Why didn't Dravidian separatism ever take off in British India?

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
17,728
SoCal
#1
By the end of British India's existence, a very strong Muslim separatist movement developed that resulted in almost all of the Muslim-majority parts of British India successfully breaking off and becoming Pakistan (and later, Pakistan and Bangladesh):



For some reason, however, a strong Dravidian separatist movement never developed in British India. Why exactly was this the case? I mean, one would think that British India's Dravidians would likewise have enough people to create a large-scale separatist movement like British India's Muslims were able to do.

Indeed, any thoughts on this?

 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
17,728
SoCal
#2
One would think that, just like Britain played divide-and-rule in British India by pitting Muslims and Indus against each other, Britain could have likewise played divide-and-rule in British India by putting Indo-Aryans and Dravidians against each other.
 
Mar 2013
950
Breakdancing on the Moon.
#3
Because Dravidian is just a broad ethno-linguistic (primarily linguistic) category. Why would that ever translate into a full on nationalism? Its like positing a pan-celticism or a pan-germanism, it just doesn't work. Too broad and an academic rather than an everyday category.

Religion if anything plays a bigger role in India.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
17,728
SoCal
#4
Because Dravidian is just a broad ethno-linguistic (primarily linguistic) category. Why would that ever translate into a full on nationalism? Its like positing a pan-celticism or a pan-germanism, it just doesn't work. Too broad and an academic rather than an everyday category.

Religion if anything plays a bigger role in India.
Pan-Germanism actually did have some temporary successes in Germany under a guy named Adolf H., though. These successes could have become permanent had he not started WWII--or, alternatively, had he won WWII. :(
 
Likes: World Focker
Jun 2017
520
usa
#5
Because there was no "Indo- Aryan" and "Dravidian" separation in India prior to the Europeans setting foot. These were European constructs which held no validity.
"Dravida" is the Sanskrit word for surrounded by water. That is it. It is a geographical location not a race like it is fraudulently portrayed.


Muslims were always different than Hindus. Contrary to what many like to think, Hindus and Muslims have always had a negative feeling about each other.
 
Mar 2013
950
Breakdancing on the Moon.
#6
Pan-Germanism actually did have some temporary successes in Germany under a guy named Adolf H., though. These successes could have become permanent had he not started WWII--or, alternatively, had he won WWII. :(
Yeah I did think of this when I wrote that. The truth is, how successful was it? The English were not at all taken by it. Rightfully so, they have their own proud history without having to appropriate their Germanic cousins too. I don't know a lot about the Nords, but I suspect there was a healthy dose of skepticism there too. Likewise with the Germanic speaking Dutch. As for the Franks (French) - there was such an about turn that post WWII they started emphasising their Gallic heritage over their Merovingian/Carolingian Frankish.

You need more than vague ethno-linguistic markers to make a people tbh. You need religion, culture, shared history. The thing about India is you might get groups who don't share one or two of those, but every group shares something out of them with the others.

I don't know. The rise of nationalism and Hindu right wing extremism in India is quite sad to see. It really was a wonderful experiment of diversity and unity.
 
Likes: Futurist
Mar 2019
1,420
KL
#7
By the end of British India's existence, a very strong Muslim separatist movement developed that resulted in almost all of the Muslim-majority parts of British India successfully breaking off and becoming Pakistan (and later, Pakistan and Bangladesh):
the fate of pakistan was not decided until the very last days before the partition, the muslim league was not a separatist party, it wanted to create autonomous regions where muslims had their majority, within the confines of all india, infact the name of muslim league at that period was all india muslim league.

it is after the hindu muslim riots, and the killings of the muslims which resulted in direct action day and all those heated events which lead muslim league to demand a separate country. If the Hindu leadership had shown true leadership then it would have never taken place. Muslim league leaders like allama iqbal even wrote indian nationalistic poems such as ''saare jahan se acha hindustan hamara'' meaning india best nation in all the worlds or something and which was declared naional anthem of india before they adopted their official one.

regards
 
Likes: Futurist

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,371
New Delhi, India
#8
Religion if anything plays a bigger role in India.
Nice. The other thing which plays an important role in India is 'caste'. IMHO, Dravidianism originated because of 'caste' - Periyar E. V. Ramasamy - Wikipedia.
The rise of nationalism and Hindu right wing extremism in India is quite sad to see. It really was a wonderful experiment of diversity and unity.
Don't be sad. The rise of Hindu right wing does not mean end of rule of law in India. It will mean end of the anti-Hindu policies of the dynasty rule. The diversity will still be there. Of course, there will be corrections. Most affected will be the Muslims with new rules for marriage and divorce (Talaq, Nikah Halala, polygamy, inheritance, maintainance in case of divorce and custody of children), since the Indian Constitution guarantees equality of sexes and the Supreme Court has already clarified its position. Shariyah would not do in India, it is against the Indian Constitution. Also full covering of the body in case of Muslim women at some point of time because that is a security risk. For example, in the next election, there may be women poll officers to check the identity of women.
 
Last edited:

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
17,728
SoCal
#9
the fate of pakistan was not decided until the very last days before the partition, the muslim league was not a separatist party, it wanted to create autonomous regions where muslims had their majority, within the confines of all india, infact the name of muslim league at that period was all india muslim league.

it is after the hindu muslim riots, and the killings of the muslims which resulted in direct action day and all those heated events which lead muslim league to demand a separate country. If the Hindu leadership had shown true leadership then it would have never taken place. Muslim league leaders like allama iqbal even wrote indian nationalistic poems such as ''saare jahan se acha hindustan hamara'' meaning india best nation in all the worlds or something and which was declared naional anthem of india before they adopted their official one.

regards
AFAIK, the Muslim League's original goal was to have an independent India be a federation with a Muslim component and a Hindu component. Bengal and Punjab were supposed to remain undivided and were meant to be used by the Muslims as bargaining chips in order to ensure that Muslims in Indian provinces where they were a minority would be treated well under Hindu rule. In other words, the fear of Hindu minorities in Bengal and Punjab being mistreated by Muslims would have prevented Hindus from mistreating Muslims in Hindu-majority parts of India.

This was Ayesha Jalal's thesis, if I recall correctly.
 
Likes: Ashoka maurya
Mar 2019
1,420
KL
#10
AFAIK, the Muslim League's original goal was to have an independent India be a federation with a Muslim component and a Hindu component. Bengal and Punjab were supposed to remain undivided and were meant to be used by the Muslims as bargaining chips in order to ensure that Muslims in Indian provinces where they were a minority would be treated well under Hindu rule. In other words, the fear of Hindu minorities in Bengal and Punjab being mistreated by Muslims would have prevented Hindus from mistreating Muslims in Hindu-majority parts of India.

This was Ayesha Jalal's thesis, if I recall correctly.
yes, the creation of muslim league infact was majorly because of congress itself which in those days played the role of hindu nationalists, in the initial years there were many muslims who joined congress but then left it since congress was increasingly becoming a hindu party as opposed to a pan indian party, those same members formed muslim league, if the congress had not done that and not alienated its muslim members, muslim league had never been formed and Pakistan never demanded. Muslim league never even attained majority in muslim majority states except bengal until the very end in 1946

regards
 
Likes: Futurist