Scholars argue that the RSS prefers to operate less through overt political activity and more through a sustained cultural presence.
Published Sep 27, 2025 | 12:21 PM ⚊ Updated Sep 27, 2025 | 12:21 PM
Many scholars stress that in Tamil Nadu, no one can enter politics by ignoring Periyar’s Dravidian politics or by refusing to engage with the question of social justice. Credit: x.com/ambedkariteIND, iStock
Synopsis: In 1925, India saw the rise of three major ideological movements: the Self-Respect Movement, RSS’s Hindutva, and the Indian Left. Periyar’s Dravidian ideology clashed with RSS’s Hindu Rashtra vision, shaping India’s political landscape. While the DMK’s ideology dominates Tamil Nadu, the RSS struggles to gain ground, highlighting a century-long ideological battle over social justice, caste, and federalism.
In 1925, three major ideological movements emerged, to the extent that the year can be described as a landmark in Indian history.
First, in South India, the Self-Respect Movement was launched on the foundation of Dravidian nationalism. Second, in North India in September, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) was established, stressing Hindutva nationalism. Third, the Indian Left movement was formed on the core principle of “Workers of the world, unite!” These three movements have left a decisive imprint on a century of India’s history.
Whether it was Periyar’s Self-Respect Movement, the Indian Left movement, or Ambedkar’s movement for the oppressed, all three had one common adversary—the RSS.
A hundred years ago, Ambedkar declared that the creation of a Hindu Rashtra in this country must be resisted even at the cost of one’s life. Speaking from South India, Periyar argued that the root of the problem was the Brahminical system of social order; without dismantling it, neither caste nor inequality could be abolished.
Even today, these three ideologies remain central to India’s political struggle. Historians and journalists point out that the Communist movement—considered the “fourth” ideological current—was slow to take up the fight against the caste-based varna-ashrama system, and therefore lost ground and was pushed out of the centre of this struggle.
At present, it is the Dravidian politics of the DMK, born from Periyar’s Self-Respect Movement, and the Hindutva politics of the BJP, born as the political wing of the RSS, that have emerged as the two dominant forces clashing head-on in Indian politics.
How did a movement that arose in one South Indian state, Tamil Nadu, transform into a political force influencing Indian politics as a whole? And why is it that, despite the RSS having entrenched itself across much of India, it has still not managed to gain significant ground in Tamil Nadu? Is it true that it has failed to grow? These are questions that must be critically examined in this century.
In his 2025 Independence Day address, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said: “100 years ago, an organisation called the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) was born. That organisation has sacrificed itself for the growth of this nation. It has played an important role in building this country. It is the world’s largest and most disciplined NGO.”
But one must ask – is RSS truly an organisation that has supported Indian nationalism?
Historian and long-time scholar of religious politics, writer Ram Puniyani, in his book ‘Understanding the Agenda of RSS–BJP’, points out that Hindu nationalism was created in opposition to Indian nationalism. He notes that the RSS adopted Hindu nationalism as its guiding principle, with the explicit aim of establishing a Hindu Rashtra.
He further argues that the organisation did not participate in the freedom struggle—in fact, it functioned in support of the British, while the British also favoured it. According to him, the British calculated that the RSS would help keep India divided, prevent unity among the people, and weaken the momentum of the freedom movement.
At the same time, voices calling for social justice and social reform had already begun to rise across India in the 1800s. In Tamil Nadu, for instance, the Madras Secular Society—an atheist-reformist movement founded in 1878—campaigned against religious superstition on rationalist grounds through its journals until 1888. In this lineage, one can cite Ayothidasa Pandithar in South India, and Jyotirao Phule and Savitribai Phule in North India, among others.
Continuing in this tradition was EV Ramasamy “Periyar,” initially a staunch Congressman. Senior journalist Vijayasankar Ramachandran notes that Periyar left the Congress after confronting its entrenched Brahmin dominance and its failure to take up the liberation of the oppressed. In Tamil Nadu, the Justice Party, though led by non-Brahmins, was largely dominated by elite non-Brahmins. Hence, Periyar built his own movement on the principle of Self-Respect, asserting the fundamental dignity of every human being.
