India's Language Wars: BJP's Push Against English Tests Regional Identity and Opportunity

English, Hindi and the struggle over India's future

Home Minister Amit Shah's declaration that "those who speak English will soon feel ashamed" has sharpened a dispute reaching from medical colleges in Madhya Pradesh to classrooms in Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra. As of July 26, 2025, the Bharatiya Janata Party's campaign to reduce the dominance of English and promote Hindi and regional languages has become a battle over education, opportunity and national identity.

India's 1.4 billion people live in a country with hundreds of languages and dialects. Hindi is the first language of roughly 44% of the population, while about 10% speak English. Those figures measure different things: a first language is the language someone learns at home, while an English speaker may have learned English later, at school or work.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government presents greater use of Indian languages as a way to strengthen cultural pride and open education to students who struggle with English. Opponents fear that the same campaign will push Hindi into regions with their own strong linguistic traditions and make English harder to obtain for families without money for private schooling.

Shah, the home minister and a senior BJP leader, tied his argument to cultural identity. He described Indian languages in these terms:

the languages of our country are the jewels of our culture

He also warned that without those languages:

we cease to be truly Indian.

English occupies a complicated position in this argument. It carries the legacy of British rule, yet it also connects Indians to higher education, scientific research and international employment. Regional leaders are defending a different combination: strong local languages alongside access to English, without compulsory Hindi.

How English became a lasting link

British traders arrived in India in the 1600s seeking spices and silk. English initially served commerce and administration, then became embedded in law, education and institutions associated with power and privilege. When India gained independence in 1947, the language was already deeply rooted in elite public life.

India's leaders faced the task of holding together a country whose people spoke hundreds of languages and dialects. Hindi was proposed as the official language, but resistance from regions where it was not widely spoken kept English in place as a "link language". What began as a temporary compromise has lasted more than seven decades.

India's linguistic framework includes 22 recognized Indian languages, with English retaining a central role in official life. The practical question is therefore larger than which language people speak at home. It concerns which languages give them access to government, universities, professional training and employment.

The main stages behind the current dispute span centuries:

• 1600s: British traders arrived, and English began developing a role in commerce and administration.
• 1947: Independence left India with English deeply embedded in elite institutions and a difficult choice about a shared official language.
• 2014: Modi and the BJP came to power and pursued greater use of Hindi and Indian languages.
• 2020: The National Education Policy revived the three-language formula.
• 2023: Official invitations for the G20 summit used "Bharat" instead of "India".
• By July 26, 2025: Disputes over school languages, education funding and English had intensified regional opposition.

English has consequently become both an inheritance from colonial rule and a route to social mobility. Removing its dominance appeals to those who see it as a barrier, while limiting access worries those who see it as a bridge.

What the BJP wants to change

Modi's government has encouraged officials to use Hindi in official communications and on social media. Other measures include introducing medical and technical degrees in Hindi in some states, replacing English greetings and songs with Hindi equivalents at public ceremonies, and using "Bharat" on official invitations such as those for the 2023 G20 summit.

BJP supporters view these steps as an assertion of cultural authenticity and a release from a "colonial mindset". Their argument is that Indians should be able to participate in education and public life through their own languages, rather than first having to master English.

Critics see risks in combining that goal with rhetoric that makes English speakers objects of shame. They warn that reducing English could weaken India's global competitiveness and deepen divisions between people who can buy access to the language and those who depend on public education.

Hindi promotion also carries a different meaning across regions. In much of the Hindi speaking north, it can be presented as recognition of a familiar language. In the south and west, Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and Marathi are central to local identity. A policy described as national unity can therefore be experienced as pressure to accept another region's language.

The campaign joins two debates that do not always point in the same direction: whether English has too much power, and whether Hindi should gain more power. Supporting regional languages can win broad agreement while making Hindi compulsory provokes resistance.

Can medicine be taught successfully in Hindi?

Madhya Pradesh's government colleges now offer medical courses in Hindi for the first year, and other states governed by the BJP are considering similar measures. The change is among the most visible attempts to bring professional education within reach of students who have not studied extensively in English.

