Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is a psychology theory given by Abraham Maslow in 1943. At the bottom of the pyramid are the most essential needs for the survival of individual like food and safety. As one achieves fulfillment for these low levels of needs, the desire as well as efforts for higher level needs grow. The actual pyramid of needs is given below.
Since the topic of discussion is Maslow’s pyramid and its implication for civilization, we will not discuss the Maslow’s theory in itself. However, since the Maslow’s pyramid theory is applied to an individual, what has civilization got to do with this? Well, civilization ensures whether some or all of these needs are possible to satisfy or not.
Just to give you an example- a war torn Afghanistan offers only the most difficult life to most of its citizens. Most of the individual time is spent around satisfying the very basic needs. Some individual can play to satisfy their fourth level needs i.e. status and recognition but anarchy implies that even they cannot ignore the lower levels of needs all the time. Under such a scenario, it is impossible to even dream about self-actualization.
From a civilization perspective, the few important things are-
No level of the pyramid can be given lesser importance.
The base levels of the pyramid need to stay bigger. One cannot invert the pyramid and hope for stability. The civilization cannot completely ignore the lower levels else the pyramid will get inverted, thus causing undue harm to its followers.
There is also a need for enough people in the top layers to develop and grow a healthy civilization.
The western Europe under Christianity up until the 15th century could not unlock the top level due to various restrictions placed on those trying to achieve the top level. Once unlocked, large benefits accrued to their whole society and which continues up until now. Not only western Europe progressed materially but also came to dominate the lands which were once unknown. It will be foolish to argue that new continents were dominated by Western Europe just by having enough people on the top levels. They also expanded the lower base of the pyramid as Europeans grew in numbers during this time. The demographic replacement of entire continents happened thanks to the presence of enough people on the lowest base.
As we talk now, the civilization focus of the west has completely shifted from stabilizing the lower levels of the pyramid as seen through their neglect of families, safety and demography. Families in Europe are broken, safety is being sabotaged by invitation of aliens who do not believe in same civilization ethics and local demography is eroded through state benefits to those who contribute the least to civilization. The remaining civilization is top heavy, where individuals chase esteem through signalling their big hearts, while at the same time having their own lower levels of needs unfulfilled. This leaves very few for self-actualization goals.
The Islamic societies on the other hand are perpetually locked on the lower levels of Maslow’s pyramid. They are only stable as long as they can poach on others to satisfy their lower level needs. The failure to unlock higher levels due to inherent incoherence implies that their societies will continue to lock their followers on the lowest levels.
Hindus at present are also in no better position. A large section of its people are stuck at the lowest base due to economic policies pursued by the post independence leaders. For those who managed to break through the cycle of everyday needs are now extremely focused on top and ignore the importance of base levels of the pyramid like their western European counterparts. This continues as the pretamata and rakshasmata slowly hollows the base level of Hindu civilization. What many forget in this discussion is that you cannot build a healthy civilization on a small base. Losing at the lower levels of pyramid essentially implies inverting the pyramid, which will bring down the whole civilization.
How the pyramid was made stable under the VarnaAshram system is a question we leave for the readers.
Why do you create riches if the enemy waiting behind the lines will come and take it all away one day in the future? Would not you have been better if you had invested that time in building defence and keeping the barbarians off your territory?
Let me start by retelling early recorded Chinese history. There was once a confederation of nomadic tribes which the Chinese referred to as Xiongnu, known as the Huns today. The most famous person of the confederation being Attila the Hun who sacked the eastern Roman empire. This retelling is about Meha the Hun, an ancestor of Attila, who was able to unite the various tribes into a strong Confederacy. Meha, a brave and capable general went on to raid China repeatedly. Basically these Nomads lived off by plundering the Chinese who had a far refined culture, way of life as well as developed systems of governance. All the Huns did was bide their time and look for a perfect opportunity to attack and plunder and take away whatever they could, be it women, gold, silver, horses etc. Many would now find parallels between the Afghans and the Huns, which is true, both lived on plunder. Now let us come to the present times, Hindus are today working hard, earning money, trying to build a civilization, rather rebuild it as some of the readers may point out later on, while Pakistan or certain sections of our society are simply biding their time. They are not bothered about poverty or well being, they know they can always snatch what they like from others when the opportunity arises. Does Kairana ring a bell?
