Talk:Periyar/Archive 1

Caste of Periyar

Is Periyar a Kannada Naidu or Telugu Balija Naidu?

Visit to Kasi

The article on the visit to Kashi looked too "schoolish". Hence I have abridged the section. Moreover anyone who wants to add to it cite proper evidence or accounts before pasting III standard school texts into it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramananrv123 (talk • contribs)

Sorry, text from 3rd standard school books will be deleted. This is not a place for texts without proper source reference nor is this a place for voicing ones opinions.

Genetic and anthropological assessments

Indian populations show a high degree of genetic similarity that stems from a population that formed on the island roughly 12,000 years ago and has been little changed through invasions by Indo-Aryans and other groups. A 2003 Stanford study analyzing the origins of various South Asian populations (including 40 Sinhalese and over 90 Tamils from Sri Lanka) found that most of the population of the island and India in general:

Taken together, these results show that Indian tribal and caste populations derive largely from the same genetic heritage of Pleistocene southern and western Asians and have received limited gene flow from external regions since the Holocene. [1]

These findings are corroborated by numerous other studies including a 2004 Biomedical Central Study:

Gene flow from West Eurasia-Broadly, the average proportion of mtDNAs from West Eurasia among Indian caste populations is 17% (Table 2). In the western States of India and in Pakistan their share is greater, reaching over 30% in Kashmir and Gujarat, nearly 40% in Indian Punjab, and peaking, expectedly, at approximately 50% in Pakistan (Table 11, see Additional file 6, Figure 11, panel A). These frequencies demonstrate a general decline (SAA p < 0.05 Figure 4) towards the south (23%, 11% and 15% in Maharashtra, Kerala and Sri Lanka, respectively) and even more so towards the east of India (13% in Uttar Pradesh and around 7% in West Bengal and Bangladesh). [2]

Modern Pakistani, Indian, and Sinhalese donors, examined for combinations of mini- and microsatellite loci, along with a number of Y chromosome and mtDNA markers (24), show varying degrees of diversity, which is expected from their geographic position and ability to receive waves of migrants pulsing from Africa and West Asia at different times. DYS287 or Y chromosome Alu insertion polymorphism also clearly demonstrate the gradual decline in insert-positive Y chromosomes from Africa to East Asia, reaching a transition point from polymorphic levels (1 to 5%) to private polymorphism in Pakistan. [3]

regarding criticism

he is considered to be a rationalist,however other than personal vendetta,i dont think he ever had a scientific temper.he says aryans were invaders who subdued dravidians and that he supports dravidians.well the photo clearly suggests he was fair,which means he was from the aryan race,so he is no authority over the dravidian people.second,people who follow his ideology namely mr karunanidhi, mr maran(present telecom minister)are fair,which implies they were aryans. the tamilians dont have understanding of who are aryans and who are dravidians. fair people who are descendants of indo european people are aryans . dark people who are descendants of indo african people are dravidians. but according to tamilians,dark people and that too living only in tamil nadu,not even south india are dravidians,then what about the tribals of north india?they too are dravidians. third,tamilians say all brahmins are aryans.well in chennai laone i have seen a sizeable number of dark skinned brahmins,from both iyer and iyengar community.--Jayanthv86 04:55, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Mr.Jayanth, I think you should study some bio-genetic science regarding the skin colors, initially every human race was black and they latter adapted to the colour as per the working habits and weather conditions. People will classify the race as per the colour of hair, nose size, eye features etc. U said that he dont have any scientic temper, I dont know what made you to trap him into the scientic jargons but ironically he is the first leader to suggest the ways to control birth and also said that 'abortion' practice will come in near future (which is unthinkable at that time). What I can see you from your whole document is U have some colour maina. I suggest U to read some of his articles and then come for the discussion. --Kalaa

this discussion is being posted again by me for the sake of vadakkan who seems to revert all edits:

well i dont think u can classify him as a freedom fighter.he worked towards the formation of a dravidian country,totally against the country.i also think he was a worthless person.if he was a aethist,then why does he refer to himself as buddhist (Buddha was an Aryan prince).i think he was a big time loser who has made no mark even among the dalits.the dalits in tamil nadu also criticise him for his lack of work and empty talk.he spoke more so against brahmins and not against the thevars,who were the actual oppressionists along with the Britishers. i will classify him as anti Hindu and not a modern thinker.if he was against god,then why did he stop with the burning of bhagawad gita,he should have dont the same with bible aand quran.he didnt because he was a selfish person,and he did all that for the sake of his party publicity.--Jayanthv86 18:25, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I dont think that Periyar should be under the category of Indian freedom fighters. He has not done any notable contribution to Indian Independence - 202.54.150.250 15:01, 3 Apr 2005