Modi has argued that teaching in Indian languages will allow students from poorer backgrounds to pursue medicine and engineering. A student who understands science but struggles with English may otherwise face two tasks at once: learning the subject and learning the language used to teach it.

Dr. Rajan Sharma, identified as a former head of the Indian Medical Council, questioned whether the teaching workforce and professional environment were ready for the change. He said:

Where are the Hindi-speaking teachers to teach medicine? ... I am proud of the contribution made by Indian doctors to healthcare globally, thanks to their training in English. The policy will be a failure.

Supporters point to Germany and Japan, where medicine can be taught in native languages, as reasons India should be able to do the same. Their position is that difficult subjects need not belong to English alone.

Medical education nevertheless requires more than translated textbooks. Teachers must explain complex terms accurately, and students need access to international research. The dispute is about whether Hindi instruction can provide that full educational support while preserving the opportunities Indian doctors have gained through English.

Tamil Nadu ties language to state autonomy

Tamil Nadu has a long history of opposition to compulsory Hindi, including agitations in the 1930s and 1960s. Its schools follow a policy of two languages, Tamil and English, rather than the central government's formula of three languages.

Tamil provides continuity with the state's culture and public life. English offers a connection beyond the state without requiring students to adopt Hindi. The state's opposition rests on preserving that arrangement and its authority to decide what children study.

Udhayanidhi Stalin, Tamil Nadu's deputy chief minister, described resistance to compulsory Hindi as a refusal to accept intimidation. He said:

Tamils value love but will not surrender to intimidation. We will not accept the imposition of Hindi or any other language over Tamil.

Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan threatened to withhold crucial education funds unless Tamil Nadu complied with the central policy. Chief Minister M.K. Stalin accused the central government of blackmail. The funding dispute brought the argument beyond language preference and into the practical resources available for schools.

Tamil Nadu's leaders see the three-language campaign as pressure to add Hindi. The National Education Policy promises flexibility, but the state fears that implementation will make Hindi the expected third language. That gap between the written promise and the feared result drives much of the confrontation.

Federalism means that authority is shared between the national government and state governments. Tamil Nadu's dispute concerns how that sharing works when national education priorities conflict with a state's language policy. Money becomes a powerful instrument because schools depend on public funding as well as decisions about their curriculum.

Maharashtra forces a retreat over compulsory Hindi

Maharashtra's government, led by the BJP, attempted to make Hindi a compulsory third language in schools. The decision triggered opposition from Congress and regional parties, including Shiv Sena and the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, known as the MNS.

Those parties accused the government of weakening Marathi culture and introducing Hindi by stealth. Marathi pride made the issue politically sensitive even in a state outside the southern centre of resistance.

Raj Thackeray, the MNS chief, challenged the idea that Hindi should stand above other Indian languages. He said:

Hindi is not a national language but a state language like any other. Linguistic regionalism is being undermined.

The Maharashtra government withdrew its decision after the backlash and promised to consult those affected before making further changes. No date for a replacement decision was given.

Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu illustrate different stages of the same conflict. Maharashtra's government retreated from a compulsory school requirement, while Tamil Nadu's confrontation extended to threatened education funding. In both places, regional parties treated language policy as a question of political authority and cultural standing.

What the three-language formula promises

The National Education Policy of 2020 revived the three-language formula with a promise of flexibility and inclusion. It provides for three languages, with at least two being Indian languages; English is commonly part of the combination. The controversy concerns which choices states and students will actually have.

Tamil Nadu rejects the formula because it fears a requirement to learn Hindi alongside Tamil and English. Critics in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal regard the policy as pressure on state autonomy. They argue that a programme described as multilingual could become a vehicle for giving Hindi greater reach at the expense of regional languages.

Schools also face practical constraints. A third language requires qualified teachers, teaching materials and classroom time. Shortages of teachers and insufficient funding can make an ambitious policy difficult to deliver, while pupils may struggle with the burden of learning several languages.

