Exploring The Political Publics: An Ethnographic Study of Thuglak's Annual Meetings

Antrocom Online Journal of Anthropology vol. 19. n.
2 (2023) 391-410 – ISSN 1973 – 2880
Antrocom Journal of Anthropology

ANTROCOM
journal homepage: http://www.antrocom.net
Exploring the Political Publics: An Ethnographic Study of

Thuglak’s Annual Meetings
Prabhakar K. B.
Research Scholar, Department of Electronic Media and Mass Communication, Pondicherry University <editorkb@gmail.com>.
keywords abstract
Thuglak, Brahminism, This paper explores the intricate interplay between mass-mediated communication, the
Print, Publics, Politics, formation of publics, and the political landscape within the culturally diverse and politically
Political Ethnography vibrant state of Tamil Nadu, located in Southern India. The study focuses on the unique
context provided by the annual readers’ meetings of the vernacular political satire journal,
Thuglak. Employing a comprehensive political ethnography approach, the paper uncovers
a complex web of interactions, ideologies, and identity formation that shape the publics of
Thuglak. The paper further reveals that the political character of the journal’s readership is
profoundly influenced by the journal’s core tenets, particularly Brahminism and Hindutva.
Through a nuanced exploration of the Thuglak readers’ meetings, the paper contributes to
a broader understanding of the role of mass-mediated communication in shaping public
sentiment and, subsequently, the political landscape in Tamil Nadu. This study serves as a
testament to the powerful influence of local media in shaping the political destiny of a region
and underscores the critical importance of examining such connections in an increasingly
interconnected and globalised world.
Introduction
In a political landscape dominated by Dravidian narratives,1 Thuglak, a Tamil-language political
satire weekly, has emerged as a prominent and unapologetic critic of the Dravidian movement in the
southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu. The term ‘Dravidian Movement’ is often used synonymously
with the Non-Brahmin Movement, Self-Respect Movement, and political parties with ‘Dravida’
nomenclature, such as Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), All India Anna Dravida Munnetra
Kazhagam (AIADMK), and Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra (MDMK). The movements are
rooted in the Dravidian ideology, which is characterised by principles such as rationality, self-respect
and social justice. The Dravidian ideology necessarily represents the antithesis of Brahmanism, a system
that perpetuates social inequality and upholds the supremacy of the Brahmin community within the
hierarchical structure of Hindu society. Thuglak was founded in 1970 and edited by Cho Ramasamy
until his demise in 2016. He staunchly advocated Brahminism and later aligned with right-wing
politics. Following Cho’s passing, S Gurumurthy, an auditor by trade and a significant figure in shaping
1 The Dravidian movement arose as a response to the prevailing dominance of Brahminism and effectively crafted
counter-narratives to challenge Brahminical hegemony. Political parties emerged from the movement viz., DMK and
AIADMK have maintained a strong grip on the Tamil Nadu state assembly for over half a century.
Please cite this article as: Prabhakar K. B., Exploring the Political Publics: An Ethnographic Study of Thuglak’s Annual Meetings -
Antrocom J. of Anthropology 19-2 (2023) pp. 391-410.
392 Prabhakar K. B. / Antrocom Online Journal of Anthropology, vol. 19, n. 2 (2023) 391-410
politics and the economy under the guidance of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS),2 assumed the
editor position. Thuglak owes its prominence to Cho’s earlier fame as a film comedian, playwright,
and theatre actor. His close association with influential circles also played a pivotal role in elevating
the journal’s status. Cho consistently expressed his socio-political viewpoints in response to the socio-
cultural changes catalysed by the Dravidian movement in his earlier endeavours. This continued in
Thuglak, where his sharp wit critiqued the Dravidian movement, resonating with upper-caste elites
dissatisfied with the movement’s rise (Venkatachalapathy, 2019; Geetha, 2016).
Proponents of Dravidian ideology, including figures such as E. V. Ramasamy (Periyar), C. N.

Annadurai, M. Karunanithi, S. Gurusamy, V. R. Nedunchezhiyan, L. Ganesan and N. V. Natarajan,
employed diverse strategies to elucidate and contest the prevalent dominance of the Brahmin community
within Indian societies. Individuals from various backgrounds, including politicians and academicians,
embarked on political, persuasive, and scholarly endeavours, fostering a solid narrative that challenged
Brahminical hegemony. In response, Brahmin ideologues strategically positioned themselves as the voice
of the people, engaging in discourse on good governance, the spiritual significance of the varna system,
and emphasising the enduring importance of Brahminic scriptures such as Vedhas and Upanishads
(Geetha and Rajadurai, 1995). In 1967, when the DMK, a political manifestation of the Dravidian
movement, came to power in the Tamil Nadu State Legislative Assembly, Cho launched Thuglak with
the explicit mission of critiquing the governance of Dravidian parties (Thuglak, January 14, 1970). This
move substantiates the arguments mentioned earlier, further strengthened by the current editor of
Thuglak, who asserts that Thuglak’s achievement lies in presenting an alternative narrative to “atheistic,
anti-national, and anti-Hindu’’ Dravidian narratives and earning respect for this alternative narrative
(Gurumurthy, 2020). However, it is crucial to emphasise that criticisms directed at the Dravidian
movement in this context do not equate to an endorsement of Brahminism. Instead, this postulate
builds upon S V Rajadurai’s (1993) proposition, suggesting that Brahminism, when confronted with
ideologies challenging its core principles, actively engages with these ideologies to sustain Brahminical
supremacy. This perspective aligns with Geetha’s (2002) argument about Brahminism, which posits
that Brahminism often portrays Brahmin caste interests as universal and national concerns, positioning
themselves as representatives of the ordinary people. This necessitated the Brahminical authorities to
invest significant dedicated effort in upholding Brahmin dominance during the Dravidian era.
On the other hand, in addition to publishing the journal, the Thuglak publishing house annually
hosts a gathering mainly for its readers. While Cho mentioned that Thuglak’s annual meetings
(henceforth, ‘annual meeting’) aimed to establish a direct connection between the editor and the readers,
extending beyond the journal’s pages (Thuglak, February 14, 1977), the annual meeting serves a broader
purpose. It acts as a crucial forum for strengthening and affirming the socio-political convictions of
committed Thuglak readers, potentially nurturing publics that resists the counter-hegemonic impact
driven by the Dravidian movements against Brahminism. The emergence of publics among dedicated
Thuglak followers provides an intriguing context for scholarly research to explore the interplay between
mass-mediated communication and the formation of publics in the Tamil Nadu political landscape.
The significance of publics formed among devoted Thuglak readers (henceforth ‘Thuglak’s publics’)
is rooted in several factors, including the nature, the content of their discussions and their potential
alignment with dominant Brahminical values.
Given the significance of investigating Thuglak’s publics, this paper aims to discern and elucidate the
political attributes of Thuglak’s publics through the exploration of the following two research questions:
• What fundamental principles drive committed Thuglak followers in their opposition to Dravidian
2 The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), established in 1925 under the aegis of Keshav Baliram Hedgewar,
assumes a conspicuous position as a Hindu nationalist organisation in the Indian landscape. The RSS is considered the
parent organisation of several affiliated groups including Bharatiya Janata Party, collectively known as the Sangh Parivar.
Prabhakar K. B. / Antrocom Online Journal of Anthropology, vol. 19, n. 2 (2023) 391-410 393
political parties?
• To what extent has the opposition within the dedicated readership of Thuglak against Dravidian
parties manifested in specific political orientations or directions?
In the pursuit of contextualising the discourse surrounding Thuglak within the intricate fabric of
Brahminism in the political landscape of Tamil Nadu, the following section of this paper titled ‘Mass-
mediated Political Subjects’ diligently traverses a compendium of pertinent scholarly literature. It
underscores the critical importance of delving into the formation of public spheres, thereby establishing
the foundational objective of this paper – understanding Thuglak’s publics. This quest for comprehension
is facilitated through a comprehensive political ethnographic methodological approach, which involves
tools such as participatory observations and in-depth interviews conducted during Thuglak’s 50th-
anniversary event, as elaborated in the ‘Political Ethnography’ section of this paper. This section also
assesses the study’s samples and inherent limitations. Establishing the methodological approaches, the
paper adeptly situates the discourse of the study within the contemporary political milieu, as expounded
in the ‘Thuglak and its Annual meetings’ section. As the paper unfolds, the sections ‘Thuglak’s Anti-
Dravidian Discourse’ contextualise and expound upon the relevance of the research objectives. In the
paper’s critical section, ‘Thuglak Dialogues on Dravidian Parties, Nationalism, and BJP’, the revelations
of findings and discussions derived from the data collection are judiciously scrutinised within the
context of the research questions. Finally, the ‘Conclusion’ section succinctly consolidates the salient
points of this research endeavour, underscoring its contributions to a deeper understanding of political
satire and the intricacies of publics.
Mass-mediated political subject:

