted the political Brahmins; and yet there is no stop to the social degeneration of the people. Hence we were obliged to direct our whole energy and time towards social work, and with a
view to turn the present social system topsy-turvy and establish a living bond of union among all people irrespective of caste or creed, we founded the Self-respect movement. The achievements of the Self-respecters, in the short span of five years, are so great that a good portion of people in our province have ceased to be threatened by the words, god and religion.
And now, the present proposed policy of the Non Brahmins of Bombay serves as an impetus to our movement, and their determination to protect the agriculturists from social and religious exploitation by priests, is sure to be a beacon to those of our men who are being led by the noses. The proposals of the Non Brahmin party of Bombay, we hope, will be an incentive to our own Justice party to pay greater attention to the sphere of social reform.
The Non Brahmin Party of Bombay
Drastic changes in the policy of the Non Brahmin Party of Bombay, it is understood have been proposed by Mr. Jayakar, Secretary, in the course of a representation to the President of the party, the Hon. Mr. Jadhav, Minister, Bombay Government. Mr. Javalkar suggests the party should shed communalist appellation and should be called a Peasants Party with “Dominion Status for the present” as its goal. The cardinal principle for which the party should work should be protection of agriculturist India from social, religious and economic exploitation by Mullahs, Moulvis, priests or usurpers and any one accepting this principle, even if he be a Brahmin should be admitted into the party membership.
Revolt, 23 June 1929
The Nellore Confederation
Many of our Non-Brahmin contemporaries have written a great deal already on the conference that is to meet very shortly at Nellore. The Conference is being held at a very critical period of the Non-Brahmin party. When we say critical, we don’t refer to so much to the political aspect as to the social one. The Non Brahmins of the province have passed the stage of being merely satisfied with the ‘loaves and fishes of office’ as the monopolists call it. They have gone far beyond the stage of being enticed by a few appointments in the services. They have come to the painful realization that politics alone has not made them better. They feel their degrading position in society, and have discovered how the time honoured customs in the name of God and religion, have plunged them in the mire of ignorance and slavery. They have understood the real causes of the age long divisions of society and have determined to lay the axe at the root of the evils. Hence we said the conference takes place at a critical period of the history of South India. We therefore feel it our duty to lay before the public the importance of the confederation.
The necessity for the immediate reconstruction of society has been so keenly felt by the Non-Brahmins of this province, the need for reform has been so often emphasized by the people that the confederation cannot afford to ignore the fact that the removal of social injustice is the first and foremost task before it. To achieve that end, the conference must lay out a clear programme of work and leave a solid foundation for an active propaganda of social reform in the country. We have almost grown sick of mere resolutions and we want more practical achievements. The conference which assembles after such a late hour after the demise of the leader of the party (the Raja of Panagal – editors) has a more difficult task to perform in the field of social service, than it has hitherto done or has been supposed to have done. The confederation should not lose sight of the world current and should in no circumstances fail to carry the people with the current of progress. The members of the Confederation should realize that they have not advanced in the achievement of the chief aims of the movement as much as they ought to have. They should not forget that their progress in the past has been very limited. The leaders of the movement must take particular care in considering the importance of social reform before everything.
The two main issues before the conference, we understand are the inclusion or non-inclusion of Brahmins within the party and the election of a leader. The first question has been elaborately dealt with from different points of view by our Non-Brahmin contemporaries. Different opinions have been expressed by individuals. For our part, the problem does not seem to be as difficult as it is to others. For we hold decided opinion on this point. We had occasion to show in these columns in connection with the Non-Brahmin party of Bombay, how the inclusion of Brahmins in the party at this stage at any rate, is not only not desirable, but detrimental to the interests of the movement. So far as the Nellore confederation is concerned we are at a loss to know how this question has cropped up as an urgent issue.
