top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 11:29:11 am

Gen Z revolt leaves Modi govt scrambling

Mumbai: The recent CJP agitation at Jantar Mantar, amplified by a ferocious wave of social media backlash, has achieved what years of fragmented opposition politics could not: it has visibly shaken the highest echelons of the Narendra Modi government. For the first time in over a decade, the seemingly impenetrable fortress managed by Prime Minister Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah appears vulnerable. Driven by a Gen Z demographic that refuses to play by traditional political rules, the...

Gen Z revolt leaves Modi govt scrambling

Mumbai: The recent CJP agitation at Jantar Mantar, amplified by a ferocious wave of social media backlash, has achieved what years of fragmented opposition politics could not: it has visibly shaken the highest echelons of the Narendra Modi government. For the first time in over a decade, the seemingly impenetrable fortress managed by Prime Minister Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah appears vulnerable. Driven by a Gen Z demographic that refuses to play by traditional political rules, the movement has made the ruling dispensation’s meticulously crafted narrative look starkly outdated. The scale and intensity of the public unrest have triggered alarm bells, prompting the government to take unprecedented corrective measures. In a remarkable departure from its usual top-down approach, the Union government has officially deputed Officers on Special Duty (OSDs) to execute a massive ground-level feedback-gathering exercise. Insiders reveal that this crisis management strategy operates on multiple tiers. The government is actively seeking counsel from technology experts and content analysts to decipher exactly what went wrong and to understand the strategic advantages of the digital content generated by CJP supporters. These grassroots digital campaigns brought about a drastic, organic shift in public expression that caught the administration entirely off guard. Furthermore, officials are engaging in candid dialogues with independent, well-meaning individuals tasked with holding a mirror to the administration's failures. Professionals entrusted with coordinating these meetings admit the outcome remains uncertain, but the sheer scale of outreach marks a watershed moment for a government usually insulated from external critique. The political vacuum created by this unrest has been masterfully exploited by the opposition. Capitalizing on the opening created by the CJP protests and climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, Rahul Gandhi has seized the political advantage. By deploying an emotional narrative—particularly regarding the use of pellet guns—Gandhi has effectively targeted Amit Shah, leaving the Prime Minister cornered. The optics in Parliament have been equally jarring for the ruling party. For the first time in twelve years, fumbling, elderly figures within the BJP found themselves outmatched by the scathing, articulate assaults from Rahul and Priyanka Gandhi. Armed with quick wit, finesse, and an undeniable superiority in content, the Congress leadership is dictating the terms of the debate, forcing the BJP onto the defensive. This sudden vulnerability has blown the lid off simmering discontent within the ruling party. Insiders are now openly arguing that the hyper-centralization of power by Modi and Shah is fundamentally flawed. The strategy of installing dependent "yes-men"—leaders who shine merely in borrowed light—in key state positions is backfiring spectacularly. While this iron-fisted strategy yields dividends during favourable times, the current crisis proves that an artificially sustained leadership cannot withstand a genuine storm. Many within the party lament the sidelining of softer, grassroots-connected leaders like Shivraj Singh Chouhan. A leader of Chouhan's calibre, possessing natural empathy and a deep understanding of the masses, could have offered a sympathetic and appealing rebuttal, contrasting sharply with the shallow, dry rhetoric currently being peddled by the party's younger, yet out-of-touch, defenders. The immediate consensus is that the party desperately needs to replace its aging heavyweights with articulate voices who can genuinely connect with an evolving electorate. Perhaps the most shocking revelation from the fallout is the catastrophic failure of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh's (RSS) legendary feedback and feed-forward mechanism. For decades, the RSS has served as the eyes and ears of BJP governments, but this time, the machinery completely failed to gauge the scale of the impending unrest. According to senior insiders, the root cause lies in a deep-seated rot within the RSS itself. As the organization celebrates its centenary year, it is grappling with an internal crisis. Unlike previous BJP regimes where the political arm bore the exclusive brunt of corruption allegations, the malaise has now reportedly crept into the highest echelons of the RSS leadership. This unprecedented internal decay has severed the organization's vital connection to the ground, leaving the BJP flying blind during a crucial socio-political upheaval.Despite the prevailing anxiety within the corridors of power, the newly initiated feedback-gathering exercise is being hailed as a much-needed course correction by veteran leaders within both the party and the RSS. Long-sidelined stalwarts view this desperate measure as a vindication of their long-held grievances against the centralized high command. While the designated OSDs and professionals remain cautiously optimistic about the immediate impact of their data-gathering, these old-guard insiders sense a rare opportunity. They believe that confronting the unvarnished truth from the ground might finally force a complete and necessary overhaul of the Parivar organizations, dismantling the fragile, sycophantic structures currently in place and returning the party to its grassroots origins.