According to Vijayasankar, Hindutva’s idea of Hindu Rashtra is premised on excluding Muslims, upholding the varna-ashrama order of Manusmriti, and continuing caste hierarchy unquestioned. In sharp contrast, the Self-Respect Movement of the Dravidian ideology was founded on the principle of social justice: all rights must belong to everyone, education must reach all, there should be no hierarchy, and women must have equal rights.
Thus, the two political expressions born out of these ideologies—the DMK and the BJP—stand today as the two principal rivals in Indian politics. Though Congress is positioned as the main face against the BJP, at the level of ideology the greatest clash is between Hindutva and Dravidian.
To understand Periyar’s contributions to women’s rights and the continuing relevance of the Self-Respect Movement, South First spoke with Dr S Anandhi, former Professor of Gender Studies at the Madras Institute of Development Studies (MIDS) in Chennai, and writer-translator Rajasangeethan.
Dr Anandhi identified three major transformations triggered by the Self-Respect Movement in Tamil Nadu: self-respect, inter-caste marriages, and women’s empowerment.
“Periyar was one of the earliest leaders to link social reform with women’s liberation. He openly spoke about gender rights, equal access to worship, and the right of women to be atheists. He urged women to break free from superstition and patriarchy, questioning Brahminical practices that reinforced gender hierarchies,” she said.
As early as 1929, at the Chengalpattu conference, Periyar raised the issue of women’s property rights—decades before they took legal shape. In the 1940s, he campaigned against polygamy and demanded legal safeguards for women. “Tamil Nadu’s pioneering property rights legislation was deeply rooted in the Self-Respect Movement,” Anandhi noted.
But Rajasangeethan countered that the very space Periyar opened up for dignity and equality has now become a battleground for the RSS.
“The RSS thrives on Brahminical hierarchy and masculine authority. It carefully targets children, education, and youth to implant Hindutva ideals early. They focus on three groups: children, education, and youth—because they know they can shape the next generation with their ideas,” he said.
This, he argued, is part of a larger project of social engineering that runs directly against the ideals of the Self-Respect Movement. “While Periyar wanted women to inherit property and dismantle patriarchal authority, the RSS quietly entrenched caste and gender divisions through its cultural outreach.”
Anandhi highlighted how Periyar’s ideas were far ahead of his time. “Between 1948 and the 1950s, he foresaw the liberating role of science and technology in women’s lives. He spoke about abortion, pregnancy, and IVF, predicting these would break traditional notions of motherhood and domestic confinement. He encouraged women to embrace education, financial independence, and political participation.”
But Rajasangeethan cautioned that the RSS is actively reshaping narratives of science and tradition.
“The RSS cannot create history—it can only distort it. Where Periyar used science to free women from superstition and patriarchal control, the RSS deploys pseudo-scientific claims and fabricated stories to keep women confined. By mixing myth with science, they create a false sense of empowerment that actually reinforces subordination,” he said.
“For example, they recast civilisational narratives—contrasting Sindhu Samaveli Nagarigam with Sindhu Saraswathy Nagarigam—to impose a Brahminical past on India’s future,” he added.
Anandhi underlined that the Self-Respect Movement was not only about gender—it was about reimagining identity itself. Periyar urged Tamils to drop caste titles from their names and instead embrace terms of dignity. This was a direct strike at Brahminical hierarchies that used names to enforce inequality.
Rajasangeethan recalled: “The people of Tamil Nadu learnt to prefix their names with Maanamigu (honourable) instead of caste names. It was about reshaping social imagination, giving dignity priority over inherited caste.”
This, he added, still resonates today: “The Self-Respect Movement taught people to say Maanamum arivum manitharkku alagu—dignity and reason are the true adornments of a human being. Against the RSS’ Brahminical vision, that principle remains Tamil Nadu’s strongest shield.”
Apart from that, Anandhi also notes that Periyar continues to be a weapon in the fight against patriarchy and caste oppression: ‘Indian feminism has much to learn from him. Women in Tamil Nadu still draw on his legacy to carve out spaces of resistance.’
With regard to the non-Brahmin movement that arose in Tamil Nadu, there were two streams. One was the movement for social justice, and the other was a movement against Sanskrit—that was the Pure Tamil movement(Thani Tamizh Iyakkam). The person who connected both these currents into the struggle for linguistic rights was Periyar.