It is a settled fact that the Brahmins as a class are determinedly opposed to all ideas of progress and all Brahmins from the most learned scholar to the most idle purohit are dead against the abolition of caste. Whereas the Non-Brahmins as a community, thanks to the divisions between them and thanks to the originators of the divisions decidedly desire the destruction of caste, the Brahmins as a community uniformly hold that if the caste system is destroyed a deathblow will be dealt to Hinduism, which in its turn will overthrow the superiority of Brahmins. The rungs of the social ladder are so arranged that the top most rung is inaccessible from the next one. That is why the above mentality as regards the caste system, has become more or less the general feature of both the communities.
When the existing evils in our society are proved to be the natural and inevitable outcome of the invidious system of caste, we know not what else is required to emphasise the overbearing importance of the destruction of caste. In our opinion this is the fundamental principle on which we the people of India have to proceed towards the achievement of our final goal. Organisations for bringing about all the divergent castes into a homogeneous fraternity and a harmonious whole have cropped up throughout the country. We are also witnessing how the most advanced of Brahmins like Mr. Malaviya are opposed to this noble and humane task. We are experiencing everyday how the ‘spotless’ of Brahmins in the ‘patriotic’ circle are plotting against those movements and individuals who aim at the destruction of caste and similar reforms. Incidents of the history of the Tamilnadu Congress and the Khaddar Board ought to have taught us sufficiently how even a ‘spotless’ Brahmin can destroy or Brahminise any movement or organization which is in its infancy. Incidents in history where the Brahmin intrusion has destroyed partially or wholly even the most rational of religions and the best forms of Government are not found wanting. Therefore, so far as the social side of the Non-Brahmin movement is concerned, we are strongly convinced of the dangers of admitting the Brahmins into our fold, at this stage. As for the political manipulations, we think it better to leave the question entirely to the discretion of the political party in the Council.
Of the second issue in the conference, the less said the better. We on behalf of the self-respect movement wish to observe that the leader who is elected or chosen must adjust himself to the broad and noble outlook of the masses who have welcomed with one uniform voice, the cardinal principles of the self-respect movement.
– Revolt, 29 September 1929
Fight to the last
We had occasion to refer in our last article to the impending danger to a movement which has been started by the most foreseeing social workers of South India but which is today unhappily being roughly handled by a politically-intoxicated section of the educated group of the Non-Brahmin community. We have been time and again stressing upon the dangers that would inevitably follow at the admission of Brahmins in the Federation of Non-Brahmins (that is, the South Indian Liberal Federation (SILF) or the Justice party – editors).
We have pointed out how the question of the inclusion of Brahmins is nothing but an unwitting attempt to lay the axe at the root of the best of democratic movements. Ours is an organisation purely democratic, in the strict sense of the term. Real democracy hates aristocracy of any kind. Aristocracy by birth is as harmful, and even more harmful than aristocracy in wealth or intellect. A Brahmin is an aristocrat by birth who holds a firm control over the intellect of the masses thereby establishing his superiority over the rest of our people. Even as the French Constitution prohibits any member of the Royal family becoming the President of the French Republic, the originators of the Non-brahmin movement thought it wise and safe to exclude the monopolist element from the organization. Ever since its birth, the movement has traced its way through the dark paths of thorns and bushes, through the tumultuous waves of political manipulations of self-seeking individuals and through the storm and thunder of the monopolists of the country. In short, the movement has survived, thanks to the social oppressions of the Brahmins, the several onslaughts that were made from within and without.
At the end of the last elections, the political party of the Non-brahmin movement suffered some reverses, which for the nonce, appeared to be greatly discouraging. But that was a blessing in disguise. The defeat showed to them how their work in the past has not been so much satisfactory to the masses, as they hoped to be. It was a period of low tide for the party and indirectly to the movement. Again a fresh start was given to it by the forceful and practical work of the Self-respect movement.The newly started one took fire with the younger generation, and the spirit of the Non-brahmin agitation was diffused throughout the Tamil country, and even beyond. The tremendous achievements of the Self-respect movement within a period of four years took hold of the minds of the masses so firmly that the echo of the movement is heard today in far off lands and islands. It is no exaggeration when we say that in Burma and Ceylon, almost all the Tamil speaking people are whole-heartedly in accord with the principles of the Self-respect movements. Thus, as days went on the old movement began to be little by little merged in the new one, until the one was identified with the other. The first Self-respect Conference has decided not to admit Brahmins into its fold; and what is the S.I.L.F. going to do? We wait for the answer.
