
English is now code for ‘Khan Market Gang'. BJP is fighting a phantom enemy
He stated that 'to understand our country, our culture, our history, and our religion, no foreign language can suffice. The idea of a complete India cannot be imagined through half-baked foreign languages.' Shah also went on to say that he was aware of the challenge, but also 'fully confident that Indian society will win it. Once again, with self-respect, we will run our country in our own languages and lead the world too.'
Last week at a book launch, Union Home Minister Amit Shah made that clear. Shah said that those who speak English in India would 'soon feel ashamed' and that the creation of such a society was not far away. He went on to say that Indian languages are the jewels of our culture, and without them, 'we cease to be truly Indian'.
It's been 11 years since the Bharatiya Janata Party rose to power in India. There is a long string of victories that the government can claim, but defeating a language isn't one of them.
Shah's pronouncements aren't emerging in a vacuum. For years, language debates have simmered in India, particularly around the New Education Policy's three-language formula, which southern states view as Hindi imposition (although the policy does not explicitly mandate Hindi). Tamil Nadu has been especially vocal in its resistance, labelling the policy as a direct assault on linguistic federalism. The timing of Shah's remarks – delivered just as Bihar prepares for October-November polls and Tamil Nadu gears up for elections next April – is carefully calibrated electoral ammo. By villainising English, the BJP is no doubt betting that linguistic nationalism will energise its base in the Hindi heartland, even if it alienates the southern states.
The backlash to Amit Shah's remarks was swift – and very likely, desired. The Leader of the Opposition, Rahul Gandhi, wrote on X: 'English is not a dam, it is a bridge. English is not shameful, it is empowering. English is not a chain – it is a tool to break the chains.' He went on to accuse the BJP and RSS of opposing English education for poor children to suppress their ability to question authority and demand equality. Kerala ministers R Bindu and V Sivankutty dismissed Shah's remarks as 'restrictive and narrow-minded', warning that discouraging English would only make Indians' worlds 'more restrictive'.
From other corners of the internet came memes and videos: Of Prime Minister Narendra Modi speaking in English at a recent Bihar campaign rally; another of Jay Shah, Chairman of the International Cricket Council, speaking English haltingly.
Khan Market Gang
All of these reactions ignore the fact that when Amit Shah derides English speakers, he's not just talking about the language. He's tapping into a phantom enemy that has befuddled the BJP-RSS machine for years. 'English' is now code for a clever adversary we've known in the past variously as 'anti-national', 'tukde-tukde gang', 'Lutyens' Delhi (pejorative)', 'champagne leftists', 'limousine liberals' and my personal favourite, 'Khan Market Gang'.
Several of these labels have been around since Mr Modi's first term, but the last gained currency in 2019, when the PM famously identified them as a cabal of people that wanted to dismantle the legacy he'd built with '45 years of tapasya'. Crucially, this gang has kept the non-elites, the Hindi-speaking heart of India's population, from adequate representation in the corridors of power.
Aside from a handful of non-compliant journalists and writers, no one has yet been identified as a Khan Market Gang member. It is everyone and no one – a shapeshifting enemy that expands to include anyone who has a passing problem with the Indian state. Originally used to refer to Delhi's English-speaking, Western-educated elite who frequent overpriced cafes and wine bars, the gang's membership has grown magnificently elastic.
Say you are a farmer from Punjab or Haryana, taking exception to bills that didn't take your dissent into account. Maybe you haven't even heard about the existence of Khan Market, but mentally and spiritually, you are a member of the gang. Your integration with the Khan Market Gang organically began the day you chose to be an NGO or an activist, working to better the lives of non-elites. As a young JNU student, the gates of middling coffee shops and overpriced wine bars are probably closed for you, but no one can wrest your Khan Market Gang membership card from you.
The genius lies in the label's infinite flexibility: it can absorb any critic, and anything can be blamed on the Khan Market Gang. No one embodies this contradiction better than Shashi Tharoor. On odd days, he's Exhibit A of the Khan Market Gang's English-speaking treachery; on even days, he's dispatched to represent India's interests at global forums, in the same shameful colonial tongue.
Also read: Jaishankar's laser eyes meme hides how India blinded itself on crypto
BJP is Lutyens Delhi
Here's why Amit Shah's latest remarks on English are particularly rich. After 11 years of railing against Lutyens Delhi, you could argue that the BJP is Lutyens Delhi.
