The Nightmare Called Seeman's Nationalism
By Tamil Podhigai
12 June, 2012
Countercurrents.org
Social media websites have been abuzz with the release of the party document of Seeman's organisation, "Naam Tamilar", and it has come up for challenge from several quarters. The criticism has been wide-ranging, and we take up this space to articulate the reasons why we find this document problematic and worthy of condemnation.
This party document is perhaps one of the most fascist, neo-Nazi, xenophobic documents that has been produced in India. Perhaps the fanatical right-wing chauvinists might come close to rivalling this manifesto, but right now, we are not sure on that count either.
At the outset, while we acknowledge that there is the need for articulating the importance of Tamil nationalism and the right of the Tamil people for self determination within the political arena, we are disappointed that this document does not have any characteristic or quality to parade itself as a party document--it lacks political understanding, it lacks understanding about the functioning of the Indian nation and its state machinery, it lacks understanding about the present state of Tamil Eelam.
Lumping together the caste-based oppression of the Hindu social order codified in the Manusmriti, the colonialist oppression of the imperialist superpowers, and the misdirected and opportunistic politics of the Dravidian parties under a unitary category betrays an absolute and callous disregard for history.
If the ultimate aim of the Tamil nationalism envisioned by the Naam Tamilar is a fully autonomous state under the Indian federation, we believe that the party should have spent a little time articulating how this process would be achieved, instead of leaving this onerous task to the imagination of its readers/cadres by the single remark: “This gradual process will be determined by time”. This itself is clear evidence that the aim of the party is not any lofty ideal that pays heed to Tamil aspirations and autonomy, but it aims to merely capture political power at the earliest possible. Besides, talk of “autonomous” is merely an eyewash, because in the Tamil state envisaged by Seeman, three vital portfolios—Finance, Defence and Foreign Policy—are surrendered to the Centre. One has to remember that decision-making was vested with New Delhi in these three sectors and it was one of the reasons why it was so easy to kill one hundred thousand Eelam Tamils in 2009. To forget that corporate interests and Hindutva forces in India operate on these three points of power, and to surrender these unconditionally to the Centre clear runs antithetical to the idea of a “Tamil state” and instead resonates like a project that is perhaps fashioned by New Delhi itself.
Having gone overboard, the magic realist history of Tamils narrated by the Naam Tamilar party document will put Gabriel Garcia Marquez and Salman Rushdie into collective shame. In this phantasmagoric narration, a glorious and lionized past is constructed for the Tamils through a history that cannot be proved at any time through statements that emphasize that Tamil was the first language in the world and that Tamils were the first inhabitants. Such historical distortion and unrealistic approach will not win Tamils any brownie-points, or any sense of identity.
The immediate goal of the party, “to make a Tamil person rule Tamil Nadu” shows that nothing about the party is ideologically different from any of the Dravidian or Dalit parties in the state. At this juncture, one has to remember that Seeman and Naam Tamilar rode high on the wave of anti-India sentiments and now, in a bid to turn into a political party, they have whole-heartedly embraced the idea of the Indian Union so that they can be recognized as a political party under India’s Constitution. That is why, for a movement that spoke against the idea of India, it now makes the declaration of adhering to Indian integrity and sovereignty and unity—performing a complex somersault from its previous position.
While we respect Velupillai Prabakaran, the national leader of the Tamils and the unparalleled role that he played in waging the war for Tamil liberation and self-determination, we understand that such extensive hero-worship emanating in the political party document of Naam Tamilar arises out of a single strategic reason: the need for the unwavering support of the Diaspora Tamils.
We too have cried over the genocide. We too cannot forget the conspiracy of silence and strategic collaboration extended by the Indian polity in executing the genocide of Tamils in Mullivaaikkaal. But what makes Naam Tamilar shout slogans to say: "We will not forget Sonia, Karuna, Chidambaram, Manmohan and Malayalees?" We understand the angst about those in power. But Malayalees are just another linguistic nationality in the prison-house of nationalities called India. They are as oppressed as Tamils. Do two or three Malayalees who lobbied against Tamils, make the Naam Tamilar blacklist all thirty million of them? We are similarly disturbed by the hatred directed towards others such as the Sikhs. Does this show any concern for the Constitution? Does this sort of hate speech serve any cause except promoting intolerance and violence?
