An interesting analysis by Ana Pararajasingham (see here) of how the BJP is trying to bring Tamil Nadu, a major state in South India, in its orbit. Hindutva has been strong in the Hindi belt in the North but weak in the Dravidian South where ethnic and linguistic connections are much stronger. Southern India successfully resisted the imposition of Hindi as the national language after independence and has tried to chart an independent political course from the north since then.
Tamil Nadu has been dominated by two parties since the late 1960s, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) formed in 1949 and its rival, All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), which split from the DMK in 1972. These two parties have governed Tamil Nadu since 1969. Both of them had a series of charismatic leaders which have supported Tamil nationalism and socialist ideology. The DMK had its founder C. N. Annadurai, M. G. Ramachandran and M Karunanidhi while AIADMK had its founder M. G. Ramachandran and Jayalalithaa.
The DMK ruled Tamil Nadu from 1969 to 1976, from 1989 to 1991, from 1996 to 2001, and from 2006 to 2011 while AIADMK ruled it from 1977 to 1987, from 1991 to 1996, a few months in 2001, from 2002 to 2006 and is the current ruling party (from 2011). Ana argues that the success of both parties is due to the strength of Tamil nationalism:
The success of the DMK and the AIADMK is a testimony to the potency of Tamil nationalism, which both parties have successfully exploited. In the hands of the DMK, Tamil nationalism became an ideology of mass mobilization. This has enabled the DMK and the AIADMK to secure and hold political power for more than 50 years.
Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay in his article 'Past Continuous: BJP’s Failure in Tamil Nadu Can Be Traced Back to Congress’s 1967 Defeat There' seems to agree:
The secondary presence of national parties in Tamil Nadu stems from two dominant features of state politics: the Dravidian movement and its ideology of Draviadianism that dominated political culture and social discourse. The second feature that had a pioneering effect on other states and parties was the distinctive use of populism as electoral craft by the two Dravidian parties.
Though referred to as the Dravidian movement, the complex weave of caste, religious and linguistic concerns that articulated itself as a collective response from the early decades of the 20th century, remained confined to Tamil Nadu. This has been the principal reason behind the continued significance of national parties in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Kerala. The idea and ideology of the Dravidian movement has not spread beyond Tamil Nadu because of its rootedness in Tamil nationalism which in turn had more than just traces of non-Brahminism.
The absence of non-Brahmin upper castes in significant numbers in Tamil Nadu enabled class and social polarisation between Tamilian Brahmins and others and they were depicted as outsiders who brought Brahminical – and discriminatory – Hinduism to Tamil Nadu. Consequently, when Dravidianism as an ideology developed, atheism and linguistic nationalism became its cornerstones. No such unifying cultural identity emerged in other southern states and this is the reason why Telangana was eventually hived off and the demand for Coorg or Kodagu, though muted currently, keeps rearing its head ever so often.
The 1967 rout of the Congress – significantly this was not in terms of vote share – was preceded by a several decades old emotional agitation against the Centre’s attempt to declare Hindi as the official language. With its origins in the Congress government’s 1937 decision to introduce Hindi in secondary schools, the agitation gathered momentum as the January 1965 deadline neared for Hindi to become the sole official language of India.
Former Tamil Nadu AIADMK Chief Minister Jayalalithaa paying tributes to her mentor and another former Tamil Nadu AIADMK Chief Minister M. G. Ramachandran
Source: 'Past Continuous: BJP’s Failure in Tamil Nadu Can Be Traced Back to Congress’s 1967 Defeat There
The BJP's strategy is, of course, dividing the Tamils on religious lines and undermining Tamil nationalism. It picks up issues that resonate with its Hindutva ideology and tries to break the Tamil consensus as Ana explains:
In late January, at an event marking the release of a book by H Raja’s father, a participant at the event, a Hindu priest, triggered a controversy by not standing up when the Tamil anthem was played. Vijayendra Saraswathi remained seated even as other dignitaries such as the chief guest, Tamil Nadu Governor Banwarilal Purohit, stood up for the Tamizh Thai Vazhthu.
The Tamil anthem is sung or played at the beginning of functions in Tamil Nadu. By not standing up, Vijayendra Saraswathi angered the public. Several public figures condemned the Hindu priest for disrespecting Tamil sentiments, and these notably included leading politicians across Tamil Nadu with strong nationalistic leanings.
Earlier in January, Vairamuthu, a Tamil scholar, speaking on Andal, one of the best-loved Hindu poet-saints of the Tamils, quoted from the 1978 book Indian Movements: Some Aspects of Dissent, Protest and Reform, which identified Andal as a devadasi. The term devadasi is open to interpretation; it could mean a female servant of a deva (god) or in a more pedestrian sense a temple prostitute.
The BJP’s Raja mounted a vituperative attack by claiming that Vairamuthu had reduced the Hindu saint to a common prostitute. The attack gained momentum as several Andal devotees joined in, believing Vairamuthu had tarnished the image of Andal. This was met by a massive uproar against H Raja by Tamil nationalists who accused him of exploiting religious sentiments for political gain....
H Raja’s tactics are predicated on the assumption that by labeling anyone expressing anti-BJP sentiments, or by referring to his or her Islamic or Christian background, a religious divide could be perpetrated. Last October, Raja’s attempt to discredit Tamil actor Vijay, who had been critical of the BJP’s politics, by “outing” him as a Christian failed.
At present, the BJP aided by a lack of strong popular leadership in both the DMK and the AIADMK.
The DMK’s M Karunanidhi has led the party since 1969, when he became leader after the death of its founder C N Annadurai. At the age of 92, Karunanidhi created history by winning his seat in the legislative assembly for the 13th time in a row in 2016. However, old age and ill health made him retire from politics.
The AIADMK owed its success to its own charismatic leaders, M G Ramachandran, who was its leader since his split from the DMK to form the new party in 1972 until his death in 1989. And thereafter Jayalalithaa led the party from 1989 until her untimely demise in December 2016 while in office.
Since then the AIADMK has been torn apart by a leadership struggle, while the DMK is yet to find a leader who can match Karunanidhi. M K Stalin, the son of Karunanidhi and heir apparent, is yet to prove himself.
