(Un)covering the Mask that hides economic face of MOI Issue -- By Fr. Victor Ferrao



Fr. Victor Ferrao

The rising commodification of education does not seem to raise eyebrows in our society. It has brought about privatisation of education even at the primary level. But unfortunately it does not seem to concern us. It appears that the MOI issue is directly linked with the privatisation of education.

There are hyper anxieties displayed by the leaders of BBSM about the MOI policy of the Government. But they do not seem to be credible as the very same people either run schools whose MOI is English or have their wards exercising a choice that is clearly pro-English. Although, the hypocrisy of these leaders is glaring in our eyes, it does not seem to disturb them and their followers.

While a rich educationist can exercise his/her democratic choice to run a primary school that has English as a medium of instruction as a business, the parents of the children have no natural choice. They have to buy the same choice for a price from some of these very salesmen who are in the forefront of the BBSM movement. That is why the mask that hides the economic interest under the cover of love of mother tongue and its deemed primacy for the education at primary level has fallen away. The economic denominator of the MOI issue cannot be trivialized and brushed aside. Indeed, it has to be identified as the primary factor that is responsible for the entire MOI imbroglio.

The economic factor that we have discerned here also comes in the way of the denial of a democratic right to choose freely the MOI when it comes to the parents.  The fact that there appears to be a murder of democracy when the parents do not enjoy the freedom to choice of a MOI for their wards also reveals the economic fangs that undergird the issue. When even a begger is paying tax for a simple match box in our country, how could we think that denial of grants to schools where mainly the poor study can be morally acceptable? Is it not crass pro-rich policy that the BBSM is standing for? Why is it not asking for a closure of all English schools to save Konkani and promote its ideology that deems mother tongue as the best medium of instruction at the primary level?  Is not that the children of the poor have the burden to save the culture and the mother tongue? If the mother tongue principle produces good education then why it is not applicable to the private schools that trade on English? Who is promoting English and thus setting clock back on Konkani is clearly visible to all.

Shouting and leading public demonstrations against the children of the poor while closing one’s eyes to free trade on English Medium only makes the tall leaders of BBSM look dwarfed.  This selective targeting of the poor exposes the tyranny of both free traders of English and leader of the BBSM and the RSS.

The fact that BBSM is bending backwards to accommodate the privatization and sale of education at the primary level in Goa cannot remain unquestioned.  If the principle of primacy of mother tongue at the primary level is valid then it must be valid for all children. How is it not valid where education is for sale? How are those who trade education at the primary level not agents of de-nationalization? Does it mean right to trade and commerce gives us licence to destroy our culture? How do we understand the silence of BBMS/RSS when it comes to the private primary schools? How can we be so blind to the damage that these free traders of English inflict on our Goan culture?   The fact that BBMS chooses not to target these schools on the basis that they do not receive grants from the Government manifest the lack of its seriousness and love of Goan culture. Can no receiving of economic benefits from the Government become a principle of insulation that saves them from the effects of destruction that they inflict on our culture?  These questions do matter and cannot be trivialized on grounds that these schools enjoy economic independence. It only shows that the BBSM leaders are only protecting the interest of the free traders that run the private school.  Hence, the fake facade that BBSM has crumbled down and it has the responsibility to free itself from the burden of collaborating with those who are agents of destructions of Konkani, our mother tongue.

The real face of movement of BBSM unfortunately is destructive of the very Konkani that they intent to save. Even if we grant that these leaders do not really willingly intent the same , they become signatories of the destruction of the large section the children of the rich parents that study in the private school. This is so because the universally valid principle of mother tongue is not enforced in the private schools. Moreover, the rich parents as well as the free traders of education who stand on the stage of BBSM/RSS do not grant universal validity to the principle of mother tongue when it comes to their private schools.  Besides, the fact that the leaders of BBSM/RSS also do not deem it fit to bring these free trading schools under the purview of the principle of mother tongue  that they force the poor only shows that they themselves do not believe in it. It appears that principle of mother tongue at the primary level as a means of handing over our culture applies only to the poor. By that token, those who can pay can forget their culture and mother tongue and it does not produce any anxiety for the BBSM.

Is this not culpable and malicious insulation of the free trading schools from all responsibility of destruction of our culture? If not then the sham movement of BBSM in league with the RSS is a movement against the poor that is unleashed in our society only to protect the interest of those who have put education for sale at the primary level. 

Fr. Victor Ferrao is a Professor  of Rachol Seminary.