By the unbounded enthusiasm and tireless work of the youths, the movement has emerged unscathed from the blazing fire of opposition and suppression. In their selfless work for the amelioration of the downtrodden masses, our youths have carried the noble massage of the movement to every nook and corner of the Tamilnad, and have laid the foundation for the growth of a democratic spirit in the country. While some of our elders were playing with fire and making love to it, within the Council and outside, the youths of the movement were making a life and death struggle against the forces of orthodoxy and obscurantism. They only can realize what impediments they had to face on their way, in how many ways Brahmins or Brahminisim tried to upset their work, and what methods they pursued to undo their attempts. The ignoble task of setting up our own people against us, the contemptible method of misrepresenting the ideals of the movement, and the despicable manner of misinterpreting the objectives of the movement have not yet vanished from the sights of our youths.
If even under the above circumstances, the Brahmins had succeeded to a certain extent in obliterating some of our easy achievements, and in blockading our progress, we know not what else they cannot do, if they are openly admitted into our fold. We are sure, however, the youths of the land will not be so unthinking as to give our only sword to our enemy.
In our humble opinion, social reform is not such an easy game as politics. The policy of “Tickle me Tobby and I will tickle thee” may be fruitful in politics, but never in social reform. The task of social reconstruction is a play with the sword. A slight slip will end in a cut. A wrong swing will result in a thrust. An intelligent sword-player, however skilled he is, will not agree to have his sword soaked in poison. It is not only deadly to him but to the audience also, whose fate would be final if the hilt of the sword loses his grip. That is the game we are playing now. Are the youths, we ask, going to allow the soaking of their sword in poison?
– Revolt, 6 October 1929
Questions Answered (By “Plain Speaker”)
I give below the answers to some of the questions put by Mr. N. Subramania Aiyar in the issue of the HINDU. The questions raised are of the utmost public interest and importance and hence I shall take them one by one and try to answer them.
Q: “If justice is the end and democracy the means, what are they exactly in their honest and understandable import?”
A: Justice of course means fair dealing with all people irrespective of caste and creed, nation or rank. Democracy is Government of the people by the people of the country.
Q. ,“If to the Justice Party, as to the other political parties, Swaraj is the goal, what is Swaraj?”
A. This question is a very difficult one to be summarily answered. It presumes the existence of more than one party, having Swaraj as the goal. Before we proceed to examine into the connotation of the term “swaraj’ if that is the goal of the Justice party, I desire to know the so-called parties who are really aspiring for Swaraj.
If so what is the kind of Swaraj for which they are a severally working? When it is taken for granted that all these parties work for Swaraj, where is the necessity for the existence of several parties if all of them mean one and the same thing by setting their ideal on Swaraj? The truth is with some parties, Swaraj is self-government in the sense that they themselves should enjoy the monopoly of the Government of the country. In this sense, Swaraj is not the ideal of the Justice Party. There are some others whose conception of Swaraj is a Government in which they can play any part in any manner they like. There are still some other leaders who want to work and move about under high sounding names without worrying themselves for an exact import of the term “Swaraj” since they are always on the alert to carve out something substantially useful for themselves while the sun shines. A crore of rupees was subscribed to the Tilak Swaraj Fund and the public know how the fund was collected and managed. There is yet a fourth conception of Swaraj. This is because that some have fallen foul with the present British Raj and find themselves unable to exhibit all their idiosyncrasies with impurity and hence they cry for a changed Government i.e., a form of Swaraj. They say they are so immensely patriotic, it is their last resort, as per Dr. Johnson’s dictum.