Publics emerged through the advent of print as a collective of people who are physically apart but
mentally connected (Tarde, 1969). Scholars from diverse academic disciplines within the realm of social
sciences have exerted substantial efforts in formulating theories and conceptual frameworks concerning
the emergence of ‘publics’, particularly within the domain of politics. In academic scholarship, two
seminal contributions by Habermas (1989) and Anderson (1983) delve profoundly into the genesis
and significance of publics within modern societies. Habermas emphasises the importance of the public
sphere, where people gather to discuss common issues. Anderson, on the other hand, focuses on the
power of written language in creating connections and forming ‘imagined communities.’ Both scholars
contend that there exists a distinctive mode of social interaction engendered by the deployment of mass-
mediated communication, giving rise to thinking about public life in new ways. In this modern way of
thinking, people see themselves as essential parts of a strong group, working together within the constraints
of everyday life, and they feel liberated from external rules. The inherent fascination of “publics” within
the realm of theories surrounding political liberation lies in their capacity to autonomously establish
legitimacy through the exchange of ideas autonomously, surpassing considerations of ideological
inclinations, whether they lean towards liberalism, nationalism, or radicalism. Nevertheless, it is
noteworthy that these scholars’ contributions have encountered critical scrutiny, notably from feminist
scholars, who have raised objections regarding their Eurocentric orientation and inclusivity-related
issues (Fraser, 1990; Hill and Montag, 2000).
However, contemporary understanding emphasises that publics comprises numerous distinct

segments intricately connected to specific communities (Calhoun, 2002; Fraser, 2007). Scholars
have undertaken significant inquiries to uncover the complex dynamics of human interaction within
publics, politics, and governance. Recent academic work has ventured into understanding how shared
ideas are formed, mainly when these ideas are prepared for dissemination in the public sphere (Graan,
2010; Shryock, 2004). The composition of the publics suggests that it arises from interconnectedness
among individuals through various forms of communication, going beyond just written text. These
interactions occur not only in written discourse but also in various physical settings, ranging from tea
shops to public gatherings (Latour, 2005). What is essential in these interactions is not only the topic
being discussed but also how it is deliberated and communicated.
Within the political landscape of Tamil Nadu, scholars such as Bate, Cody, and Pandian have
undertaken investigations into the impact of mass-mediated communication infrastructure on the
formation of publics within the region. Their inquiries explore how these publics influence the region’s
political trajectory, providing invaluable insights into the dynamic interplay between mass-mediated
communication and politics in the region. Bate’s (2009) study centres on the significance of language
employed in public oratory, which significantly contributed to the rise of Dravidian politics. Cody’s
study concentrates on the role of language in print media in cultivating readership and how the act
of reading itself nurtures specific categories of publics. Pandian’s work, on the other hand, scrutinises
the cinematic works of M G Ramachandiran to unravel the narrative discourse that played a pivotal
role in Ramachandiran becoming the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, in competition with his strong
contemporary, Karunanidhi. These scholarly endeavours not only illuminate the patterns of mass-
mediated communication consumption within Tamil society but also offer a vivid portrayal of the
evolving political landscape in the region, shaped by the consumption of mass-mediated communication.
Furthermore, to gain a comprehensive understanding of Tamil Nadu’s political landscape, it is

imperative to consider the scholarly contributions of individuals such as Robert L. Hardgrave (2022),
Eugene F. Irschick (1969), Lloyd I. Rudolph (1961), Geetha and Rajadurai (1995). Their scholarly
endeavours provide invaluable insights that navigate us through the intricate dynamics of politics within
the region. A compilation of articles edited by Asokan (2022), which focuses on the political initiatives
led by Annadurai, offers insights into the socio-political transformation engendered by the DMK. This
compilation of work provides a comprehensive portrayal of the societal shifts that disrupted age-old
norms and cultural paradigms deeply entrenched in Brahminical values, carrying forth the principles
espoused initially by the Dravidian movement. These transformations were spearheaded under the
stewardship of Annadurai, and his ascent to power played a pivotal role in advancing this mission,
leading to a fundamental reconfiguration of the state’s institutions. These scholarly works provide
insight into the central role of caste dynamics influenced by Brahminical ideology within Tamil Nadu’s
socio-political milieu. They underscore the enduring predominance of Brahminism, which historically
occupied a prominent position in the power structure.
In perusal of understanding Brahminism, Geetha’s (2002) scholarly work is a significant contribution,

providing a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of how Brahminism operates within modern
institutions. Geetha’s examination scrutinises Brahminical ideologies, practices, and networks within
the framework of modern institutions. This comprehensive exploration elucidates the multifaceted
and frequently intricate ways in which Brahminism moulds and influences the functioning of these
institutions, impacting various facets of governance, policy-making, and societal structures. On the
other hand, Rajadurai’s (1993) work adopts a more concentrated approach by immersing itself in
the variegated manifestations of Brahminism’s sway, extending beyond the confines of religion and
culture, permeating the domain of politics. He sheds light on how Brahminical ideologies have played
a pivotal role in shaping political ideologies, including the ascendancy of Hindutva politics. Arunan’s
monumental eight-volume work embarks on a historical odyssey, tracing the evolution of Brahminism
over centuries. Arunan explores how Brahminism has adapted and responded to the challenges posed
by its diverse adversaries. This historical perspective permits us to discern how Brahminism has evolved
and sustained its influence in the face of evolving political, social, and cultural landscapes.
Collectively, the academic works of Geetha, Rajadurai, and Arunan provide a thorough and varied
depiction of the complex relationship between Brahminism and politics. Their academic endeavours
not only cast light upon the various facets of Brahminism’s impact but also provide a framework
encompassing historical, cultural, and institutional dimensions. Their analysis enables us to trace
the trajectory of Brahminism over time, allowing us to observe how it adjusts and reacts to evolving
circumstances and the challenges posed by a diverse range of adversaries. These studies also advocate
for sustained scholarly investigation into the functioning of Brahminism, particularly in the context of
modern politics.
Despite the limited scholarly literature on Cho and his journalism, essays written independently
by Venkatachalapathy, Vijayashankar and Geetha offer a comprehensive analysis of Cho’s journalistic
trajectory within the epistemological framework of Brahminism and Tamil Nadu’s socio-political
landscape. Each essay sheds light on distinct aspects of Cho’s multifaceted career, from his early satirical
writings to his transformation into an ardent proponent of right-wing ideology. The chapter devoted to
Cho in Venkatachalapathy’s (2019) book “Tamil Characters: Personalities, Politics, Culture,” focuses on
Cho’s association with sabhas, which were voluntary cultural centres predominantly among Brahmin
communities. These sabhas played a pivotal role in entertainment for the elite class during the Dravidian
era. Venkatachalapathy highlights Cho’s strategic utilisation of the Brahmin dialect in his scripts to
satirise Dravidian movement plays, reflecting Cho’s scepticism towards Dravidian politics and alignment
with conservative Brahmin values. Vijayashankar’s (2016) article delves into Cho’s remarkable journey
from a fearless satirical journalist to a staunch advocate of a conservative, right-wing ideology. He argues
that Cho’s satirical style was primarily directed at the DMK, mirroring the concerns of specific upper-
caste segments. Vijayashankar contends that Cho’s opposition to various progressive measures, such
as bank nationalisation, emanated from his right-wing beliefs. According to Vijayashankar, a pivotal
moment in Cho’s ideological transformation was his opposition to reservation policies, particularly
the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes, and Scheduled Tribes Act of 1993, which clashed
with his right-wing ideology and anti-social-justice traditions. Geetha’s (2016) insightful article
offers a balanced critique of Cho’s contributions to Tamil Nadu’s political and social landscape. It
highlights Cho’s commitment to civil rights while pointing out limitations in his comprehension of
democracy, particularly his emphasis on good governance over individual rights and liberties. Geetha
also underscores Cho’s evolving political stance, particularly his shift towards Hindu nationalism while
remaining deeply rooted in Tamil Brahminical culture. The array of literature that has been explored
illustrates how Thuglak contributes to shaping the Brahminical perspective of the political narrative
within the region. The journal’s ability to resonate with Brahminical sentiments and maintain sustained
engagement with its readers underscores its significance.
The existing body of literature that examines theories related to the formation of publics
predominantly focuses on the intricacies and attributes of significant political entities. These theories
provide perspectives into shaping, mobilising, and influencing publics within the broader context
of societal and political dialogues. However, a noticeable research gap emerges when considering the
creation of publics that oppose the prevailing political narratives of the Dravidian movements in the
political landscape of Tamil Nadu. Theories concerning the counterpublics (Fraser, 1990; Warner,
2002) emphasise that participation in publics extends beyond simply addressing a broad audience. These
theories highlight the role played by “social imaginaries” (Taylor, 2004) in configuring and imbuing the
concept of ‘publics’ with significance. It transcends mere numerical metrics and encompasses the shared
notions and convictions that shape how individuals engage with one another within the realms of public
discourse (Calhoun, 2002). While ‘crowds’ may not always engage in organised and deliberate public
discourse, understanding the challenges posed by these shared emotional experiences in democratic
societies can enhance our comprehension of the development of large-scale political identities (Laclau,
2005; Mazzarella, 2010). They can still symbolise the power and collective will of the people tangibly.
The existing research gap underscores the urgent need for a more in-depth examination of these
alternative publics. It calls for research efforts that delve into the origin, evolution, and influence of
alternative publics in contemporary society, offering insights into their capacity to shape political
subjectivities, challenge prevailing narratives, and enrich the complexities of democratic discourse.
Bridging this gap is essential for achieving a more nuanced understanding of the formation of publics
and mass-mediated communication in the modern age. It becomes apparent that the examination of
Thuglak’s publics holds significant importance within Tamil Nadu’s contemporary political landscape.
Political Ethnography
The study aims to delve into the intricate web of political dynamics within the realm of Thuglak’s
public, utilising a qualitative research design based on the methodology of political ethnography. A
qualitative research design, particularly when complemented by the political ethnography methodological
approach, enables us to gain a profound, in-depth understanding of the motivations and perspectives of
individuals within Thuglak’s public (Auyero, 2006; Baiocchi and Connor, 2008; Nader, 2011; Priyam,
2016). It provides the flexibility needed to delve into their subjective experiences. Political ethnography,
specifically, enables us to immerse ourselves in the discourse, offering nuanced insights into the actions
and beliefs of Thuglak’s public within their social and political contexts. By directly observing and
interacting with Thuglak’s public, the study reveals subtle and often unseen grassroots actions.
A preliminary literature review was conducted, aiding in the identification and understanding of
the unique political attributes of Thuglak’s publics. However, it is essential to note that the core of this
study lies in the immersive fieldwork that followed. To gain an intimate understanding, participatory
observations (Emerson et al., 2001) were employed during the 50th-annual meetings organised in
five different urban locations in Tamil Nadu on different dates. During these gatherings, field notes
(Clifford, 2019; Emerson et al., 2001; Sanjek, 2019) were diligently compiled, serving as the primary
means of capturing observations, interactions, nuances, and speeches within the discourse. These field
notes facilitate in-depth analysis and later reflections, allowing us to interpret findings and identify
patterns. Before and after the events, meaningful connections were established with the participants,
fostering rapport which granted access to their profound perspectives.
In tandem with participant observation, in-depth interviews (Briggs, 1983, 2007) were conducted
with a diverse selection of attendees who were randomly chosen, ranging from regular attendees of the
annual meetings to first-time attendees and avid readers of Thuglak, to ensure diversity within Thuglak’s
public. The interviewees, spanning a broad spectrum of age groups, with a notable preponderance of
individuals in the middle-age category, were provided with a comprehensive overview of the study.
Subsequently, their informed consent was diligently sought and obtained (Murphy and Dingwall,
2001). These interviews adhered to a semi-structured format, which permitted an in-depth examination
of participants’ reasons for attending the anniversary meeting, their political convictions and the paths
they had taken in their political involvement (Galletta, 2013).
The data thus collected underwent rigorous thematic analysis (Aronson, 1995; Dey, 1993; Guest
et al., 2011; Terry et al.,2017), identifying recurrent themes, patterns, and trends within the dataset.
The constant comparative method was rigorously employed throughout, allowing for the continuous
refinement of emerging themes as the study unfolded. Augmenting these primary sources, an examination
of relevant archives (Plummer, 2001) from the Thuglak journal, accessible at RMRL, was undertaken.
These archival materials provided invaluable contextual background and supplementary data to enrich
the study. To maintain the integrity of the research process, the researcher diligently maintained a
reflexive journal (Galletta, 2013), serving as a repository for personal reflections and potential biases
encountered during fieldwork. This self-awareness was instrumental in mitigating potential researcher
bias and enhancing the study’s credibility. It is important to acknowledge certain limitations of this
study. The immersive nature of political ethnographic research necessitated time constraints, potentially
limiting the depth of data collection and analysis (Price & Murnan, 2004; Theofanidis & Fountouki,
2018). Moreover, the study’s historical depth was confined to a single year’s annual meeting within the
context of a 50-year tradition, potentially affecting the historical comprehensiveness of the findings.
Additionally, challenges related to access in specific political contexts or with certain individuals may
have impacted the study’s completeness. However, this research methodology serves as a comprehensive
framework for conducting political ethnography, affording an immersive exploration of the political
context, its actors, and the rich tapestry of political behaviours and cultures within Thuglak’s public.
Thuglak and its annual meetings

