Language and regionalism..

This may be considered as a sequel to the previous blog. Here i am putting my take on language and regionalism.. 

Let us look at language as an axis of distinction and try to debate its efficacy in the Indian scenario. Let me not go into the State reorganization committee and its reports. That will be just a debate for the heck of it. Instead let us look at some historical evidences vis-a-vis language as a basis of division.

Many obituaries have been written about India and Indian democracy right from Mirza Asadullah Khan Galib in 1827 (Chirag-i-dair) to many many western liberals as early as 2000. All the obituaries were attributed to multi language and multi ethnic virtues, heritage and culture of India. The fact is that all of them were proved wrong to the amazement of many western observers and few Indians as well. 

In my opinion (Largely influenced by Dr Ram Guha), one strong reason for this is our rich linguistic tradition and division of India on basis of language. Let me substantiate this with historical evidences rather than putting my own arguments.

Indian national congress in the 1920s spearheaded by Mahatma Gandhi reconstituted the provincial committees on linguistic lines to foster administrative unity and efficacy. Congress also made promises that the states in India will be reorganized on linguistic lines post independence. Immediately after independence Gandhi advocated division of states on linguistic lines. 

Joseph Stalin, the Russian dictator tried to impose Russian throughout USSR without giving freedom and recognition to other languages. He was quoted as saying “ A national community is inconceivable without a common language and that there is no nation which at one and the same time speaks several languages”. This lead to the language policy of USSR where learning Russian was made obligatory (Source: Epilogue of "India after Gandhi" By Ramchandra Guha). We all know what happened to USSR in 1991.

Closer home, in 1956 when India redrew her map based on linguistic lines, Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) did not recognize the separate state for Tamils and tried to impose Sinhala as the sole language. The county was torn by armed rebellion for over 50 years.

Jinnah warned the people of East Pakistan soon after independence that “Without one state language, no nation can remain tied up solidly together and function and that state language of Pakistan was Urdu and the people of East Pakistan have to take it up sooner or later” Bengali was never recognized as an official language of Pakistan and in 1971, we had a torn Pakistan. And today Bengali is the official language of Bangladesh.(Source: Epilogue of "India after Gandhi" By Ramchandra Guha)

There are many many such evidences in erstwhile Europe and USSR.

While we may think that language is a barrier and linguistic distinctions may foster balkanization, in reality it’s not so. On the other hand language has provided the basis of administrative unity and efficiency. It has also lead to an efflorescence of cultural creativity, as expressed in film, theater, fiction and poetry. 

It is Utopian to have these barriers vanished (It need not be considered as a barrier. Pride in one's language, in India, has rarely been in conflict with broader identification with the nation as a whole. Examples of secessionist movements in Nagaland (1950s), in Punjab (1980s) and in Kashmir (1990s) have affirmed religious and territorial distinctiveness, not a linguistic one)

Sociologically speaking, the “in-group” feeling is inevitable. Nationalism and regionalism stems from this and it’s a group phenomenon. Rashtrakavi Kuvempu who gave the world the “Vishwa manava Sandesha” (ವಿಶ್ವ ಮಾನವ ಸಂದೇಶ ) in the same breath said “Kannadave sathya, Kannadave nithya”(ಕನ್ನಡವೇ ಸತ್ಯ ಕನ್ನಡವೇ ನಿತ್ಯ)