By Badri Narayan

Some political forces try to exploit societal aspects such as language, culture, or social categorisation as resources which may ultimately turn into political capital. Some of them also use emotions and such linkages to mobilise supporters. All sorts of identities — social, cultural, and political — have been used for mobilisation in electoral politics.

These resources are used in two ways — first, by recreating positive emotion, and secondly, reproducing negative emotions — for political mobilisation. The recent debate on the three-language formula in the Indian education system has been reignited by a few state governments led by Tamil Nadu. This may be seen as an attempt to stir up negative emotions around language aimed at specific political gains. Tamil Nadu chief minister MK Stalin has shown his disagreement with the three-language formula and sought to continue education in his state in two languages. It is clearly an effort to deploy language as political capital. Language as politics is being used in two ways here. On the one hand, it is inculcating suspicion that through the three-language formula proposed by the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, Hindi may emerge as the dominant language. Secondly, in this way, the Tamil linguistic identity may be honed by creating negativity around this formula.

The three-language formula is not an invention of NEP 2020. During the British Raj, there was a discussion in the British parliament on how to deal with the multilingual Indian society concerning governance and education. The three-language matrix emerged in their debates too. The classical, vernacular, and English were incorporated into the three-language formula. Classical languages like Sanskrit and Persian were termed “oriental” by the British; an example of a vernacular languages is Bangla. These, along with English, formed the linguistic triangles in colonial governance and education policymaking.

When Mahatma Gandhi started the movement against British colonialism, he also realised that dealing with the linguistic diversity of India was a conundrum. As a solution, he also pushed the three-language formula, in which Hindi and regional languages got prominence. He was of the view that Indians should read, write, and communicate in Hindi instead of English. Gandhi advocated creating close connections between Hindi and other regional languages such as Tamil, Gujarati, Telugu, and Bangla. To do so, he suggested a path in his famous deliberation at the Kashi Nagri Pracharini in Varanasi in 1916. He suggested that while Hindi could be the language to be prioritised, the vernacular languages could be learnt alongside. Interestingly, what NEP 2020 has proposed is largely influenced by Gandhi’s lecture at Wardha in 1937. On that occasion, he outlined an indigenous pedagogic design in which he advocated for education in the mother tongue from classes I to VIII. It later appeared in his Wardha scheme, which became a part of his pedagogic principle known as Nai Talim or Basic Education.

During the national movement, most leaders from across regions and sections of society arrived at a consensus on the three-language formula. During a discussion in the Constituent Assembly on September 14, 1949, Jaipal Singh Munda, an eminent tribal face of the freedom movement, also strengthened the argument in favour of learning one more Indian language besides one’s mother tongue. Syama Prasad Mookerjee also called for respecting the linguistic diversity of India in our pedagogy, and giving importance to the mother tongue along with the rashtra bhasha (national language). English remained in the trifecta because it was the language understood by a majority of the world and was used for instruction within the British state.

Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, also advocated linguistic diversity many times. The three-language formula thus emerged and prioritised the mother tongue, another Indian language, and English in that order. In post-Independence India, the formula appeared in our pedagogic discourse. In 1968, the first NEP, which was formed on the basis of a report by the Kothari Commission, proposed to include it in the education system. This policy specified that Hindi-speaking students should learn another Indian language and students in non-Hindi speaking regions should learn Hindi. However, this was not implemented in its true spirit.

NEP 2020 fulfilled the commitment of the national movement and Gandhian thought by attempting decolonisation of education as it proposed the three-language formula and outlined a detailed plan for its implementation. The TN government criticised this and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). It is noteworthy that the BJP has been trying to draw a connection with Tamil culture, language, and identity. PM Narendra Modi started the Kashi-Tamil Sangamam, a programme designed to encourage interactions between scholars, artists, linguists, and entrepreneurs from the southern state and Varanasi. He and the BJP have never argued for any Hindi imposition. Modi, in various international fora, has also accorded a lot of importance to Tamil as “the world’s oldest language”. It begs the question: Why is the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam trying to create conflicting views for NEP 2020? It goes with the anti-BJP stance of the party.

Union education minister Dharmendra Pradhan, in reply to Stalin, has said: “The policy does not advocate the imposition of any language. Many non-BJP states have implemented the progressive policies of NEP despite political differences. NEP 2020 aims to broaden the horizon, not narrow them.”

Language need not turn into politics that could affect our education system. Education is meant to sculpt the future of our younger generation. NEP 2020 proposes to create an educational ecosystem which can contribute to making India a developed nation. We need to save both education and languages from being used as political capital for short-term gains.

The writer is Director, GB Pant Social Science Institute, Allahabad.

Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal and do not reflect the official position or policy of FinancialExpress.com. Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.