Thuglak annually convenes the anniversary meeting for its readers, traditionally scheduled on Pongal
Day, which coincides with its anniversary date. This tradition was initiated on its first anniversary. This
event is organised in one of the urban locations in Tamil Nadu as a three-hour program, typically scheduled
to commence in the evening at 6:30. The announcement of the anniversary, which succinctly states,
“Cho will discuss contemporary political issues,” remarkably garners the allegiance of dedicated readers
from across Tamil Nadu and beyond, even though it takes place on the day of a widely celebrated festival.
“We eagerly anticipate this occasion throughout the year, rather than waiting for the Pongal festival”,
remarks Ramani, a regular attendee of the anniversary (Ramani, personal communication, Madurai 08,
2019). Beyond the cadre of ardent readers, this convocation attracts political luminaries predominantly
from Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), industrialists, and prominent public figures, whether in the capacity
of invited speakers or mere attendees. Frequent attendees include prominent figures from the BJP, such
as L. Ganesan, Thirunavukkarasu, H. Raja, Pon. Radhakrishnan, and C. P. Radhakrishnan, as well as the
Tamil cinema superstar Rajinikanth. The event is often graced by national-level political leaders like L. K.
Advani, Narendra Modi (Modi), Nirmala Sitharaman, and Venkaiah Naidu. The Thuglak anniversary
often grabs the headlines of Tamil news journals due to the controversies it often stirs. For example, the
attendance of Modi,the then Chief Minister of Gujarat at the time and is presently the Prime Minister of
India, at one of the Thuglak annual gatherings stirred up controversy in Tamil Nadu. This event marked
one of his early appearances outside Gujarat after the 2002 Gujarat riots.3
The inauguration of the anniversary is ritualistically orchestrated by the editor, who introduces the
contributors and other staff members of the Thuglak office in a customary order. This introduction
typically precedes a witty welcome, often satirising a prominent contemporary political event. Cho
frequently utilises the introduction segment itself to lampoon these political occurrences. Subsequently,
the proceedings culminate in the eagerly awaited ‘Question and Answer’ session, an emulation of the
renowned ‘Questions to the Editor’ section within the pages of Thuglak. Within the journal’s pages,
readers submit questions to the editor, with selected questions, often garnished with the editor’s signature
wit, finding publication in the subsequent week’s edition. Vivek, a seasoned reader of Thuglak, astutely
observes, “The questions are posed primarily with the expectation of eliciting Cho’s witty retorts rather
than a quest for substantive answers” (A. Vivek, personal communication, Trichy, November 24, 2019).
During the anniversary, attendees must pre-register for participation in the ‘Question and Answer’
segment. Among the registered participants, a select few are chosen through a lottery to join the editor
on stage, where the editor addresses their queries extemporaneously. This segment has matured into
a distinct and fervent fanbase, with its appeal attributed not only to the editor’s insight but also to
the incisive humour of the responses. Questions, while soliciting the editor’s witticisms, also function
as a platform for showcasing the editor’s perspective on contemporary political matters. This section
consistently stands out as the pinnacle of engagement during the event.
Following this, invited speakers take the podium, often articulating their own convictions or aligning
3 The 2002 Gujarat riots were a period of communal violence that occurred in the Indian state of Gujarat during
Narendra Modi’s tenure as Chief Minister. These riots were marred by extensive controversy and criticism concerning the
government’s management of the situation, with some accusing Modi of not taking sufficient measures to prevent or control
the violence. The events remain a subject of ongoing debate and discussion in relation to Modi’s political career and legacy.
themselves with the political parties they represent or sympathise with. The invited speakers typically
encompass a diverse range of individuals from various points on the political spectrum, contributors
to Thuglak, writers, literary figures, spiritual leaders, and celebrities from various fields. These speeches
precede the editor’s address on contemporary political matters, a hallmark of the event. This segment
is often presented as a response or commentary on the speeches delivered by the guests, providing a
continuous commentary on contemporary politics. Cho, actively engaged in shaping political alliances
both at the state and national levels, viewed these anniversaries as opportunities for him to assume the
persona of a shrewd political wit. He leveraged these gatherings and his considerable influence to guide
the political parties he endorsed toward what he considered the most appropriate direction.
Furthermore, he mobilised Thuglak’s readership to rally behind these alliances, both through the
anniversaries and the pages of Thuglak. His humorous and clever expressions enabled Cho to convey
his ideas to the followers easily. After about three hours, the anniversary concludes with the rendition of
the national anthem. Attendees, having savoured the political discourse and formed new acquaintances,
disperse while engaging in convivial exchanges with friends and acquaintances cultivated during the
event. The event maintains the same format even after Gurumurthy assumes the role of editor following
Cho’s passing.
A perceptive initial observation, derived from an analysis of Thuglak’s annual meetings and its pages,
is Thuglak’s consistent alignment against Dravidian parties, particularly the DMK, and a discernible
affinity for right-wing politics, particularly its endorsement of the BJP. This warrants a comprehensive
examination through the lens of Brahminism, promising to yield profound insights into the complex
interplay among political ideologies, cultural components, and regional politics within Tamil Nadu.
Thuglak’s Anti-Dravidian Discourse