This is obvious troll. --Rrjanbiah 17:38, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I wouldn't categorize him as freedom fighter either. He was a social reformer. The political platform he belonged to, the Justice Party, wanted the British to stay in India till the social inequalities were "fixed."--Kingsleyj 02:46, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

This is yet another troll. --Rrjanbiah 19:09, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Just saying someone is a troll does not invalidate their point. Do you have sources for Periyar's freedom fighting activities? I'm willing to be convinced.--Kingsleyj 19:41, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

You may be right. But, it's well known fact that he did destroy palm trees and followed Gandhi (once). Unlike other upper caste freedom fighters, he did work for the freedom from internal and external forces; without him at least half of the people will be still a chain gang. Anyway, I'd like to know, your definition of freedom fighter. --Rrjanbiah 04:18, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Do not the scholars across the spectrum in Indology concur that India was first inhabited by Dravidians? Does anybody here differ on this? Who in India is "Fair"? Is the difference of skin color not striking between a Teutonic Aryan and and Indian? There are few "Fair" people in India, plausibly those brahmins who managed not to get 'contaminated' with the native Dravidians. Rest all, be it North India or South India, are Dravidians with the southerners being 'purer' than the others. It is quite understandable when the amount of murder and rape committed by the invading aryan tribes in the north, (as is repeatedly mentioned in the Vedas, the 'aryans' destroying thousands of 'puras' of 'dasyus' or Dravidians)is taken into account. The lingustic demography of the subcontinent offers irrefutable evidence of this. The Brahui Dravidians (in the remote places of Baluchistan), The Kurux and Malto (Dravidian languages) speakers in Nepal, West Bengal and Bangladesh, the innumerable Dravidian tongued tribes in Chattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, are all strong pointers to the fact that Dravidians are the native Indians and the 'Aryans' deracinated them progressively to the south. I suppose more elaboration on this is not appropriate in this link. As for Periyar's atheism, can anyone be criticized for being an atheist? If he is called as being 'Rationalist', then are the criticizers ready to be classed as 'Irrationalists'? Periyar had devoted all his life in pursuit of truth. If today we, as Indians, know our Dravidian origins and dispelled the myth that India is 'Aryan', as has been ceaselessly portrayed by the Brahmins in the North, and those Northern Dravidians who fancy themselves to be 'Aryans' just because they speak an Aryan language, it is, with little qualification, due to the monumental work of Periyar. - Stalin.

Skin color is dependent on the pigment melanin. To produce vitamin D the skin needs to allow sunlight. In colder countries in the higher latitudes the skin adapts to become more transparent to allow more light and produce vitamin D. In lower latitudes the skin has to block excessive sunlight to protect itself from skin cancer etc . That is the only reason for skin color variations. The genetic factor comes in the short term. Brahmins in South like others who have been in Tamil Lands are darker due to their existence in the south for thousands of years. The fairer Brahmins might have migrated more recently and mixed with other Brahmins. The truth is that a lot of Tamil Brahmins are darker than other non Brahmins in South and North India. So only a foolish racist like EVR with no Scientific knowledge can claim the validity of a distinct Dravidian Race.

Cleanup ?

This article seems riddled with POV and bad grammar.

"He is very well known for his quotation against religion: He who created god was a fool; he who spreads his name is a scoundrel and he who worships him is a barbarian."

Shouldn't this be in WikiQuotes instead? It is enough to say that he advocated atheism and social reform.

