Is the Dissection natural? That’s the statements of the top BJP leaders do have some hidden meaning, which the countering voices hearing better than others.
A section of Indians has started believing that, every word uttered by BJP leaders gets thoroughly scanned by the Congress, followed by a keen dissection and acute “nit-picking” by another section of the Nation (BJP haters, you can say).
Only a fortnight ago, Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s “puppy” allegory (analogy is better word) had to suffer acute dissection at the hands of the media & the online opinion makers; and now BJP president Rajnath Singh’s remarks about English have caused great commotion.
So what is the real situation?
Is BJP becoming victim of unjustified dissection? Wherein, the members of the ruling party are countering the opposition’s views, for no real reason and; BJP critics using their imaginative powers to interpret such remarks in the most bizarre ways possible.
Is the Dissection natural?
That’s the statements of the top BJP leaders do have some hidden meaning, which the countering voices are hearing better than others.
To answer this, lets look at BJP President Rajnath Singh’s said statement,
Rajnath Singh said,
“English language has caused a great lot of loss to India. We have started forgetting our religion and culture these days. There are only 14,000 people left in this country speaking in Sanskrit.”
“Knowledge acquired out of English is not harmful but the Anglicization penetrated into youths in this country is dangerous,”
Looking at the Statement Closely:
Let’s leave aside, what Congress spokespersons said of these statements by BJP leaders. They are in politics, so they may be countering BJP leaders more vehemently than required. That apart, a seasoned politician like Rajnath Singh, with ample exposure, may very well be aware of the importance of English in today’s world. If the children he’s personally responsible for, are educated in English medium, then the value of english is well acknowledged by him.
Rajnath later makes it very clear in his statement that gaining knowledge out of the English language is in no way harmful.
That said, the statement appears to be for the political consumption. Since the statement is lambasting not the English language, but what he calls the Anglicised Culture. Hence it’s making “come back to Indian culture and tradition” rhetoric.
Which essentially is the Hindutva ideology for mass consumption — Study and embrace every positive influence the world has to offer, but remain pure to your tradition and religion.
By attacking the anglicised culture, he’s cautioning the youth in India from unconsciously aping the Anglicized culture, which may in turn eclipse indigenous culture and tradition.
This takes us to another important question: Has the statement some hidden agenda?
It appears, it has.
First of all it’s ridiculous to assume that when you embrace a new influence, you can remain unaffected by it.
For instance, if you start learning English language, you somehow become more receptive to english newspapers, magazines, signboards, road signs, English mannerisms, english clothing, english products etc. Hence what may appear as the blindly aping of Anglicised culture, may indeed be just simple transition.
Secondly, bringing Sanskrit language to the political discourse is out of context. If there are just 14000 Sanskrit learners in India at present, this means that the language has gone out of favour, not only with anglicised citizens, but also with non-anglicized ones. So cautioning the people of Anglicised culture, by quoting Sanskrit language, is misplaced.
The statements made by Rajnath Singh, reminds one of the conversation that took place between Amul Founder, Verghese Kurien and RSS Head in late 60s. The conversation is shared by Kurien in his Autobiography. Kurien, a keralite and a non-vegetarian, was friends with the RSS Head. The RSS head once told Kurien how “Save Cow can be a politically benefitting for him, as people can be mobilized by the slogan”.
To conclude, Rajnath Singh’s latest statement and Modi’s puppy allegory are fine examples of carefully crafted statements created by intelligent PR personnels and media planners. The words used have both direct and indirect meanings for the listeners. And that’s why, if someone gets the indirect meanings, he/she shouldn’t be criticised for that.
A sharp reader of Dehradunpost.com summed up Modi’s Puppy Alegory as:
The puppy analogy was very carefully chosen, because like u said dog is used as an expletive, but he did not say dog, he said “puppy”…hardcore supporters will gleefully acknowledge tat he called em dogs, moderate ones will say he loves em n tats y he said puppy……
Over all, as an aware listener, one should see such statements the same way. As some clever statements to serve one’s political agenda. For instance, what you can make of Rajnath Singh’s statement, which claims: English language has caused a great lot of loss to India. ? English has in fact opened opened doors of BPOs for lakhs of Indian youths. To the extent that half of our exports come from the BPOs. So has English language really done that bad of India? You get the idea the meaning is something else than what is being said.
This means that, those who are intending to learn English language can go ahead with their plans. You’re learning English not because you want to become anglicised, but as you see better job prospects after learning English. And that’s quite logical. Try typing in Hindi language (a language developed from Sanskrit and Urdu) and English language, you will instantly learn, which is more versatile. Yes it’s English.