Politics
In the 1920s and 1930s, Nadar Mahajan Sangam supported the non-Brahmin movement and Justice party. W. P. A. Soundrapandian Nadar as the president of Nadar Mahajana Sangam led the effort to ally the community with Periyar E. V. Ramasamy's Self-respect movement. The Nadars joined the Justice party in its attack against Brahmins on cultural and religious front. Nadars also practiced self-respect marriages during the non-Brahmin movement. The Northern Nadars would continue to give their support to the justice party until the rise of Kamaraj Nadar. Kamaraj, the Nadar freedom fighter, was stoned by the Nadars when he tried to speak on behalf of the Congress in Kamudi, and branded as a traitor of the Nadar community for supporting the Congress.
However, in the late 1940s the Nadars' support shifted to Indian National Congress. Though Kamaraj was detested by his own community initially, his political success gradually changed the Nadars' support to Congress. Kamaraj went on to become the Indian National Congress president,from 1964 to 1967, and Chief Minister of Madras state,from 1954 to 1963. After the end of Kamaraj's era, the Nadars' political support have become diffused across various parties and the Nadar Sangam has become less politicized.
Read more about this topic: Nadar (caste)
Famous quotes containing the word politics:
“The average Kentuckian may appear a bit confused in his knowledge of history, but he is firmly certain about current politics. Kentucky cannot claim first place in political importance, but it tops the list in its keen enjoyment of politics for its own sake. It takes the average Kentuckian only a matter of moments to dispose of the weather and personal helath, but he never tires of a political discussion.”
—For the State of Kentucky, U.S. public relief program (1935-1943)
“Political organizations have slowly substituted themselves for the Churches as the places for believing practices.... Politics has once again become religious.”
—Michel de Certeau (1925–1986)
“While you’re playing cards with a regular guy or having a bite to eat with him, he seems a peaceable, good-humoured and not entirely dense person. But just begin a conversation with him about something inedible, politics or science, for instance, and he ends up in a deadend or starts in on such an obtuse and base philosophy that you can only wave your hand and leave.”
—Anton Pavlovich Chekhov (1860–1904)