Why? --Rrjanbiah 19:09, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

I recant. Have it your way :) --Kingsleyj 19:41, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

"He is the founding father of Dravidian Nationalism which is based on Dravidian race and language. He demanded vivisection of India and creation of a separate Dravidian nation. Today, his ideology dominates the socio-political landscape of Tamil Nadu. All major political parties in the state are based on his ideology."

Can you cite sources for this? I've read 2 collections of his speeches and I don't remember reading anything about Dravidian statehood. Also his ideology does *not* dominate current Tamil politics, though the dominant forces do claim his heritage. I have changed the assertion about the state parties to a claim.

--Kingsleyj 03:07, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

POV all over, it appears

Sorry chaps, but this article just does not appear to pass muster as far as Wiki standards go. Its completely POV one way or the other - rationalist, sympathetic to Periyar or stridently religious. And its terribly written. Too many grammatical errors. I've had to put up the Disputed sign. --Tigger69 1 September 2005

Err

The content is full of error now and POV.

• It wasn't the asumption about caste; but was about the practice of untouchability.
• Periyar was freedom fighter. But, once the "power" has transformed to Brahmins, he asked to mourn on the independence day. He said, british rule is better than brahminical dominance. But, the article is cripppled a lot.
• Also, hard to refer Periyar as Budhist, as he was *damn* against to god. The idea behind his support towards Budhism is related to Ambedkar and against to the Ganesha.
• The page has to be moved to "Periyar" as he is popularly known by that name (Refer Eminem).
• Read the Tamil version and http://www.tamilnation.org/hundredtamils/periyar.htm before anyone makes the so called grammatical cleanup.

--Rrjanbiah 17:24, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

FWIW, it is extremely sad that the leader who played a full and high role in liberating non-brahmins is under attack here. While every other (upper caste) leaders are fighting to get back the "power", only the Periyar thought about liberating *everyone*. Not sure, if anyone attacks Martin Luther or any such leaders in this way. --Rrjanbiah 17:35, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Destroying Idols

It is a well known fact that EVR destroyed Vinayaka idols and smashed Rama's photos. Why is this not being mentioned in the article. And he did not dare to criticise Christian idol worship and islamists.

Feel free to add details you think are missing, but do keep in mind the need to maintain a Neutral Point of View. Please be careful not to just remove information as you did in your last edits. -- Arvind 22:04, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

well i dont think u can classify him as a freedom fighter.he worked towards the formation of a dravidian country,totally against the country.i also think he was a worthless person.if he was a aethist,then why does he refer to himself as buddhist.i think he was a big time loser who has made no mark even maong the dalits.the dalits in tamil nadu also criticise him for his lack of work and empty talk.he spoke more so against brahmins and not against the thevars,who were the actual oppressionists along with the brititsh. i will classify him as anti hindu and not a modern thinker.if he was against god,then why did he stop with the burning of bahgwad gita,he should have dont the same with bible aand quran.he didnt because he was a selfish person,and he did all that for the sake of his party publicity.--Jayanthv86 18:25, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted your deletion of the "Atheist" category. The issue of whether or not he was a freedom fighter is more complex. He was a member of the Congress from 1919 to 1925, giving up his position as chariman of the municipal council at Erode in the process. He courted arrest and participated in the Vaikom satyagraha - which makes him a freedom fighter under the GoI's definition. But I agree that it is a little odd to call him an "Indian" freedom fighter, given that he changed his views as radically as he did.

As regards your other points, the reasons he parted ways with the Congress are complex (he cited its domination by the upper castes), as are the motives behind his actions once he joined the Justice Party. On Wikipedia, we need to take a nuanced, scholarly approach towards the man and his works, whatever our personal views may be. For example, he addresses the question of why he did not condemn Islam and Christianity in his works. He also explains why he demanded independence for Tamil Nadu. An article on Wikipedia should report these views, and report scholarly criticisms of them. And that is all - whatever our personal views may be, this is not the place for them. -- Arvind 22:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Atheism

