Linguistic Stalinism

AMONG THE RISING NUMBER OF VISITORS AT THE third edition of the Kashi Tamil Sangamam held in Febru­ary were hundreds of ‘delegates’ brought to Varanasi by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The contingents from Tamil Nadu included farmers, artisans and women from varying social and caste backgrounds, intended to make their cultural experience immersive and inclusive. The event—an initiative by the Union government—wasdesigned as were its previous editions, to showcase the heritage, arts, storytelling and historical connections between Kashi and Tamil Nadu. This year it included discussions on common values espoused by the Bhagavad Gita and Tirukkural, and iconic Tamil sage Agastya as the unifier of the two centres of culture and civilisation. The idea struck roots abroad too, with the Copenhagen Tamil Sangam and the Indian embassy organising a conversation on the sage, Tamil language and medicine.

The cultural and political resonance of the Kashi Tamil Sanga­mam and its growing appeal sit at odds with the ideology of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), whose leaders have called for the eradication of Sanatana Dharma, labelling it an exploit­ative, Brahmanical and retrograde belief system. The derogatory language went well beyond the articulation of DMK’s professed rationalist and atheistic moorings. The intensity of the attacks appeared, on the face of it, disproportionate and raised more ques­tions about the likely motive and objectives. After all, the social and political aspects of the Periyarist revolution have been long settled in Tamil Nadu. So, why was DMK devoting so much attention— and ire—to the subject? Hindutva votaries have mostly been seen as a small, even if increasingly vocal, minority and how did picking a fight with BJP over Hindu identity make political sense? Or did DMK see BJP as an emerging threat and was trying to sharpen its identity politics, albeit in a deliberately unsubtle manner?

Since 2023, when Tamil Nadu’s deputy chief minister and DMK heir apparent Udhayanidhi Stalin raised a storm by comparing Sanatana Dharma to malaria, dengue and the coronavirus—com­ments endorsed by other leaders—DMK and its allies swept the 2024 Lok Sabha elections in the state. Yet DMK, which contested 22 seats, two less than in 2019, saw its vote share fall by 6.5 per cent. AIADMK’s vote inched up by 1 per cent but it contested many more seats and could have hoped for bigger gains. BJP, which contested 23 seats without allying with the main Dravidian parties, gained a creditable 7.5 per cent vote share, taking it into double digits at 11.2 per cent. On paper, the vote shares of the AIADMK and BJP alliances are still short of the DMK coalition’s, but not by much. As things stand, prospects of BJP and AIADMK reviving their understand­ing look remote but the state elections due in April-May 2026 are some way off. The stagnation—and even decline—in AIADMK’s vote offers the intriguing possibility of BJP being the main chal­lenger, a suggestion that would have been dismissed as the product of an overheated imagination not too long ago. DMK leader and Chief Minister MK Stalin led his party to victory in the 2021 As­sembly election over a weakened AIADMK, adrift after the death of J Jayalalithaa. He would need to establish that the 2021 win was not a one-off event shaped by a propitious set of circumstances.

Although political parties in Tamil Nadu apart from BJP con­verge on supporting the state’s two-language formula, the issue does not strike a chord with other southern states. Apart from Tamil Nadu, other southern states are already following the three-language formula, and the MPs Open spoke to did not have strong views on the subject other than stating that language should not be imposed. Most were indifferent to Tamil Nadu’s conflict with the Centre on changing the rupee symbol in the state budget. Not surprisingly, they are more receptive to arguments about the political fallout of delimitation raised by Stalin.

The Telugu Desam Party (TDP) is banking on Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s assurance that South India will not lose seats. As of now, TDP is anticipating that delimitation may be referred to a parliamentary panel. BJP MPs from the south dismiss it as Stalin raising speculative issues, saying the Centre has not spelt out any details of delimitation.

Manickam Tagore, Congress MP from Tamil Nadu and party whip in Lok Sabha, said the state has a history of anti-Hindi stirs. “You cannot bulldoze a language. It’s a sensitive issue,” he said.

