It is but natural that one hugging delightful dreams, while dozing becomes terribly enraged, if he is rudely shaken off from his slumber. And when he is not actually sleeping but wide awake courting illusion, he becomes even wolfish in temper, when somebody presents convincing arguments shattering the illusion. Most of the Congress leaders are in a similar predicament. They have been laboriously building up an illusion—'Bharath, one and indivisible' —but find today that they are on slippery grounds, their strength being diminished by the very effort at standing strong and erect. The pet idea which they have been nurturing almost with the affectionate care of a fond mother, is fast becoming unreliable and uncouth, and naturally they are irritated. Nothing irritates an individual so much as the consciousness of failure. No amount of optimism could now brighten up the Congress leaders. They find to their dismay, that what they have built up is cracking—the very massiveness of the structure causing disintegration. Like the anxious school girl trying to hold too many books and boxes, with her slender little hands, but finds the bundles thrown topsyturvy, the framers of the Indian Constitution have attempted at an unattainability and those who are charged with the task of maintaining the same, do find themselves in the jungle, and out of fear and remorse screach forth still more shibboleths just to get some solace and comfort.

Hence we find Congress leaders getting a shudder at the very mention of the term, 'Separation'. For, having been in the company of the illusion—'Bharath one and indivisible'—they are afraid to face the reality, and when circumstances emerge continuously, disproving their idea about 'Unity of India', they fret and foam.

Some of them are taking comfort in the thought that this talk about separation would die down in course of time.

Still others think that this is a cry in the wilderness.

There are others who delude themselves with the thought that this 'talk' emanates from disgruntled politicians.

A handful of them are attempting to brandish hot epithets and angry denunciations.

No day passes without one of them passing scathing remarks against the demand for Dravida Nad!

"Till there is one Congress worker left in the country", pompously declares the Congress leader, "you are not going to get this Dravida Nad."

We do not know whether he is asking us to take note of the fact, that the number of Congress workers is fast dwindling; may be he is trying to be a bit rhetorical, heroic.

But this is a problem that cannot be floored either by flippant remarks or fiery abuses. This is an urge, everyday gaining momentum. Events here and elsewere are becoming so many arguments in favour of this demand, and even the vituperation emitted by these eminents go but to prove, that the demand for separation is justified.

To counteract this momentous urge for a separate existence, some of the top-men are advancing geographical, historical, political and even religious reasons, in favour of the unity of India.

"Bharath is one, from Kashmir to Cape Comorin" explains the political philosopher of the Congress camp, "for, from there to here, we worship Shiva and Vishnu." None doubts that fact. But is that any reason why all the lands peopled by different ethnic elements should be cabined in an unrecognisable, and unmanageable single political entry—grotesque in appearance and performance? If the worship of Shiva and Vishnu are to be cogent arguments for welding all the States into one whole, how is it, that the Son of God is worshipped in politically independent states, in the European Continent? None answers! For, there is no answer!!

If Christianity is not advanced as an effective argument for doing away with National States in Europe why should Hindu Gods be employed for forging a fallacy?

In their anxiety to put forward some reason or other to hoodwink the public, some of the Congress politicians are debasing ethics and religion too.

But, time, the relentless master, is unleashing new forces and fresh circumstances, — the urge for an Independent Dravida Nad is gaining more and more strength.

In fact, there were some who had the acumen to visualise the shape of the things to come.

It was Sarat Chandra Bose, who boldly formulated the theory of a Separate Bengal — long before partition — but at that time, a cajolery was employed — 'Hindudom' was talked about and hence Sarat Chandra Bose had to fall in line.

But the thought of a separate existence — independent status — has never died down, in spite of the vigorous campaign carried on for infusing energy and life to the illusion.

Whenever the States feel despondent, defeated, and discontented, at the attitude of the Central Government, the talk about 'Seceding' bursts forth!

When Delhi was adamant with regard to the oil refinery question, leaders of various political parties in Assam spoke about 'seceding from the Indian Union."

Mr. Maganbhai P.Desai, in his Separate Note to the Kher Commission Report on the language question, points out that a Congress leader from the non-Hindi region, spoke about seceding from the Union in case Hindi were to be imposed from the Centre.

Not all, of course, are as definite and outspoken as those who advocate Dravida Nad, but in all these speeches, there are hints, suggestions, indications.

Either it needs time or stoutness of heart, for most of them to come out in the open to demand what is their due.

Even those who deride us, and talk disparagingly about the upsurge of Nationalism here, are oftentimes forced by bitter circumstances to voice forth their protest against the all-powerful Centre.

While we talk about 'Separation' —they talk about decentralisation!

We talk about North Indian Domination over the South. They protest against the Central Government's over-riding power over the States.

Louder and clearer the protests are becoming—and they are from varied quarters as well.

Even Congress ministers in our State—the best amongst the lot of yes-men—are now-a-days becoming heroic! They begin to assure the people here that they would never stoop before the North! In fact the Finance Minister of our State, asks people here to note and applaud his courage and valour during those passages-at-arms at Councils of an All-India level.

Probably they are thinking that such assurances are enough to thwart the attempt of those interested in fighting for a full-fledged, free State. But, no! Their very defence acts as a pointer! Their arguments add strength to the urge instead of annihilating it. For, the people are able to find out even from the lips of Congressmen and ministers, that there is an acute problem facing the South.

"This talk about North and South, is all pure fiction—product of a diseased brain—the mischief of the reactionary", so thunder forth the Congress leaders from here. But on closer scrutiny, we find, these same men are conscious of the thraldom under which they are placed.

We, of course, unchained to the chariot wheels, are able to demand—they, poor souls!—fated to eke out their livelihood by waiting for the crumbs from the master's table, are prepared only to whine!

But sometimes even this whining assumes significance.

We are accused of being reactionary whenever we point out the glaring contrast between the North and South, in the economic field. But, let us here procure the services of a Congressman of stature.

"Are Ahmedabad and Bombay the only places where raw materials for the textile industry are available in plenty? I represented in the previous legislative assembly 5 districts, 4 of which have the largest area under cotton cultivation. There is not a single spinning mill there. Why should you bring all the cotton to Ahmedabad to be spun into yarn and woven into cloth, and sent back to the very place where it has come from? Is that not the very fact against which we had been fighting, that cotton which is produced in the country was being taken to Manchester to be woven into cloth and sent back to us? Was it not for that we fought the British imperialists? Are we going to supplant one imperialism by another imperialism?"

It will not be possible for many to put in more vigorously or valourously the case for the South, than this. And such a strong case was put up, not inside a Congress pandal or on the sands of the Marina, but right on the floor of the Parliament.

"Are we going to supplant one imperialism by another imperialism?"-was the heroic question put forward—and the voice was that of a Congressman — it was none other than Mr. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar—now Speaker.

So at one time or other, someone from the South, gets up and under the influence of a patriotic fervour, speaks for his father-land. But, alas, the flesh is weak, temptations are many, and even brave spirits succumb when once they are caught in the coils of a sly imperialism.

(Editorial - 22-06-1958)