Civilization is a delicate thing. To protect it we must strive to destroy the barbarians at the gate, at all costs. Humanity or other forms of opiates which stem from universalism or similar doctrines, should be neutralised as soon as possible and never let these problems prolong as time only strengthens the barbarians at the gate.
When the barbarians arrive to plunder our civilization, refinement, superior ways of life will count for nothing! Seize the opportunity and smash the enemies into oblivion. Compassion is a value your enemies do not share.
There is so much propaganda on the internet, movies (specially Hollywood, but sometimes in Bollywood and other local Indian film industries as well), press (most of the national press especially the ones run in English language) about how Western “civilisation” is superior and how they civilised the whole world. This is specially true among the conservatives and the StormFront type white nationalists/superiority advocates, and they use this notion to justify the hundreds of millions their countries slaughtered, looted and starved. For instance the British barbarians today, typically justify their barbaric looting along the lines of “We gave India the science and technology, rail roads etc and hence our looting and starvation of hundreds of millions of Indians is OK”, even though it is pathetically false through and through as shown in this article Myth of British helping India. This propaganda is so pathetic that modern day “rationalists” like Sam Harris claim that western interventions today is Ok since western civilization and way of life is superior and interventions are a way of bringing said civilisation to the rest of the world. For instance Sam Harris even remarked how British and Portuguese helped end Sati in India, partially justifying millions of people that Portuguese genocided in Goa with their Goan inquisition and hundreds of millions the British barbarians starved to death during their loot, even though the truth is that Sati was banned by both Sikhs and Marathas, long before the British did it in their respect areas and was a practiced in areas where Indians/Hindus were not in power like Bengal as a self defence against Muslim barbarians. In fact, Hindu voice against Sati is much older and it is prohibited even in the Vedas, as shown here by Koenraad Elst. As one can see, this argument of western civilisation being superior is often used as a justification to intervene and destroy other countries, much like USA spreading democracy in Iraq.
So it is imperative to understand the term “western civilization” for what it is to safeguard our civilization from the looting barbarians today. In the past, several non western publications poked holes in the notions of western superiority to show Westerners a mirror whenever they started denigrating others. But for some reason, that seems to be lost today because of the shameless western wannabeness among the middle class Indians and Indian elites, because of their colonised minds. Their media, much like Indian media, never shows the actual face of the Western countries or their barbaric societies and hence Indians have a very rosy view of the west, far removed from reality. This is a recent phenomenon though, as many in the past used to point out west for it what it is to their face before, much like what Mahatma Gandhi said about Western “civilisation”. When asked about it, he famously quipped that “It would be a good idea”, meaning if west had a civilisation, it would be a good idea. So Indians need to know what a shallow soulless garbage western “civilisation” is to counter both the Strom front and Brietbart type of white supremacists on the internet and to prevent the inevitable decay of our civilisation if we ever follow the western “civilisational” model.
Western Civilisation is not a civilisation
The most pathetic claim about the notion of Western Civilisation is that western countries are civilisation to begin with. So what do they actually mean by the term western civilisation? The term Western civilisation refers to the descendants of the “Western half of the Roman empire and its descendants” while the Eastern Roman empire or the Byzantium Empire is traditionally called the Eastern Roman empire. This is where the term comes from. But how legitimate is the claim that western civilisation is the descendants of the Western Roman empire? As one will shortly see, not very much.
