Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu took significant steps on March 17, 2025, advocating for the importance of language learning amid rising tensions over the National Education Policy (NEP) and its proposed three-language formula. His remarks came at a time when politics surrounding language had intensifying ramifications, particularly as related to the DMK-led government of Tamil Nadu, which has been vocally opposed to the NEP's approaches.
During his address to the Assembly, Naidu firmly emphasized, "Language is not for hATING. Our mother tongue is Telugu. National (Jaatiya bhasha) language is Hindi. International language is English. We should learn as many languages as possible for our livelihood, but we should never forget our mother tongue." His framing sought to move discussions on language away from polarizing political contexts and toward practical benefits, asserting the utility of learning multiple languages to navigate societal needs more effectively.
Naidu contended, "If we learn the national language like Hindi, even if we go to Delhi, it will be easy to speak fluently," underscoring the necessity of Hindi for communication. This viewpoint aligns with current socio-economic dynamics where language fluidity is viewed as advantageous for personal and professional opportunities.
Interestingly, Deputy Chief Minister and head of the Janasena Party, Pawan Kalyan, who had previously stirred controversy over his comments relating to Hindi's imposition, supported Naidu’s sentiments. Speaking at the Jana Sena Party's foundation day celebrations on March 14, Kalyan remarked, "Misinterpreting the NEP for political gains and accusing me of changing my stand shows lack of undersTANDING," clarifying his position on the importance of all Indian languages without holding against any one language.
The backdrop of Naidu's statements includes the current political tensions between the Union Government and Tamil Nadu's DMK government over the stricter application of the three-language policy. Tamil Nadu leaders have strongly criticized this federal initiative, equipping it with accusations of imposed linguistic hegemony, which they argue undermines regional languages.
Beyond South India's politics, Naidu's remarks also reflect broader trends concerning language learning and educational policy. He pointed out the significance of assuring it is not only aimed at enhancing one's knowledge base but also practical day-to-day communication. He stated, "Knowledge is learnt best when studied in mother tongue... mother tongue is the easiest to learn/ That is the experience anywhere in the world," implicatively promoting regional languages alongside national necessities.
Addressing criticisms stemming from misconceptions about language education, Naidu argued emphatically against the prevailing beliefs tied to the superiority of English. He reconsidered the common notion, saying, "Some people seem to think English is equivalent to knowledge. Language is only for communication. It does not bring knowledge. Knowledge is learnt best when studied in mother tongue." Such insights aim to demystify the notion around elite status attached to English proficiency and give credence to local vernaculars' significance.
Simultaneously, the criticism armed back from various political factions allied to the DMK points out the central government's strategies as aggressive tactics to impose northern languages and cultures onto the southern states. This has found resonance amid the local populace, feeding sentiments against perceived political overreach.
The deep connections between language, identity, and culture were echoed when Kalyan reaffirmed his intentions not as anti-Hindi but as advocacy for respecting and elevatively contributing to all regional identities. His statements have highlighted the nuanced distinctions between criticizing imposed policy and fostering hate against any language.
Recent developments have also included financial tensions, where the Union government has withheld significant funds amounting to ₹2,152 crore under the Samagra Siksha scheme, leading Tamil Nadu's leadership to demand their immediate release. This financial maneuver emphasizes not just the cultural but also the fiscal stakes under the shifting policies surrounding linguistic education.
Naidu’s approach is one of advocacy for multilingualism but pinned onto the conviction of not dismissing any language as inferior, particularly noting the fluid exchange dynamics of Hindi and English within his remarks. He stated, “For livelihood, we will learn any number of languages. We won't forget the mother tongue."
This poignant call to action echoes throughout his supporters as they approach discussions moving forward with solutions intended for unity rather than division.
Undoubtedly, the continuing debate around language is set to shape the political, educational, and cultural landscapes across southern India. Future dialogues will likely aim at balancing these pressing issues with the rights of state governments and central policy strategies for equitable treatment across diverse linguistic populations.