There are still sincere persons, who honestly believe that if we unite now, we can get complete independence and the moment we get full freedom all our social, political, religious and economic ills will automatically come to an end, and India will become a paradise on Earth. With great respect to such thinkers, I submit that this conception is too Utopian to be realised in the near future.
The ideal of Swaraj as understood by the Justice party does not conform to any of the conceptions mentioned above. The Justicites do realise the injury caused to a country by an alien Government. At the same time they are aware of the helpless condition of the nation and the force at the back of the Government with which we may have to fight and wring out Swaraj from them.
They have also to reckon the many and varied social and religious evils under which the nation has been smarting for centuries past and as a result of which unity has well nigh become an impossibility in this country. Composed as it is by a large number of castes and creeds, speaking various languages, following different social rules the problem of a united Indian nation is unique by itself and does not admit of comparison with the evolution of other countries on the face of this earth. India is verily a continent. Hence the Justicites feel that if every community or caste works for its own educational, social, economic amelioration then the nation would become composed of men best fitted to work for the political regeneration of this country.
Students of History and Literature would have heard of Edmund Burke, who in his famous book “Reflections on the French Revolution” writes:
“To be attached to the sub-divisions, to love the little platoon we belong to in society, is the first principle (the germ as it was) of public affections. It is the first link in the series by which we proceed towards a love to our country and to man-kind. The interests of that portion of social arrangement is a trust in the hands of all those who compose it.”
It is this sacred trust that the leaders of the Justice party find themselves bound to discharge first and foremost, since they believe that in doing so they only work for the national regeneration in as much as this movement embraces within its fold more than 90% of the population. Similarly if every community strives for its own uplift and advancement, then the whole nation is bound to progress automatically. Thus the masses send their true representatives. These representatives undergo practiced training under a well established constitutional Government – a training involving the least risks. Gradually they are bound to monopolise every department of the Government and thn we would have got Swaraj in reality though not in name. Thus in this comprehensive sense Swaraj is the goal for which the Justice party is working.
The other questions asked under this head are purely academic in character and as such outside the scope of practical politics.
Q: “If Justice meant equal opportunities for all caste and sects, may we ask equal opportunities to do what?”
A: “Equal opportunities for all people to participate in the administration of the country”.
Q: “Is it to beg for doles of food, i.e., employment in the services controlled by other nations Governmental or non-Governmental – fawning on or foaming against them alternately?”
A: Plain questions indeed! They deserve to be answered plainly, I shall just explain what the “Justice” party does not mean by its demands.
It does not mean that all the Brahmins should be provided first before the case of Non-brahmin is taken into consideration. It does not mean that the bench and the Bar are the exclusive monopoly of the one only caste. “Begging for doles of food” – yes. They do not fight shy of this, since they have been reduced to beg irrespective of caste and creed. Food is indispensable to keep body and soul together. And begging is certainly more honourable than stealing and aggrandisement. “Employment in the services” – Why is this feigned aversion to the services! I am reminded of the “story of the fox and the grapes”. It was the Brahmins that entered the government services from the very beginning in such large numbers. Having monopolised the services the incumbents began to patronise their own Kith with the result that
it gave rise to the stout opposition on the part of the Justice movement. Who is to be blamed for this? The aggressors should thank their own stars for bringing upon them the latest catastrophe of a Communal G.O.(1) Mr. N.S. Iyer refers to “fawning or foaming”. Evidently Mr. Iyer refers to the Coimbatore decisions and the subsequent role played by Mr.A. Ramasami Mudaliar till now. May I submit that men like Bhupendranath Basu, Surendranath Banerjee and a host of others who have roared vehemently on the Congress Platforms against the present Government have not shown the least hesitation to be employed in the services controlled by a foreign government? After getting employed in discharging their official duties, they have done not a little to retard the national movement in India. But as soon as their period of service was over, they have once again gone back to their old pulpits and harangued about national honour, and indignity in accepting office under an alien bureaucracy. Now I leave it to the readers to realise for themselves in what camp real fawning or foaming is found in abundance.