In 1925, Periyar initiated a transformative shift in the Dravidian movement by establishing
‘Suyamariyathai Iyakkam’ (Self-Respect Movement), which later evolved into Dravidar Kazhagam in
1944. This marked a notable departure from conventional traditions, as it boldly declared a political agenda
of “Kadavul illai, Kadavul illave illai” (no God, no Gandhi, no Brahmin, no religion) (Chidambaranar,
1983). Periyar attributed the caste system and social hierarchy, issues deeply rooted in Brahmanism, as
the primary factors behind societal problems (Kudiarasu September 7, 1930). He championed a vision
of “Self-Respect,” encapsulating a socialist ethos rooted in human dignity, in contrast to Brahmanism.
Periyar’s movement not only challenged but invalidated Brahminical values and norms to liberate society
from entrenched social oppression and inequality (Manoharan, 2022). In this endeavour, the Self-respect
movement members pursued several significant measures, such as discarding caste appellations in their
names, eschewing caste symbols, promoting inter-caste marriages, and advocating for broader social
reforms, including women’s rights. Dravidar Kazhagam experienced substantial growth from 1920-45 and
impacted significantly in reducing Brahmin community influence and power in Tamil Nadu, especially
the movement’s call for sanctions against Hindu temples had a dual effect, diminishing Brahmins’ wealth
and reducing their societal influence (Irschick, 1969 and Barnett, 1976). On September 15, 1948, the
majority of DK, under the leadership of Annadurai, split from the party to form the DMK, asserting that
involvement in electoral politics is inevitable and serves as a means to materialise the Dravidian principles.
The DMK captured power in 1967, within 15 years of its inception.
The DMK’s rise to power resulted in the implementation of legislation that substantially enhanced
the status of non-Brahmins in Tamil Nadu while simultaneously bolstering the political influence of
these communities (Jeyaranjan, 2021). The DMK upheld and legitimised many of the core principles of
Periyar and his Dravidar Kazhagam, enacting measures that directly or indirectly challenged Brahmanical
norms and dominance. These measures included several pivotal legislative reforms. One notable change
introduced by the DMK was an amendment to the Hindu Marriage (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act
of 1967. This amendment granted legal recognition to self-respect marriages, which aimed to eliminate
endogamy, a fundamental aspect of the caste system supported by Brahminism.
Additionally, the DMK implemented the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Reduction of Ceiling on Land)
Act in 1970. This law sought to address disparities in land ownership by reducing the allowable land
ceiling from 30 standard acres to 15 standard acres. Over time, this measure contributed to a reduction
in the concentration of land in the hands of Brahmins and forward communities. In the realm of gender
equality, the Self Respect (Movement) Conference held in Chengalpattu in February 1929 adopted
a resolution advocating for equal rights for women. However, it was not until 1989 that the DMK
enacted The Hindu Succession (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act 1989, which ultimately granted women
equal succession rights. This law, though perhaps not widely recognised through the critical lens of
Brahmanism, had a significant impact in addressing gender inequality, going against Brahminical norms.
In 1970, the DMK introduced an amendment to the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Act, which suggested that temple trustees were not legally obligated to exclusively appoint a family
member (from the Brahmin community) as the priest. This legal amendment had a brief lifespan, as it
encountered a legal challenge.
Nonetheless, these laws and ordinances brought about substantial changes in the caste relations
and economic landscape, significantly shaking the Brahminical hegemony. Significantly, Thuglak has
conveyed dissent towards these initiatives. Thuglak has constructed a narrative contending that all these
actions run counter to the culture and alienated the historical heritage of this region, a viewpoint that
bears a resemblance to Brahminical narratives.
Ramachandran, who split from the DMK due to disagreements with its then-president Karunanidhi,
established another Dravidian party, the Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (later renamed All India
Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam). Despite bearing the term ‘Dravida’ in its name, the AIADMK
did not overtly manifest any Dravidian ideology. The AIADMK, initially a populist party with no
solid ideological foundation during Ramachandiran’s leadership (Pandian), gradually shifted towards
a right-wing political orientation during Jayalalithaa’s leadership. Notably, during Jayalalitha’s tenure,
the AIADMK government introduced legislation that ran counter to foundational principles of the
Dravidian movement, exemplified by the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Forcible Conversion of Religion
Act, 2002. This law had a significant impact, particularly on the Dalits, limiting their ability to change
their religious affiliation. Thuglak, in a supportive stance with the government, propagated a narrative
endorsing the legislation as a means to prevent coerced religious conversions, thus aligning with a core
aspect of the RSS agenda.
Furthermore, in 2003, Jayalalitha instructed District Collectors and law enforcement to strictly
enforce the Tamil Nadu Animals and Birds Sacrifices Prevention Act of 1950, effectively aligning with
Brahmanic or Hindutva-inspired reformism. While Thuglak opposed this action, it framed the issue
within the context of Hindu rights. However, while there exists a distinct lack of agreement on various
fundamental principles underpinning the Dravidian movement, it is crucial to acknowledge that the
party did implement certain principles advocated by the Dravidian movement. AIADMK’s political
philosophy revolved around addressing people’s basic needs, with a significant achievement being the
socio-economic improvements brought about by the empowerment of non-brahmin communities
through its ‘nutritious mid-day meals’ scheme (Kalaiyarasan and Vijayabaskar, 2021), which was openly
ridiculed by Thuglak (Thuglak). In 1982, AIADMK established a committee under the chairmanship
of Justice S. Maharajan to research and provide recommendations on the appointment of temple priests.
The report produced by this committee remains a crucial document supporting the demand for priestly
appointments for all castes in temples, which is a backlash against Brahmin dominance.
Additionally, one of AIADMK’s notable accomplishments was the removal of caste identifiers
from street names. Despite its ambivalent ideological and political positions, AIADMK has frequently
introduced numerous social welfare programs during its rule, which have played a significant role in
contesting Brahminical influence. However, Thuglak no longer deemed the AIADMK a substantial
impediment to its political objectives.
While Dravidian parties have maintained dominance in Tamil Nadu’s state assembly for over half
a century, criticism and opposition to these politics have been persistent in the Tamil Nadu political
landscape on various grounds. For instance, communists initially labelled Periyar as a capitalist reformer
and continued to critique their liberal economic policies, while Dalit thinkers have argued that Dravidian
politics has evolved into a movement centred on intermediate-caste interests. In contrast, the regional
political party Pattali Makkal Katchi has positioned itself as an alternative to Dravidian politics, rallying
intermediate castes and promoting their caste pride. After the 2009 Sri Lankan war, Tamil nationalist
organisations, dissatisfied with Dravidian parties, particularly the DMK, have revived Guna’s (2013)
argument that Dravidian politics is detrimental to Tamil national identity and was established to
protect the interests of non-Tamil immigrants. The fundamental principles of the Dravidian movement,
including anti-Brahminism, anti-Hinduism, support for minorities, opposition to Hindi imposition,
and advocacy for state autonomy, are fundamentally at odds with Hindutva politics.
Consequently, Hindutva organisations like the BJP have been critical of Dravidian politics.
Despite criticism from different quarters of the political spectrum on various grounds, it is crucial to
acknowledge that both the Dravidian parties have significantly empowered non-Brahmin communities
by decentralising power from forward communities. This positioning has propelled Tamil Nadu
as a leader in education, industry, and individual development, eventually leading to a situation
where individuals and organisations focused on rationality, equality, anti-Brahminism, and Tamilian
consciousness have aligned with the Dravidian parties in electoral politics. This alignment includes left
parties and Dalit movements.
In the contextual landscape being explored, where Dravidian political parties have arisen as a
contemporary challenge to Brahminical hegemony, it is imperative to recognise that Thuglak consistently
voiced its dissent against the emergence of Dravidian parties, notably the DMK. It is worth noting
that opposition to Dravidian parties does not inherently adopt a Brahminical standpoint. Nevertheless,
this paper posits that the resistance of Thuglak’s publics toward Dravidian parties can be ascribed to
the substantial role of Thuglak’s narratives in cultivating Brahminical sentiments. Consequently, it
is crucial to delve into the principles motivating Thuglak’s publics in their opposition to Dravidian
parties, especially in light of the multifaceted contradictions. Moreover, as opposition inherently calls
for transformation and seeks alternatives, it is equally crucial to investigate whether the fervour of
Thuglak’s publics in opposition to Dravidian parties has been guided by the narratives promulgated by
Thuglak in a particular political direction. The later inquiry holds significant weight, particularly in light
of the discernible and intentional shift of Cho and his journal, Thuglak, towards right-wing politics,
underscored by an emphasis on Hindutva principles. A comprehensive examination of Thuglak’s anti-
Dravidian discourse is indispensable for comprehending the Brahminical anti-Dravidian discourse and
its pertinence in contemporary dialogues within Thuglak’s publics.
Thuglak Dialogues on Dravidian Parties, Nationalism, and BJP

