Both Annamalai and Vijay focus their speeches on three main themes: Eradicating corruption, ending dynasty politics, and opposing the DMK.
Published Apr 04, 2025 | 5:02 PM ⚊ Updated Apr 12, 2025 | 11:35 AM
K Annamalai and Vijay.
Synopsis: Young and charismatic, K Annamalai and Vijay represent the anger and aspirations of the youth. However, both leaders are from different backgrounds and present contrasting political ideologies. The question is, who will get Tamil Nadu’s backing?
“Annamalai from Karur quit his IPS career to pursue livestock farming, natural agriculture, and farmer empowerment.” These were the opening lines of the first article on K Annamalai, published in Pasumai Vikatan on 10 July 2020. The article played a significant role in introducing Annamalai to Tamil Nadu.
Four years later, on 6 December 2024, Vettri Kazhagam leader Vijay attended his first public event—the launch of the book, Ellorukkumana Thalaivar Ambedkar. The launch was organised by the same Vikatan Group.
It is noteworthy that both leaders started their political journey on the same platform, making it a common factor. This shared starting point highlights an interesting parallel in their political careers.
When Annamalai was appointed the president of the Tamil Nadu BJP in July 2021, he was only 36 years old. Not only was this unprecedented in Tamil Nadu BJP’s history, but also rare in the state’s political landscape.
Earlier, he was given the opportunity to contest the Assembly elections from the Aravakurichi constituency as an ADMK-BJP candidate. Despite his defeat, he was later appointed the BJP’s state president. Subsequently, in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, he contested from the Coimbatore constituency—again unsuccessfully.
Meanwhile, on 2 February 2024, Vijay announced his political party, the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), at the age of 49. However, he chose to stay away from both the 2024 Lok Sabha elections and the Erode by-election.
From the beginning, TVK maintained that its primary focus was the 2026 state elections. Currently, the party is appointing administrators at the grassroots level and forming booth committees.
For the BJP, the primary opponent in Tamil Nadu is the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK). Ever since assuming charge of the party, Annamalai emphasised slogans against dynasty politics, corrupt governance, and the DMK’s rule.
Ideologically, the BJP’s stance is directly opposed to Dravidian politics.
On the other hand, TVK operates within the landscape of Dravidian politics. While it identifies the DMK as its primary opponent, it has also declared the BJP as its ideological rival.
However, DMK alliance partners like VCK, Congress, and CPI(M) have often accused Vijay’s party of being hesitant in openly criticising the BJP.
Interestingly, Vijay himself frequently speaks — like Annamalai — about removing corrupt governance and dynasty politics, as well as ousting the DMK from power.
Social researcher and political commentator Gladston Xavier opined that while analysing a personality, the context should also be examined besides the individual level. The context in this case was the 2020 elections.
“During the 2020 elections, there was a narrative that Tamil Nadu needed a young and dynamic leader with bureaucratic experience to handle the state’s unique characteristics. The BJP was then in a weak position in Tamil Nadu, with limited prospects beyond alliance-based gains,” he pointed out.
“This was the context in which Annamalai was brought in. He was someone completely unfamiliar with Tamil Nadu’s political landscape.”
“However, since he had resigned from the IPS, he was keenly observed. Initially, his image was linked to goat-herding, natural farming, and other activities, which led to a stigma. No matter what he said, the environment was one of constant criticism,” Xavier said.
“In contrast, Vijay’s entry into politics was well anticipated. Through his films and various indirect hints, people already knew he would enter politics. Moreover, Vijay was already a well-established figure in Tamil Nadu. Even if he lacked direct political experience, he was familiar to the people,” he further said.
“Through cinema, Vijay gained immense respect among children and young audiences. This goodwill capital is a major advantage. He has a massive fan base, which acts as a form of political capital,” Xavier added.
Unlike actor Rajinikanth, Vijay’s political entry is seen as a bold move. For over a decade, it was widely believed that Rajinikanth would enter politics. He also hinted at it on many occasions. However, he later announced that he would no longer be joining politics.
Vijay, on the other hand, never explicitly spoke about his political entry. However, he, too, dropped hints through his actions—indirectly criticising dynasty politics, assisting students, and visiting the home of S Anitha, the student who died by suicide after failing to clear the NEET.
Then, all of a sudden, he officially registered his party, and it has now been more than a year since its formation.
“The timing of Vijay’s political entry is crucial. If he had entered five years earlier, it would have been premature. If he had waited another fifteen years, it would have been too late. So, his entry now is well-timed,” Xavier opined.
“Unlike Annamalai, who was brought into politics by a national party, Vijay is an independent entity. He entered politics on his own accord, without any external backing.”
