DMK after Karunanidhi: His absence speaks volumes

Chennai: “If only Kalaignar was there, he would have handled it differently,” is a common refrain that comes up at every juncture when the DMK government and Chief Minister MK Stalin confront a difficult situation. Call it plain nostalgia, but it reveals a yearning for him. For, his absence has robbed the public discourse of many things, making politics itself appear mundane.

Though the DMK under the stewardship of Stalin has been winning successive elections, the shadow of the late patriarch refuses to go off. It is not surprising since he had engaged the cadre as well as the public through his films, writings, and captivating oratory for more than 50 years. While excelling in rhetoric and satire, he used them as an idiom to convey a political message. As such, what is missing now in the DMK is politics with substance and aggression, that defined the late leader, opined analysts. In their view, while facts and data are necessary, they have to be presented through a political idiom.

“Not only the party old-timers, DMK sympathizers too feel that the party and the government are not strong enough in taking on the BJP. This is at a time when the saffron party, till now considered a marginal player, is making an aggressive push to capture the opposition space and project it as an alternative to the DMK. The soft handling of the BJP by the present DMK government has made many feel that they miss Karunanidhi,” explains senior journalist and author Babu Jayakumar.

For, Karunanidhi would not have ceded political space for the BJP, he added. While this is partly a reason for the nostalgia, Jayakumar admits that Stalin too is not free of it. The Chief Minister is invoking Karunanidhi at all events, whether it is an investors' meet or a college function, he pointed out.

Concurring with him, Dr. C Lakshmanan of Madras Institute of Development Studies (MIDS), says had the patriarch been alive, he would have ensured that the AIADMK government did not last its full term after the demise of Jayalalithaa and there would not have been an Edappadi K Palaniswamy or an O Panneerselvam as leaders.

“Spiritual politics being touted by certain DMK ministers would have been anathema for Karunanidhi. It is nothing but being apologetic. This ideological dilution and compromises like the U-turn on revoking the ban on palanquin procession of a Mutt head following opposition, definitely create a yearning for Karunanidhi. Further, the DMK engaging BJP with rebuttals rather than confronting it is perceived as a weakness. Politics is not merely extending government doles and welfare measures. Rhetoric sans message will turn politics a sterile territory,” he says adding that the DMK, being in a vantage position, needs to set the agenda rather than respond to those of others.