Hello Jayant. When editing controversial topics, please cite your sources. You have asserted that Periyar was not an atheist - could you please cite a verifiable source to back it up? Remember that many Buddhists are atheists, as Wikipedia's own article on atheism tells you! Given Periyar's famous "There is no God" quote, I find it hard to see how you could assert that he actually was not an atheist. As such, there is no basis for deleting his categorisation under "Atheist". I would also suggest you try to maintain a civil tone while entering into discussions with other users. Saying that someone "seems to revert all edits" is not a very good way to begin a discussion. -- Arvind 11:15, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

This article is very incomplete

This article is highly incomplete... It does not give his political history. His association with Ghandhi, the Justice Party or how his followers formed the DMK. His political influence in the Madras state is also not mentioned. Here a link to get started on his public life: [4] --hydkat 20:33, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

tamil alphabet section irrelevant

please list only the changes proposed/implemented by periyar and avoid giving personal criticisms. i am deleting most of the paragraph as it is irrelevant to periyar and criticizes the tamil alphabet instead. --ti 22:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Recent edits by anon

Several recent edits might violate WP:NPOV. Please be certain to present legitimate criticism of the article's subject with proper sources and without unbalancing it. Also, convention suggests that the most common name be used as far as possible in the text of the article. Hornplease 06:59, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Please we need to use one name Periyar or EVR

Some recent edits have changed Periyar to EVR.We need to use only 1 name.Hence changing it to Periyar as more of the articles and other articles mention him as thus.Harlowraman

Hello, it is ridiculous to refer to a person always by the title he recieved from his admirers. It is pathetic to see he was called 'Periyar' from his birth. Why don't you call a person by his name, I mean 'his' name as found in records. His name is E.V.Ramasami Naicker, that was he was called in official records, that is how he referred to himself, that is how even a biographer Anita Diehl calls him. He was called 'Periyar' the first time in the late 1930s and only from 1950s that title became more widespread. So, it is suggested that wherever his name occurs , including the title, be changed from Periyar. Of course, it can also be mentioned that he got the name Periyar from his admirers. Very first point in biographical notes - refer to a person by his name , as found in the official records.

Periyar or EVR Hitler in the wikipedia page is called Hitler not Fuhrer . So should EVR be called EVR not periyar. Periyar is just a title his cronies called him. It is not an official name. He did not have a passport that referred to him as Periyar.

Title to be changed to E.V.Ramasamy Naicker

That is a correct decision since that is how he called himself and his freinds called him. Do it quickly, please.

Ref Periyar

This page is clearly getting vandalised.

1:Only 1 name needs to be used either Periyar or EVR not 2 creates confusion to readers particularly foriegners.Periyar is how he is known.He is refered as Periyar in Tamil Nadu Government. University is called Periyar Universityn named after him

2: Periyar being likened to Hitler is potentially libellous as Hitler was responsible for millions of deaths whereas Periyar was not guilty of even one.Further no evidence or citation is given this comment.Periyar turned the offer to become the head of the Madras Presidency in 1939 after the Congress quit but he turned it down now to compare Hitler is wrong.

3:Brahmins:comments like The population of Brahmins in Tamil Nadu, which was about 10% in the 1920s, is today less than 3% as a result of persecution by EVR and his followers are strange as not even a Single Brahmin has been killed in the entire Dravidan movement. Further Rajaji,Jayalaitha and Janaki who were Chief Minsiters were Brahmins and ruled Tamil Nadu longer than any other single community and these statements are not backed by citations or evidence which are required.Jayalalitha is the head of a Dravidan Party

4: And the wording should be encyclopedic none emotional and contraversial lines like Within a span of 20 years, the Brahmins of Tamil Nadu, who had been living there for more than 2000 years, were turned into alien immigrants by the DK's propaganda. The speeches called for the elimination of Brahmins from Tamil Nadu, and the enslavement of Brahmin women. The speeches harkened back to an ancient Tamil glory, similar to Hitler's revival of ancient Germanic culture are not abcked by citations or Evidence

5:Further some blanked His Childhood and Education

Harlowraman.

If Periyar had his way in creating a Tamil Nation, Brahmins would have been killed. Also there has been a significant migration of Brahmins from Tamil Nadu to other states and Countries. His words characterize him and they are racist and violent enough to compare him with Hitler.

