Unclear if the DMK is still the party of the modest or is for the modest

Political commentator and author R Kannan recently launched his book, ‘The DMK Years: Ascent, Descent, Survival’ which is account of the DMK’s journey, from its foundation in 1949 by CN Annadurai to its present-day prominence under MK Stalin. In an interview with Divya Chandrababu, the author speaks on the DMK’s 75th founding day that the Hindu assertion of the BJP has forced the DMK to hold a conference for Murugan, the deity. Udhayanidhi’s real test is a post Stalin-phase, he says adding that DMK’s strength is in its organisational base and a divided opposition but if actor Vijay were to join forces with AIADMK or others, the ruling party may be in trouble for the 2026 assembly polls.
Your previous books were on Dravidian icons CN Annadurai and MG Ramachandran which recorded Tamil Nadu’s politics until their death. Your new book is not on any personality but on the DMK itself. With the party celebrating its 75th founding day, how would you see the DMK’s journey from 1949 to the present?
In retelling the post-independent story of Tamil Nadu’s socio-political history with a DMK emphasis, M Karunanidhi is featured prominently, as his public career overlaps with most of those years. A group of modest young men founded the DMK as a socio-political movement. It has been instrumental in social change and welfare. However, after its founder Annadurai’s demise, the thrust has been more on winning elections – at any cost. It is unclear if the DMK is still the party of the modest or is for the modest. Public life is no more about serving others but serving oneself.
2. DMK’s rationalist tenets from its founding years have diluted over time but recently, there is disappointment among its allies and party workers that they are embracing religion in a way that’s a far cry from its ideology.
Firstly, the DMK is not an atheist party. Its founder repeated saint Tirumoolar’s ‘One humanity, one divinity’, and DMK leaders regularly participated in the Muslim League events to mark Prophet Mohammed’s birthday. AIADMK leaders like MGR and Jayalalithaa had no compunction in exhibiting their faith. The passage of time and the Hindu assertion driven by the BJP has put the DMK in a defensive position. The DMK president had to state that 90 percent of the DMK members were Hindus and he even sported a Murugan spear later and his administration recently hostied a Murugan conference.
3. In the decade that BJP has led the Union government, what are the changes you observe in the DMK in being a vanguard against what they term saffronisation?
After the 1999-2004 cohabitation, the DMK concluded that the BJP was a political liability as it heavily depended/depends on minority support. Opposition to the BJP is Hobson’s choice. Is there a Jayalalithaa around to force the DMK into the BJP corner?
4. DMK continues to fend off the usual criticism over dynastic politics, corruption and a weak administration particularly in law and order. With three years in government, what are the areas where you think the party has done well and what are its challenges going forward?
Welfare measures, namely the free bus rides and the ₹1,000 monthly dole for women, and now some students are welcome. Other than this, the administration is heavily dependent on liquor revenues. Corruption seems manifest. A divided opposition and its organisational base are the DMK’s strength. However, party men don’t seem happy, and the administration appears removed from the ordinary people. Fulfilling the basic needs of the constituents, infrastructure, jobs, water, and environment remain challenges. Politically, if actor Vijay were to join forces with the AIADMK and others, the DMK would be in trouble.
5. What can you tell us about M K Stalin’s style of leadership in the party as well as in heading the state?
He has done reasonably well as the party leader and chief minister, but he seems removed from partymen and people. He doesn’t have to be his father, but his father had his ears to the ground.
6. What is your opinion on Udhayanidhi’s elevation? While he has the support of the party leaders there is also criticism that he is not experienced enough as his rise has been meteoric compared to that of Stalin.
I don’t think experience is a must. When his grandad became a minister, he was 43 and later chief minister at 45. They had never been in power. In any case, Udhayanidhi’s elevation would only formalise a position that he already enjoys within the party and the administration. The real test for Udhayanidhi will be in the post-Stalin phase.