TN Says No: Periyar's Legacy Against the Three-Language Policy

Tamil Nadu is unique in India for its unwavering commitment to a two-language policy: Tamil and English. While the rest of India grapples with the complexities of a three-language formula (regional language, Hindi, and English), Tamil Nadu has steadfastly resisted the imposition of Hindi. This policy isn't a modern political whim; it's a deeply entrenched principle rooted in the social justice movements of the last century, spearheaded by the visionary leader Periyar E.V. Ramasamy.

So, why does Tamil Nadu stick to its guns? Let's dive into Periyar's profound and pragmatic arguments.

The Core of Periyar's Stance: Equality and Opportunity for All

At its heart, Periyar's argument was about social justice and ensuring equitable opportunities, especially for the oppressed and marginalized. He wasn't just against Hindi for linguistic pride, though that was a factor for many followers. For Periyar, language policy was a critical tool that could either uplift or further suppress vulnerable communities.

Here are the key tenets of his argument:

1. English: A Necessary, Albeit Burdensome, Bridge

Periyar was remarkably pragmatic about English. While he recognized it as a colonial language and understood the burden it placed on learners, especially those from uneducated backgrounds, he also saw its undeniable utility:

• A Level Playing Field: For oppressed castes, who had historically been denied access to traditional Sanskrit-based education and faced discrimination within existing social structures, English offered a neutral ground. It didn't carry the baggage of caste hierarchies often associated with indigenous languages. It was a pathway to modern education, administration, and professional opportunities, offering a chance for upward mobility.

• Gateway to Knowledge and the World: Periyar understood that English was the language of science, technology, global commerce, and international discourse. Proficiency in English was essential for accessing higher education, advanced knowledge, and participating in the wider world.

• Neutrality: Crucially, English was a "foreign" language to everyone in India. It didn't favor any one regional linguistic group over another, thus acting as a neutral lingua franca in a diverse nation.

2. Hindi: An Unnecessary and Detrimental Third Burden

This is where Periyar's argument became particularly pointed. If English was already a considerable hurdle for many, especially those from rural and disadvantaged families with no prior exposure, then imposing another foreign language (Hindi, from a non-Hindi speaker's perspective) was seen as:

• An Unjustifiable Handicap: For a student already struggling to master English, adding a third compulsory language, particularly one like Hindi that offered no immediate practical benefit in their local context, was a recipe for academic failure. Periyar argued that this would disproportionately affect the poor and marginalized, making it harder for them to pass exams, pursue higher education, and secure government jobs.

• Perpetuating Inequality: He foresaw that making Hindi compulsory would create a new form of linguistic elitism. Hindi speakers would have an inherent advantage, further entrenching the existing social and economic disparities. This ran counter to his entire mission of social equality.

• Empirical Evidence of Failure: Periyar and his followers often pointed to the abysmal pass percentages in Hindi examinations in non-Hindi speaking states, particularly in rural areas of the South. This was seen as clear proof that the imposition of Hindi was not working and was actively hindering the educational progress of students. Why force a language that people struggled with and saw no use for?

The Two-Language Solution: Pragmatism Meets Principle

Based on these powerful arguments, Periyar advocated for the two-language policy:

1. Mother Tongue (Tamil): For primary education, cultural identity, and communication within the state. This preserved the rich linguistic heritage of Tamil and ensured foundational learning was accessible.

2. English: As the link language for higher education, administration at the central level, and global opportunities.

This formula was seen as the most pragmatic and equitable approach. It ensured that:

• No linguistic community felt like a second-class citizen.

• Educational and economic opportunities remained accessible to all, without adding an insurmountable linguistic barrier.

• Tamil identity was protected, while simultaneously providing a window to the world.

The Legacy Lives On

The legacy of Periyar's arguments is evident in Tamil Nadu's steadfast linguistic policy. It's not merely an act of defiance; it's a deeply considered stance rooted in principles of social justice, equal opportunity, and the protection of vulnerable populations. For Tamil Nadu, language policy is not just about words; it's about dignity, access, and the future of its people.

---