Periyar E.V. Ramaswamy once objected to the brahmin domination in the Khadi Board. As a result. K. Santhanam (Iyengar) resigned his secretaryship of the Board. He also sought (M.K.) Gandhi’s help to withdraw the resignation. In this connection, the following dialogue took place between Periyar, Gandhi, C. Rajagopalachari and K. Santhanam in March 1927.
Periyar: Since there was a preponderance of brahmins in Khadi Board, I suggested as the President of the Board that more non-brahmins should be appointed to the Board. This did not please K. Santhanam. So, he submitted his resignation.
Gandhi: Is C.R. not aware of this?
Periyar: In this respect all of them (i.e. brahmins) are one in their thinking (This means that brahmins are opposed to reservation for non-brahmins)
Gandhi: In that case, does it mean that you do not have faith in C.R. too?
Perlyar: The brahmins have faith in C.R., but I do not have such faith.
Gandhi: Does it mean that you have no faith in any brahmin?
Periyar: I find it difficult to have faith in them.
Gandhi: Does it mean, in the whole world there is not a single good brahmin, in your opinion?
Periyar: No good brahmin in visible to me! What am I to do?
Gandhi: Please do not say like that I know one good brahmin. That is Gokhale. He never calls himself a brahmin. If anyone calls him a brahmin, he would say that he does not deserve to be called a brahmin,
Periyar: If to the ‘Mahatma’ himself, only one brahmin is visible, what would be the position with such as us!
Gandhi: (laughing) Cannot Santhanam withdraw his resignation?
Periyar: I have no objection provided there should be reservation of 50% for non-brahmins Sankara! Banker: It is really surprising that Periyar asks only for 50% reservation for non-brahmins.
Gandhi: I will not agree. At least 90% reservation should be made for non-brahmins.
Periyar: They are reluctant to give even 50%. Then where is the question of 90% reservation?
Gandhi: I do not say that a resolution should be passed in this regard. It is proper that such provision should be made. Santhanam, what is your objection to giving the posts to non-brahmins?
Santhanam: I have no objection. But nobody comes forward to take up the posts.
Perlyar: That is not true. First jobs should be given. Next, they should be treated with proper respect. If both these conditions are satisfied, a number of persons would volunteer for the jobs. Gandhi: In that case, you take up the responsibility of appointing persons to the posts.
Periyar: If Santhanam declines to do the job. I shall do it
Santhanam: I have no objection C. Rajagopalachari (C.R): (hastily intervening) That is impossible. Only those who get the work done should have the power to appoint the persons to the posts. Otherwise, work will not be got done.
Gandhi: (laughing): I have a feeling that there is an element of truth in what E.V.R. says, Now I am the. President of the Congress, I appoint some persons. If Jawaharlal Nehru, as Secretary, cannot get work done, either I should be at fault or Nehru should be at fault. There cannot be any fault in the person appointed to the job. Even in government, the appointing authority is a different person from the one who supervises the work. The work gets done smoothly.
C.R.: If reservation is adopted, should we not think in terms of merit?
Gandhi: I am sure E.V.R. would take that aspect also into consideration. Even if work suffers a little on account of appointing non-brahmins to the posts it does not matter. Even as Khadi is important, so is communal harmony. Let the appointment of persons to the posts be entrusted to E.V.R.
Congress a Party of Brahmins?: [The dialogue revealed many interesting things. Even though Gandhi ruled that Periyar should take the responsibility of appointments of persons to the posts in the Khadi Board, the brahmins ignored his ruling. Slowly they got full control of the Khadi Board. It also revealed that Gandhi was seized of the question of brahmin domination and sought to nullify it but in vain. When Santhanam was willing to hand over the responsibility of appointments to posts to Periyar, it was C.R. who hastily intervened to safeguard the interests of brahmins and to perpetuate brahmin monopoly. Then, in 1927, even as now, the bogey of merit and efficiency was raised to prevent non-brahmins getting their legitimate rights.
It showed how consistently Periyar had fought for social equity and social justice right from the beginning. It showed now neither Gandhi nor Periyar could succeed in their laudable aims within the framework of brahmin-dominated Congress Party. It showed how brahmins were prepared to resign their positions if they cannot appoint their own clansmen in several posts. It is the same clannishness and nepotism that successfully prevents the implementation of Mandal Commission recommendation even unto this day (9/92) The successive resolutions brought forward by Periyar for reservation policy were effectively foiled by the brahmins in the Congress party. Realising that the Congress party does not stand for social justice, he quit Congress and worked all through his long life for the legitimate rights of the deprived classes.].
The Modern Rationalist, Sept. 1992.