“In established political parties, opportunities for young leaders are limited. Every party has faced criticism for not providing space for young politicians. This creates a space that new parties seek to fill. Many politically inclined young individuals, who feel sidelined in mainstream parties, see leaders like Vijay as an opportunity to get involved and gain recognition.”
“However, Annamalai does not have this advantage. He has been made the leader of an already existing party, the BJP. While the BJP is relatively new in Tamil Nadu, it still comes with ideological constraints.”
“In contrast, Vijay entered politics without such ideological constraints. Even though he positions the DMK as his main opponent, his party still aligns with Tamil Nadu’s core Dravidian political values,” Xavier said.
Public speaking is a crucial aspect of politics. In today’s digital era, it is not just about speeches on stage—social media posts, videos, and other online content also play a vital role in a leader’s campaign.
In this regard, when it comes to Annamalai, Xavier stated that continuously voicing his opinions is what matters the most—whether what he says is true or false, beneficial or not, he ensures that his statements remain a topic of discussion.
“Vijay’s campaign style is something we still need to evaluate. So far, he has been following the playbook of cinema. His speeches resemble movie dialogues—both in content and delivery. We have yet to see how well he understands Tamil Nadu’s socio-political issues in depth,” he said.
“On the other hand, Annamalai has the challenge of building a party from scratch in Tamil Nadu. Under his leadership, the BJP has undeniably grown in visibility. While it may not have transformed into a strong vote bank, it has become a constant topic of discussion, which itself is an achievement for the BJP in Tamil Nadu,” he added.
Ever since Vijay launched his party, several political figures criticised him, with one of the most vocal among them being Annamalai.
During a press conference on 18 March, Annamalai took a jab at Vijay, referencing the actor’s remarks against the BJP’s TASMAC protests. He stated, “Vijay does politics from the comfort of work-from-home, while we take to the streets and fight. Are we, like Vijay, coming straight from a film shoot after pinching actresses’ waists and dancing around?”
His comments were sharp and scathing.
Later, on March 28, after his meeting in Delhi, Annamalai once again targeted Vijay, claiming that “Vijay criticises the BJP just to stay in the media spotlight.”
Despite Annamalai’s repeated attacks, Vijay has never once spoken about him in public forums. Even when controversies arose over Periyar during the Erode by-election, neither Vijay nor his party, TVK, responded, despite considering Periyar a key ideological figure.
However, when the Union Home Minister, Amit Shah, remarked about BR Ambedkar, Vijay was quick to issue a statement condemning it.
Such selective responses from Vijay, according to senior journalist Priyan, highlight his lack of ideological clarity.
When asked about the target voter base of both leaders, Xavier noted, “Both leaders target a similar voter base—18 to 40-year-olds. Unlike just political parties, DMK and AIADMK have evolved into cultural identities. Breaking into their support bases is not easy. Even MGR, when he split from the DMK, brought along a large segment of its cadres to form the AIADMK. But they are already active members of politics. Vijay doesn’t have that support base. He has a degree of celebrity appeal, but whether that translates into votes remains uncertain.”
Xavier drew parallels with Vijayakanth. “When Vijayakanth launched his party in the 1990s, it was met with great enthusiasm. However, over time, his party declined. Similarly, in Delhi, AAP initially attracted volunteers from Chennai, but today, everything has turned against them. Vijay must ensure his political journey does not follow a similar trajectory.”
Both Annamalai and Vijay focus their speeches on three main themes: Eradicating corruption, ending dynasty politics, and opposing the DMK.
“If Vijay speaks against corruption, he must present an alternative. What changes will he bring if he comes to power? So far, he has not provided any clear policy direction, which is a major drawback,” Xavier noted.
“Similarly, when he criticises dynasty politics, he must offer a concrete solution. Merely making promises is not enough; they must be implemented.”
“Tamil Nadu is already one of India’s leading states in economic indicators. Whether under AIADMK or DMK, the state’s infrastructure and economic progress are well-established. Without offering an alternative economic vision, mere criticism will not be effective.”
“For Annamalai, the challenge is different. Every time he compares Tamil Nadu unfavorably with other states, people respond by comparing it with BJP-ruled states, which puts him on the defensive.”
“Despite differences in their approaches, both Annamalai and Vijay largely echo the same set of issues. Their speeches often resemble theatrical performances rather than substantive policy discussions,” he added.
Annamalai and Vijay represent the angry, frustrated, and disappointed youth, yearning for a change. To bring about this transformation, they have chosen different platforms: BJP and TVK.
However, whether their efforts will translate into real impact on the ground is something we’ll have to wait until 2026.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