GC Chandrashekhar, Congress MP from Karnataka, asked what would be the basic norms for delimitation and questioned the lack of consultation and echoed concerns about northern states gaining a disproportionate number of seats. “As for language, we learnt Hindi in school. I am not against any language. But the Cen­tre should not force it on anyone,” he said. On replacing the rupee symbol in the Tamil Nadu budget, he said the focus should be on developmental issues rather than controversial measures.

Lavu Sri Krishna Devarayalu, TDP MP from Andhra Pradesh, said the party is indifferent to Tamil Nadu’s face-off with BJP over Hindi. “Our priority is Telugu and after that it’s up to children which language they want to learn. I know kids who know Korean and Japanese. Why restrict them to one or two languages? The rupee symbol controversy in Tamil Nadu is the narrative ahead of elections,” he said.

MK Raghavan, Congress MP from Kerala, had similar res­ervations on delimitation but said the state already has a three-language formula. “But we have to keep in mind the sentiments of the states. Nothing should be imposed,” he said.

CM Ramesh, BJP MP from Andhra, countered the Opposition’s claims about delimitation saying, “Only Stalin is saying it because he wants to make it a political issue. DMK wants to divert atten­tion. Has anybody said that delimitation will take place based on population? It’s mere speculation.”

PV Midhun Reddy, YSRCP MP from Andhra, noted the language issue was immaterial to his party, seeing it as a DMK versus Centre spat. “Home Minister Amit Shah has assured that the south will not lose seats and any increase will be proportionate,” he noted.

THE POLITICAL CURRENTS in Tamil Nadu and DMK’s calculations can explain Stalin’s decision to pick a fight with BJP and the Centre over the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 almost five years after it was unveiled followed by the National Curriculum Framework (NCF) in 2021. It follows Stalin upping the ante over the delimita­tion of Lok Sabha seats, which he claims will discriminate against South India for having made progress on family planning, or his decision to replace the rupee symbol with a Tamil one. The cur­rently delayed national Census that will be the basis of future delimitation has not been scheduled yet, but is seen as a potent subject to work up emotions over a presumed threat. The NEP controversy is linked to Tamil Nadu’s two-language formula in schooling which is part of the state’s political legacy. It implies a rejection of Hindi, which is not offered even as a secondary subject in state-run schools in Tamil Nadu. The NEP and NCF were adopted after wide-ranging consultations that included all states and various stake-holders. In a communication dated March 15, 2024, the DMK government expressed its keenness to sign an MoU with the Centre to establish PM SHRI schools—intended as exemplars of NEP implementation—in the state. A DMK delegation led by senior party leader Kanimozhi met Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan and sought speedy implementation of the scheme in Tamil Nadu. Yet, when the MoU was shared with the state, it returned an amended docu­ment which replaced the reference to NEP with the state educa­tion policy, effectively rejecting the three-language formula. The March 2024 letter does state that a state-level committee had been established for implementing the PM SHRI schools programme but it was always evident that the scheme envisages the adoption of NEP 2020. Officials who have served in Tamil Nadu point out negotiations could have sorted out the state’s concerns about the policy’s implications as well as any political fallout. The decision to indulge in brinkmanship and invite a showdown with BJP and the Centre was a calculated one, intended to spark a political battle over language and identity.

The reasons for the U-turn in the Tamil Nadu government’s thinking might lie in DMK’s heightened sense of exceptional­ism but there is possibly an added element of equations within the first family. Kanimozhi has sought a role for herself in Parliament and Delhi, regularly meeting Central ministers to take up issues related to the state’s economy, trade and commu­nities such as weavers and fishermen. The Thoothukudi MP is at ease in Delhi where she has the experience of having been a Rajya Sabha MP for two terms beginning in 2007 and then a Lok Sabha MP since 2019. The image enhancement and media cover­age have not always gone down well within the Karunanidhi clan, it is felt. When Parliament met for the second part of the Budget Session, DMK leader Dayanidhi Maran, an articulate and assertive leader, led the party’s charge in Parliament and planned its interventions and protests. When Pradhan rose to answer a question on March 10, he deliberately chose to speak in English, understanding the need to put across his message and force­fully counter Maran’s submissions. By refusing to implement the NEP, the state government was denying students access to quality education and the benefits of Central schemes and funds. He accused the DMK government of changing its stance while other non-BJP states like Karnataka and Himachal Pradesh have accepted the NEP and are setting up PM SHRI schools. DMK has been dishonest and is ruining the future of the state’s students. “Their only job is to raise language passions… Let’s be honest with the people of Tamil Nadu,” he said.

