He is a crackpot and didn't do anything good for the society. The only achievement was that he brought thugs like Anna , Karunanidhi etc.. to the power. The one good thing was MGR but he was believed god.
RE:Periyar is a nut
by rationalbeing being on Apr 30, 2007 12:13 PM Permalink
what periyar did not mention that the chaturvarna was first adopted according to the division of work,not on the basis of caste.in history,we would find several intercaste,even inter religious marriage including friendship between different communities-rajput king married a bhil girl,sri krishna was a yadav who married several khsatriya girls,akbar and jehangir married rajput hindus,sri ram had a friend like guhak who was a chandal,laxman got knowledge from ravana when he was in death bed.so ancient india was not full of casteism.jabal stayakam was welcomed by maharishi goutam who termed satyakam as brahmin(satyakam had no registered father),chandragupta maurya got the title from her mother who was a dasi and chandragupta maurya and samrat ashoka were not the representative of upper castes.sufi movement,bhakti movement was against casteism and religious narrowness.sri ramakrishna and swami vivekananda faught against casteism not balming the hinduism alone.so i think periyar missed and crossed the line.he could have mentioned the tolerism of hindus who gave place to other religious groups.there is not a single evidence in the ancient,medieval even in some parts of modern world in the field of religious tolerance in christian and islam country.also hinduism accomodated several different thoughts within a religion-here we have idol worship,nirakar god,even we get atheist philosophy,every person can woeship god in any foem in this religion.hinduism is the only religion which never involved in forceful religious conversion.but pity is that periyar did not mention these positive sides.but sme extent he spreaded a sense of hatred in the name of abolishing casteism.i donot know why.yes upper castes are very much responsible in many cases.but almost all of the great persons are from upper castes who made indians proud by their tallent,dedication not by their caste identity,what periyar also did not mention that many people from upper castes did several social reforms-RAJA RAMMOHAN ROY,ISWAR CHANDRA VIDYASAGAR were brahmin but did signficant social reform,sri ramakrishna vivekananda also did their best,upper caste personalities were greatly involved in the country's freedom struggle(subhas bose,tilak,nehru ,gandhi ,gokhale,bagha jatin,jatin das,lala ljpat and many names)where the leadership was maintained by them.even the great achiever of tamilnadu-srinivas ramanujam,cv raman was from upper castes.i donot know why he ignored all this.ok,but still he has a place in my mind for his movement for social justice which some extent changed as a movement of hatred at latter stage.
RE:Periyar is a nut
by Polisetty Ravishankar on Apr 30, 2007 12:19 PM Permalink
You are actual wasting yourtime dear rational being. Its a waste explaining.... we need a good danda (thick stick) to explain. If u have these plans in reckoning plz tell me - sairavishankar_9@rediffmail.com
RE:Periyar is a nut
by Rajagopalan on Apr 30, 2007 12:41 PM Permalink
Periyar was fomenting social unrest till he lived. Physical attack on Brahmins is the legacy developed by Periyar.
Any Social prevailing in the world has inherent drawbacks and modification have been brought with proper maturity and keeping the dignity of citizens.
He shown more hostility towards the social system than needful and balance appraoch. He against independence and want to become henchman of English. He is kannadiga by birth did not honour either Kannada or tamil language.
He brought self interested leaders like Annadurai, Karunanidhi and veeramani who have demaged tamil nadu and will take more than 100 years to recover from social unrest.
Mr Gynasekharan wasting his time like Periyar stirring the Garbage gets nothing.
U.G. Krishnamurthy also strived for social cause better than Periyar. He is no more now. Besides he does not want followers and missioneries and any other oraganisation like Dravidar Kazhagam to act as mouth piece.
Periyar is against Brahmins only and close friend other castes hindus to survive his cause. He has no guts to oppose other religions if it has many drawbacks. Whereas UGK has more dynamic than Periyar widely honoured persons in in the universe.
Periyar appraoch is problems are outside to be tackeled and set right. The problems are in the heart inside. To conclude Periyar himself is the problem to himself.
