We elect archetypes not politicians
The recent victory by TVK, led by Joseph Vijay, the superstar, made me look Tamil Nadu politics from the lens of a curious strategist.
Tamil Nadu has a long standing love affair with Cinema Politics. It's a state that has managed to convert reel power, superstardom to a political machinery for governance. And it has a track record of 6 decades.
Vijay isn't an aberration, he is the norm proving the fundamental system.
But as a strategist, I felt that this state doesn't elect politicians but archetypes and characters who are required for the story of the times.
Each of these people become successful when their party's manifesto resonates and aligns with the unmet needs of the voters and resolves the cultural contradiction of the times.
Their archetypes truly shine when all of these align.
Let's start with Karunanidhi.
He came to power as a highly educated, intellectual and powerful orator, script writer and the architect of pushing the Dravidian philosophy to the masses through his movies.
His win happened at a time when the Tamil Nadu culturally was fighting casteism (trying to break the stronghold of Brahmins within politics and otherwise). It was also fighting the English speaking Congress force by adopting a more regional approach, using Tamil identity as his war cry against the colonially-rooted Congress. The voter sentiment was resonating that feeling. It demanded to be heard, to be seen, and Karunanidhi with DMK did just that. His speeches, campaigns spread the Tamil identity ideology and made every voter feel seen and heard. Although highly educated, he managed to connect with the masses and understood that rural emotion outweighed urban rational. The title of Kalaignar (artist, craftsman) was apt for the times. He was instrumental in shaping the Dravidian narrative through his movies and the party became a force that shaped it into reality. As an archetype, Karunanidhi was the ARCHITECT.
Then comes MGR.
He started his run with DMK and was already a superstar. His title of Makkal Tilagam (jewel of the people) - a people's champion was leveraged by DMK and later instrumental when he created AIDMK. He was star who connected the masses through his popularity. His movies were reflective of oppressive power and he the hero who fought against the system for those who couldn't. He was the first to convert his screen presence and united the state to follow him beyond movies to politics. His party was an offshoot of him. It was more welfare focused, more populist. And when he came to power, the cultural tension and the voter sentiment were favoring him. They needed someone who would bring everyone together and fight for the unheard, weak, oppressed, the poor. He was seen as a the big brother for the mass. 30 years of playing the wrongly persecuted poor man who triumphs through virtue. His Noon-meal scheme reflected his ideology and is still running. People didn't elect a politican, but their ELDER BROTHER to fight their fight. They elected a character they trusted for decades.
Jayalalitha was the next powerhouse.
She came to power as a challenger against the dynastical political power. It was the era of coalition, of yet a highly male dominated politics. Sentimentally, Tamilians were ready for a fight, they were hardworking, relentless, fearless and she personified it all. Every court case, every political attack made her stand strong and fight back with dignity. She was the Iron Clad lady for the resilient mentality that voter demanded. Her monicker of AMMA became her archetype. Although educated, and a dashing movie star paired against the dominant stars of her era - she became the caring mother opposing the artist in her political life. Her schemes of Amma Canteen, Amma Water, Amma Salt all state welfare schemes that cemented her name and her identity. She branded herself through these state-driven schemes. She represented the non-negotiable spirit of Tamil Nadu. She expanded Tamil identity to women too, making it more liberal yet maternal. Politically she was defiant, but to the masses, she was a benevolent mother who nursed and helped and empathized.
Vijaykanth's entry into politics was timely.
He was against the duopolistic political landscape. He gave hope to people who came to believe there was no option against the giants. His moniker CAPTAIN played into the political narrative. A righteous fighter for the forgotten, a crusader against corruption. He definitely got the voter sentiment right but his party lacked the depth to survive the long battle. He won fights but never the war. He become a powerful challenger against legacy parties and people used his shoulder to fire against the wrongdoings of the other 2 parties but never really supported him along the way. What he failed to work out was the party narrative and that made it difficult for his archetype because it didn't have a clear storyline to rally behind.
Rajinikanth - the superstar who was worshipped like a god, came in with a meek undecided political presence. He announced his entry into politics, then backed out then announced again. The people needed him and it was a time when they felt his popularity could help lift the Tamil identity through a more secular lens. A rags to riches story, a struggler, hustler who made it big, a narrative that played to the masses that hardwork pays off. Voters were looking for that assurance. They believed he could become their voice. He was culturally fit, matched the voter sentiment but he failed because his party was unable to file a sharp promise and thus missed capitalizing his popularity. His indecisiveness was seen as abandonment and his ASCETIC archetype became the reason for his failure.
Kamal Haasan came in when the DMK and AIDMK were already having under-currents of corruption, of favoring dynastic politics, of mal-governance. People were unhappy with both of these parties that were playing musical chairs with the high post. He became the intellectual voice to stand against this sentiment. He was presented as a messiah against corruption, fighting the right fight. He promised a stark improvement. A right governance. His intellectual wit backed with his popularity made him unfortunately more a niche than a mass success. He was the REFORMER. His failure is not managing to address the voter sentiment. Fresh off Covid, they didn't want reform as much as to be seen. They wanted be recognized and understood beyond the Dravidian and Tamil identity politics. They wanted evolution and he was offering revolution. And that backfired.
Now the scene is set for Vijay. Tamil Nadu is in a political vaccum. The post-Dravidian story has played its course. The AIDMK welfare-driven party seems shattered and leaderless. But there is huge aspiration. Development is at an all-time high. The Tamil identity needed a new torch bearer. People were looking for a change but also needed someone they could trust. They wanted a leader who could support them and represent their collective hope, aspiration. The state demanded a leader who could take everyone along.
His party name 'Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam' resonated his collectivist approach. It was a victory of the people. And he became the voice of this collective. His political narrative aligned with his movie personality he has built over the last 2 decades. The crusader who fought against the system not for personal vengeance but as for the collective good. He is the MORAL CHALLENGER.
But unlike Kamal Hassan, he understands the pulse of the masses and speaks their language. People don't look up to him, they feel he is one of them.
Vijay has just demonstrated how the archetype coupled with the alignment of the cultural contradiction, the voter sentiment and the party's manifesto can win the election but is no guarantee of a successful governance.
He proves that emotion gets you the seat. The work determines the legacy.
Comments