Dear reader,
As Tamil Nadu votes in its 2026 assembly election today, the long-standing dominance of the Dravidian parties faces a fresh test. The actor-politician Vijay’s Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) is aiming to make its mark as the AIADMK–DMK duopoly shows signs of strain. But can cinematic fame become a durable political machine?
In his piece for Himal Southasian, Vignesh Karthik K R examines Vijay’s political entry and the limits of stardom in Tamil Nadu politics, arguing that the real challenge lies in turning popularity into lasting political power.
I sat down with Karthik for a conversation to go behind the piece – diving deeper into what’s really at stake in this election and where Vijay’s entry with the TVK fits in, from the resilience of the Dravidian duopoly to the possibilities and constraints shaping the Tamil superstar’s political project.
An edited excerpt from the interview is below. You can also watch the full conversation on YouTube.
To continue bringing you analysis of moments like Tamil Nadu’s 2026 election and conversations that go beyond the headlines – we rely on your support. Become a paying Himal Patron today to help sustain our independent Southasian journalism!
All the best,
Shwetha Srikanthan
Associate Editor, Himal Southasian
Shwetha Srikanthan: With Tamil Nadu’s upcoming assembly election, Vijay’s political debut comes at a moment when the DMK looks fairly secure and the AIADMK seems to be finding its footing again. But there’s talk of a possible shakeup in Tamil Nadu’s longstanding two-party dominance. Could you walk us through what’s really at stake in this election and where Vijay’s entry with the TVK fits into that?
Vignesh Karthik K R: Yes, the longstanding Dravidian duopoly – it’s a two-alliance system: the DMK-led alliance and the AIADMK-led alliance. Historically, both have depended on alliances. From about 1977 to 2021, these two alliances together accounted for around 85 percent of the vote. Typically, the winning alliance gets about 45-plus percent and the losing one around 40-plus percent. There are exceptions, but this has broadly been the pattern.
In 2024, the DMK alliance secured 47 percent vote share, while the AIADMK and BJP alliances split much of the rest. But the broader consolidation still holds. Around 10 percent went to Seeman’s party.
This is the context in which Vijay is emerging. The AIADMK may be weaker than the DMK, but it remains a cadre-heavy party – so it is weak, but not at its weakest. Vijay’s entry is to chip away at the margins: the residual 10-15 percent, along with disgruntled voters and fence-sitters, rather than core party bases.
In terms of ideology, Vijay’s is still quite vague. He does not have the time to build a full ideological framework, especially when Dravidian mobilisation, Hindu nationalism and Tamil nativism have taken decades to develop. So he is trying to ride waves rather than create one. He draws from multiple figures – Kamaraj, Velu Nachiyar, Annadurai, Periyar, Ambedkar – but that is not the same as building a political project.
Looking ahead to 2026, the contest will likely be pulled back into a DMK–AIADMK frame. The absence of references to Vijay in campaign rhetoric reflects this – the fight is brought back to the Dravidian ethos, both through what is said and what is not said. The delimitation debate is a good example of this. The DMK has used it to mobilise around development, growth and representational justice.
SS: There are still growing concerns about the future of the Dravidian project, especially as its current leadership ages and some of its big promises prove harder to deliver on. In that context, you describe Vijay as less as a fully formed political alternative and more as a kind of vessel for dissatisfaction. Could you unpack that a bit for us?
VKKR: So the Dravidian political project itself is an expansive political project. It essentially tries to form a broad, horizontal coalition among marginalised caste groups, or marginalised social and economic groups across caste, class, religion and gender. All these marginalities are brought together through a kind of horizontal solidarity.
In that kind of project, there are always unfinished elements. More importantly, there are always dynamically evolving marginalities. A political project that speaks about recognition, redistribution and representation will always have chinks in the armour – ones it is trying to fill, even as new ones emerge.
In this context, Vijay – or anybody – can emerge as someone seeking to fill those chinks. But that requires acceptance and recognition; it requires credibility, and more importantly, a lot of hard work.
Are there people looking for a third alternative? Yes. That’s also why the Dravidian majors have so many alliance partners – they don’t claim to speak for everybody, but to bring different groups together. It is a project of coordination, rather than one of dominant consensus or assimilation.
I can share a recent example. Let’s say you are Vijay and you want to go after the Dravidian majors. When the delimitation debate came up, both parties had constraints – they’ve been in coalitions at the state and union levels, and carry that baggage. But as a new political actor, you don’t have those shackles. You can take a maximalist position.
Much before the DMK announces protests, what stopped you? The claim is that your fans will mobilise before anybody else – so use that. Call for action, take positions, go after both the AIADMK and the DMK. But that didn’t happen. So yes, he is a vessel – but a vessel of what? There seems to be a lot of opportunity, but this vessel is not catching on to it.
The point is, he will still have a considerable chunk of vote share – his die-hard loyalists. Even five percent is significant. There are larger numbers being floated, but 20 or 25 percent would be a huge claim – that would be a landslide moment for him, even if it doesn’t translate into proportionate seats.
