TWO developments present a picture in contrast as far as promotion of Hindi language is concerned. While the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for ‘Hindi@UN’ project between India and the United Nations (UN) presents a picture of openness and multi-lingualism, the stance adopted by Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Mr. M K Stalin exposes his party DMK’s parochialism. India is known internationally for richness of diversity including in languages. Multiple languages are spoken across India. Since pre-Independence period, Hindi has been a widely used Indian language. During the freedom struggle, use of Hindi was an important unifying factor that aroused the support of people from different strata and States speaking different languages.

 

At present, among the officially recognised languages in India, Hindi is the most widely spoken. Hindi is the third most spoken language in the world after English and Mandarin. Obviously, no international body with a vision to extend communication to the most populous country of the world can ignore Hindi. Hence, the UN has signed an MoU with India aims at enhancing its public outreach in Hindi language. This reflects both -- practical wisdom as well as multi-lingualism in practice. Unfortunately, Mr. M K Stalin fails to see both when it comes to use of Hindi in Tamil Nadu. In the name of protecting Tamil culture and languages, already the DMK brand of parochial politics has adopted a foreign language like English widely. There is no problem with accepting a foreign language as a tool for practical communication at international level. Because, accepting any language while according to it a rightful and respectful place in socio-cultural discourse reflects support to diversity.

 

The ordinary people of Tamil Nadu have no problems with this. However, the political class, especially the DMK, engaged in divisive discourse has problems with Hindi only. For, apart from Tamil, at least five other languages -- Telugu, Kannada, Urdu, Malayalam, and English -- are spoken in Tamil Nadu by a good number of people. Hindi is spoken by people in much lesser numbers than those speaking the above-mentioned languages. This exposes duplicity of Mr. Stalin’s divisive brand of politics, which has been on display often. Whenever his party’s political fortunes dwindle, he rakes up some controversy, which invariably questions the noble Indian principle of ‘unity in diversity’. So, sometimes, he pitches Sanskrit and Tamil against each other instead of making efforts for a healthy exchange of knowledge from both the languages to enrich the cultural understanding of common Indian roots. Not long ago, his minister-son Mr. Udhayanidhi Stalin had resorted to anti-Sanatana rhetoric.

 

When divisive politics backfired, Mr. Stalin criticised Prime Minister Mr. Narendra Modi. Thus, all through, more than speaking about development or embracing the positive values of globalised world or proudly wearing rich Indian multi-lingualism and multi-culturalism, Mr. Stalin and his party have adopted restrictive stand. Thankfully, the educated and apolitical Tamilians spread across the world do not subscribe to such a narrow thinking. They speak the language of the State or the country they are in, without compromising on own cultural values. This increases their acceptance across the country. Abroad, they are identified as Indians practising the noble ideal ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ (the world is my home). Mr. Stalin’s failure to associate with positivism among people regarding Hindi, will isolate his party from the fast-evolving multicultural world. He will continue to project himself and his party as ‘sharp contrast’ to the broadening worldview, and may deprive people of Tamil Nadu of embracing newer choices.