In the past few weeks, the politics of language in Tamil Nadu (TN) has once again started rearing its ugly head. The immediate provocation, it seems, is the implementation of NEP 2020 (New Education Policy) which, among other things, talks of the “Three language formula” – a much-despised phrase in the politics of TN. If the advisors to the government on this NEP had some knowledge of the state’s repeated brush with the Centre on the question of language, they would have avoided this phrase and instead advocated something different, like, say, the “Open Language formula”!
For, unlike the earlier three-language formula of the past central governments, which advocated the teaching of the state’s local language, English and Hindi in schools, the new policy is more open. It promotes the learning of three languages with at least two being native Indian languages. The choice of the languages is left to the state, regions and the students. It also gives an option to change the languages after a few grades. As far as I went through the highlights of NEP 2020, there is no mention of Hindi as being mandatory. In fact, it goes a step beyond to promote primary education in the local regional language of the state (Not Hindi). Therefore, the brouhaha in Tamil Nadu which is ruled by an opposition party that is facing elections in the coming year is fully understandable. Other opposition ruled states also jumping on to the Hindi imposition bandwagon, is also equally understandable.
Beyond this politics of language, is there a merit in the arguments of both sides – who advocate the learning of Hindi as a link language in India and who resist it as something which is useless? Now, like in debates of this nature, there are merits, de-merits, truths and half-truths in all these arguments.
People from TN who have not studied Hindi in schools have managed to migrate to Hindi-speaking states in the country and do well in their lives. The vice versa is true as well. We see today many people from Hindi-speaking states living in TN and picking up working Tamil for day-to-day existence. Of course, for professions that need proficiency in Hindi, people from other states who have that skill may get preference. This happens more often than not in higher paid governance and management jobs.
I have also seen that people from other South Indian states like Kerala and Karnataka, who had adopted the original three language formula and learnt Hindi in schools, are experiencing the same struggle in Hindi speaking states as the Tamils.
While having a common link language is certainly desirable, as far as India is concerned, it is not proven to be a handicap so far. We have managed all these years without one, isn’t it? The only time I feel the problem is during business discussions with foreigners outside of the US. During crucial deal negotiation meetings, the other side seamlessly switches to their local language among themselves, leaving us bewildered. On our side, we have to discuss among ourselves in English, which is what is the “comfortable” and “comprehensible” link language among ourselves. What we talk in English can be comprehended by the other side as well, making them more prepared to counter.
The oft-repeated argument from Tamil Nadu on accepting English imposition but not Hindi imposition is that it has served the state well economically. Had the state accepted the original three-language formula, would it have affected the capacity of the students to master English as they have done today?
So, whichever you look at it, in my opinion, the opposition to the original three-language formula is more out of political considerations than anything else. It served the Tamil Dravida parties well to take on the Congress by raising the bogey of “Hindi imposition” and win the state back in the 60’s. Much water has flown under the Cauvery bridge since then. Yet, the Hindi imposition bogey continues to be a rallying point during election time. The only difference is, it was the Congress then and it is the BJP now who is the imposer!
Congress under Nehru back then responded in a way it knows best – which is to maintain status quo on anything without upsetting the apple cart. Indira Gandhi tried her luck too but backed out. Under Rajiv Gandhi, Navodaya schools were set up across the country except Tamil Nadu because of the state’s opposition to the three-language formula. The successive governments, including that of Vajpayee, followed suit by leaving TN alone as far as the three-language formula was concerned.
The NEP 2020 brought in by the Modi Sarkar actually attempts to address the fundamental issues related to the language in India. It attempts to encourage the use of one’s mother tongue and local regional language as the medium of instruction in primary education. It is believed that learning in the mother tongue improves the cognitive skills of children. I am not sure if we have enough data to prove this, but we have empirical evidence looking at countries like Japan, Germany, etc.
Also, NEP doesn’t insist on Hindi as the second Indian language but keeps it open. As a third language, it even encourages kids to learn a foreign language that could be English or anything else. So, in my opinion, the new policy checks all the right boxes and speaks the right language. It challenges the status quoist approach of the past while allowing a continuum of the past. Therefore, equating the proposition under NEP with the old three language policy is just pure politics.
I believe that the politics of language would continue to play out in the open as the election season hots up. Irrespective of this, the political class that opposes Hindi tooth and nail should understand that the “language of politics” in India is Hindi. A tall leader in the Congress like Kamaraj couldn’t even dream of becoming a Prime Minister of the country since he couldn’t converse in Hindi. The same is the case with Pranab Mukherjee who otherwise had all the qualifications. On the other hand, a Narasimha Rao, despite being from the south, could become a PM as he was proficient in Hindi. The leader of DMK, a party whose raison d’être has been Anti-Hindi imposition, Karunanidhi, while at many points in the Indian political history had significant political clout at the Centre, was never in the race for a PM thanks to his aversion for Hindi. That he might not have aspired for the same is another matter. A less politically astute Deve Gowda or an I.K. Gujral could get a chance as they were Hindi speaking. Therefore, not knowing Hindi from TN may not make one less employable, but for TN politicians this is certainly a limiting factor to take a shot at the top post.
Parties could play the politics of language and at the end of the day should master the language of politics if they have aspirations to flourish!
Post script: December 20, 2012. It’s the counting day for the Gujarat State elections. By evening it was clear that Narendra Modi was winning the state for a third consecutive term. That evening at Gandhinagar, Modi addressed the party workers in a huge victory rally in his typical saffron coloured half-sleeved Kurta. Just that, unlike his campaign speeches that were in chaste Gujarati, this speech was in Hindi! BJP got its next prime ministerial candidate that day who understood the language of politics!