SS: You place Vijay in a longer line of Tamil film stars who’ve tried to make the jump into politics with mixed results. Kamal Haasan and Rajinikanth both tested the waters in different ways, but neither quite managed to build a durable political project like the ones we’ve seen in the past. How do you see those trajectories shaping the expectations around Vijay today? And what, if anything, might he be doing differently?
VKKR: The striking difference is the demographic that Rajinikanth and Kamal Haasan inherited versus what Vijay inherits now. They decided to take the plunge into politics much later, so their active youth supporters had already become older, with different responsibilities. Vijay’s supporters, on the other hand, are largely youngsters. So there is potential to convert this young base into a political class of workers.
In the 1950s, 60s and 70s, when the DMK and AIADMK emerged, they also had a large number of young supporters.
So how do Rajinikanth and Kamal Haasan shape Vijay? I don’t think they shape him much. Vijay is entering a different demographic moment and a different political matrix. It is somewhat similar to what Kamal Haasan faced – the DMK under Stalin and the AIADMK under EPS – but with a different kind of potential. Whether he can convert that potential into political dividends remains to be seen.
One lesson Vijay can take from Kamal Haasan is the importance of continuity. After the initial performance of the Makkal Needhi Maiam, Kamal Haasan overhauled the party, asking the existing leadership to step down and make way for new people. That proved costly, because a political party is not a business that can be revamped based on new inputs.
A party runs on labour. In India, campaign funding is weak and often opaque, and much of the effort comes from loyal supporters willing to contribute their time and resources. After a loss, the expectation is that you keep these supporters close. Leaders like Jayalalithaa and Karunanidhi did this consistently – they retained and consolidated their base even in defeat.
That is a key lesson for Vijay: regardless of the result in 2026, a party’s survival depends on how it manages its low tides as much as how it rides its high tides.
SS: The DMK, of course, has framed this election as a contest between Tamil Nadu and New Delhi. And like you said, the BJP has long tried to expand its footprint in the state by relying on alliances with players like the AIADMK. At the same time, Vijay has come to be seen by some minority groups as a potential shield against majoritarian politics, especially given his own framing of the BJP as an ideological adversary. There are also moments that seem to open the door to possible alignment or leverage from the BJP. Tell us more about this?
VKKR: New Delhi versus Tamil Nadu is one of the most available frameworks for the DMK to use, because it has not just rhetorical value but also empirical grounding. Take the delimitation bill, for example – that is one clear instance. The DMK has not only opposed it, but has also pushed alternative proposals, including on women’s representation, delinking it from census or delimitation. So it’s not just rhetoric – there is a factual basis to this framing. In that context, Delhi versus Tamil Nadu becomes a powerful narrative.
The other issue is the possibility of an alignment between Vijay and the BJP. That perception comes partly from statements like the one by Ramdas Athawale, who said at a press conference that if they fall short of seats, they would seek Vijay’s support. This suggests that Vijay is seen as politically malleable, which is itself a problem.
Because perception works both ways. You can call the BJP an ideological adversary, but you also have to perform that adversarial position. Charisma is a two-way street.
As for an alliance, taking him at face value, he has said there is none, and that he is contesting independently. It is true that some of his candidates have had ties to the RSS or the BJP. But given the nature of his fandom, that may not immediately affect support – many will still believe that their leader will change things.
What remains to be seen is how long this depoliticised youth base remains depoliticised, especially as the Dravidian parties are themselves returning to actively politicising younger voters.
SS: As we head into the election this week, what are the key things you'll be watching for on the ground, whether in terms of vote share or the kind of constituencies Vijay is able to mobilise? And what do you think will count as a meaningful outcome for the state at this stage?
VKKR: For the state, a meaningful outcome would be a government that can promise continuity. There are states with low growth and low development, like Uttar Pradesh or Bihar; states with low growth but high development, like Kerala and Himachal Pradesh; and states with high growth but lower development, like Gujarat and Maharashtra. Tamil Nadu stands apart in being both high-growth and high-development.
Across a range of work – including The Dravidian Model, The Cambridge Companion to Periyar, and other scholarship – there is a broad consensus that, despite differences, Tamil Nadu has seen a certain socio-political unidirectionality. There have been gaps, but these are not failures of conception as much as of execution. The commitment to a trajectory of growth, development, and the pursuit of justice, equality and dignity has remained consistent.
In that context, my expectation would be a government that ensures continuity in that trajectory. Because in today’s climate, even speaking about dignity, justice and equality can seem like a leap of faith.
In terms of Vijay, anything he manages in this election is, in some sense, a gain. Given the level of effort so far, any outcome is still an outcome. But the more important question is about stability and continuity. His supporters have invested in him with that expectation – whether he sustains that beyond the election remains to be seen.
This election, though, is as much about the extent of the AIADMK alliance’s weakness as it is about the DMK alliance’s consolidation – which is more a question of magnitude. And then there is the question of how much figures like Seeman, or Vijay himself, are able to chip away at these coalitions. Let’s see.