The majority of the claimants of western civilisation are not actual descendants of the Western Roman empire to begin with. For example, the flag bearers of supposed western civilisation today, United Kingdom, Germany, and its descendants in United States and Anglosphere, the Anglo Saxons are not actually descendants of Roman civilisation or culture and are just barbaric Anglo Saxon tribes (as referenced during Roman period) which robbed and looted and eventually settled in present day England, Germany. They are not Romans, but rather the barbaric tribes which scavenged the corpse of the dying and decaying Roman empire and carved their own respected societies in modern day Britain and Germany. Then of course, the Britain got invaded and conquered by the Scandinavians, who themselves were barbaric Vikings (and one can even now see association of Americans to Vikings to relate their history and ancestry today) in the 6-7th century well after the fall of the Roman empire to warring barbaric hordes. Similarly, the French today are the descendants of Frankish tribes which carved out their own kingdom in France or Gaul, as known in Roman empire. These are the same people which then went onto settle in USA, Canada and Australia. They have little or nothing to do with the Roman civilisation. The same is true for most other European countries as well. Their claims of being western civilisation is their pathetic attempt at trying to forge a history of civilization pre-dating their colonial era of barbarity and looting, which isn’t filled with barbarity and hunter gathering tribes as was the case with most of their histories. They attempt to paint themselves as the Western civilization because without that illegitimate claim, their actual history is nothing but that of barbarity, loot and rapes, unlike a civilizational country like India, China or even Persia/Iran.
These claims of being descendants of western civilisation by the Anglo Saxon west or indeed the majority of west is of course as legitimate as that of a poor fatherless bastard claiming his successful rich neighbour as his own dad to make up for the fact that he doesn’t have a dad or that he is an illegitimate bastard. Hence, the term western civilisation is by itself is an illegitimate and pathetic one and a more apt description would be to call them as modern nation states without any actual history. The truth is, most of them actually know it deep down, specially in the colonial countries like Canada, Australia and USA. They often make up for their lack of legitimate history or civilisation with artificial stories of greatness and of course trying to downplay the achievements of actual civilisations like Bharatiya or Chinese civilization through their communist coolies and sepoys here through their use of deliberately corrupted Indology and with attempts to rename Indian subcontinent as South Asia, for example.
Of course, there is no actual western civilisation today as not even Italians can claim Roman heritage today. Rome is dead so are its customs and languages. While Shri Rama still enlightens the heart of any true Bhartiya today, does Jupiter generate any veneration in the hearts of Italians? The Roman civilization died the moment it adopted the worship of the bastard Jew from Bethlehem (ironically situated in Arabia/Asia). The original Roman culture or the western culture of worshipping Jupiter or Juno is long dead and what is present is a cheap Abrahamic culture which masquerades as a descendant of the Roman culture since facing the reality of lack of any history or culture on their own is embarrassing. This is especially hilarious when seen in the context of Scandinavia which had nothing whatsoever to do with “Western Civilisation” or Roman Empire,not even in the slightest, and still gets lumped together to cite western countries. Ironically, even the camel banging Bedouins of Saudi Arabia or other barbaric Islamic nations can at the very least claim a religion and culture of their very own unlike Europeans who resort to worshipping an Asian Jew/Semite while calling themselves “superior culture or civilisation”.
Why Western superiority is a Myth
The second problem with assertion of western civilizational superiority is of course the very assertion that the western society is superior in the first place. The truth of the matter is that, the supposed western superiority these people talk about is a very recent and a transient phenomenon borne out of looting, pillage and genocide against actual civilisations and not really their own achievement. This is evident from the fact that the only period of time where the supposedly superior west even had an edge over proper civilisations of Asia, i.e. during the 18-20th century is also the time they looted and raided the Asian civilisations to enrich their pathetic decadent societies. As soon as the decolonisation, caused primarily by Hitler’s breaking of colonial empires backs, an inter-barbarian civil war among the European barbarians, made them too weak to hold onto their colonies, they descended back into their historical role in the world- playing second fiddle to Asian civilisations
Ever since the loss of their colonies, western countries like UK, Germany, French etc, is back to their barbaric and decadent ways of mediocrity and are today once again back to being the second fiddles to Asian countries and proper civilizations, like India, China, Japan or South East Asia or is in the process of losing out to the above like USA, which is on its decline. This is not anything new to known Human history of 8000 years. Indians and Chinese were living in large cities in Indus Valley and Yangtze river by 3000BCE, when the Scandinavians, Britons, French were still hunter gathering barbarians even in 7th century. Asia was the centre of arts, culture, science, philosophy, religion for most of Human history. India was the centre of the world for religion, arts, culture, science and philosophy, having also taught the other South East Asian countries like, Japanese and Chinese. The supposed western rise of the 18th century was due to western conquest and genocide of four continents – the two Americas, Africas and Australia- and not because of their greatness. Even many of the technologies used for these conquests were copied from the East in the initial phase of colonization.