To the lady or Gentleman who put the unsigned comment. I respect your right to your views.However facts are different.Periyar even if go to 1919 when the Justice Partywas started not a single brahmin has been killed while we had scores of Dalits and others have been killed in riots over the years.Look if you say the Kashmiri Pandits fled Kashmir due to persecution .Anyone would agree 100%.However Tamil Brahmins migration to the USA,Gulf,Bangalore,mumbai it was for Better opportunties.They did not go as refugees it was each family individual decision This is true for millions of others from other parts of the country who migrate this includes in larger numbers like gujaratis etc.Periyar turned the offer to became the Prime minsiter of the Madras Presidency twice in 1939 and 1940.He was not after power and was for social reform.This is an encyclopedia and not a debating forum where points like what would happened if an independent state was created to be debated .However I agree with another user who put Periyar has been accused of abusing Brahmins with vulgar language and running a hate campaign against them in Criticism while removing non encyclopedic and emotional and contraversial linesFurther Jayaliatha a brahmin was the chief minister,many brahmin Actors,businessman all come from Chennai and others parts of tamil Nadu the list is endless.Harlowraman 06:10, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Reverted the Mass deletion done by 192.223.243.6

I have Reverted the Mass deletion done by 192.223.243.6.Harlowraman (talk)

Libellous comments without evidence removed

comments about Periyar without proof removed.another user asked for proof no proof given hence removed.Please provide Proof and add

In the 1930s, EVR visited Germany. It is not clear what he learnt from Hitler's Germany, but it is certainly true that the Dravidar Kazhagam was patterned after the Nazi Party - its black-shirted storm troopers were prone to anti-Brahmin violence.[citation needed] Its conferences prominently displayed lewd caricatures of Brahmins - somewhat patterned after Julius Streicher's Der Sturmer.[citation needed] The speeches called for the elimination of Brahmins from Tamil Nadu, and the enslavement of Brahmin women. The speeches harkened back to an ancient Tamil glory, similar to Hitler's revival of ancient Germanic culture.[citation needed] The DK positioned Brahmins as the antithesis of Tamils and Brahmins as the enemies of the Tamil language (ignoring the significant contribution by Brahmins to Tamil literature from time immemorial.) Within a span of 20 years, the Brahmins of Tamil Nadu, who had been living there for more than 2000 years, were turned into alien immigrants by the DK's propaganda.[citation needed]

His speeches used foul language to attack Brahmins, a practice that is followed even today by his followers. He never made any attempt to distinguish between good or bad Brahmins. For him, all Brahmins were evil, and were to be exterminated. By changing the usage of the word 'Brahminism' (which meant rituals and religion of the Brahmins) to mean 'casteism', he absolved all other upper castes of any responsibility of casteism, and only put the blame on Brahmins.[citation needed] His followers plastered the state with anti-Brahmin messages - for example: "If you see a snake and a Brahmin, leave the snake alone and kill the Brahmin." "We will break the temple and set fire to the agraharam (Brahmin settlement)" "We will turn Brahmin women into public property".[citation needed] Many of these slogans can be seen in walls in Tamil Nadu even today. The population of Brahmins in Tamil Nadu, which was about 10% in the 1920s, is today less than 3% as a result of persecution by EVR and his followers.[citation needed]

59.144.31.158 06:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Comments against Brahmins put in crictisim

Comments without citation have been removed but I have however add it in citicism that he uses vulgar language and runs a hate campaign against Brahmins 125.22.66.201 05:31, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Pro-EVR comments seem to have less hurdles than anti-EVR comments.

Added 'citation required' notes for a number of blatantly pro-EVR comments which where there in the article without any substantiation. - ramananpi.

Dubious references and Incorrect title for this article

The references www.periyar.org and www.tamilnation.org are NOT unbiased or academic sources. Periyar.org is a propaganda page of the Dravidar Kazhagam, and Tamilnation.org is a propaganda site created by a SriLankan activist. These are not sufficient citations.

Most of this article is highly biased towards EVR. The title should be changed from Periyar Ramasami to E. V. Ramaswamy Naicker. That is his real name. Periyar is merely a title that is given by and used by his followers. -- Sekar.