10-18-2006, 05:04 PM
From above..
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Definition of Dravidanad and link with M.A.Jinnah...
To the criticisms levelled against his scheme of a Dravidian State, E.V.R. replied in detail in a letter to the editor of the Mail (20 Nov 1939). His definition of Dravidanad lay on linguistic bases in the same manner as the Congress demanded linguistic bases in the same manner as the Congress demanded linguistic bases in the same manner as the Congress demanded linguistic provinces. But, for E.V.R. the concept was a Dravidian Federation which compromised all areas where the four major Dravidian languages were spoken. His definition of Dravidians included all people who inhabited those areas - "Muslims, Christians, Depressed classes and all 'Hindus' except Brahmins who call themselves Aryans." As to the problem of non-Tamilians [meaning Brahmins] would be duly protected and properly safeguarded. As regards the problems of defence and foreign relations of the proposed Dravidian State, he recognised the need of British help for an interim period.
  <b>From the beginning of 1940 E.V.R. added a new dimension to his theory of Dravidanad by joining hands with M.A. Jinnah and supporting the Muslim League's demand for a separate Muslim State.
</b>
In January 1940, at the invitation of the non-Brahmin citizens of Bombay, E.V.R. visited Bombay where he met Jinnah and B.R. Ambedkar, Leader of the Depressed classes. Speaking in Tamil at Dharavi, Bombay, E.V.R. said that he was disgusted with the Brahmin domination which "had crushed the spirit of the masses and kept them under religious, economic, social and political subjection". E.V.R. held that Brahmins were not Tamilians and that they were foreigners. He argued that in order to get the province freed from Brahmins the only remedy was to create Tamilnad into a separate state like Burma. He pointed out that Tamilnad had a population as large as that of England and that in area it was as large as Germany, with a culture, tradition and civilization of its own, and that it could well constitute an independent nation.
It was reported that E.V.R met Jinnah and that "he discussed with him the possibilities of joint action by parties opposed to Congress". Later speaking at Madras E.V.R. referred to his meeting with Jinnah and said that "there need not be fear among any one that they have entered into some alliance". At the Lahore session of the Muslim League in March 1940, a resolution was passed demanding that "areas where Muslims were numerically in a majority as in the north-western and eastern zones of India, should be grouped to constitute an independent state in which the constituent units would be autonomous and sovereign".
From the time of the passing of the Lahore resolution the relationship between the Justice Party and the Muslim League became more intimate. Since the founding of the Justice Party, Muslim members had taken an active part in it for according to the definition of the term 'Non-Brahmins' given by the Justice Party, Muslims were included along with Christians and Hindu non-Brahmins. On the other hand the Muslims, forming a small fraction of the population in the Tamil districts, found a friendly ally in the Justice Party in opposing the Congress party. This alignment was further strengthened when the two parties began to demand separate states from the proposed Indian Federation to be formed after the departure of the British.
At a joint meeting of the Justice Party and the Muslim League at Madura, Justice Party members suggested that they must seek Jinnah's help in achieving a Dravidian State. A. Ponnambalanar, a leader of the Self-Respect Movement and the Justice Party, announced that Jinnah had promised E.V.R. that he would tour Tamil districts for a month in April or May 1940 and support the demands for a Dravidanad. Speaking at Erode in support of Jinnah's partition scheme, E.V.R. said:
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Â Â "Mr Jinnah's scheme for a separate state for the Muslims in India is to be viewed as the sanest way of settling the baffling Hindu-Muslim problem.... Mr Jinnha's proposal for a partition of India as Muslim India and Hindu India has not come as a surprise to me for I have been urging for the separation of Dravidanad from the rest of India for the last twenty years."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
C.N. Annadurai, then organising secretary of the Justice Party, was critical of the view held by many politicians and scholars that the idea of a separate sovereign state for Dravidians was copies from the example of the Muslim League's demand for Pakistan.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->It was pointed out that it was chronologically wrong as well to say that E.V.R copied the idea from the Muslim League for the Lahore session of the Muslim League was held in March 1940 whereas the Justice Party Confederation in which E.V.R. put forward his demand for a separate Tamilnad was held at Madras in December 1938.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
At the fifth Coimbatore District Justice Party Conference held at Erode in April 1940, a resolution was passed stating that the demand for separate national units proposed at the Lahore session of the Muslim League had been caused by the fear and distrust created in the minds of all non-Congress people by the twenty-seven month's Congress regime, and the Government was requested to consider the necessity of the separation of Dravidanad from the rest of India when such a partition takes place.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Definition of Dravidanad and link with M.A.Jinnah...