Of course one could argue that the conquest of proper civilisation like Indians, Chinese or South East Asia was only possible because of western superiority but that is a nonsensical argument. Superior army tactics doesn’t equate to being a superior civilisation. Nobody in their right mind calls the Gengiz khan and his horde of Mongolian horse back raiding barbaric thugs as a superior civilisation just because they managed to conquer China, Persia, Europe(Russia) and Central Asia. We just call them barbarians with superior military tactics who destroyed the civilised world for their own profit. Similarly,the western colonialists which conquered the proper civilisations like India, South East Asia or China are not superior civilizations but rather just barbaric thugs with better military tactics and they looted, plundered and killed hundreds of millions, sometimes even in the name of the bloodthirsty psychopathic monotheistic God for filling their treasury. If western barbarians are to be considered superior civilization because they conquered others, then so should be the Mongolian barbarians under Gengiz Khan. In short, military strength is not what demonstrates the superiority of a civilisation and the only superiority west had was that, else everything it acquired was by looting others and preventing others from developing. Also, European military superiority is a 200-300 year glitch in 8000+ years of written civilization, where Asians dominated the world and are on the way to dominate it again.
Asia had the largest GDP, had the better science (Indians and Chinese had Heliocentrism for 4000 years, while Europe was still persecuting Galileo for heliocentric theories in 16th century), better religions (Europeans or west doesn’t have a religion of their own and worship an Asian Jew), better societies with even caste ridden India was a much better place for the lower castes than the peasant life (peasant castes as opposed to Nobility caste of Europe) in Europe during the 15-18th century (peasant revolutions were unheard of in medieval India while extremely common in Europe due to exploitative systems employed there) before industrialisation in Europe destroyed the caste structure there, which was denied to India during her colonial rule and hence the persisting caste problems (since India was robbed for 200 years of industrialisation and the subsequent societal growth), better livelihood, better sanitation , better philosophy (of building your own country rather than loot and destroy other countries and steal their resources like the European barbarians did at that time). The European spike in living standards during the 18th century was a result of conquest by military and not because of ideas or superiority of culture. Even industrial revolution was brought by the mass production of rifles for the military at the time in the Britain.
So, when this conquest and looting of others stopped, so did the momentary superiority of the so called Western countries, which they enjoyed over proper civilisations like India or China. With loss of colonies, Europe and west is relegated to their decadent societies as powers of yesteryears and a society of bastards, dead bodies and crime. The Asian century as the 21 st century is called today is a misnomer as all centuries, except 18-20th had been Asian centuries only, for the known history of Human race. It is especially funny that certain white cretins in online forums advocate eugenics as if their race is in the top hierarchy of races of the world, even though any proper analysis of human history would show how much of the bottom feeders the white race actually is.
Of course leaving history aside, what is the supposed superiority of western countries today? 50% bastard rates? 2000% higher rapes per capita compared to Asia? Several magnitudes higher crime figures and prison population? 50% divorce rates? A “culture” so materialistic and self indulgent that they can’t even bring themselves to have enough children to replace themselves and have to import rape happy Muslim immigrants from middle east for improving their economy? Seriously which part of western society can one define as being superior? Their economic prosperity was of course brought by loot of others and now that that has dried up, even the economic edge the western barbarians had over proper civilisations like India and China is dying out today .