For example, at the women’s conference held in Chennai in 1938, the chair was Neelambigai Ammayar, daughter of Maraimalai Adigal, who is called the father of the Pure Tamil Movement. Women from the Dravidian movement led that conference, and women from Islamic movements also participated. There is abundant evidence to show that Tamil Nadu’s first language struggle in 1938 was conducted entirely under the leadership of Periyar.
From then till today, voices opposing Hindi imposition have continued to rise in Tamil Nadu. For instance, at present, the Union government is withholding SSA (Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan) funds for Tamil Nadu because the state has refused to accept provisions of the new education policy, including the three-language policy. All of this resistance was seeded by Periyar’s Self-Respect Movement.
“During Independence, the differences of opinion between Anna and Periyar were very significant. For Anna, the most important task in independent India was to gain political power within the newly forming democratic system. But for Periyar, the position was that if you entered politics, everything would be corrupted. So the decision Anna took at that juncture was very important—without political power, no social reform could be implemented. And Anna proved this. After coming to power, he named the state Tamil Nadu, gave legal recognition to Self-Respect marriages, and consistently advanced reservations. Everything the Self-Respect Movement demanded, Anna brought into law and policy,” said Vijayasankar.
From women’s property rights to reservations, the abolition of untouchability, and Self-Respect marriages—everything that Periyar’s movement advocated was turned into laws and schemes by Anna and later by M Karunanidhi in their governments.
“Tamil Nadu was the first state in India to pass a resolution demanding state autonomy. Karunanidhi carried forward that demand. It was only after that that Jyoti Basu in West Bengal, the Akali Dal in Punjab, and political movements in Jammu & Kashmir and Karnataka pushed for state autonomy. I believe it was Karunanidhi who set all this in motion,” said Vijayasankar.
He added that the key battlegrounds where Dravidian thought and Hindutva thought clash are language identity, reservations, women’s property rights, rationalism, and state autonomy.
“Just as the Self-Respect Movement began by opposing caste hierarchy, the RSS was formed by upholding caste hierarchy. For the RSS, issues of small states or linguistic states were irrelevant. For them, Sanskrit was the supreme language. The main fighters for Hindi as the national language were largely from Congress and the Jan Sangh. So state rights and language rights were never issues for them. Their organisational model itself is one of strong centralisation,” said Vijayasankar.
He argued further that Periyar’s Self-Respect Movement was founded on science, whereas the RSS was founded entirely on the Vedas, outside the realm of science. Moreover, the political heirs of Periyar’s movement stressed federalism, while the RSS emphasised centralisation.
As an example, he pointed to the current Narendra Modi government.
“On one side, there is a government at the Union level that does not respect state rights, centralises power, and avoids power-sharing. On the other side, there is a government in Tamil Nadu that prioritises rationalism and education, and insists on a federal philosophy. The clash between these two ideologies has sharpened as never before, because for the first time there is a government at the Union level founded entirely on a counter-ideology,” he said.
According to him, even during Karunanidhi’s time, though there were conflicts between the Congress and the DMK over issues of state rights and autonomy, it was never as aggressively confrontational as it has become now.
To assess the impact of these two contrasting ideological movements, let us compare three states: Tamil Nadu and Gujarat—both long ruled by the Dravidian and Hindutva models, respectively—and Kerala, where the Left-led CPM has governed for decades.
We will examine how these ideological governments have performed on key fronts such as education, maternal mortality during childbirth, women’s participation in the workforce, per capita income, and poverty eradication. For this, the 2023–2024 NITI Aayog report serves as our guide.
|
HDI Indicator |
Tamil Nadu |
Kerala |
Gujarat |
|
Zero Hunger |
75 |
84 |
41 |
|
No Poverty |
92 |
81 |
75 |
|
GER in Higher Education |
47 |
41.3 |
24 |
|
Per Capita Income |
₹1,96,309 (2024–25) |
₹1,62,040 (2023–24) (NA for 2024–25) |
₹1,95,617 (2023–24) (NA for 2024–25) |
|
SDG Overall Performance |
78 |
79 |
74 |
Source: NITI Aayog
In comparative terms, states ruled by parties rooted in Dravidian and Communist ideologies have achieved better outcomes than the state ruled by a Hindutva-based party. Of course, this may vary from state to state.
But as Vijayasankar pointed out: “It is the results of Dravidian governance that have given India double-digit economic growth, an education system where Tamil Nadu excels, and significant poverty reduction.”
