periyar was a charlatan and a hoax.
his supporters are busy making up stories about him. one such is his appellation as 'vaikom veerar' or 'vaikom hero', regarding the myth that he was a major player in the vaikom satyagraha on 1924 in kerala.
the fact of the matter is that evr went to kerala. nobody paid the slightest attention to him, because everyone in kerala knew him as a hate-mongering ruffian. he came, he saw, and he was ignored. so instead of 'vaikom veerar', he was 'vaikom visitor' or 'vaikom tourist'. but this 'vaikom veerar' bullshit was part of a speech made by karunanidhi justifying 'dravidian' imperialism over the mullaperiyar dam in kerala just a few weeks ago, so they are still shouting from the rooftops about it.
and why do i feel particularly incensed about this lie? it is because members of my family led the vaikom satyagraha, and they were the ones who were beaten up by the police. this poseur periyar just showed up, got some 'photo ops' and was roundly ignored by all concerned.
this is the kind of 'truth by repeated assertion' that the 'dravidians' and their patrons the christists are very good at. 'dravidianism' is a nihilistic and empty neo-semitic cult, and the cult founders and camp-followers have made out like bandits, just like the fellow-travelers who have benefited from all the other neo-semitic ideologies like marxism, nehruism, ambedkarism, etc.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Anand
| |
The perversity of Periyarana
V SUNDARAM Retd IAS officer
A detailed study of Karl Marx is called Marxiana. A detailed study of Gandhi is called Gandhiana. A detailed study of Churchill is called Churchilliana. A detailed study of Periyar is called Periyarana.
I have read all the writings of that great intellectual giant Periyar, called the Socrates of Tamilnadu or Bernard Shah of Europe. Personally I have received great inspiration, illumination and rational instruction from his mighty intellectual outpourings. l am giving you some flashes of time-defying wisdom and original genius from the Intellectual Armoury of 'Periyarana'.
'Tamil is a barbourous language and Tamilians are barbarians'
'15 August 1947 is a day of mourning and sorrow'
'I want to be surrounded by fifty bloody fools, so that I am heard without any undue disturbance at all my public meetings'
'Parimelazhagar who wrote the commentary on Thirukural was a 'Parppanar' (Periyar was always more interested in Dravidian substance than in Aryan shadow!). '
Periyar was a world renowned authority on public administration. Writing about The Board of Revenue in 1965, he stated as follows at a public meeting on the Marina Beach:
'The Board of Revenue today consists of senior civil servants who are drawing very fat salaries. Unfortunately, not one of them is a Tamilian: The first member of the Board of Revenue is T A Verghese ICS. He is a Malayalee. He is not a Tamilian. The second member of the Board of Revenue is C A Ramakrishnan ICS. He is a 'Parapannar'. He is also not a Tamilian. The third member of the Board of Revenue is M S Shivaraman ICS. He is also a 'Parpanar'. He is not a Tamilian. The fourth member of the Board of Revenue is E P Royappa IAS. Unfortunately he is also not a Tamilian. He is only a Christian'.
As a world renowned anthropologist, sociologist and ethnologist Periyar had highly original, iconoclastic and racist Ideas about who is a Tamilian? The public of Tamilnadu have a right to know whether Periyar belonged to Karnataka or Tamilnadu and whether his mother tongue was in fact Tamil. These questions become relevant because of the mysteriously Magisterial Verdict given by him above on the origins of some of the ICS/ IAS civil servants in Tamilnadu. Today these questions have become more relevant because the members belonging to the Dravida Kazhagam and Periyar Dravida Kazhagam are fighting not for the soul of Periyar but for the installation of the statue of Periyar opposite the Rajagopuram of Srirangam Temple in Tiruchirapalli.
The enlightened public of Tamilnadu, regardless of caste, colour, creed or religion, (the Brahmins and forward communities not excluded!) would like to ask the following pertinent questions:
a) Why did Tamilnadu government, which is usually in a state of self-chosen rational coma in all situations affecting public peace and welfare, galvanize itself into a state of combat readiness to deal with the Da Vinci Code film issue which had been fully cleared by the Film Censor Board of the Government of India some months ago? Tamilnadu Government gave clear signals to the effect that it is their public duty to show great concern for the religious feelings and susceptibilities of Christians in minority in the State. It is a different story that later on, on par with the stand taken by the Andhra Pradesh High Court, Madras High Court also took the same stand and overruled the decision of the Government of Tamilnadu to ban the screening of the film in Tamilnadu.
b) Why is Tamilnadu government indifferent and contemptuous towards the religious feelings and susceptibilities of the Hindus who are in absolute majority in terms of numbers in Tamilnadu?
c) Why is it no immediate action was taken under Sec. 153-A and 295-A of the Indian Penal Code against those elements who wanted to install the statue of Periyar opposite the Rajagopuram of Srirangam Temple?
d) Are not some of the anti-social elements reportedly acting under the banner of the DK and the Periyar DK 'inciting violence, disturbing public tranquility, promoting, on grounds of religion, feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will between different religious communities and insulting other religions or beliefs of other communities in Tamilnadu'? (Exact words seen in the IPC).