They govern from the same corridors. They live in the same bungalows that they claimed were symbols of elite capture. As 'outsiders' who promised to drain the swamp, they now control every single institution – executive and regulatory bodies, investigative agencies, media houses – that they once accused of being compromised. Yet somehow, the Khan Market Gang remains the perpetual threat.
In 2022, Caravan magazine wrote about a 'Khan Market cast of mind' and the failure of the urban elite to reckon with caste in a meaningful way: 'It is eight years since 2014, certainly time enough for any efforts at increased diversity and inclusiveness to show up. But consider the G-23 list of the Congress. More than a third are Brahmins, and half are either Brahmin or Thakur. Consider the NDTV ads of their anchors beaming down at us, a majority of them Brahmins, all of them upper castes.
Look through the editorial ranks of even the new digital portals that lead the challenge to this government, and you see the same old caste profile, the article stressed. 'Stare at the faculty at Ashoka, take the case of any of the most prominent civil-society organisations or consider any gathering of people from the Left and the same phenomenon is repeated.' The same Brahmin-dominated elite that the BJP claimed to challenge continued business as usual.
Meanwhile, the masses who believed this anti-elite promise face a more complex reality. While there is clear evidence that India has made significant strides to reduce extreme poverty, our employment figures tell a different story. Economic growth that doesn't translate into sufficient job creation for a young, expanding workforce. Policy decisions like demonetisation and the Covid-19 pandemic lockdowns hit people in the informal sectors – championed by the BJP – the hardest. Meanwhile, champagne liberals, insulated in formal employment and inherited wealth, weathered these storms largely unaffected.
India's non-English speakers have been promised a moving target of a $5-trillion economy and dreams of becoming the 'vishwaguru', a global teacher leading the world through ancient wisdom and modern prowess. Yet, both these headline objectives require exactly what Amit Shah now wants Indians to abandon. English dominates international commerce, scientific research, diplomatic engagement, and knowledge exchange. India's IT and service sectors, which have represented upward social mobility for lakhs of families, exist because of our English proficiency.
So when Shah promises that English speakers will feel ashamed, it begs the question: How exactly does India plan to become the 'vishwaguru' if its citizens are ever more insular? Phantom enemies are fine; every government needs a few. But when you convince people that their limitations should be viewed as patriotic victories, the consequences extend far beyond politics. This is how a country talks itself into irrelevance.
Karanjeet Kaur is a journalist, former editor of Arré, and a partner at TWO Design. She tweets @Kaju_Katri. Views are personal.
(Edited by Zoya Bhatti)
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Indian Express
30 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Corporate India has a caste problem. And it is time to talk about it
On June 23, the Indian aviation industry was again in the news, however, for all the wrong reasons. Reports started coming in of an IndiGo pilot trainee alleging caste based discrimination by his bosses. An FIR has been filed, and a police investigation is underway. Meanwhile, IndiGo has strongly refuted such claims, saying it stands for 'zero-tolerance policy towards any form of discrimination'. The investigation will take its own course, but it opens the avenue to talk about a much larger issue: Corporate India's caste problem. Post the 1990s, when the private sector started to expand immensely owing to policy changes, it was primarily the Savarna entrepreneurs who benefited greatly. Among them, the rise of Bania capital within India Inc has been mapped extensively. However, this has been perceived as an organic development, born out of inherent merit, developed in some sort of 'casteless vacuum'. However, the material realities of labour and capital are intrinsically caste-coded. The overrepresentation of communities in some sectors of the economy is directly and (often) proportionally related to the absence of other communities in the same. Babasaheb Ambedkar had analysed caste as not just a system of division of labour, but rather a division of labourers. Within corporate India, this division and categorisation of labourers is starkly visible. In the last decade or so, even as corporate culture internationally veered towards 'Diversity, Equity, Inclusion', also known as DEI practices, India Inc has remained caste-blind. Not just within corporate structures and the industry, but even within allied ecosystems — from B-schools to market commentators, journalists, and podcasters — there has been no serious or critical conversation on caste as a key variable in business management and planning. This is very surprising because most of the real economy is based on kinship networks and 'contacts' which often overlap with political funding and are ultimately mediated through caste connections. In the absence of any meaningful discourse on these intersections, the corporate understanding of Indian market realities remains stunted, myopic and unsuited for Indian needs, as it frequently over-fixates on some socio-cultural segments while invisibilising large swathes. India's commerce minister, Piyush Goyal's recent comments on the lopsided nature of startup/business priorities of corporate India also seem to suggest the same. The minister's