To the criticisms levelled against his scheme of a Dravidian State, E.V.R. replied in detail in a letter to the editor of the Mail (20 Nov 1939). His definition of Dravidanad lay on linguistic bases in the same manner as the Congress demanded linguistic bases in the same manner as the Congress demanded linguistic bases in the same manner as the Congress demanded linguistic provinces. But, for E.V.R. the concept was a Dravidian Federation which compromised all areas where the four major Dravidian languages were spoken. His definition of Dravidians included all people who inhabited those areas - "Muslims, Christians, Depressed classes and all 'Hindus' except Brahmins who call themselves Aryans." As to the problem of non-Tamilians [meaning Brahmins] would be duly protected and properly safeguarded. As regards the problems of defence and foreign relations of the proposed Dravidian State, he recognised the need of British help for an interim period.
  <b>From the beginning of 1940 E.V.R. added a new dimension to his theory of Dravidanad by joining hands with M.A. Jinnah and supporting the Muslim League's demand for a separate Muslim State.
</b>
In January 1940, at the invitation of the non-Brahmin citizens of Bombay, E.V.R. visited Bombay where he met Jinnah and B.R. Ambedkar, Leader of the Depressed classes. Speaking in Tamil at Dharavi, Bombay, E.V.R. said that he was disgusted with the Brahmin domination which "had crushed the spirit of the masses and kept them under religious, economic, social and political subjection". E.V.R. held that Brahmins were not Tamilians and that they were foreigners. He argued that in order to get the province freed from Brahmins the only remedy was to create Tamilnad into a separate state like Burma. He pointed out that Tamilnad had a population as large as that of England and that in area it was as large as Germany, with a culture, tradition and civilization of its own, and that it could well constitute an independent nation.
It was reported that E.V.R met Jinnah and that "he discussed with him the possibilities of joint action by parties opposed to Congress". Later speaking at Madras E.V.R. referred to his meeting with Jinnah and said that "there need not be fear among any one that they have entered into some alliance". At the Lahore session of the Muslim League in March 1940, a resolution was passed demanding that "areas where Muslims were numerically in a majority as in the north-western and eastern zones of India, should be grouped to constitute an independent state in which the constituent units would be autonomous and sovereign".
From the time of the passing of the Lahore resolution the relationship between the Justice Party and the Muslim League became more intimate. Since the founding of the Justice Party, Muslim members had taken an active part in it for according to the definition of the term 'Non-Brahmins' given by the Justice Party, Muslims were included along with Christians and Hindu non-Brahmins. On the other hand the Muslims, forming a small fraction of the population in the Tamil districts, found a friendly ally in the Justice Party in opposing the Congress party. This alignment was further strengthened when the two parties began to demand separate states from the proposed Indian Federation to be formed after the departure of the British.
At a joint meeting of the Justice Party and the Muslim League at Madura, Justice Party members suggested that they must seek Jinnah's help in achieving a Dravidian State. A. Ponnambalanar, a leader of the Self-Respect Movement and the Justice Party, announced that Jinnah had promised E.V.R. that he would tour Tamil districts for a month in April or May 1940 and support the demands for a Dravidanad. Speaking at Erode in support of Jinnah's partition scheme, E.V.R. said:
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Â Â "Mr Jinnah's scheme for a separate state for the Muslims in India is to be viewed as the sanest way of settling the baffling Hindu-Muslim problem.... Mr Jinnha's proposal for a partition of India as Muslim India and Hindu India has not come as a surprise to me for I have been urging for the separation of Dravidanad from the rest of India for the last twenty years."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
C.N. Annadurai, then organising secretary of the Justice Party, was critical of the view held by many politicians and scholars that the idea of a separate sovereign state for Dravidians was copies from the example of the Muslim League's demand for Pakistan.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->It was pointed out that it was chronologically wrong as well to say that E.V.R copied the idea from the Muslim League for the Lahore session of the Muslim League was held in March 1940 whereas the Justice Party Confederation in which E.V.R. put forward his demand for a separate Tamilnad was held at Madras in December 1938.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
At the fifth Coimbatore District Justice Party Conference held at Erode in April 1940, a resolution was passed stating that the demand for separate national units proposed at the Lahore session of the Muslim League had been caused by the fear and distrust created in the minds of all non-Congress people by the twenty-seven month's Congress regime, and the Government was requested to consider the necessity of the separation of Dravidanad from the rest of India when such a partition takes place.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->