All in all, it is stupid to think that western “civilization” is actually superior (actually it is not a civilization if we go by proper definition and death of Roman culture) and it is suicidal to mimic their decadent culture of single mothers, bastards, divorces and rapes. Every Indian (and indeed every non westerner) should know this fact. Next time the Storm front or Brietbart thugs brag about “Western civilization”, they should be shown a mirror for what they truly are- a subhuman barbaric trash for most of human history, someone who got rich and wealthy by destroying other races and cultures. Their model of society/culture/”civilization”, as they like to call themselves, is not a model for anyone except barbarians. Civilisations like India, China, Japan, South East Asians etc would do well not to adopt the western barbaric morals or code or culture or religion!
Contextual editorial illustration for the restored article.
This article is sourced from @Rjrasva and @dasyavevrka who have researched on Japanese response to early Christian missionaries in 16th century in the paper called “Japan – Her first dalliance with West”. The below article provides summary of their work.
The history of the world since fourth century CE has seen the expansionist monotheistic religions from Middle East stamping out the pagan traditions in one land after another. We, Hindus, have keenly felt the result of this monotheistic Abrahamic onslaught losing more than half of our lands. A thorough reversion of Abrahamic expansion has occurred only in one land – the land of our pagan cousins, the Land of Rising Sun. Japan is a land of Gods (kami) for the Shintoists just as Bharata is a punyabhoomi and karmabhoomi for us. Japanese have digested many Hindu devis and devatas (Sarasvati as Benzaiten, Lakshmi as Kichijo, Ganesha as Kangiten, Garuda as Karura etc.) in their pantheon through the intermediary Buddhists from China. While Japan was spared from any Islamic invasions, she had to face the onslaught of the second Abrahamism from the sixteenth century. Some missionaries even planned to use a Christian Japan to invade and subdue China as we shall see later.
Christian inroads into Japan led to severe troubles not unlike what we faced in Goa and Santhome. Shinto and Buddhist shrines were razed to the ground in the name of the Saviour. In this essay, we shall see how the Japanese handled the Christian attempts, their study/understanding of the monotheistic traditions, their view of the West and its religions and also, the reason why Japanese do not fall to Christian proselytism so easily.
Japanese response
Over a period of time beginning early 16th century, Japanese rulers realized the threat potential of Christianity. Since, the missionaries also brought with them good trading opportunities, it made Japan dependent on trade and in turn depend on Christian. This is not any different from today when Indian courts US for FDI and other outsourcing jobs and in return turns a blind eye to evangelist groups. The Japanese tried to reduce their dependence on this trade so that they can hit back on Christians who were serving as pawns for foreign powers like Spain and Portugal. Thus over a period of time Japanese came up with different laws to contain the march of Christianity.
In their campaign to suppress Christianity, the Japanese authorities had realized an important point regarding the Christian psyche, this being the Christian fetish for martyrdom. The initial public executions of captured Christians resulted in the veneration of the executed people as martyrs. The astute men in charge of the eradication of Christianity realized this and decided that henceforth the official policy should be geared towards securing apostasy with execution being a final resort. We can glean this from the order given by Hasegawa Sahioye Fujihiro, the chief Governor of Nagasaki (the Christian center in Japan):
The Christians desire death in order that they may be honored as martyrs. Hence it is not desirable to slay them, but rather to prolong their lives, subjecting them to such severe punishments as will finally overcome their resistance. The most effective trial will be to enslave their woman, sending the most beautiful of them to the houses of prostitution in Kyoto. If the people will renounce the religion of Christ, they shall be exempted from imposts and other obligations; moreover, Chinese ships will be induced to come to their ports for trade, and this will be for the great enrichment of the country. (Cary 1996: 184)
In order to secure apostasy, persuasion was tried first and if this was unsuccessful torture followed. The most ingenious of the torture techniques was the tsurushi which the Japanese refined with practice on Christians. The contemporary Christians sources testify that it was by far the most effective of the torture techniques as the following shows:
At last they found a more hellish and exquisite way of torturing than before; they hung these sufferers by the heels, their heads in pits, which to give the blood some vent, they slasht lightly cross-waies, (but they do that now no more), and in this posture they live several daies, ten or twelve, and speak sensibly to the very last: The greatness of this torment surpasseth all other, being beyond all humaine strength to suffer and be undergone; but by such who are extraordinarilie strengthened from above. This extremitie hath indeed (by reason of its continuance) forced many to renounce their religion; and some of them who had hung two or three daies, assured me that the pains they endured were wholly unsufferable, no fire nor no torture equalling their langour and violence. (Turnbull 2000: 15)
No pagan civilization to our knowledge ever went to the lengths that the Japanese did in crushing Christianity. Others such as Qing China may have indulged in sporadic persecutions but the Japanese went to much greater lengths and devised many policies specifically designed to crush Christianity. The idea that force does not work or is counterproductive when dealing with Abrahamic religions seems laughable after studying the Japanese experience. In the following paragraph, we have summarized some of the methods the Japanese employed and urge the readers to read the more detailed article cited in the next paragraph to get an idea of Japanese thoroughness in dealing with Christianity.