Then Mr. Iyer observes, “If, again “public service” is the service undertaken by Government and paid for by the people, to be discharged by the best men available, is it not sheer repudiation of conscience to make birth any the smallest test of eligibility?”– Most certainly! The overwhelming majority of the Non-brahmins contribute the major portion of the revenue. They prefer having Non-brahmins to serve them. Is this against the dictates of conscience? Why should anybody presume that the Non-brahmins are made up of inferior metal? If birth is not at all to be taken into consideration in any department of life, is it lawful that a Brahmin young man however wicked in conduct, is allowed to enter into the Sanctum-Sanctorum of a temple whereas even the most pious man of 70 or 80 years of age is not allowed to enter simply because he happens to be born in a Non-brahmin family. Who is the author of this mischievous regulation in public life-based on the criterion of birth? Does not the conscience of Mr. Iyer revolt against this rule?
If merit is the consideration what was the unusual exhibition of merit by a Fourth Form boy to be made a Postal Superintendent to begin with! Then he proceeds to say that this proportional representation is of no use to the communities so represented. He further elucidates his point thus: “One can understand the advantage if a distribution of the sums doled as salaries is to be made among all the members of a particular community. If Mr. Ramasami Mudaliar or Mr. Satyamurthi
becomes minister – their salaries will not be made available for distribution per capita for all Mudaliars and Iyers.” I am really very sorry that a fellow countryman should entertain such crude notions as these. Does it not follow from his reasoning that a man should not give his vote or consent unless he gets a benefit in return? Let me take an example. It is rumoured that Sir Sankaran Nair will be appointed Governor of Central Provinces instead of an English man. Will Mr. Iyer be glad at the appointment of an Indian only when he doles out every month something to Mr. Iyer and other Indians in response to whose agitations he is made a governor? The absurdity involved in this argument is too patent to need any further elucidation. Does not this argument savour of voters selling their votes which are quite illegal?
Mr. Iyer sums up his view-point of the present situation thus: “what is wanted is a clear and universally accepted definition of “Nation”. This is a fit subject to be referred to the next session of the National Congress at Lahore. Then he enumerates certain indispensable characteristics of a nation and winds up by saving that England is no nation! I am afraid he is too much obsessed with the academic side of politics to take a correct perspective of men and matters. He is like the proverbial Vaidya who went to the market to fetch vegetables. How grossly erratic he is in his views, the march of time alone can prove to demonstration. Meanwhile I would earnestly entreat all my readers to remember that in politics more than in any other department of life, practice is a thousand times more difficult and more useful than precept. The age of tall talk is no more. Let us gird up our loins and be prepared for spade work.
– Revolt, 13 October 1929
All is Not Well that End Well (By P. C. P.)
There is unholy satisfaction in some Non-Brahmin quarters that the Brahmin entry question did come up before the Nellore Confederation and was decided in the way it was done. The Brahmin himself, after the event, has been gracious enough to point out that he himself never wanted it. The Anglo-Indian seems to think that it was not the considered decision of prominent Non-Brahmins – whatever that might mean.
The question is not that what effect such a decision had upon others.
The question is: Has this suggestion itself of admitting the Brahmin any deleterious or enervating effect upon the Non-Brahmin movement as a whole?
It is perfectly clear that no Brahmin of any importance wanted entry. There is no use in blinking it. On the other hand, he has been in season and out of season, crying down the very movement. What the attitude of the Anglo-Indian is towards this question has been long immaterial. He may sometimes consider such a union dangerous to his narrower interests; he may at other times consider such a division as a standing reflection upon the prestige of his western politics and civilization. It all depends. Nor are we at the present moment concerned with that. As regards the Pro-brahmins among the Non-brahmins, there are those who by long association have come to regard any movement without the Brahmin in it as something inauspicious and there are others of them who have to live their political life upon the smile and in constant dread of the frown of the Brahmin.