Lingua Pragmatica

Updated: Mar 20, 2025

As Southern leaders like M.K. Stalin rage against Hindi, Andhra Pradesh’s Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu offers a model of pragmatism over parochialism.

Chandrababu Naidu
Andhra Pradesh

Amid the cacophony of opposition in southern states to Hindi, Andhra Pradesh CM N. Chandrababu Naidu has taken a markedly pragmatic stance by remarking recently in the state Assembly that there was no harm in learning other languages. Hindi, Naidu noted, was useful for communication across India, particularly in political and commercial hubs like Delhi. His remarks, though avoiding explicit mention of the NEP, were widely seen as an endorsement of multilingualism and a rebuke to the linguistic chauvinism that has gripped parts of the South.


Few issues in India stir political passions quite like language. It is not merely a means of communication but a marker of identity, a relic of colonial resistance, and a source of political mobilization. In the southern states, where anti-Hindi sentiment has long been entrenched, the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and its three-language formula have reignited old tensions. No state embodies this defiance more than Tamil Nadu, where the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) led by M.K. Stalin has framed the policy as an assault on its linguistic autonomy.


Naidu’s words, welcomed by his ally and Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, mark a sharp contrast with the DMK’s position. Tamil Nadu’s hostility towards Hindi dates back to the 1930s, when C. Rajagopalachari’s attempt to introduce it in schools met with fierce resistance. The anti-Hindi agitations of the 1960s cemented the DMK’s ideological stance, with its first Chief Minister, C.N. Annadurai, famously warning that Hindi imposition could push Tamil Nadu towards secession.


The question, however, is whether this rigid opposition serves Tamil Nadu’s interests. While Stalin, with an eye to the upcoming Tamil Nadu Assembly polls, has been relentlessly portraying Hindi as a threat to his state’s regional identity, Naidu, a partner of the BJP-led Centre, is framing it as a tool for economic mobility. His argument is not that Hindi should replace Telugu or English but that it offers a competitive advantage.


The economic case for multilingualism is compelling. Indians who speak multiple languages tend to have better job prospects, higher earnings and greater geographic mobility. Andhra Pradesh’s Telugu-speaking diaspora is a case in point. Telugus make up a significant proportion of Indian-origin professionals in the United States, the Gulf, and Southeast Asia as Naidu pointed out, hinting that this success story was built not on linguistic rigidity but on adaptability.


In a country where inter-state migration is rising and where Hindi remains the most widely spoken language, refusing to learn it amounts to self-imposed isolation. Tamil Nadu’s approach, by contrast, risks limiting its youth. The DMK government has refused to implement the three-language policy, keeping schools strictly bilingual with Tamil and English. Its justification that Hindi is not necessary for global success could be true in a narrow sense but ignores the domestic context. If Tamil filmmakers can dub their movies into Hindi to expand their audience, why should Tamil students be denied access to the language that could open more doors for them within India?


The DMK has accused successive central governments, particularly under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), of pushing Hindi at the expense of regional languages. Yet, rejecting Hindi outright is an overcorrection. The reality is that Hindi is an important language in India’s economic and political landscape. Naidu’s position, one of accommodation rather than confrontation, offers a middle ground that other Southern leaders would do well to consider.


Some states already recognize this. Karnataka, despite its own history of linguistic pride, has allowed Hindi to be taught as an optional language. Kerala, whose migrants work in Hindi-speaking regions and the Gulf, has been less hostile to Hindi education. Naidu’s model, balancing regional identity with practical necessity, offers a way forward. Languages should be embraced, not politicized. Southern leaders would do well to listen to him.

Comments

bottom of page