Political scientist Samuel Huntington warned that rapid change without institutional support can produce disorder rather than development. Critics apply that warning to India's language policy: changing requirements faster than schools can support them risks division instead of the promised unity.

Rural and tribal communities face a related problem when children must study in languages unfamiliar to them. Students have to work out what the teacher's words mean before they can understand the lesson itself. Such difficulties are associated with poorer learning outcomes and higher dropout rates.

UNESCO research finds that children taught in their first language perform better academically and are more likely to remain in school. That supports attention to the language a child actually knows, including local and tribal languages, rather than treating the choice as a contest between Hindi and English alone.

English remains an aspiration, but access is unequal

English proficiency opens doors to higher education, better paid jobs and participation in the global economy. India's technology and startup sectors, along with its position as a centre for international business, have benefited from a large pool of people who speak English.

Linguist Ayesha Kidwai described the language's changing social meaning:

English is now an aspiration for many, not just a colonial legacy.

Urban, wealthy and upper caste families are more likely to have access to English than rural families and communities lower in the caste hierarchy. The language can therefore help people advance while also marking advantages they inherited through wealth, schooling or social position.

Critics fear that hostility towards English will make this divide wider. Families with money can continue obtaining English through private education, while students dependent on public schools may have fewer opportunities. Private provision can meet demand, but it can also leave access increasingly tied to household income.

Germany, Japan, South Korea and China have embraced English for practical reasons connected to science, technology and commerce. Their example is part of the argument for keeping English available alongside Indian languages, rather than making cultural pride depend on restricting it.

For Indian students, the concrete stakes are the subjects they can study, the research they can read and the jobs they can pursue. Education in a familiar language can make learning easier. Access to English can widen later choices. Providing both addresses different needs within the same child's education.

Smaller languages risk being left outside the debate

UNESCO classifies nearly 200 Indian languages as endangered, while more than 220 have vanished over the past 50 years. The rise of Hindi and English, together with rapid urbanisation, has pushed many tribal and regional languages towards the margins.

Activists argue that language loss affects rights and recognition as well as culture. When a community's language disappears from classrooms and public life, its members lose space to pass on their knowledge and express their identity through the institutions around them.

India's most prominent language dispute is therefore larger than the rivalry between English and Hindi. A policy that increases the standing of either can still overlook children whose first language is neither. Protecting regional and indigenous languages requires attention to those communities as well as the country's largest language groups.

Opposition parties and regional leaders frame their resistance as a defence of diversity and federalism. They see the BJP's promotion of Hindi and reduced role for English as part of a broader project shaped by Hindu nationalist ideals, giving greater weight to the majority. BJP supporters instead present the changes as cultural renewal and empowerment through Indian languages.

The News Minute editorial expressed the argument for protecting opportunity and equality in these words:

The debate over English is ultimately about equality, dignity, and India's future—choosing between science and dogma, progress and nostalgia.

Experts and activists argue that India needs quality education in both English and Indian languages, regardless of a student's region, class or caste. In that approach, English becomes a public resource rather than a privilege, while regional and indigenous languages retain a place in learning and public life.

India's choices will affect how children learn, whether families must pay privately for English, and how much control states retain over schools. The competing promises are tangible: cultural pride and easier access to education on one side, and protection against exclusion, lost opportunity and weakened linguistic diversity on the other.

Key Points

• The BJP's campaign promotes Hindi and regional languages while challenging the dominance of English.
• Hindi is the first language of roughly 44% of Indians; about 10% speak English.
• Madhya Pradesh offers medical courses in Hindi for the first year, drawing debate over access, teachers and international research.
• Tamil Nadu defends Tamil and English in schools and faces a dispute over threatened education funding.
• Maharashtra withdrew its compulsory Hindi decision after political opposition and promised consultation.
• The 2020 education policy promises language flexibility, while critics fear Hindi will become the default third language.
• Unequal access to English affects education and employment, especially for families relying on public schools.
• Nearly 200 Indian languages are classified as endangered, and more than 220 have vanished in 50 years.
• The central challenge is providing opportunity through English while protecting regional and indigenous languages and state autonomy.