Even as a political party, the Non-Brahmin Party had and even now has its own ideals. Those ideals may not be identical with those of any other political party in India. Or even if we accept for fiction’s sake that all political parties in India have the same or similar ideals and ambitions, it does not mean and has never meant that all political attention must centre round a coalescing of all parties.
All the three political parties in England, which count at the present moment have the same object in view, the betterment of their country. But no one party under normal circumstances, devotes any great attention to win over to their side the members of other parties. It does happen sometimes but it is purely casual and not the result of any sustained policy or effort. Such being the case, there are ever so many political organizations in South India, by means of which the Brahmin can achieve all his objects and ambitions. To mention a few most prominent, there is the National Congress; there is the Liberal Party; there is the A.I.S.A.; and there is Varnashrama Dharma, certainly not the least of these. Remove the Brahmin from any of these organizations and that particular organization will cease to function. At its worst, no Brahmin can afford to accuse the Non-Brahmin party of occupying a worse status than that of the Varnashrama Dharmite. And there are enough Non-Brahmins of influence and importance in South India at the present moment who are prepared to maintain a very strict attitude towards the Brahmin right up to the very end of the disappearance of Varnashrama Dharma. These you may classify as Self-respectors.
But says the political Brahmin, not all Brahmins are Varanashramites. The equally obvious retort is: Nor are all Non-Brahmins Self-respecters. The trouble is, that at present, there are as many political minded Non-brahmins with outstanding abilities as among the Brahmins, if not more so.
The Congress is accused of being a Brahmin organization; it is not, says the political Brahmin. Mr. R. K. Shanmugham the astutest politician in South India took the Brahmin at his word, entered the Congress and has become a Self-respector. He is there sticking in the political Brahmin’s throat. The Brahmin can neither swallow him nor digest him. And all the time Mr. R. K. Shanmugham’s reputation for sanity and sobriety is circling round the world. The South Indian Brahmin may one day burst.
It would have been simply a question of time and opportunity, say about three years back, for some of the ablest members of the Non-brahmin party to have entered the Congress – if it had shown signs of surviving – swamped it and driven the Brahmin to a corner. There was Mr. Shamugham’s lead anyway. If others – we mean by others, such of the Non-brahmins as have a following and a stake in the Non-Brahmin party, coupled with outstanding ability and not mere door mats, for all and sundry to wipe their foot upon – if these others were then hesitating it was simply because they felt in their bones that the Congress, as a National institution, was doomed. And the death-knell of the Congress in the South was clearly sounded when two of the best known Congressmen in all India Messrs. George Joseph and R. K. Shanmugham were at the front of it at Nellore with hands uplifted against the Brahmin. That day, the political Brahmin collapsed.
Well, may the bewildered Brahmin lament, that at Nellore, this question was raised, without his own consent anyway, in order to dig the grave of the political Brahmin’s pretensions. That is just it.
He does not believe in the political sincerity and good faith of such of the Non-Brahmins who at the risk of losing every shred of their reputation in their own party and with their own followers, attempted a friendly gesture towards the political Brahmin. He treats it as mere camouflage. And such of the political Non-brahmins who undertook the risk, must have known by this time, at any rate, the risk they did run.
If one may make bold to express, in all humility, to our honoured leaders, one and all of them what is felt deeply throughout the Non-brahmin world, it is this: The Non-brahmin party can ill-stand such a strain as even discussing such a question or even thinking at all, that without the Brahmin in it, the Non-brahmin party cannot function, can achieve no good. If you think you are going to have headache, sure enough you will have it. It is ordinary human experience; it may very well be coverism (an Australilan faith based on equivocation – editors) or auto-suggestion. We shall leave it at that, with the simple prayer that for the respect of the party no one will think of having anything to do with the Brahmin with or without his request, for a period of ten years to come, at any rate. The preferable course would be not to dream of it at all, till Varnashrama Dharma is wiped off the face of the earth.
