Actor Vijay, widely known as “Thalapathy” (Commander), has embarked on a political journey that his dedicated fan base enthusiastically frames as a “noble sacrifice,” stating he has “forsaken crores in salary to enter politics and deliver good governance.” Yet, as his political movement gains momentum, it simultaneously faces a relentless barrage of criticism centered on his method and strategy.
While addressing his massive rallies, Vijay himself has frequently cited “intense pressure” and “obstruction,” claiming, “They are not allowing me room to speak… they are cutting the speaker wires… they are creating many pressures… are they that afraid of me?” This narrative of political victimhood, however, is being countered by an increasingly loud demand for a proactive political strategy that transcends complaints.
A Strategy Deficit in the Digital Era
Critics contend that in the digital age, an aspiring leader committed to the welfare of the people must deploy a more consistent and robust communication strategy. If physical rallies are being suppressed, they ask, why the reluctance to utilize accessible platforms? Political commentators suggest that “all his grievances and political intentions could be communicated effectively through regular video messages.”
Furthermore, rather than limiting political dialogue to mass gatherings, Vijay is urged to “frequently invite the media to his Panaiyur office and conduct regular press meets.” Analysts note that a serious political commitment requires daily engagement—turning sporadic musings into sustained political discourse.
The handling of a recent tragic incident in Karur has particularly drawn the ire of observers. Despite the gravity of the event, the response was confined to a “tweeted statement.” Many felt that a “video message offering solace,” even in lieu of a personal visit, was the bare minimum expected. The key question being posed is not about ability but about willingness: “Who, truly, can prevent him from undertaking these essential acts?”
The Accountability of Mobilization and Leadership
The critique runs deepest concerning the mobilization of his fan base. It is acknowledged that Vijay’s political venture naturally seeks to leverage the “innocent, fiercely loyal” following he has cultivated through cinema. However, once this group was identified as “vulnerable,” the responsibility for their proper guidance became paramount. Political pundits are now unequivocal in their assertion that “he failed to manage them appropriately.”
Politics, they stress, is won by strategy (mathi), which can overcome conspiracy and fate. The lack of visible, professional political infrastructure is highlighted. Beyond a small core of advisors, analysts question: “Who forms the brain trust necessary to chart a successful course?”
The underlying consensus among observers appears to be that Vijay must recognize that “serious political engagement is not the same as an audio launch event.” The time for cinematic scripts has passed. The most urgent plea now is for the leader to “stop using this innocent crowd of young people, who were drawn in by his cinema, for his own self-interest any further.” Without a demonstrable, functioning political strategy, critics conclude, “How can he ever expect to win the hearts of the electorate and deliver a stable government!?” The ultimate call is for the youth to “return to pursuing their livelihoods.”