Throughout the document, the word “Hindu” is not used, instead opting for “Manuviyar”, and there lurks the danger of conflating the Tamil identity with the Hindu identity. This is further evident when the idea of Tamil as a “religion” is posited against the religions of “Islam and Christianity” and when the document advises Tamil Muslims and Tamil Christians to choose Tamil as their primary identity and push their religious identity to the background. This reflects Hindutva/ RSS/ BJP agenda and it also goes against the spirit of secularism in the Indian Constitution, a rulebook that the Naam Tamilar has to follow in its aim to function as a political party.
At the same time, without going into the details we want to point out that the attack on the Dravidian politics by Seeman shows an absence of knowledge about the history of the Tamil struggle. Dravidian identity is not a blanket term for the four states of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Kerala—it originates from the Non Brahmin Movement that began in the then Madras Presidency. Likewise, we also wish to point out that the veiled attack on Periyar appears like a childish attempt. Trying to fix the blame of letting down of Eelam Tamils by the DMK during May 2009 on a social revolutionary like Periyar holds no basis in reason. To forget the contribution of Periyar is to invalidate the voice of caste annihilation and women’s liberation in the Tamil national struggle.
In this context, one observes that not a single woman writer/intellectual/artist/leader/fighter/activist has not been mentioned among the list of Tamil icons. We are hurt by this iconography that makes Tamil women absent. With the sole exception of Senkodi who immolated herself and has been listed among the martyrs, there is no mention of the name of any woman from Tamil Nadu. Such a wilful erasure of the Tamil feminists and women leaders once again exhibits how the project of nationalism has been hijacked by patriarchal forces.
Moreover, seeking the support and strength of the Tamil capitalist bourgeois shows the poverty of revolutionary thought. Listing out the capitalists as friendly forces is an affront to Marx and Che Guevara whose names have also been included in the document for decorative purposes. The document is also silent on the exploitation of the corporates on the Tamil Nadu land, nor does it have a general policy on how to counter the attack on the natural resources.
We are pained to see the absence of the word “Dalit” anywhere in the document, clearly betraying that the party has no idea of radical identity politics or the oppression suffered by the marginalized ex-untouchables. We also want to take this opportunity to remind the Naam Tamilar party that caste is not merely a “contradictory force” that operates in the Indian subcontinent, and that it is rather a brutal oppression that is played out through exclusion, conflict, brutal atrocities, bloodshed, endless exploitation and everyday violence.
Problems of caste and gender have been dismissed as problems of the superstructures. In recent years the organized Left in India, whether it is the traditional Marxists or the radical Maoists, have been fighting caste oppression, and themselves do not dismiss the caste question in such a careless manner. Instead of confronting this reality, Seeman and his party, the Naam Tamilar seek to easily sidestep it in order to appeal to their casteist, patriarchal bourgeois following. It is disturbing to see that a party that lays claim and seeks to imitate the identity and iconography of the Tamil Tigers could cast itself in such a condemnable manner. Moreover, we believe that Tamil society has to rise up to the challenge of the times and address the questions of oppression and violence against women. The Tamil society must also work towards rectifying the cultural injustices against women by fighting patriarchy. We are of the firm opinion that any national struggle that does not address and include the message of caste annihilation and women’s liberation cannot be revolutionary or inclusive.
For a document that disallows the use of caste names three names stand out: Padaiyachi, Thevar and Kone with an eye on the consolidated caste votebanks of the Vanniyars, Mukkulathors and Yadavas in Tamil Nadu. Likewise, the document’s glossary gives away the party’s unabashed worship of Brahmins.
One has to stay wary of mixing local political doctrines or ideology within the Indian state with the Eelam liberation struggle, because of the logical reason that it could turn counterproductive to the cause of Tamil Eelam liberation. Here again, the Naam Tamil party doctrines falter.
Finally, although the back-cover of the manifesto declares that Naam Tamilar "is not constituted of politicians but is made of revolutionaries," reading the document makes it evident that this is nothing but the handiwork of reactionaries who feed on linguistic jingoism to alienate others. We believe it risky to associate with such a brand of hate-espousing nationalism. Even as we distance ourselves from its delusional politics that borders on linguistic imperialism, we have written this criticism because we earnestly believe that maintaining silence on this document is self-defeating to Tamils.
Tamil Podhigai is a social activist based in Chennai
Due to a recent spate of abusive, racist and xenophobic comments we are forced to revise our comment policy and has put all comments on moderation que.