Observations from the meetings
In a departure from its traditional approach, Thuglak organised special gatherings in four different
urban locations within Tamil Nadu: Kumbakonam, Trichy, Madurai, and Coimbatore, in addition to
its customary annual meeting. The Kumbakonam special meeting took place on November 17, 2019, at
the Kumbakonam Municipal Marriage Hall. The program featured a welcoming address by Sethuraman,
the Chancellor of Sastra University, and guest speeches by prominent figures, including Kamakodi,
Chairman of City Union Bank; Tirupur Krishnan, Editor of ‘Amudhasurabhi’ magazine; Manikandan,
a speaker known for his insights in religion and literature; and K. Vaithyanathan, the Editor of ‘Dinamani.’
The venue was at full capacity. Subsequent special meetings were held in Trichy on November 24,
2019, at the New Marriage Hall - Kalaiarangam. The event commenced with a welcoming speech by
Rajappa Rajkumar, an Entrepreneur, and featured guest speeches by Ramasuppu, the Managing Editor
of Dinamalar; Rangaraj Pandey, the Managing Editor of the ‘Chanakya’ web portal; U.V. Velukudi
Krishnan, a renowned storyteller; and Tamilaruvi Maniyan, the President of the ‘Gandhiya Makkal
Iyakkam.’ The Madurai special gathering occurred on December 15, 2019, at the Tamil Nadu Chamber
Of Commerce and Industry. The event began with a welcome address from Srinivasan, a spokesperson
from the BJP, and continued with guest speeches by Karumuttu T Kannan, an Industrialist; Sumathi,
an Advocate; Maalan Narayanan, a Journalist; and G. K Vasan, President of the Tamil Manila Congress.
As with previous gatherings, the hall was filled to capacity, with over a hundred people congregating
outside to listen to the speeches. In Coimbatore, a special meeting was held on December 15, 2019, at
the SNR Auditorium - Sri Ramakrishna College of Arts and Science. The event commenced with a
welcome address by Kanagasabapathi, a Senate Member of Bharathiar University, and featured guest
speeches by Saidai Duraisamy, a former MLA from AIADMK and Former Mayor of Chennai; Krishnaraj
Vanavarayar, an Industrialist and La. Ganesan, a prominent BJP leader. The auditorium was filled to
capacity. In each of these special meetings, the editor of Thuglak delivered the concluding speech. A
noteworthy change in this year’s gatherings was the provision of refreshments to the attendees after
the meeting, a first in the history of Thuglak meetings. The Conventional annual meeting took place
on January 14, 2020, at the Kalaivanar Arangam in Chennai. The hall was overflowing with attendees,
and hundreds of people gathered outside. To accommodate the overflow, the meeting was broadcast
outside the auditorium. The event followed its usual sequence, commencing with the introduction
of staff and Thuglak contributors. Outside the hall, as attendees watched the event on a screen, some
engaged in lively discussions, predicting the order of introductions and displaying their knowledge of
Thuglak and its events. When a technical issue with the audio system arose, their predictions served as
a guide for new attendees. Within a few minutes, the audience watching the event on the screen began
demanding that the organisers repair the audio system. An elderly man in the audience, disappointed
with the protest, remarked in a Brahmin dialect, “What nonsense is this? This resembles JNU culture.”
After some time, the organisers resolved the audio issue. Following the introduction segment, the editor
responded to questions raised by readers, an event that garnered significant attention. Subsequently, the
editor delivered his speech. The event’s highlight was a pre-recorded speech by Prime Minister Modi
in Delhi, commemorating the Golden Jubilee of Thuglak. The then Vice President of India, Venkaiah
Naidu, participated as a special guest speaker, along with the esteemed Tamil actor Rajinikanth. Naidu
released the Golden Jubilee special issue, and Rajinikanth received the first copy. The event featured
guest speeches by Naidu and Rajinikanth.
Each meeting began with audio recordings of Cho explaining Sanskrit verses from the Mahabharata,
followed by reciting these verses. As the scheduled meeting time approached, an audiovisual compilation
of clippings from previous meetings, titled “Nectar Drops from Shri Cho Ramaswamy,” was screened
before the event commenced. The meetings concluded with the national anthem. The Alliance
publications set up a book stall showcasing books authored by Cho. Attendees visited the stall before
entering the meetings, leading to nostalgic conversations as they reminisced about their experiences
with the titles. These discussions often evolved into lengthy debates and political discourse.
Questions and Answers
The questions from the audience encompassed various topics, including an evaluation of Thuglak’s
50 years of accomplishments, the influence of Thuglak in shaping political alliances for the upcoming
Tamil Nadu state assembly election, the position of the AIADMK in the same election, the potential
impact of Rajinikanth’s entry into Tamil Nadu politics, the culture of protest at JNU, the rapid
decision-making and actions of the BJP government, the outlook for a Hindu voting bloc, and concerns
regarding the fusion of Tamil Nadu politics with mainstream nationalism. In response to these queries,
the editor adeptly presented a narrative that depicted the Dravidian parties as adversaries of the nation
and its cultural values while commending the governance of the ruling BJP in the central government.
Furthermore, the editor condemned the dissenting voices from JNU as anti-national and supported the
idea of Rajinikanth entering the political arena.
The substance of the speeches
The 50th-anniversary annual meetings provided an illustrious platform for distinguished
personalities to engage in profound dialogues concerning the intricate political landscape of the state.
These gatherings were dedicated to the meticulous examination of multifaceted subjects, including the
nuanced exploration of the Dravidian movement, the prominent role accorded to spirituality within the
construct of nationalism, and the enthusiastic endorsement of the BJP.
Within these discussions, a prevailing motif was the discerning critique of the Dravidian parties, which
collectively painted a critical portrait of their performance. These discussions coalesced into a forum
comprehensively evaluating Tamil Nadu’s political landscape. The inaugural Kumbakonam meeting set
the tone for this discourse, with Tiruppur Krishnan highlighting Thuglak as a potent instrument for
combating the perceived injustices and lawlessness plaguing the state. His remarks insinuated that the
Dravidian parties, holding sway in the Tamil Nadu Assembly for over half a century, had presided over an
era marked by a dearth of justice and honesty, thus indicating a profound inability to deliver efficacious
governance. Within the same Kumbakonam meeting, Dinamani Vaithiyanathan extolled Cho and cast
light upon the apparent leadership vacuum within the Dravidian parties, particularly in the wake of the
demise of towering figures like Karunanidhi and Jayalalitha. His reference to Cho’s passing creating a
leadership lacuna hinted at the notion that the Dravidian parties were grappling with a leadership crisis.
During the Trichy meeting, Rangaraj Pandey, a prominent journalist steadfastly opposing the
Dravidian ideology while championing the tenets of the RSS and the BJP, underscored Cho’s unique role
as a dauntless critic during the heyday of the Dravidian movements. This characterisation implied that
the Dravidian parties had proven impervious to constructive criticism, with Cho emerging as a solitary
dissenter against their prevailing narratives. In the same Trichy convocation, Tamizharuvi Maniyan
accentuated the shortcomings of the Dravidian parties, alluding to a historical incident where Cho
expressed scepticism about the feasibility of Anna’s promise to distribute three ‘padi’ (approximately
2.25 Kg) of rice for a rupee. Maniyan decried the Dravidian parties for relying on divisive factors such
as caste and religion, which, in his view, impeded the progress of Tamil Nadu and perpetuated the
pernicious influence of divisive politics.
During the Madurai meeting, Karumuthu Kannan offered a nostalgic perspective on his experiences
with Thuglak. He recalled how Thuglak was known for its critical stance against Dravidian politics,
consistently subjecting the DMK to pointed critiques. Kannan also recounted an instance in which
Cho had humorously mocked the concept of Self-Respect Marriage during Karunanithi’s family
function. As recounted by Rajinikanth, there was an incident in 1971 when Periyar led a procession
in Salem where he portrayed Hindu deities Sri Ramachandra Murthy and Sita in a manner considered
disrespectful. Rajinikanth underscored Cho’s crucial role in bringing this incident to the public’s
attention. Subsequently, Cho published a penetrating exposé of the event in Thuglak. Rajinikanth
further highlighted that the DMK government, which was in power then, faced a substantial blow to
its reputation due to this revelation. In response, the government resorted to confiscating the journal to
prevent the widespread dissemination of this information. Rajinikanth’s statement about this incident
sparked controversy not only within the political landscape of Tamil Nadu but also in the media sphere.
Another recurrent theme revolved around the eminence of spirituality within the context of nationalism
and the seminal roles played by Thuglak and Cho in propagating this paradigm. During the Kumbakonam
annual meeting, Kamakodi effusively highlighted Thuglak as the quintessence of nationalism rooted in
selflessness, contributing to a more expansive conception of national identity. Dinamani Vaithiyanathan
acknowledged Cho’s profound influence in inculcating a sense of nationalism, emphasising their
unifying function in nurturing a collective national identity within the Indian subcontinent. In the
Trichy meeting, Rajappa Rajkumar eulogised Cho and the incumbent editor, Gurumurthy, for their
unwavering commitment to the tenets of nationalism and spirituality. The reverence accorded to Cho
by a diverse array of leaders testified to the enduring impact of his ideas and convictions in the realm of
spirituality and nationalism. This influence continued to permeate the narrative associated with Thuglak,
cementing its role as a vanguard for propagating spiritual and nationalist values.
During the Madurai meeting, journalist Maalan Narayanan underscored the significant political
transformation in Tamil Nadu during the 1967 elections. He specifically emphasised that among
the many notable figures in Tamil Nadu, only Bharathi and Cho had left an enduring impact on the
cultural and intellectual traditions of Tamil Nadu. Narayanan highlighted Cho’s reputation for his
sharp political writings and also noted his profound exploration of ancient Hinduism epics like the
Mahabharata and Ramayana, which are considered the bedrock of the nation’s cultural heritage.
Narayanan articulated his concerns about unseating the Dravidian parties and offering alternatives to
them. He stated that they had been critiquing the Dravidian parties for a considerable time, with many
voices consistently calling for their removal and the liberation of Tamil Nadu from their dominance.
He noted that after Kamaraj, it was only Cho who had opposed the Dravidian parties. Maalan pointed
out that today, similar sentiments were echoing through various forms and different political parties,
all sharing the common goal of ousting the Dravidian parties. He observed that despite more than fifty
years of effort, this goal had not been achieved. According to him, addressing the existing political issues
required instigating a cultural transformation, encompassing beliefs in the divine, personal ethics, and
transparency in governance. Maalan suggested that Gurumurthy should take the lead in facilitating this
collective effort. In the Coimbatore meeting, Kanaga Sabapathi underscored the momentous role of
Thuglak, accentuating its function as a metaphorical seed sown to propel the destiny of Tamil Nadu
forward. He lauded Thuglak as a commendable voice to counteract the burgeoning influence of anti-
spiritual forces in a land where such antagonistic forces had gained prominence.
The President of India, Venkaiah Naidu, who was a distinguished guest speaker at the Chennai
meeting, praised Cho’s remarkable contributions across a spectrum of fields, encompassing journalism,
politics, cinema, drama, law, literature, and, most notably, in the realm of profound wisdom rooted
in Sanatana Dharma. Cho’s visionary insights were firmly grounded in his unwavering belief in the
rich fabric of Indian civilisation and the enduring tenets of Sanatana Dharma. Notably, in the sphere
of literature, Cho’s distinguished works, including “Mahabharatham Pesugirathu” (Mahabharatham
Speaking), “Srimad Ramayana”, “Hindu Maha Samudram”, and others, merit special recognition.
His deep-seated faith and allegiance to the profound philosophies underpinning Hindu Dharma,
encompassing the Vedas, Vedanta, and Epics, remained unshaken. It is worth mentioning that his work
‘Enge Brahmin’ (Where is Brahmin) found its way into television as a serial. Cho’s extensive body of
work primarily engaged with issues, belief systems, ideologies, and diverse socio-political contexts.
In the same meeting, Rajinikanth praised Cho’s intellectual contributions, which extended beyond
the confines of political discourse. He commended Cho’s capacity to explore themes encompassing
nationalism and spirituality, evoking a spectrum of emotions from humour to contemplation.
The invited speakers also vociferously expressed their unwavering support for the BJP, the party currently
at the helm of the Indian government under the leadership of Modi. This endorsement was particularly
palpable in the oratory of Manikandan during the Trichy assembly, as he recollected the pivotal juncture
in 2012 when Cho propounded Modi as a formidable candidate for the position of Prime Minister. This
juncture marked a seminal turning point, ushering a principled Prime Minister to the forefront of the
Indian political landscape. Rangaraj Pandey raised a caveat regarding the BJP, citing a political upheaval
in Maharashtra at midnight, as he counselled the party against sacrificing ethical principles for transient
political gains. He fervently underscored the need for the BJP to adhere to a principled and unassailable
moral compass. This sentiment found resonance with Tamizharuvi Maniyan during the same Trichy
assembly, as he pointed out the incongruity of Modi’s pledge to eliminate corruption while simultaneously
endorsing the rule of the AIADMK in Tamil Nadu for two years. Maniyan argued that for the BJP to
expand its influence within the state, it was essential to uphold a strict set of ethical principles and pursue
growth autonomously rather than leaning on the laurels of another political party.
In his welcome address at the Madurai meeting, Srinivasan, a representative of the BJP, expressed that
it was through Thuglak that he was first introduced to the RSS movement. He further credited Thuglak
for bringing Advani to Tamil Nadu in 1984. Most notably, Srinivasan underscored Cho’s pivotal role not
only in introducing Modi to Tamil Nadu but also in endorsing him as the prime ministerial candidate.
He lamented that due to criticisms, particularly from certain quarters in the Dravidian parties of Tamil
Nadu, the BJP had been labelled negatively. Consequently, Srinivasan emphasised the need to dispel
this perception and asserted that the BJP should be recognised as a favourable political force, refuting
the notion that it is an anti-Tamil party. During the Coimbatore meeting, a key BJP figure, the party’s
national vice-president, highlighted Cho’s role in promoting Modi’s political career. He recounted how
Modi, as the Chief Minister of Gujarat, was introduced to the people of Tamil Nadu at an annual
meeting. Furthermore, he described a significant moment when Modi and Advani appeared together
on the same platform during another annual meeting. Cho’s public endorsement of Modi as the next
Prime Minister, with Advani’s support, added weight to the BJP’s leadership prospects.
In essence, the invited dialogues during Thuglak’s 50th-anniversary special annual meetings
furnished a trenchant evaluation of the Dravidian parties in Tamil Nadu, accentuating their perceived
infirmities in the realms of atheism, corruption, leadership, and divisive politics. These meetings deftly
crafted a narrative that cast the Dravidian parties as contrarian to the cultural values and the welfare
of the populace. Furthermore, these meetings positioned spiritual nationalism as a counterfoil to
Dravidian ideology, underscoring the profound influence of Thuglak and Cho in shaping the discourse
surrounding spirituality and nationalism within the state. Moreover, these meetings underscored the
unreserved endorsement of the BJP and the leadership of Modi while also revealing the intricacies of
political ideologies and ethical principles in the context of Indian politics.
The discourses presented by the esteemed speakers during these assemblies were far from arbitrary;
instead, they were intricately interwoven with the recurring themes championed by the current
editor, Gurumurthy. Throughout these meetings, Gurumurthy consistently expounded upon the
very concepts that found resonance with the speakers, thus fostering a notable convergence of ideas
between the editorial direction of Thuglak and the perspectives shared by these eminent figures. During
the Kumbakonam meeting, while elucidating the pivotal role played by Cho in launching Thuglak,
Gurumurthy underscored that Thuglak’s inception occurred during what he described as a rather bleak
phase in the history of Tamil Nadu. He further elucidated that during this era, the state grappled with the
ascendancy of atheistic and separatist ideologies. In response, Cho’s journal garnered substantial support
from many individuals. Gurumurthy emphasised the profound connection between nationalism and
spirituality in the Indian context, contending that politics devoid of these foundational principles had
no place in the nation.
Gurumurthy’s critique of the Dravidian parties continued in the Trichy gathering, positing that
both were equally tainted by corruption. He asserted that Cho had sown the seeds of the notion that an
alternative political force was imperative to challenge the duopoly of these two parties in Tamil Nadu.
Elaborating on these views during the principal meeting held in Chennai, Gurumurthy attributed the
practice of electoral bribery in Tamil Nadu politics to the DMK and insinuated that various political
malpractices could be traced back to the pioneering role of the DMK in these affairs. Furthermore,
Gurumurthy raised questions regarding the intellectual acumen of the Dravidian parties, suggesting
that confrontations with BJP leader Modi demanded a level of intelligence that activities such as stone-
throwing or knife-throwing could not furnish. He contended that the DMK lacked the requisite
capabilities for such a contest.
According to Gurumurthy, Cho’s candid evaluation of Dravidian politics, dynasty-based