At this point, two questions need to be asked. First: Why have the RSS and the BJP failed to grow significantly in Tamil Nadu over the past 100 years? Second: Does the absence of significant growth mean there has been no growth at all?
Let us first address the first question. In February 2024, actor Vijay launched a party called the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam. Of the two leaders he declared as the ideological icons of the party, one was Periyar and the other was Anna. Many scholars emphasise that in Tamil Nadu even today, no one can enter politics by ignoring Periyar’s Dravidian politics or by refusing to engage with the question of social justice.
Even Prime Minister Modi has reached the point of announcing an award for Karpuri Thakur and declaring that his government is one of social justice.
But when it comes to the BJP in Tamil Nadu, both its leadership here and the directions it has received have always been opposed to Tamil Nadu’s concerns, a RSS source told us on the promise of anonymity.
“If you go to Kerala or West Bengal, the politics articulated by BJP and RSS leaders there generally reflects the aspirations of the people of those states. But in Tamil Nadu it is the exact opposite. Instead of explaining the value and benefits of learning Hindi, they provoke public anger by asking people, ‘Why don’t you learn Hindi?’ That has been the situation here,” the source said.
On the one hand, this is how the BJP’s own leadership has functioned. On the other hand, for more than 60 years, almost every ruling party or newly formed major party in Tamil Nadu has been built on the foundations of Dravidian ideology. Since 1967, when the DMK first came to power, only the two Dravidian parties have ruled the state.
Just as the DMK declared that it was founded on Periyar’s principles, the AIADMK, at its inception, also announced that it was functioning on the ideological foundations of Periyar and Anna.
Accordingly, on core issues such as reservations, language rights, and women’s advancement, they have consistently taken firm stands. Despite criticisms from many quarters, it is these two Dravidian parties that ensured Tamil Nadu’s unique 69 percent reservation system remains in place—something no other state in India has.
By contrast, the RSS and BJP have, by their very nature, opposed such measures. A recent example was at the Golden Jubilee celebrations of the Halba Samaj Mahasangh in Nagpur on September 20, where Union Minister and staunch RSS member Nitin Gadkari said, “I tell them that no human is greater because of caste, religion or language, but only because of their qualities. I often joke that the biggest favour God has done for me is that I was not given reservation.”
This approach, the RSS source argued, is exactly why the BJP has been unable to take root in Tamil Nadu for so long.
At the same time, the presence of the AIADMK in Tamil Nadu—as a party that internalised a Right-wing tendency and acted as a substitute force—also blocked space for the BJP, noted Tamil cultural scholar Tamil Kamarasan.
MG Ramachandran’s soft approach towards the right, Jayalalithaa’s anti-conversion law, and her bans on animal sacrifices such as goats and chickens, were all examples of this, he said.
According to him, Jayalalithaa repeatedly demonstrated that when compared to the hardline religious right-wing politics growing at the Centre, her version of the right was the better alternative.
Now we come to the second question: Does the fact that the BJP and RSS have not grown significantly in Tamil Nadu mean that they have not grown at all?
“Every single day, there are about 3,000 RSS shakhas (branches) meeting in Tamil Nadu,” claimed Bharata Mata Senthil, General Secretary of the Hindu Makkal Katchi.
His argument is that since the 1980s, the RSS movement has been steadily growing in Tamil Nadu. As evidence, he pointed to the increase in the BJP’s vote share to around 12 percent in recent years.
Beyond the Hindu Munnani and the BJP—the political wing of the RSS—he highlighted the expansion of 46 Sangh Parivar affiliates in Tamil Nadu. According to him, every district now has 30–50 Hindu organisations operating, and their influence has grown especially after leaders like K Annamalai entered the scene.
“Their core ideology is Hindu unity, Hindu protection, and Hindu rights,” Senthil said. Though there may be differences in approach among these organisations, he added, they unite under a single umbrella to fight on common issues. But, he stressed, the BJP cannot be fully accepted as a Hindu party.
“The BJP cannot be accepted as a complete Hindu party. It even has Muslims and Christians in it. So at the national level, it cannot be called a pure Hindu party. As a ruling political organisation, it has to make compromises. But for us, only those who fully accept our ideology can be called a true Hindu party. The BJP partially fulfils that role,” he said.
