but it is...

Tweet

Whatsapp

Part 8: Periyar Questioned Capitalists by ‘Birth’

MCPI(U) Marxist party has given a controversial statement that Marxists in Tamil Nadu did not perceive Periyarism properly. Following this, the party has announced its policies, and it cites that “the party has felt the complete need of Periyar and Ambedkar significantly in the present where caste and religious divisions are strengthening.” This symposium was organized based on this. The discourse of Kolathur Mani is as follows:

Periyar wrote an editorial about how the Russian government decided to take action to eliminate God and religion within five years on 04/12/1932. Periyar mentioned in Kudi Arasu about the guest lecture of London parliamentarian comrade Adal Douches who spoke about the atheist five-year plan in London.

“In the first year, they have planned to close all the temples and religious worship places. In the second year, they prohibited the existence of pooja rooms and prayer halls in all the houses and those who have religious thoughts and beliefs were restricted from government jobs, all the religious texts and their pieces of evidence should be destroyed and resolute to perform a greater number of atheist dramas and cinemas.

In the third year, they were determined to erase the mere utterance of God in each and every household and those who did not adhere to this were to be ostracized from the country. In the fourth year, all the temples and religious worship places were ought to be used for public welfare like cinema halls and recreational places.

In the fifth year, that is within 01/05/1937, it is decided that no temple and religious worship places should be inside the Russian territory”.

Comrade Adal Douche explained this in the London parliament citing Russia as an example and expressed his distress about his country without any development. Periyar penned down this incident in his magazine Kudiarasu.

He completed his speech by saying that Annihilating God is equal to annihilating rich people. Same way, destroying religion is nothing but destroying the discrimination between highs and lows in society.

London is one of the Christian countries where there was no discrimination in their religion. They abolished slavery as a Christian should not enslave another Christian.

But here, a Hindu is enslaving another Hindu. Russians were ready to annihilate Christianity itself even though it was a religion with humanity as not even slavery was practised there. But here, not even a single change is brought into the Hindu religion. They enacted a law stating that all people can become Purohits.

Leaving the comrades as we speak atheism, the question was, why people who have belief and faith over God and those who have learnt Vedas professionally cannot become purohits. But the question was left unanswered. They even insisted on setting basic qualifications which apply to everybody. But they aren’t ready to incorporate even minimal changes.

On the other hand, in 1640 AD Galileo was punished for his statement, the earth is round. Later in 1992, Pope Paul II apologized for being wrong and expressed his repentance.

Western communists thought that a religion that allows big bang theory also should be destroyed. On the other side, here highs and lows of society are justified in the name of God and they claim that Varnashrama discrimination and caste system are inbuilt by God and so people are not ready to incorporate even small changes. How is it possible for communism to sprout in this country without criticizing the Hindu religion and Varnashrama which is being safeguarded every time by this Hindu religion?

Periyar told communists that ‘they were speaking only about capitalists who invest their capital but not about capitalists by birth and also failed to notice stone capitalists and this snag still prevails even today.’

Once somebody questioned Periyar “why did he change his policies often?". Periyar answered that “may be, I would have changed my policies but there would be a valid reason behind it. I would have said to wear a sweater in Ooty and to remove it in Mettupalayam but what if you are asking, ‘it is you who told to wear it but now why are you asking us to remove it?’ yes, it’s me who told you to wear it but I told you to wear in Ooty. As the climate is warmer in Mettupalayam I told to remove the sweater. Without understanding this, you people are questioning me.” There would be a just reason behind it.

All the people cannot know everything in the world. But what is being criticized is, even though there are critics, some are reluctant and refuse to research and analyze it.

So many changes took place in Marxism. Reading about Antonio Gramsci left me in wonder. Gramsci saw the capitalist state as being made up of two overlapping spheres, a ‘political society’ (which rules through coercion) and a ‘civil society (which rules through consent). Both coercion and consent are different. So, one group would keep on justifying their views through education and public domain conversations. So, it cannot be pulled down easily. Civil society did not have direct characteristics of politics and the economy. But at the same time, it creates a mindset favourable i.e., consent to ruling government through institutions like religion, family and education. Civil society creates suitable consent for the government.

We aren’t sure he spoke about this as it exists in Italy and Rome. He poses a question and we should not accept everything as such. Have anyone of us thought about how to alter or change this civil society?

(To be continued)

- Kolathur Mani, the leader of Dravidar Viduthalai Kazhagam

Translated by Maruvarthini P.

 You can send your articles to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Tweet

Whatsapp