– Revolt, 20 October 1929
Some Reasons (By Mr. S. M. Michael)
There are one thousand and one reasons why Brahmins were not admitted in the S.I L.F. The first and the most obvious reason is that it is the Non-brahmin party. One would have thought that there was no need to point out so simple and self-evident a truth but it becomes necessary now and then to labour the obvious. In everyday life we sometimes see that children have a clearer grasp of ordinary facts than grown up people. So also in public life occasions arise when the unsophisticated rank and file display a firmer hold over the basic principles of their party than some of their clever leaders who in spite of (or because of) their cleverness are sometimes apt to lose sight of elementary things. On such occasions laymen have a right to respectfully point out to their Gurus their mistakes and to correct them.
One of these simple and elementary truths is, I repeat, that in any movement which calls itself the Non-brahmin movement, a Non-brahmin movement in which room is found for Brahmins will be adjudged by all right-thinking men to be the most irrational contradiction in terms ever heard of even on this planet which Voltaire once described as “the lunatic asylum of the universe.” But to call it a “greater Non-brahmin movement”, how shall one describe it? Is it not easily the grossest abuse of language in which anyone has indulged in the present year of Grace? No, call such a movement either the Hindu movement or the National movement or any other movement but, for goodness’ sake, do not call it, the Non-brahmin movement at all! Even in those hectic days of his inexperience and perfervid pseudo-nationalism the present writer never dreamed of the possibility of including Brahmins in the Non-brahmin movement but suggested that the name of the party should be changed into the Social Democratic Party as a condition precedent to their inclusion. It is happy news that the suggestion was not seriously considered and that the very leaders who are now advocates – I hope they are only acting as a devil’s advocates – of the pro-brahmin view were dead opposed to such a move then! With riper experience I congratulate them on the sound political instinct that actuated them at that time. Today if anyone else were to propose that the name of our party should be so altered as to permit the admission of all people I would be the first to oppose it. Fifteen years’ political experience has taught me better.
Is it right, then, to try to perpetuate or at any rate to prolong the present communal cleavage? Absolutely. Indeed, it would be wrong if we failed to do so. It is a truism that self-preservation is the first law of life. The self-preservation, the growth and development of the Non-brahmin masses requires that they must organize themselves separately and solidly against the few who, in the name of Dharma, have exploited them. Having organized themselves they ought to preserve their organization intact until they come into their own socially, educationally and politically.
Be it remembered here that it is not the Non-brahmin but it is the Brahmin who originated this class cleavage. Long before the Non-brahmin movement was dreamed of by anybody, the Brahmin had introduced this distinction not only in everyday life but even in official records as the veriest tiro knows. Perhaps the Brahmin apologist will say that this was merely a “social” distinction. No greater absurdity could be imagined. Politics in all countries is the exact reflex of social life. It cannot be otherwise. And after all, social life is more than three fourths of life. Social improvement is the end and aim of politics. How could anyone in his senses expect that in India alone social life and politics would remain two distinct and unrelated factors for all time? The Non-brahmin movement was not founded by Dr. T. M. Nair or Sir P. T. Chettiar or by Mr. O. K. Chettiar or Dr. Natesa Mudaliar. Its foundations were laid by the Brahmins themselves in the remote past when they first introduced this obnoxious distinction between themselves on the one hand and all other classes put together on the other. Do they not boast that ever since their mythological Kali Yuga commenced—no doubt, so far as the masses are concerned it has been a Kali Yuga in deadly earnest right throughout – there are only two castes in India, the Brahmins and the “Shudras” in which “odoriferous” term they include all those who are not Brahmins? Why did not these graceless Mlechas pass a resolution only two or three years ago in open conference at Tanjore (2) to that effect? Is it, then, hypocrisy or congenital idiocy that makes them whine about the injustice of dividing the people into Brahmins and Non-brahmins?
