top of page

By:

Quaid Najmi

4 January 2025 at 3:26:24 pm

Uddhav tears into BJP’s claim

Mumbai:  Shiv Sena (UBT) President Uddhav Thackeray on Tuesday launched a blistering, wide-ranging attack on the Bharatiya Janata Party-led governments at the Centre and in the state, targeting what he termed as a ‘toxic political climate’, rising crimes against women, and a ‘hire-and-fire’ culture hurting workers. Addressing the 58th annual general meeting of the Bharatiya Kamgar Sena, Thackeray delivered a strong political cocktail laced with jibes, concerns over labour rights, women’s...

Uddhav tears into BJP’s claim

Mumbai:  Shiv Sena (UBT) President Uddhav Thackeray on Tuesday launched a blistering, wide-ranging attack on the Bharatiya Janata Party-led governments at the Centre and in the state, targeting what he termed as a ‘toxic political climate’, rising crimes against women, and a ‘hire-and-fire’ culture hurting workers. Addressing the 58th annual general meeting of the Bharatiya Kamgar Sena, Thackeray delivered a strong political cocktail laced with jibes, concerns over labour rights, women’s issues, unemployment, and governance priorities. Attacking Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis for his recent remarks about ‘tearing the burqas’ of the Opposition, Thackeray questioned sarcastically: “We are Hindus… So what ‘burqas’ are you going to rip off? Were you even present in the Lok Sabha?” Referring to atrocities on women, Thackeray sharply questioned the government’s priorities saying while the CM is campaigning in other states, women are being molested right here, fake babas are multiplying and drug rackets are flourishing in the state. On BJP’s claims of commitment to women’s reservation, the SS (UBT) chief asked “why the President (Droupadi Murmu) was not invited to key national events such as the inauguration of the new Parliament building or the consecration of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya”. “This is not a new issue. We are ready… Implement women’s reservation today,” Thackeray asserted. Veering to national politics, Thackeray said that the BJP today lacks personalities of (the late) Arun Jaitley’s stature, and described West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee as “a fighting tigress who is bound to win”. He claimed that ‘two lakh CRPF personnel’ were deployed in West Bengal while barely 20,000 were stationed in the violence-hit Manipur. “Security forces were once used by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel for integrating states into the Union, but now they are being used to win elections,” Thackeray said. On the alleged misuse of central security agencies, Thackeray dared the BJP to ‘set aside the CBI and ED’ and face the elections in a fair fight. “You deploy security forces to ensure your party wins as you lack the capability to win on your own merits, or unleash the ED-CBI. It is better to live like a tiger for one day than as a goat for 100 days,” said Thackeray. Alluding to the debates triggered by RSS Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat’s views on population, he asked: “Encouraging more children is fine - but who will feed them? What about unemployment problems?” Thackeray expressed concerns over delimitation based on population, warning it could skew political representation. “Some states are implementing family planning programmes quite effectively… Is practicing family planning now considered a crime?” Turning to the distress faced by the working classes, he flayed the current employment model as a ‘constant cycle of hire-and-fire’, with the government ignoring the security of workers. “Why are workers being compelled to leave the state, or even the country, for employment. They are the architects of the nation’s destiny. Now reports emerge that workers from north India are being employed in Dubai. The country is calling them to ‘return’. They ignored the calls, preferring to die by a bomb rather than returning to India only to die of unemployment,” said Thackeray, in a swipe at Prime Minister Narendra Modi. He compared the current bout of global tensions, including the ongoing Iran-United States war, as a repetitive spectacle, triggering multi-fold domestic economic anxieties.

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