Rejoinder

The right to opt out of what is understood to have negative features:

1. There is a numerically significant, lower caste community in Malabar, called the Thiyyas. With an exception of a few higher class families, by hereditary vocation, they were the labour and coconut plucking class. Incidentally I do belong to this community.

2.

Over the centuries, their dressing standard was like this: The men wore throth (thin whit towel) as lower garment. They wore nothing as upper garment. On the head they had a Palathoppi (cap made of aracnut palm leaf).

The women wore something like a lungi or kayili as lower garment and did not wear any upper garment, other than a thorth as a shawl. The dressing standards had a link to social suppression. Actually women who from this community who tried to opt out of this social code were levied a penal tax.

They were compelled to clothe themselves thus by social as well as statutory compulsion. They could not opt out. However, when Malabar came under the British rule, the statutory compulsion got removed. Only social compulsion remained. They could opt out of this dressing code, if they wanted.

The men started wearing mundu and women slowly changed to sari and blouse. Both mundu and sari are not really the hereditary dresses of the majority people of this place, even though it is taught to students as that.

3. Similarly Malayalam has suppressive and feudal features. Currently the need to learn Malayalam is only due to social compulsion. A person or child can opt out of it, if he or she desires it. The impugned government order has the effect of making it a statutory compulsion.

4.

There is no justification to make it a statutory compulsion. If a person wants to learn Malayalam, then it is his or her right to do so. Like there are women in many places in the world who go around topless. It is their right. Likewise if anyone wants to learn Malayalam, it is their right.

But it is not to be imposed on others. Like topless dressing standards should not be enforced on other women.

5. There are people who love Malayalam and the hierarchical social relationship it brings in. They fear that Malayalam would slowly vanish, if not imposed on others.

6.

There is no need for them to fear that. For, if they love Malayalam, they can learn it themselves and also teach their children. Lovers of Malayalam can make the language live.

In 1947, the number of people who speak Malayalam was less than 50 lakhs. Now, there are around 3.5 crore people Malayalam speakers in Kerala alone. So the contention that Malayalam is disappearing is not correct.

In this nation of ours, everyone has the right to profess, practice and propagate what he or she thinks is true. However, he or she has no right impose his own likings, ideas, social systems etc. on others.

7. Children of the poorer classes bear the brunt of the feudal words in Malayalam. They should be given a helping hand by the government to learn good quality English.

8.

Instead of the government pumping in crores of rupees for teaching Malayalam, that money should be spend on teaching English to the financially lower class children.

A study on this matter should be done. That is, on whether the poorer class parents want their children to learn English or not. Organised minorities with vested interests are forcing the poor class children bear the brunt of their selfish interests.

Learning Malayalam in Kerala is a very easy thing. Any man, who lives here, can pick up Malayalam within six months of social interaction here, if he or she desires. A 100 crore rupees spending on this is a useless expense, and should be used for improving English standards of the children. There is enough and more infrastructure here, including the print and visual media who promote Malayalam.

A few generations of people of West Bengal has suffered heavily due to the removal of English from their primary education. This should not be allowed to happen here.