Their objection to a separate Non-brahmin association is still more strange, surprising and inexplicable in view of the formation of a Brahmin Mahasabha. We, Non-brahmins, shall not imitate their bad example; we will not be so foolish as to say that their organisation is uncalled for; we shall not abuse them as rank communalists; we freely admit that they are right in having openly organized themselves against us; the same law of self-preservation that justifies us justifies them also. It is good for us and good for them and good for India that our society is thus for the first time in history organised in two distinct and separate camps with an open declaration of war. It shall be and it must be war to the death between the two. There can be no quarter or mercy, no compromise in this war. Either the one or the other must triumph – autocracy, spiritual and social which is synonymous with Brahmanism or democracy social, intellectual and political represented by Non-Brahmanism. One of these two must conquer. They cannot exist side by side indefinitely for ever. Therefore, it is well that this frank communal cleavage has arisen. Let shallow-witted folks wail that this communalism is a curse. The future impartial historian will call it the greatest good fortune that has ever befallen this country.
Now, what will our Brahmin friends say if a Non-Brahmin were foolish enough to seek admission in the Brahmin Mahasaba? What shouts of laughter there will be what shrieks of anger against the very notion? Why then should our Brahmin friends take umbrage at our refusal to admit them in our avowedly Non-Brahmin organization? Why, in the name of common sense, should the Brahmin press write column after column of leaders and leaderettes piteously pleading that the Brahmins
too should be taken into the N-B fold? Why should they condemn our refusal to listen to their advice? Did they really expect us to be deceived so easily?
But, whatever their notion, there has not been even one single Non-Brahmin hitherto who has expressed the slightest desire even in the most remote or indirect manner to be enrolled as a member of the aforesaid Mahasabha; and I am quite confident that there will not be any Non-Brahmin who will do so thereafter. However, the Brahmin in his wisdom has entreated us times without number to broaden the basis of our party as he has been good enough to put it sometimes so as to allow him to enter. Broadening the basis, indeed! If we listened to his appeals we would be so broadening it as to bury it deep enough in all conscience! Was Brahma talking arrant nonsense when these people issued from his mouth, I wonder? Some of their loose, irresponsible and senseless talk is inexplicable. And yet the self-same Brahmin talks big at times and pretends perfect sang-froid and nonchalance about our activities. Have they not beaten Buddhism in the past? Is the Non-Brahmin movement a greater enemy? No, they will beat it yet. Then, in all sober sense, why do they feel so much anxiety about it as to attack and abuse it in season and out of season? Are they not in their hearts’ deepest depths afraid of it?
They are and know it. They know that now they are up against the greatest foe that has threatened their domination in the whole history of India. They know that for the first time in that history Non-Brahmins as such have risen against Brahmins as such. They know that their game is up at last. They know that a greater danger than Buddhism is confronting them today. Buddhism accommodated them. Buddhism perished. Non-Brahmanism refuses even to listen to the question of their accommodation. So Non-Brahmanism may succeed where Buddhism itself failed. Let, therefore, Non-Brahmanism is destroyed by hook or crook! That is the Brahmin’s secret wish. That is the deepest desire. That is his prayer. That is why he is at present trying to worm himself into our favour and so wriggle into our ranks. And that is why we must keep him at a respectable (though not respectful) distance. Till Adharma is destroyed, till Dharma, Sama Dharma, the Dharma of Social Democracy is crowned with victory it is our duty to maintain our organization unimpaired, distinct and intact.
– Revolt, 10 November 1929
Notes
Government Orders issued by the first Justice Party ministry and subsequently made operative by the Independent Ministry headed by Dr. P. Subbaroyan which regulated appointment to government services of the various communities on the basis of their percentage in the total population. Dr. Subbaroyan’s Ministry was sympathetic to Non-brahmin concerns and as chief Minister of the Madras Province, Subbaroyan lent his support to and participated in the First Self-respect Conference held in Chinglepet in 1929.
The Brahmin Sammelan – Maha Sabha – held in 1927 at Thuvar near Tanjore, now Thanjavur, in Tamil Nadu unanimously opined that in the ‘Kali Yuga’, that is, in the present, there are only two Varnas –Brahmin and Sudra.