politics, and the pervasiveness of corruption positioned Thuglak as a discerning observer in the ever-
evolving landscape of Tamil Nadu politics. The journal consistently aimed to assess which of the
two predominant Dravidian parties was better suited to lead the state at any given time. Moreover,
Gurumurthy justified Thuglak’s endorsement of the AIADMK by recalling the journal’s prior critiques
of both major Dravidian parties. He depicted the DMK as a symbol of atheism, covert anti-nationalist
politics, dynastic politics, and familial corruption. Conversely, he characterised the AIADMK as being
characterised by corruption but without overt anti-atheistic or anti-nationalistic stances. Gurumurthy
noted that the degree of corruption within both parties was so similar that distinguishing which was
more or less corrupt posed a challenge. Nevertheless, amidst the backdrop of the politics prevailing in
Tamil Nadu, Thuglak chose to support the AIADMK, perceiving it as the lesser of two major evils.
In addition to his perspectives on Dravidian politics, Gurumurthy conveyed his support for the
BJP during the annual meeting in Chennai, extolling Prime Minister Modi’s resounding triumph in
the recent parliamentary elections. He reiterated that Thuglak had consistently advocated for Modi’s
return as Prime Minister. Gurumurthy expressed profound satisfaction with realising their desired
outcome, highlighting that Modi had met and surpassed their expectations. Concerning the Rafale
controversy, Gurumurthy acknowledged that, despite the Supreme Court’s verdict exonerating Modi
of any wrongdoing, a review petition had been lodged and sensationalised by certain media outlets, thus
cultivating an impression of corruption within the government. Nevertheless, Gurumurthy stressed that
the public had not embraced this narrative. He posited that Tamil Nadu was in dire need of a credible
national alternative to the two predominant Dravidian parties. Gurumurthy also raised questions about
the BJP’s ability to effect substantial changes in Tamil Nadu, given the entrenched dominance of the
two Dravidian parties. In this context, he alluded to Cho’s perspective that Rajinikanth should enter
politics to catalyse transformative change. This idea was met with applause, underscoring the audience’s
enthusiastic reception of the notion of an alternative political force in the state.
In-depth interview
Anti-Corruption Sentiment
From the in-depth interviews, it is evident that a prevailing sentiment among the respondents is a
strong sense of collective identity, driven by a desire for an alternative to both the DMK and AIADMK
political parties. The primary motivation behind this opposition is a pervasive anti-corruption sentiment.
The respondents firmly believe that the Dravidian parties have tainted the political landscape of Tamil
Nadu. From their perspective, these parties operate in politics solely for power and financial gain, with
little regard for serving the public.
One respondent, Nandhan, illustrates this sentiment by highlighting the widespread corruption
under the governance of the DMK and AIADMK. According to him, officials often demand bribes to
perform their mandated duties, and various infrastructure projects are initiated to accumulate wealth
through contracts, effectively turning public funds into the private assets of political families.
Reservations and Caste Politics
Another significant point of contention among Thuglak’s public is the issue of reservation policies.
Many respondents argue that the existing reservation policy in the state exceeds the maximum limits
outlined in the Indian Constitution. They question the necessity of reservations in education and
employment and believe that these policies are either ineffective or exploited for caste-based political
gains. Furthermore, respondents contend that reservation and similar schemes are employed to secure
the votes of minority communities. Some sections of Thuglak’s audience, however, exhibit a level
of sympathy toward the AIADMK. They appreciate that the AIADMK has not disrupted religious
customs and heritage, with exceptions noted during the tenure of Jayalalitha.
Critique of Political Culture
Critiques also extend to the political culture propagated by the Dravidian parties. Many respondents
note that the cadre of these parties often comes from occupations such as liquor brewing and lack
the intellectual capacity to govern the state effectively. This, they argue, has resulted in administrative
inefficiency and hindered economic development. Additionally, they accuse these parties of promoting
alcoholism for their own benefit.
Language Policy and Job Opportunities
Some respondents express dissatisfaction with job opportunities and argue that the Dravidian state’s
two-language policy has hindered their careers for generations. They also criticise the substantial allocation
of tax money for freebies and social welfare schemes, viewing it as mismanagement of public funds to
secure votes. Furthermore, there is a sentiment that the Dravidian parties have perpetuated caste divisions
in society rather than addressing them. Respondents argue that these parties select candidates from the
dominant communities in their respective constituencies, contrary to the principles of social justice.
Wasteful Spending and Populism
The allocation of a substantial portion of tax money to freebies and social welfare schemes is another
point of contention. Many respondents view this as an unfair use of public funds, motivated by a desire
to secure the parties’ vote banks.
Alternatives to Dravidian Parties
When asked about alternatives to the Dravidian parties, respondents offered diverse perspectives.
Some see Modi and the BJP as the primary alternative, citing Cho’s endorsement of Modi’s leadership and
the developmental success of the Gujarat model. Others acknowledge the potential of the BJP for state
development but express concerns about its sensitivity to Tamil culture. The prospect of Rajinikanth
entering politics garners support from those who believe in his honesty and intentions for the state.
Hindu Majoritarian Politics
Regarding the perception of Hindu majoritarian politics by the BJP, respondents clarify that it is about
reclaiming the rights of the majority Hindu community rather than being against minority communities.
However, some BJP supporters view the party as a secular entity that also protects Hindu culture and rights.
Perception of BJP Governance
In evaluating the governance and achievements of the BJP government, most respondents express
contentment, with only a few expressing dissatisfaction with certain implementation aspects of
government schemes.
Discussions
The findings presented in the above section indicate that the journal Thuglak is consistently
articulating an anti-Dravidian narrative, which is rooted in Brahminism, and places nationalism and
spirituality in opposition to it in order to promote Hindutva politics driven by the RSS and BJP. This
argument can be constructed based on several key observations and themes:
• Critique of Dravidian Parties: Thuglak, as evident from the annual meetings and interviews,
consistently critiques the Dravidian parties, particularly the DMK and AIADMK. The journal
portrays these parties as corrupt, promoting divisive politics and failing to provide efficient
governance. This portrayal aligns with the Hindutva narrative that seeks to delegitimise regional
political parties and promote a nationalistic alternative.
• Promotion of Nationalism and Spirituality: The findings indicate that Thuglak emphasises the
importance of spirituality and nationalism. It highlights the role of Thuglak and Cho in shaping
the discourse surrounding these values. This aligns with the broader Hindutva ideology, which
seeks to promote a Hindu cultural identity and a sense of nationalistic pride.
• Support for the BJP and Modi: Thuglak’s explicit endorsement of the BJP and Modi as an alternative
to the Dravidian parties is evident. This aligns with the Hindutva agenda of promoting the BJP
and its leaders as champions of Hindu interests.
• Calls for an Alternative Political Force: The findings suggest that Thuglak supports the idea of an
alternative political force in Tamil Nadu. This aligns with the RSS and BJP’s interest in expanding
their influence beyond their traditional strongholds.
• Critique of Dravidian Parties’ Caste Politics: The findings mention the critique of the Dravidian
parties for their involvement in caste politics, further aligning with the Hindutva discourse, which
seeks to transcend caste divisions in favour of a unified Hindu identity.
While it is clear that Thuglak consistently articulates an anti-Dravidian narrative and promotes the
BJP and Hindutva politics, it is essential to note that not all opposition to Dravidian parties should
be equated with support for Brahminism. Thuglak’s criticism of the Dravidian parties may stem from
various factors, including concerns about corruption, governance, and divisive politics, rather than
religious or caste-based considerations. However, it is also evident that Thuglak’s narrative aligns with
the broader discourse of Hindutva and nationalism, which promotes specific cultural and religious
values associated with Brahminism.
Therefore, the findings provide substantial evidence to argue that Thuglak consistently articulates
an anti-Dravidian narrative rooted in Brahminism and promotes Hindutva politics driven by the RSS
and BJP. This narrative influences readers to adopt an anti-Dravidian perspective, which can ultimately
benefit Brahminism by sustaining its supremacy. While opposing Dravidian parties is not equivalent
to supporting Brahminism, the analysis of Thuglak’s discourse demonstrates Brahminical discourse
within the anti-Dravidian narrative.
Conclusion
This paper has unveiled Thuglak’s constant propagation of an anti-Dravidian narrative deeply
entrenched in Brahmanism, as well as its active advocacy for Hindutva politics steered by the RSS
and BJP. Thuglak consistently scrutinises and depicts the Dravidian parties as marred by corruption,
fostering division, and inadequacies in governance. While opposition to the Dravidian parties in Tamil
Nadu is multifaceted, encompassing concerns about corruption and governance, this paper underscores
the alignment of Thuglak’s narrative with the broader Hindutva and Brahminical discourse. It is
important to emphasise that a myriad of ideological and regional dynamics shapes the intricate political
landscape in Tamil Nadu. Hence, it is critical not to conflate all opposition to the Dravidian parties with
an outright endorsement of Brahmanism.
Furthermore, Thuglak fervently emphasises spirituality and nationalism, intending to foster a