On elections, Senthil remarked: “When it comes to Hindu unity, the Hindu vote bank also comes into play. But we support only those who completely adhere to our ideology. That does not always mean the BJP.”
Just as these Hindu organisations mirror the RSS in their operations, politics, and ideology, they also function similarly in matters of finance.
The RSS, in its book ‘Bhavishya Ka Bharat’ (Future India), available on its official website, claims it is a self-reliant organisation. It says it does not accept unsolicited donations, even if offered. Instead, volunteers treat the saffron flag as their guru and contribute annually through guru dakshina to cover expenses. The RSS also states that many of its volunteers are engaged in social service activities, receive support from the public, and run registered charitable trusts to raise funds within legal frameworks.
Likewise, Senthil noted, these smaller organisations also do not feel obliged to disclose exactly how much money they receive or from where. “As registered trusts, they submit accounts to the Income Tax Department. We get funding from businessmen and from those who believe in our ideology,” he said.
Scholars argue that the RSS prefers to operate less through overt political activity and more through a sustained cultural presence.
Writer-translator Rajasangeethan recalled his student days: “I used to see RSS members training silently in parks. They never made noise about their growth, unlike Dravidian or Left parties that publicly count their crowds. That is how the RSS has grown in Tamil Nadu—through silent strategies, expanding quietly below the radar.”
Even the RSS source we spoke to admitted: “Members rarely showcase themselves. They enter only where they can execute a specific task. Once their goal is achieved, they quietly disperse without claiming credit.”
According to Rajasangeethan, the RSS and BJP function like two ends of a tunnel: “The RSS works at the base, training people on the ground, while the BJP, at the tunnel’s mouth, focuses on governance.” As part of this agenda, he said, the BJP organises initiatives like Kashi Tamil Sangamam and spiritual tours to gain cultural influence and popular legitimacy.
Ask any BJP member in Tamil Nadu what their ultimate goal is, and they will proudly declare: to destroy Dravidian ideology. Yet, their alliance with the AIADMK, itself a Dravidian party, remains a glaring contradiction.
In this centenary year of the Self-Respect Movement, it is crucial to self-examine whether the slow but steady growth of the RSS and its political face, the BJP, poses a threat to Dravidian thought.
“In 2025, they believed Hindu Rashtra would be established. They expected to win 400 seats. But the people delivered them a different verdict, forcing them into dependence on other parties. So what we are seeing now is an intensification of the ideological battle between the Self-Respect Movement and the RSS, which have both shaped political currents for a century. The Left, which should have played this role, has grown too weak. Today, Dravidian politics has stepped into that space as the leading force. But the expansion of shakhas has not yet translated into political reflection. That is crucial. The real danger will come only when that changes politically. That has not happened in Tamil Nadu yet—but we cannot say it will never happen. For now, it is the DMK and other Dravidian movements that have blocked it,” said Vijayasankar.
Rajasangeethan echoed this, but added a sharp retort, referring to Prime Minister Modi’s recent claim that he is a devotee of Shiva who can ingest poison. “If the fascist power can claim to swallow poison, then Periyar’s vision still remains like a fishbone stuck in its throat.”
Both scholars stressed in unison: “The Self-Respect Movement still has answers for every challenge the RSS poses today. Periyar gave a fierce voice to rewrite fabricated lies, from south to north.”
Scholars like Tamil Kamarasan and journalists such as AS Panneerselvan noted that while the rest of India delivered one kind of verdict over the last three elections, Tamil Nadu alone stood apart with a different verdict. It was a verdict against the ideology of the religious right; it was the verdict of Periyar.
As Anna declared in his parliamentary speech: “I am a Dravidian. I am proud to call myself a Dravidian. By saying this, I am not against the Bengali, or the Marathi, or the Gujarati. As Robert Burns said, however a man may be, he is still a man. But when I call myself a Dravidian, I believe the Dravidian has something definite, clear, and distinct to contribute to the world. The right to self-determination is our need.”
In line with that conviction, Tamil Nadu has long delivered a different verdict from the rest of the Indian Union.
As Dr Anandhi says, the Self-Respect Movement was about dismantling every brick of oppression. “As long as the Self-Respect Movement prevails, the RSS will struggle to gain a foothold in Tamil Nadu,” she said.
(Edited by Amit Vasudev)