comments stirred up a debate. Most business leaders responded with a litany of complaints against the government itself and lamented the business challenges they faced. While there is certainly a lot of validity in their collective grievance, very few actually acknowledged that there was a 'priority gap'. Fewer still tried to analyse why the 'gaze' of India Inc remains limited only to a very small range of business models, often urban-situated and catering usually to high-net-worth individuals. Even as every B-school teaches its MBAs to 'think outside the box' and all industry captains talk ad nauseum about innovation — it seems that in the last 30 years no one has realistically found a way to innovatively create value for large sections of Indian masses outside those wealthy urban enclaves (almost always populated by other wealthy Savarnas like themselves). It may well be because of the lack of diversity in their leadership, in the one-dimensional, non-diverse pedagogy (in spaces of training) that celebrates itself as ground-breaking and inventive. India Inc, despite three decades of neoliberalisation, remains a social formation that is run by Savarnas, for other Savarnas and trained by Savarnas. This total ubiquity of Savarna-ness renders corporate culture in its own shape, where the omnipresent becomes the invisible. As per David Foster Wallace's allegory about the fish swimming in water does not 'see' the water, the caste stratified codes of corporate India become invisible to Savarnas within it. But almost immediately, it manifests to folks who come from different socio-cultural realities, often in hostile and contradictory ways. So much so that for many marginalised people, to survive and move ahead in India Inc, they have to internalise and validate Savarna idioms of business success. Whether it is the casteist ad campaign run by Zomato, Narayan Murthy's work-life balance ideas or Swiggy's decision for veg-only fleets (rescinded upon backlash) — that is how you emerge with statements or decisions. And on occasion, where friction within teams emerges, inherent, embedded caste prejudices come to the fore in ways that are traumatic for caste-marginalised people but may seem totally normal or par-for-the-course to other Savarnas. It remains to be seen whether this is the case in the aforementioned IndiGo matter. Irrespective of how the matter unfolds, these types of flashpoints remain an unspoken reality for the minority caste-marginalised professionals working in top positions. In most cases, one stays silent and compliant, and internalises the bias as the structure itself is coded in the vocabulary of the dominant caste. At a time when a strong online campaign is emerging against caste-based reservation among educated, elite Savarnas, it is perhaps time for India Inc to reflect upon itself and give shape to the unfulfilled promise of diversity and consider reservations in the private sector as an innovative, bold and progressive step in bridging market reforms, nation-building mandates as well as dignity to all working professionals. The writer is Associate Dean at Woxsen University, Hyderabad. His latest book is Meet the Savarnas: Indian Millennials Whose Mediocrity Broke Everything


Hindustan Times
33 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Is language row the reason for MNCs' exit from Bengaluru? Social media debates
A social media post on the ongoing Kannada language row in Bengaluru and the resultant divide between locals and migrants sparked a fresh discussion on Monday. A social media user shared a picture of a sign that read, 'Please communicate in Kannada,' saying it is the reason why companies were exiting Bengaluru.(X) "When my children ask me in the future, "Why did IT and Electronics MNCs move out of Bengaluru?", I will show them this," a social media user posted on X, sharing a picture of a sign that read, 'Please communicate in Kannada.' It amassed more than 23,000 views and over 600 likes at the time this article was being written. It also garnered several replies, with most users agreeing with the sentiment. ALSO READ | 'Bengaluru deserves the hate it's getting…': Woman's viral post on growing divide sparks debate 'No wonder why companies are leaving bangalore and moving to Hyderabad,' a user replied. 'Bhai, the number one reason would be the insane traffic and cost of living. This will be the 2nd,' another wrote. ALSO READ | 'I'm not for it, people are already...': Karnataka labour minister opposes controversial 12-hour workday proposal 'Seriously. I live in Hong Kong and everyone here services me in English in my daily life. No such thing like learn Chinese. Same when I visit Dubai, no one expects me to learn Arabic, or Bahasa in Singapore..,' one more response said. 'Will they speak to their foreign clients also in Kannada,' a user shared. On the other hand, many came to the support of locals, with one writing, 'Full support to kannadigas for this, go for that, we Marathis are with you...'. 'Nobody is moving out for language. You will keep hearing global giants opening new offices almost every week. Even if some move out, it will be only because of civic mismanagement and cost of living,' another said. ALSO READ | Bengaluru airport faces major disruptions, 16 international flights cancelled amid Middle East tensions: Report 'Bengaluru deserves the hate…': Woman's viral post In a similar instance, another social media post by a Bengaluru resident has gone viral, igniting conversations around class tensions, attitudes of locals, and the changing social dynamics of the tech hub amidst the language row. 'I'm a Kannadiga and I'm done defending Bengaluru. This city deserves the hate it's getting,' the woman posted on Reddit.