The data from UDISE+, the education ministry’s information management system, shows a decline in enrolment in Tamil-medium schools from 54 per cent in 2018-19 to 36 per cent in 2023-24, which reflects poorly on the state government. The data for the system is provided by the states, an official said. The shift from state language to English-medium schools may not be unique to Tamil Nadu, but it is evident that students and parents are seek­ing better choices that they feel will secure the future interests of their children. DMK MP Sumathy’s assertion in Lok Sabha that the NEP is an imposition that Tamil Nadu will not accept and amounts to an assault on the federal structure since education is on the Concurrent List seems an afterthought. Until it rejected the NEP, Tamil Nadu was already implementing the Samagra Shik­sha scheme—launched in 2018 by amalgamating Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan, and teacher education programmes. The education ministry website states: “…the scheme not only provides support for the implementation of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 but has also been aligned with the recommendations of NEP, 2020.” Education ministry sources said Samagra is very much part of NEP’s implementation but did not previously cause discomfort to the Tamil Nadu government. However, now that the DMK gov­ernment has formally rejected the NEP and the three-language formula, funds to the state have been withheld, causing distress to the schooling system.

Some analysts blame the Centre for effectively mandating the three-language formula of Tamil, English, and a regional language. While the NEP does envisage the three-language formula, it is non-prescriptive and different from the original 1968 policy that was reiterated in 1986. In fact, neither the NEP nor the NCF mentions the requirement to offer Hindi as part of the three-language formula. The previous categorisation of “Hindi-speaking” and “non-Hindi speaking” states was more discriminatory and inherently divisive. Tamil Nadu’s two-lan­guage formula, described as an expression of its opposition to the trilingual system and commitment to Tamil and English since 1968, has not been an unalloyed success. Apart from falling enrolment in state schools, it disadvantages significant sections of Tamil Nadu’s population whose mother tongue is not Tamil.

“Tamil is not the mother tongue of 22 per cent of Chennai’s population. About 12 per cent of the state’s population speaks 14 languages like Malayalam, Telugu, Kannada, as well as tribal languages like Irula and Bagada. The lack of a third language handicaps these social sections,” Chamu Krishna Shastry, chair­man of the Bharatiya Bhasha Committee under the education ministry, tells Open.

Shastry says NEP 2020 is not prescriptive at all and there is no mention of Hindi being mandatory. The three languages under the policy are referred to as R1, R2 and R3, the choice of ‘R’ relating to “reading”, the first basic skill a child learns while discovering the alphabet chart. R1 is the language in which literacy is first learnt in school. Usually, it is the mother tongue or state language. “It is of critical importance to be able to use the language the stu­dent already knows because it enables full use of linguistic and cultural resources,” the NEP says. R2 is any language other an R1 and R3 is any language other than R1 and R2. At least two of these three languages must be native and it is for the “state or other relevant bodies to decide the choices of R1, R2 or R3 that would be given to students.” The three-language formula in NEP 2020, further elaborated in the NCF, is more flexible and comprehen­sive than any previous policy articulated by a Union government. Asked if Tamil Nadu will have to offer Hindi if students ask for the option, Shastry says the state can find many ways to provide such access. It may even choose to do so by facilitating online learning. “The Dakshin Bharat Hindi Prachar Sabha has four lakh students enrolled in Tamil Nadu. Their parents obviously feel the children will benefit from an additional language. In any case, private schools affiliated to CBSE offer Hindi as a subject,” says Shastry. While the state is under no direction to offer Hindi as a mandatory part of the three-language formula, significant minority populations do not have access to their mother tongues in the state-run schooling system because of the two-language formula of Tamil Nadu.

