Pa. Ranjith, a prominent filmmaker in Tamil Cinema celebrated for addressing Dalit grievances, has positioned himself as a Dalit Buddhist championing the fight against oppression. However, his actions raise serious questions about his commitment to social justice, especially regarding the Tamil Eelam struggle.
While Ranjith critiques casteism and advocates for social justice, his sympathetic stance toward Sinhala Buddhist chauvinism—arguably the driving force behind the Tamil genocide—stands in stark contradiction to his proclaimed ideals. His affection for Buddhism, combined with his association with individuals like Shoba sakthi, an outspoken critic of the Eelam movement, appears to have skewed his perspective. Instead of engaging critically with the Tamil liberation struggle, he seems dedicated to disseminating propaganda that undermines it.
A glaring example of this is his use of Neelam Publications to promote revisionist narratives. The publication of a book glorifying Anagarika Dharmapala, a Sinhala Buddhist monk notorious for his anti-Tamil and anti-Muslim rhetoric illustrates this troubling trend.
Dharmapala, often regarded as the father of Sinhala nationalism, laid the ideological groundwork for the systemic marginalization of Tamil and Muslim communities. His hateful legacy is comparable to that of Golwalkar, the architect of Hindutva ideology in India, yet Ranjith’s platform elevates such figures under the guise of promoting Buddhist philosophy. His anti-Eelam stance not only misrepresents the Tamil struggle but also aligns him with forces that have historically sought to erase Tamil identity and aspirations.
Pa. Ranjith’s alignment with Shoba Sakthi, whom he considers a mentor, further illustrates his problematic stance on the Tamil Eelam struggle. Shoba Shakthi, a writer from Sri Lanka, claims to have been associated with the Tamil Tigers. However, his involvement was limited to the Tamil Tigers’ Art and Literature Wing for a few months before he left Sri Lanka in 1984. Since then, his career has revolved around critiquing the Tamil liberation movement, portraying it in ways that align with anti-Tamil narratives.
The Tamil Eelam struggle, particularly under the leadership of the Tamil Tigers, was not merely a resistance against Sinhala chauvinism—it was also a transformative political project aimed at eradicating caste, dowry practices, and other regressive traditions within the Tamil community. The Tamil Eelam state envisioned by the Tigers was a secular entity, whose penal code criminalized caste-based discrimination. The leadership of the movement reflected this commitment to equality, with men and women from diverse caste backgrounds occupying top political and military positions.
This progressive vision drew solidarity from Dravidian, Dalit, and Communist movements in India, which recognized the Tamil Tigers as ideological allies in their shared fight against oppression. However, Pa. Ranjith’s selective endorsement of anti-caste and anti-oppression politics glaringly omits the contributions and ideals of the Tamil Tigers. By aligning with figures like Shoba Shakthi, who profit from dismantling the Tamil Eelam narrative, Ranjith exposes the contradictions in his own proclaimed values.
For someone who claims to uphold the ideals of social justice and equality, Ranjith’s stance on the Tamil Eelam struggle is not just hypocritical but also deeply harmful. His narrative serves to delegitimize one of the most progressive liberation movements in modern history, while tacitly endorsing the ideologies and structures that sought to suppress it.
In this context, Ranjith’s anti-Eelam stance not only alienates him from the principles he claims to champion but also undermines the sacrifices and aspirations of those who fought for a just and equitable Tamil state. It is a betrayal of the very ideals he professes to uphold.
True commitment to justice requires standing against all forms of oppression, not selectively endorsing some while turning a blind eye to others.
-@mrpaluvets
08/12/2024
Comments
Post a Comment