Opinion Tamil Nadu’s opposition to three-language policy has historical roots. Centre must respect it
In Tamil Nadu, Hindi was largely regarded as an Aryan language, supporting the cause of Brahmins and suppressing the Tamil identity. Periyar led an intensified battle against Hindi, Brahmin domination and Brahmanical values.
Tamil Nadu CM M K Stalin said, "We are not opposing the NEP only for the attempt to thrust Hindi but for several other reasons as well." (Source: Express File Photo) 
-
Share -
-
-
Language is a crucial element of identity. It works as an emotional thread to connect people who speak the same language. Such a connection becomes politically effective when the fear of the “other” language subjugating “ours” grows. Even though English has spread to a large part of semi-urban and rural India, Hindi is a preferred language in many middle-class households in Hindi-speaking regions. The mother tongue, however, continues to hold importance everywhere.
Language’s inherent political identity often stirs up tensions between the Union and state governments. Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan’s remarks indicating that unless the M K Stalin-led Tamil Nadu government implements the National Education Policy 2020 and adopts a three-language policy, the Central government would not provide Rs 2,150 crore under Samagra Shiksha fund, put the two again at loggerheads. However, Stalin’s robustness to not accept the three-language policies and his commitment to the state’s two-language policy —Tamil and English — should be read through the history of the language movement that shaped Tamil Nadu’s identity.
In colonial India, after the Congress formed the provincial government in 1937, the then Premier of Madras, C Rajagopalachari, was accused of promoting Hindi. Hindi was largely regarded as an Aryan language, supporting the cause of Brahmins and suppressing the Tamil identity. E V Ramasamy Naicker “Periyar” led an intensified battle against Hindi, Brahmin domination and Brahmanical values.
The Indian Constituent Assembly witnessed a fierce debate and division on the issue of language. After the debate, the Assembly concluded that Hindi would be the official language of India. It was also agreed that the issue would be reviewed 15 years after the Constitution came into force. In 1948, 1952 and 1965 — Tamil Nadu consecutively witnessed agitation over language. In the 1950s, under M. Karunanidhi, the leader of the then newly formed Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), shops run by North Indians in Tamil Nadu were picketed, and Hindi names appearing on public billboards were tarred.
Apprehending conflict over language, Jawaharlal Nehru piloted the passing of the Official Languages Act in 1963, which provided that from 1965, English “may” still be used along with Hindi in official communication. In 1965, as the “appointed date” was approaching, there were state-wide protests in Tamil Nadu against Hindi. On February 11, 1965, two union ministers from Tamil Nadu resigned from their offices. Amid agitation, Lal Bahadur Shastri announced that his government would honour Nehru’s assurance to the non-Hindi speakers. In 1967, amendments were made to the Official Language Act.
In 1964, the National Education Commission under Daulat Singh Kothari was set up, and it recommended a three-language formula. The parliament passed the bill in 1968 giving effect to some of the recommendations made by the commission. Although the recommendations were not effectively implemented, they have largely influenced the subsequent official policies dealing with education and language.
Since 2014, the BJP government has been accused of weakening the states by excessive centralisation of power. The Hindu groups are also accused of trying to impose their variant of Hindu identity on the country’s diverse Hindu population. Many in South India, particularly Tamil Nadu, have not welcomed the Modi government’s push to embrace Hindi. For instance, in March 2017, milestones on national highways in Tamil Nadu suddenly changed from English to Hindi. On the development, Stalin, then working president of his party, said, “This is bringing Hindi hegemony through the backdoor in Tamil Nadu.” He accused the Union government of “thrusting” Hindi and Sanskrit on the people.
most read
The clash over the language is a contest to protect, change and fix one’s identity. For several followers of Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan, many supporters of the BJP, and advocates of Hindi nationalism, Hindi should be declared as a national language of the country. Conversely, a large number of Hindus from the non-Hindi-speaking states take pride in their mother tongue. For instance, in the 2021 West Bengal Assembly election, the Trinamool Congress (TMC) under Mamata Banerjee fought against anti-incumbency sentiment to defeat the BJP. Her appeal to preserve Bengali culture, identity, and language resonated among her supporters. On the other hand, Hindi speeches of central BJP leaders made them, in TMC’s words, the “outsiders”. In Tamil Nadu, Dravidian parties are on the same page over the language issue. For them, Hindi symbolises North Indian domination and Brahmanical values.
Beyond politics, every language has the potential to carve a space among non-speakers and impel people to learn it. Languages enrich themselves through interaction with each other. Modi’s call to “embrace and enrich all languages” while speaking on February 21, at the 98th Marathi Sahitya Sammelan is a welcome move. In a mature pluralistic society, linguistic diversity should be valued rather than causing conflict.
The writer is a research fellow at the Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore
-
Share
-
-
-
Share
