Among the many teachings of The Holy Bible, one incident continues to perplex me—the story of the Tower of Babel. According to Genesis 11:1-9, humanity once spoke a single language. United in purpose, men sought to build a tower that would reach the heavens. But the Gods saw this unity as a potential threat. They said, “Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.” As a result, the people could no longer work together, and the tower remained unfinished.
This tale has always intrigued me. If humanity’s unity was so powerful that it warranted divine intervention, what does that tell us about the strength of a people who speak the same language and work toward a common goal? And more importantly, why would anyone today seek to repeat what the Gods did in Babel—dividing people by language to weaken their unity?
Yet, this is precisely what Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin and his party, the DMK, have been attempting to do in India. They reject Hindi, oppose Sanskrit, and insist that India must remain linguistically divided, as if unity under a common language would somehow diminish regional identities. But let me be clear—Bharat must unite under one language while ensuring that regional languages continue to thrive.
India is a civilization, not just a country. Our unity is rooted in our shared history, traditions, and values. However, language has often been used as a political tool to divide us rather than bind us together.
When we look at great civilizations in history, a unifying language has always been a crucial factor in their stability and growth. The Romans had Latin, the British expanded English, the Chinese have Mandarin, and the Arabs consolidated around Arabic. A common language does not erase diversity—it strengthens a nation by ensuring seamless communication, shared ideas, and a collective national identity.
India, with its vast diversity, has always had Sanskrit as a cultural and linguistic anchor. Even today, many Indian languages trace their roots to Sanskrit. However, post-independence political maneuvering led to the decline of Sanskrit’s role as a unifier. Instead, the Nehruvian policy of linguistic states fueled regionalism, making language a source of division rather than integration. The DMK, in particular, has built its entire political identity around linguistic chauvinism, making Tamil Nadu a battleground for anti-Hindi and anti-Sanskrit sentiments.
M.K. Stalin’s rejection of Hindi is not about protecting Tamil—it’s about sustaining the DMK’s relevance. The Dravidian movement has long used language as a weapon to stoke fear and create an artificial North-South divide. They claim that Hindi imposition is an attack on Tamil culture, when in reality, a common link language would only empower Tamil speakers by giving them greater access to opportunities across Bharat.
The DMK’s hypocrisy is evident in its actions. Stalin and his party leaders send their children to English-medium schools, encourage Tamil youth to migrate to Hindi-speaking states for jobs, and benefit from Hindi-speaking audiences watching Tamil cinema. Yet, when it comes to national discourse, they act as if Hindi is a foreign threat.
The argument that Hindi imposition would erase regional languages is a false narrative. France, Germany, and Italy have their regional languages but also embrace English for global communication. China, with its regional dialects, still ensures that Mandarin unites the country. No state in India would stop speaking its regional language simply because Hindi becomes a national link. In fact, linguistic integration would strengthen both regional and national identities.
Bharat has survived centuries of invasions, colonial rule, and internal conflicts, but the one thing that has kept us together is our civilizational ethos. Language should serve as a bridge, not a barrier.
Consider this—if an Indian from Tamil Nadu struggles to communicate with an Indian from Uttar Pradesh, but both can communicate in English with an American, isn’t that a problem? Shouldn’t our priority be to ensure that every Indian can talk to another Indian in a common language before worrying about international communication?
The key is to find a balance. India should not abandon its linguistic diversity, but it should have a functional link language that unites the country. Hindi, being the most widely spoken language in India, is the natural candidate. It is already spoken or understood by a majority of Indians, making it a practical choice for national integration. At the same time, regional languages must be preserved and promoted. Just as Sanskrit once connected all regions of Bharat, Hindi can serve as a modern linguistic thread while allowing regional languages to flourish.
The opposition to Hindi is not just about language—it’s about political control. The DMK and similar parties fear that if linguistic barriers break down, their vote bank politics will collapse. But Bharat’s destiny is not to remain fragmented by colonial-era divisions.
The solution lies in a three-pronged approach:
Promote Hindi as a link language – Schools across India should teach Hindi as a functional language alongside regional languages and English. It should not be forced but encouraged as a practical tool for national integration.
Revive Sanskrit as a cultural unifier – Sanskrit is the linguistic and cultural foundation of Bharat. A national effort to revive spoken Sanskrit will reinforce India’s civilizational identity without threatening regional tongues.
Protect and nurture regional languages – States must continue to promote their native languages, literature, and traditions. The existence of a unifying language does not mean regional identities should be diluted. Instead, they should complement national unity.
The Gods of Genesis divided mankind by language to prevent them from building a tower that could reach the heavens. But Bharat must not repeat the mistakes of Babel. If we want to rise as a global power, we must first ensure that every Indian can communicate with another Indian without barriers.
M.K. Stalin and the DMK are trying to play God by keeping Bharat divided through linguistic politics. But Bharat’s destiny is unity. The only question is—how long will we allow political forces to keep us from achieving it?
