Linguistic Supremacy

After years of struggle from the British Raj which united a nation of diverse individuals, today this very diversity seems to be slowly poisoning the spirit of unity among Indians. India has seen internal conflicts on the bases on religion, culture, poverty etc. but overlooked the silent propaganda of linguistic prominence. After more than 60 years since Independence, in an era of technological and economic supremacy, we are being distracted by linguistic supremacy. One may ask, what is linguistic supremacy? And I would define it in view of the contemporary scenario as “An attempt to revive and preserve regionalism and cultural nexus in 21st century INDIA”.

Unfortunately this so called revolution is not similar to the freedom struggle carried out by scholars and patriots, but by power hungry and electoral vultures, who are singing the songs of linguistic patriotism to fulfill their personal and political ambition. Rise of regional politicians in Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh etc, are currently driving this issue all the way to their warm seats either in the national parliament or state assembly.

India is a land of more than thousand languages with the Indian constitution recognizing HINDI as the official language ( acc to Official Language Act of 1965- corrected by my brother from my previous statement of calling HINDI as the national language) and 18 other regional state languages. The issue of what should be its national language was under debate post independence, which the then Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru settled the quandary between English and Hindi in a very contentious manner. This insulted many Dravidian leaders, provoking and instigating an Anti-Hindi agitation by the Tamils. Today many, like the Tamil DMK party, have grown with a sole agenda to propagate their regional language and culture- The MNS and Shiv Sena in Maharashtra, the SP in Uttar Pradesh, the Kannada Chalavali Vatal Paksha in Karnataka, to name a few.

The 2004 movement by the Karnataka Film Industry to delay release of Hindi Cinemas by 4 weeks to promote regional Kannada films, last year’s anti-North Indian movement by the nascent MNS in a multi-cultural metro like Mumbai against non-marati speaking migrants from UP and Bihar, the failed legislation of only licensing educational institutions which make Kannada the language of education, the conversion sign boards to regional scripts, forceful conversion of all official documents to only regional languages etc are just few of the most absurd actions taken to promote the spirit of linguistic patriotism. The most recent incident which caught my attention was the assault of a prominent regional leader taking oath to office in the national language by other political leaders who narrated the oath in the regional language. Have we stooped so low that we are forcefully trying to instill in people this so called regionalist / linguistic feeling?

I personally respect one’s personal preference of their own regional language. I am proud to be a Kannadiga and also take pride in speaking my language but do I have the right to force that pride into someone? The legislator who was assaulted hails from a state which has Hindi as its regional language. Was he wrong in speaking in a language he is comfortable in? Many of India’s national leaders from the south do not even speak Hindi, is that considered offensive towards national pride? For five years the nation’s first citizen, the President of India did not utter a word of Hindi in all his national addresses, why didn’t anyone create a ruckus then? But there are extremes also to this cause, such the Anti-Hindi MNS chief, who doesn’t talk any other language in ‘public’ except his mother tongue, in an attempt to show solidarity towards the language, when his children are studying in English medium schools learning French and German. How about the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, who holds the tag of being a true proponent of the Tamil cause; he has educated his children in reputed English medium universities. To add to this list are also Pro-Hindi and Anti English politicians from the northern state of India, Uttar Pradesh, who educated his children in international universities. Why such a hypocrisy when it comes to one's own kin?

In a country where inter-national migration is highest, how can linguistic dominance find any takers? When an aspiring software engineer from north moves to Bangalore or Hyderabad to fulfill his ambition, how will he or she feel welcomed when they are shoved with documents in either Kannada or Telugu? How will they commute when the number and destinations on intercity buses is in regional script? How will they read commercial boards when they are in a medium alien to them? If this continues to happens, migration will comes to a standstill, dramatically constraining not only India's but also the state's economical and social growth. Why is it that these linguistic politicians do not recognize this issues? Yes, I must assert myself here saying that “when in Rome be like a Roman”- one should learn the medium of language they are surrounded by in due course fo time but should have the freedom to communicate in the language they are comfortable in. I believe the acceptance of bilingual or even trilingual schemes which facilitates communication in regional, national and English should satisfy these linguistic patriots- or will it ?

In an age when India is competing with countries like China, Russia and Brazil for technological and economic significance, one factor which makes us stand out among the crowd is our linguistic abilities. Fluency in national and regional language along with English has enabled young India to migrate to various parts of the country and the world conquering new horizons. In such a rat race, we cannot afford to indulge ourselves in linguistic dominance ignoring nationalistic spirit of progress. Every Indian should be aware and proud of his culture and language; and also have the freedom to express himself by means comfortable and satisfactory to oneself without being radically forced by hypocritical and unconvincing principles.