The great sensitivity shown by Tamilnadu government on the nominal Da Vinci Code film issue has not been shown on a more sensitive and more substantive issue involving the time-honoured religious feelings and sentiments of the Hindus in majority. Many Hindu temples have been ravaged supposedly by the DK and the PDK elements. The common man in Tamilnadu doubts the bone fides of the elected and contrived minority Government of Tamilnadu and its commitment in the matter of absolute maintenance of law and order on the one hand and giving protection to the majority Hindus against the planned onslaught of anti-social elements deriving their so-called inspiration from the umbrella of Periyarana.
The shameful Congress Party, which calls itself a national party, has degenerated into a mere suppliant of the DMK party in Tamilnadu. Congress party is a major partner in the conspiracy of political silence on this vital and sensitive issue of maintenance of communal and religious harmony in Tamilnadu.
Following the installation of the EVR statue in the stealth of the night on 21 November, a self-respecting Hindu approached Vigil secretary G R Swaminathan, a practicing lawyer in the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court to file a writ protesting the installation and seeking an injunction that pending disposal of the case no further move should be made by the DK to inaugurate the statue. It has been reported that an extremely hostile division bench remarked: 'Swaminathan, the street doesn't belong to Hindus alone, it belongs to all people'. The common man in Tamilnadu would like to ask as to why this kind of response is never shown by the judiciary when Muslims object to Ganesha procession passing down the Triplicane road in Chennai every year?
The bench made it clear that although the statue had been installed without prior government permission, yet it would not grant the injunction prayed for to stop further moves on the statue. The defendants were advised to approach the Government for permission before inaugurating the statue. By giving such an advice, in terms of plain law, was not the High Court condoning, if not ignoring, the blatantly illegal act of those who were responsible for the erection of the Statue without obtaining prior Government permission as prescribed by the Government through a Government order? I have consulted a few legal luminaries in this regard and all of them are of the view that the decision of the High Court amounted to condoning the blatantly illegal act of the D.K., which is akin to post-facto regularization of unauthorized and illegal construction.
In this context, I would like to quote the beautiful words of Felix Frankfurter, one of the greatest names in the history of American Judiciary: 'For the highest exercise of judicial duty is to subordinate one's personal pulls and one's private views to the law of which we are all guardians - those impersonal convictions that make a society a civilized community, and not the victims of personal rule'. Justice Herlan Stone in another historic Judgement in 1936 proclaimed: 'While unconstitutional exercise of power by the executive and legislative branches of the Government is subject to judicial restraint, the only check upon our own exercise of power is our own sense of self-restraint'. Justice William Douglas, in a landmark judgement in 1947 in USA, declared: 'There is no special perquisite of the judiciary which enables it, as distinguished from other institutions of democratic Government, to suppress, edit or censor events which transpire in proceedings before it'.
About two years ago I had written an article in News Today under the Title 'Decoding the Dravidian Drival' in which I wrote: 'By his highly original writings and platform speeches Periyar tried to educate the Tamilians that he was being rational when in fact he was being racist'.
The quintessence of rational-racial Dravidianism is that spiritual knowledge is superstitious and secular ignorance is rational; character is superstitious and debauchery is rational; chastity is superstitious and prostitution of mind, body, heart and soul is rational; discipline superstitious and indiscipline is rational; accepted truth is superstitious and blatant untruth is rational, refinement is superstitious and brutality is rational; justice is superstitious and rapacity is rational, counsels of the wise and the good are generally superstitious and the flattery of knaves particularly rational. And finally to crown it all having a legally wedded wife is superstitious and irrational and having innumerable concubines is logically rational.
One can go on like this in this vein endlessly in a superstitious and irrational manner, because the clear stream of Dravidian perversity and unabashed bestiality is indeed perpetual and even perennial. It may not be too much to say that all the leading actors in the highly exciting and even titillating Dravidian Drama have succeeded condomising everything excepting the condom itself in the name of rationalism and social justice.
The climax of this lurid and artificial drama will be reached on 16 December, 2006 at the same spot at Srirangam where the DK has planned to conduct a 'Moodanambikkai Maanaadu', which is pitted against the Hindus and Hindus alone and not against any other religion. It only means that all Muslims and Christians are rational according to the DK.
(The writer is a retired IAS officer)
e-mail the writer at vsundaram@newstodaynet.
1 comment:
that was a great piece. thanks for sharing!
Post a Comment