SOROOR AHMED comments on the Abu Asim Azmi episode and opines that such language riots can pose a threat to the integrity of the nation.
After all Maha-rashtra is bigger than rashtra (nation). Therefore, its language, Marathi, is certainly ‘superior’ to other languages of the rashtra – not necessarily antar-rashtra. So the Samajwadi Party MLA, Abu Asim Azmi, who took oath in the first official language of the country – Hindi – deserves to be punished. (Whether he spoke Hindi or Hindustani, that is, the mixture of Hindi and Urdu is a different matter).
This seems to be the logic of the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, the offspring of Shiv Sena. “We gave 40 days time to the non-Maharashtrians to learn Marathi, only then we took such a step,” one of its leaders argued. After all it is a Sena, rather a private army, and its diktat needs to be followed forthwith.
Not surprisingly, the Sena MLAs did not thrash those legislators who took oath in English as after all it is not the language of the rashtra – but antar-rashtra. The Maha-rashtrians had problems with the people, culture and language of the Indian rashtra and not the international citizens, therefore, English is acceptable.
Sub-nationalism is not a new phenomenon. As the concept of nationalism grew in the 19th century so did the sub-nationalism. In fact some experts say that sub-nationalism is older reality than nationalism.
But what is happening in Maha-rashtra of Senas is the brazen display of super-nationalism, the feeling that they are superior to the nation.
Language agitation, or anti-Hindi campaign, is not something new in the country. It started with the independence of the country. But 1960s saw several self-immolations in Tamil Nadu against what the Dravidian parties – say DMK as there were no AIADMK or PMK then – alleged the imposition of the Hindi on the non-Hindi speaking people by the Centre.
Whatever be the reason, Hindi is as such not the rashtra (National) language of the country as most northern Indians feel.
Reacting to the unruly scene by Raj Thackeray’s men in the state assembly some north Indian politicians went on to say that it was a great insult to the National language, when there is no such thing in the country. Even a senior journalist, while writing on Hindi, stated that it is the National language, which it is not. The truth is that Hindi is the first official language while English the associate official language of the country.
Besides Hindi there are 21 other languages recognised as Scheduled Languages by the Constitution. A candidate appearing in any exam conducted for the central government jobs may opt to take the exam in any of these languages. The founding fathers and the Constitution-makers took extra care to take into account the sentiments of the people of all sections of the society and their attachment to their respective regional languages. Yet they failed to predict that in future politicians of the country would become so unruly that they would resort to violence just because somebody takes oath in his own language and that too in the state assembly. The law of the land can do nothing to punish these law-makers who took law into their hands in the highest law-making House of its western-most and the most industrialised state. Had anyone else used such physical violence anywhere in the country he or she would have been thrown behind bars.
True, the passion for one’s own language is often very strong. This is true about the developed countries of Europe, too. At times people would not reply if you do not ask them a question in their own language. Even if they know the language, they may not answer your query. This practice is common in India too.
Love for one’s own language is one thing, but being xenophobic and intolerant towards others is quite different. If Maharashtra has grown as an industrial power house of the country, it is not just because of the local population and the Marathi language. People of other states have also contributed immensely to its development and they have full right to lead their lives in their own way and speak their mother tongues.
It needs to be understood that excessive passion for language has potential to break the country. It is being cited as one of the causes for the break-up of Pakistan in 1971. When Pakistan tried to impose Urdu on its eastern part in 1949, then called East Pakistan, a violent protest started. It culminated in 1951 leading to the killing of at least four persons in Dhaka. This was the first sign of resentment by the Bengali population and it is said that the foundation of the present day Bangladesh was laid on that very day.
So when reacting to the tantrums of Raj Thackeray’s men some of the north Indian leaders said that this move has the potential to break the country, they are not wrong. But there is a difference in the two situations. In the case of Pakistan Urdu was thrust as the language of the country on non-Urdu population. Here in India, leaders of fringe political parties – named as different Senas – are trying to impose their own language on the larger population of the country.
Language riots of early 1950s finally led to the dismemberment of Pakistan.