11 hours ago
Five Reasons Why Amit Shah's Threat of English Speakers Being 'Ashamed' is Dangerous
Union Home Minister Amit Shah's statement that 'time is not far away for a society where people speaking in English in this country feel ashamed' has sparked a major controversy, after Asian News International and other media houses deleted their media reports and social media updates about the speech.
While such statements have appeared before in Indian politics, Shah's position as the de facto 'number two' leader in the ruling BJP and as the union home minister lends extra weight to his words.
With the dark shadow of Hindutva's longstanding ideological 'Hindi-Hindu-Hindusthan' slogan, Shah's comment is not just a cultural observation. It carries deep political and global implications, touching on issues of national identity, social mobility, intellectualism and India's international image.
Here are five reasons why Shah's statement is significant.
Fuels linguistic chauvinism and division
India's strength lies in its linguistic diversity. There is no one national language, but 22 of them. By framing English as a foreign imposition and linking it to shame, Shah's statement fans the flames of linguistic chauvinism. This is especially dangerous in a country where language has often been a flashpoint for regional and communal tensions.
English often serves as a neutral bridge language in India, especially in higher education, business, and inter-state communication. Non-Hindi speaking states, especially those in the South, East and the Northeast, are likely to see Shah's statement as yet another attempt by the Hindutva regime to impose a narrow, Hindi-centric identity on the entire country, further deepening regional divides and resentment.
Colonial legacy as an excuse for furthering Hindutva
Shah's statement aligns with the BJP's long-standing agenda of promoting Hindi as being central to the Indian identity. By framing English as a symbol of colonial legacy and 'shame,' he appeals to nationalist sentiments and consolidates the party's core base. His rhetoric helps create the narrative that true patriotism is tied to embracing Indian languages, a euphemism for Hindi in the BJP's view.
While there is merit in shedding colonial hangovers, English has evolved into a global lingua franca and a practical tool for international engagement. Shah's framing of English as a source of 'shame' risks using a sensitive issue for ideological and political gains. It can polarise public opinion and distract from the much-needed debate about the quality of public education, as exemplified by the rewriting of textbooks in the BJP ruled states.
Threatens India's global competitiveness
India's rise as an Information Technology and services powerhouse is built on its large pool of English-speaking talent. This linguistic advantage has been an envy of a country like China. Casting English in a negative light sends a regressive message to the world and risks undermining India's attractiveness to global investors, multinational companies and academic collaborators.
It will discourage young Indians from acquiring the very skills that make them globally competitive, damaging the country's future economic prospects. Shah's statement, if seen as official policy of the Hindutva regime, will create concerns about India's openness and modernity, and affect India's image as a cosmopolitan, globally connected nation.
Impact on social mobility and education
English in India is often seen as a gateway to better education, jobs, and upward mobility. By stigmatising English, Shah's statement risks alienating millions who aspire to learn the language for practical reasons.
It could also influence policy decisions on language in education, potentially restricting access to global opportunities for students from non-elite backgrounds. This could deepen social divides between urban and rural populations, and between those with and without access to English medium education.
Encourages anti-intellectualism and cultural backwardness
Equating English proficiency with cultural shame is a form of anti-intellectualism from Shah. It delegitimises those who are comfortable in English, often the best-educated and most globally connected Indians, and suggests that cosmopolitanism is un-Indian. This closes minds, discourages openness and promotes a parochial, inward-looking mindset at a time when India needs to engage with the world, not retreat from it.
To sum up, Shah's statement is not just divisive; it is dangerous. It threatens social mobility, sows linguistic discord, risks India's global standing, fosters anti-intellectualism and distracts from the real challenges facing the country. Shah's ideological rhetoric of 'shame' is out of place, and is actively harmful to the country.