THE 1986 NEP, on the other hand, had made its pref­erence clear, stating: “The three-language formula provides for the study of a modern Indian language, preferably one of the southern languages, apart from Hindi and English in Hindi-speaking states and of Hindi along with the regional language and English in non-Hindi speaking states.” The policy then had noted unsatisfactory progress which is a pointer to the rigidity of the 1968 and 1986 formulations.

Pradhan’s interventions in Parliament sparked a vigorous de­bate and he found support from prominent persons with non- Hindi backgrounds. Rajya Sabha MP Sudha Murty spoke of her facility with Hindi and other languages while actor-politician and Andhra Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan noted that Tamil films are dubbed in Hindi and asked why this is consid­ered necessary if the language was seen as an imposition. Google CEO Sundar Pichai said he had learnt Hindi at school although he admitted he had not used it much. Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister and TDP leader N Chandrababu Naidu brushed aside opposition to Hindi, stating any number of languages could be learnt in pursuit of a livelihood but this did not mean the mother tongue would be forgotten.

It is evident that DMK’s language gambit, as evidenced by the reactions gathered by Open too, does not have much traction in other southern states. The confusion may run deeper in Congress though as party MPs from Tamil Nadu like Karti Chidambaram and Tagore joined regional leaders in supporting the two-lan­guage formula and labelling the NEP as a scheme to compel the teaching of Hindi. Congress leaders from other parts of the coun­try are unlikely to adopt a similar view and although this is an obvious contradiction, there has been no effort on the part of the central leadership to either articulate an official stand or resolve likely contradictions. This is in keeping with the increasingly autonomous conduct of Congress state units in the absence of central supervision and the lack of authority of party functionar­ies appointed as state in-charge.

Lessons from the pandemic that severely impacted school­ing led the Centre to launch NIPUN Bharat Mission in July 2021 aimed at ensuring children achieve foundational literacy and numeracy skills by Class 3 with focus on the 3-9 age group. The NEP brings pre-schooling within the policy framework and the effort of the mission is to instil the basic learnings—reading, writ­ing and understanding numbers—that are the building blocks for overall development and success in succeeding classes. The mission-mode approach bore results with the Annual Status of Education Report (ASER), 2024, revealing a pleasant surprise, recording a recovery in learning. The drop in learning recorded in the 2022 report had been reversed and even the 2018 mark was bettered in some instances. A section of analysts described the ASER 2024 findings as a modest recovery and the data does show there is ground to cover. Yet, percentages of Class 2 children who can read Class 2 texts or the proportion of Class 3 students who can read Class 2 texts are rising, evidence that the effort to provide reading material, master trainers, programmes for teach­ers and school heads, reading campaigns, parent participation and, above all, monthly, quarterly and annual tracking and moni­toring are paying dividends. Officials at the education ministry said the ASER results are an initial and encouraging validation of the NEP and its implementation.

Sidestepping the politicised discussion on languages and dialects, the Modi government recognises all spoken tongues as languages. The National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT) has published primers in 121 languages. Contrary to Stalin’s claim that Hindi has “swallowed” dozens of languages like Bhojpuri, Garhwali and Santhali, the NEP strong­ly promotes regional, sub-regional and tribal languages. The NCERT primers include Angami, Bodo, Garo, Kodava, Limbu, Mishmi, Tangkhul, Tulu, Gondi-Odiya, Ladakhi, Konkani, Car Nicobarese, and even Pashto. Promotion of linguistic pride and language classification has often been a vehicle for separatism and divisiveness masked as a cultural attribute. By not making such distinctions, the three-language formula offers parity be­tween mother tongues that are not the state language, the state language itself, and an aspirational language of choice. Political grandstanding hinders assimilation and instead promotes a disharmonious Tower of Babel.

DMKKashi Tamil Sangamamlanguage politicsMK StalinNEP 2020State Assembly ElectionsTamil Naduthree language formula