sense of Hindu cultural identity and kindle nationalistic pride. The journal consistently positions the
Dravidian parties as antagonists of the nation and its cultural values while simultaneously championing
the causes of nationalism, spirituality, and the BJP as a viable alternative. This critique of the Dravidian
parties aligns seamlessly with the Hindutva agenda, which seeks to discredit regional political entities
in favour of a nationalistic alternative. This alignment is particularly evident in Thuglak’s unequivocal
endorsement of the BJP and Modi as an alternative to the Dravidian parties.
The paper also suggests that Thuglak lends support to the concept of an alternative political force
emerging in Tamil Nadu, which mirrors the RSS and BJP’s aspirations to extend their influence
beyond their customary strongholds. Thus, Thuglak’s discourse undeniably reveals the existence of a
Brahminical and Hindutva influence within the anti-Dravidian narrative, which possesses the potential
to shape public perceptions and influence political orientations within the region. In conclusion, this
paper has provided valuable insights into the intricate dynamics of political discourse in Tamil Nadu,
driven by mass-mediated communication and the formation of public opinion influenced by Thuglak’s
distinctive narrative.
References
Anderson B. (1998). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso
Aronson, J. (1995). “A Pragmatic View of Thematic Analysis”. The Qualitative Report. <https://doi.
org/10.46743/2160-3715/1995.2069>
Asokan, K. (Ed.). (2022). A Grand Tamil Dream (First). KSL Media Limited.
Auyero, J. (2006). “Introductory Note to Politics under the Microscope: Special Issue on Political Ethnography I”.
Qualitative Sociology, 29(3), 257–259. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-006-9028-7>
Baiocchi, G., & Connor, B. T. (2008). “The Ethnos in the Polis: Political Ethnography as a Mode of Inquiry”. Sociology
Compass, 2(1), 139–155. <https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2007.00053.x>
Bate, B. (2009). Tamil Oratory and the Dravidian Aesthetic: Democratic Practice in South India. Columbia University Press.
Barnett, M. R. (1976). The Politics of Cultural Nationalism in South India. Princeton University Press.
Briggs, C. L. (1983). “Questions for the ethnographer: A critical examination of the role of the interview in fieldwork”.
Semiotica, 46(2–4), 233–262. <https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1983.46.2-4.233>
Briggs, C. L. (2007). “Anthropology, Interviewing, and Communicability in Contemporary Society”. Current Anthropology,
48(4), 551–580. <https://doi.org/10.1086/518300>
Calhoun C. (2002). “Imagining solidarity: cosmopolitanism, constitutional patriotism, and the public sphere”. Public Cult.
14(1):147–71
Clifford, J. (2019). Notes on (Field)notes. In R. Sanjek, Fieldnotes: The Makings of Anthropology. Cornell University Press.
Dey, I. (1993). Qualitative data analysis. A user-friendly guide for social scientists. Routledge.
Dumont, L. (1980). Homo Hierarchicus: The Caste System and Its Implications. University of Chicago Press. <https://books.
google.co.in/books?id=XsOtRGdvIigC>
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2001). “Participant Observation and Fieldnotes”. In P. Atkinson, Handbook of
Ethnography. SAGE.
Fraser N. (1985). “What’s critical about critical theory? The case of Habermas and gender”. New Ger. Critiq. 35:97–131
Fraser N. (1990). “Rethinking the public sphere: a contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy”. Soc. Text
1990(25/26):56–80
Galletta, A. (2013). Conducting the Interview: The Role of Reciprocity and Reflexivity”. In A. Galletta, Mastering the
Semi-Structured Interview and Beyond: From Research Design to Analysis and Publication. NYU Press.
Galletta, A. (2013). Mastering the Semi-Structured Interview and Beyond: From Research Design to Analysis and Publication.
NYU Press.
Geetha, V., and Rajadurai, S. (1998). Towards a Non-Brahmin Millennium: From Iyothee Thass to Periyar. Samya.
Geetha, V., and Rajadurai, S. (1995). “One Hundred Years of Brahminitude: Arrival of Annie Besant”. Economic and
Political Weekly, 1768–1773.
Geetha, V. (2002). Brahminism. <https://www.academia.edu/41022589/Brahminism>
Geetha, V. (2016). “Cho Ramaswamy (1934-2016): Writer and editor who was a relentless critic of power and its misdeeds”.
Scroll.In <http://scroll.in/article/813251/cho-ramaswamy-1934-2016-writer-and-editor-who-was-a-relentless-critic-of-
power-and-its-misdeeds>
Graan A. (2010). “On the politics of imidž: European integration and the trials of recognition in postconflict Macedonia”.
Slav. Rev. 69(4):835–58
Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2011). Applied Thematic Analysis. SAGE Publications.
Guna. (2013). Dravidathaal Vizhndhom [We fell by Dravida]. Tamizhar Kalam.
Gurumurthy S. (2020, January 14). Editor S Gurumouthy’s address, Thuglak 50th Anniversary meeting.
Habermas J. (1989). Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Hardgrave, R. L. J. (2022). The Dravidian Movement. Routledge.
Hill, J. H. (2001). “Mock Spanish, Covert Racism, and the (Leaky) Boundary between Public and Private Spheres”. In S. Gal
and K. Woolard (eds), Languages and Publics. Routledge.
Irschick, E. F. (1969). Politics and Social Conflict in South India: The Non-Brahman Movement and Tamil Separatism,
1916-1929. University of California Press.
Jeyaranjan, J. (2020). Thamizhagathil Nilapirabuthuvam Veezhntha Kathai [The story of the decline of feudalism in Tamil
Nadu]. Minnambalam.
Kalaiyarasan, A., and Vijayabaskar, M. (2021). The Dravidian Model: Interpreting the Political Economy of Tamil Nadu.
Cambridge University Press.
Laclau E. (2005). On Populist Reason. London: Verso