Hindustan Times
37 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Panchayat season 4 review: Phulera loses its innocence, originality as murky politics, repetition of formula take over
Panchayat season 4 review Cast: Jitendra Kumar, Raghubir Yadav, Neena Gupta, Faisal Malik, Chandan Roy, Sanvikaa, Durgesh Kumar, Sunita Rajwar, Ashok Pathak, and Pankaj Jha Director: Deepak Kumar Mishra Rating: ★★.5 For years, Panchayat served as a reminder of the power of Indian streaming. In a wave of crime dramas and gun battles, this show - about the life of a Panchayat secretary - had won hearts and impressed critics. But like they say, nothing lasts forever. And sadly, Panchayat's goodwill seems to be ending before the show itself calls it a day. The latest season, focused on Phulera's Panchayat elections, completely disregards what had made the show great - simplicity and relatability. Panchayat season 4 sees formula creeping in finally, and also an overload of the murkiness of politics over the simplicity of human emotions. Panchayat season 4 review: The old favourite is back, but isn't up to the mark this time. Panchayat season 4 opens a few weeks after the end of season 3. The elections are upon us, and Manju Devi (Neena Gupta) and Pradhan ji (Raghuvir Yadav) face their toughest challenge in the form of Kranti Devi and Bhushan (Sunita Rajwar and Durgesh Kumar). Abhishek (Jitendra) has long given up the hope of being non-partisan and is actively campaigning for Manju's party. But despite Pradhan's 'dabdaba' in Phulera, winning may not be as easy as it has been so far. The spectre of elections looms large on Panchayat season 4 and is easily its undoing as well. The first two seasons were splendid, largely because of the anthology-like quality of storytelling, where each episode was a self-contained story creating an overarching narrative. Season 3 digressed a little but still managed to hold its own, largely due to crisp writing and some memorable sequences. What Panchayat season 4 lacks But season 4 gets lost in the political machinations and one-upmanship of the elections. It was important for the makers to keep the focus on the elections. But one feels that it sucks the joy and innocence out of Panchayat, which had been its USP all along. The new season also feels more manufactured than before, with the sameness of formula appearing to finally show its face here. That robs the narrative of the freshness that Panchayat had managed to retain for three seasons. The biggest disservice the show does is to Pradhan ji himself. Raghuvir Yadav's character has been shown as a clever politician, but a good man who is the right choice for Phulera. That is why Abhishek is comfortable letting go of his impartiality to side with him over the years. However, this season turns him into just a politician who tries to win votes and get back into power through populist measures. If the intent was to show how flawed he is, it did not translate. In fact, if anything, it makes him come across as inefficient. There are a few stray moments in the show that highlight this, from unclean drains to unhappy voters. But the show misses the chance to really drive home the point. All it does is generate sympathy for the other side. Panchayat had a chance to act non-partisan here, too. If only it had presented Bhushan with an ounce of humanity. But it messes up there too, reducing Bhushan and Kranti to stereotypical bad guys, right down to a sinister 90s' background theme for them. What works in season 4 But then, the show does redeem itself with the arc it gives to Vinod (Ashok Pathak). It is praiseworthy how the show manages to bring a supporting character's arc to the forefront. If it was Prahlad in season 2, it's Vinod here. Pathak's heartfelt performance also deserves a mention. In the ensemble, the heavy lifting has yet again been done by the support cast, with Ashok Pathak, Durgesh Kumar, Chandan Roy, Sunita Rajwar, and Raghuvir Yadav shining the brightest. Despite how his character has been handled, Raghuvir Yadav manages to give one of the most memorable scenes of the show in the final episode. Neena Gupta and Jitendra Kumar are capable as always, but somehow get subdued with everything happening around them. It's not their fault that their characters come across as passive somehow. Panchayat season 4 is not bad. It is just a letdown by the show's lofty standards. On its own, Phulera still breathes, and there are stories and characters (the electrician and Manju's father being worthy additions) that stand out. Some old returnees also steal the spotlights. But the chuckles are fewer, the narrative a little jaded, and the sheen somewhat less bright than it had been.