Latour B. (2005). From realpolitik to dingpolitik, or how to make things public. In B. Latour and P. Weibel (eds), Making
Things Public: Atmospheres of Democracy, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 14-41.
Manoharan, K. R. (2022). Periyar: A Study in Political Atheism. Orient Blackswan.
Mazzarella W. (2010). “The myth of the multitude, or, who’s afraid of the crowd?” Crit. Inq. 36(4):697–727
Murphy, E., & Dingwall, R. (2001). “The Ethics of Ethnography”. In P. Atkinson, Handbook of Ethnography. SAGE.
Nader, L. (2011). “Ethnography as theory”. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 1(1), 211–219. <https://doi.
org/10.14318/hau1.1.008>
Pandian, M. S. S. (2014). The Image Trap: M.G. Ramachandran in Film and Politics. SAGE Publishing India.
Plummer, K. (2001). “The Call of Life Stories in Ethnographic Research”. In P. Atkinson, Handbook of Ethnography. SAGE.
Price, J. H., & Murnan, J. (2004). “Research Limitations and the Necessity of Reporting Them”. American Journal of
Health Education, 35(2), 66–67.
Priyam, M. (2016). “Political Ethnography as a Method for Understanding Urban Politics and Elections in India”. Studies in
Indian Politics, 4(1), 119–127. <https://doi.org/10.1177/2321023016634962>
Rajadurai, S. V. (1993). Indhi Indhu India [Hindi, Hinduism, Indiya]. Manikkavasagar Pathipagam.
Ramaswamy, C. (1970, January 14). “Ippothe Sollividukiren [I am telling it to you right now]”. Thuglak, 1(1), 1. RMRL.
Ramaswamy, C. (1977, February 14). Aandu Vizha [Annual Meeting]. Thuglak.
Rudolph, L. I. (1961). “Urban Life and Populist Radicalism: Dravidian Politics in Madras”. The Journal of Asian Studies,
20(3), Article 3. <https://doi.org/10.2307/2050816>
Sanjek, R. (2019). Fieldnotes: The Makings of Anthropology. Cornell University Press.
Shryock A, ed. (2004). Off Stage/On Display: Intimacy and Ethnography in the Age of Public Culture. Stanford, CA: Stanford
Univ. Press
Tarde G. (1969). “The public and the crowd”. In T. N. Clark (ed.) On Communication and Social Influence, pp. 277–94.
Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
Taylor C. (2004). Modern Social Imaginaries. Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press
Terry, G., Hayfield, N., Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2017). “Thematic Analysis”. In C. Willig & W. S. Rogers, The SAGE
Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology. SAGE.
Theofanidis, D., & Fountouki, A. (2018). “Limitations And Delimitations In The Research Process”. Perioperative Nursing
- Quarterly Scientific, Online Official Journal of GORNA, Volume 7 (2018)(Issue 3 September-December 2018), Article
Issue 3 September-December 2018.
Venkatachalapathy, A. R. (2019). Tamil Characters. Pan Macmillan.
Vijayashankar, R. (2016, December 21). “On the Right trajectory”. Frontline. <https://frontline.thehindu.com/other/
obituary/on-the-right-trajectory/article9436286.ece>
Warner M. (2002). Publics and Counterpublics. New York: Zone Books

Exploring The Political Publics: An Ethnographic Study of Thuglak's Annual Meetings

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Exploring The Political Publics: An Ethnographic Study of Thuglak's Annual Meetings

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Antrocom Online Journal of Anthropology vol. 19. n.

2 (2023) 391-410 – ISSN 1973 – 2880

Antrocom Journal of Anthropology

Exploring the Political Publics: An Ethnographic Study of

Proponents of Dravidian ideology, including figures such as E. V. Ramasamy (Periyar), C. N.

Mass-mediated political subject:

However, contemporary understanding emphasises that publics comprises numerous distinct

Furthermore, to gain a comprehensive understanding of Tamil Nadu’s political landscape, it is

In perusal of understanding Brahminism, Geetha’s (2002) scholarly work is a significant contribution,

Thuglak and its annual meetings

Thuglak’s Anti-Dravidian Discourse

Thuglak Dialogues on Dravidian Parties, Nationalism, and BJP

According to Gurumurthy, Cho’s candid evaluation of Dravidian politics, dynasty-based

an outright endorsement of Brahmanism.

Furthermore, Thuglak fervently emphasises spirituality and nationalism, intending to foster a

Laclau E. (2005). On Populist Reason. London: Verso

You might also like