In addition to their policy of no martyrs, the Japanese authorities employed a variety of techniques to catch hidden Christians and to prevent relapse of apostates. Financial rewards were announced for providing information on priests and other missionaries in hiding. The Shogunate instituted an annual test in Christian centers like Nagasaki whereby the entire population was required to trample on Christian relics such as a picture of Mary holding Jesus. Servants and even prostitutes were required to sign an oath saying that they were not Christians before they could be hired. Public announcement boards were erected throughout the country announcing the prohibition of Christianity which was declared as jashumon (“the evil doctrine”). The entire Japanese population was required to register at their local Buddhist temple and were put into groups of five households (called the gonin gumi system) which functioned as mutual assistance groups but also involved spying on the other households in the group to make sure there were no hidden Christians or law breakers of any other sort. If a member of the group knew of hidden Christians but failed to inform the authorities, the entire household group was usually punished. These were just some of the measures that the Shogunate formulated to stamp out Christianity and many of them were upheld throughout the 250 years of Shogunate rule, long after Christianity ceased to be a viable threat. For more information on these and other measures, one may consult the online article “How Japan dealt with the Christian Threat”.
Result
The result of such sanctions can be gleaned from the devil’s own mouth. So thorough were the Japanese in their eradication of Christianity that a Christian apologist was forced to declare:
Although we often recall Muslim/Christian conflicts, it was the Shinto/Buddhist nation of Japan that perpetrated one of the most thorough extirpations ever recorded of a church. The Japanese exceeded any Muslim successes in how totally they destroyed once-booming Christian communities. This movement had significant long-term effects for the direction of the Christian movement, as the annihilation of the Japanese missions decisively prevented Christianity resuming its movement towards global status, striking a dreadful blow against its progress in Asia. By eliminating potential rivals, both these campaigns contributed to maintaining the near-total European monopoly of Christianity.
For good measure, the Christian apologist is also forced to admit that:
Although we naturally pay most attention to the spectacular acts of mass martyrdom, such violence in its own right need not be absolutely destructive. We remember the saying that “the blood of martyrs is the seed of the church.” Much more effective in the long term is systematic repression associated with intense surveillance and police work, which really does ensure that a crushed church cannot rise again. The Japanese were brilliantly successful at such policies. Much like modern-day totalitarian regimes, they ran a superbly effective mechanism of repression and thought control. They offer a terrifying model of the means by which a faith – any faith – truly can be destroyed.
Indeed after receiving that crushing blow, Christianity has never again managed to make significant headway in the Land of the Rising Sun though there were periods of optimism and growth such as the early Meiji period or in the immediate aftermath of WW2.
Originally published April 11, 2016 on Yuga Parivartan. Sourced from research by @Rjrasva and @dasyavevrka, “Japan – Her first dalliance with West”.
Rajiv Malhotra’s new book, The Battle for Sanskrit, which is going to be launched soon is a great attempt at rescuing the discourse on Indology and Sanskrit from the clutches of western pay masters, who strictly guard the academic debate on interpretation of Sanskrit texts and have completely boxed out the traditional Indian schools. But while Rajiv Malhotra is busy in dismantling the western hold on Indology, an equally important question that one should ask is about the continued use of English as the national language of India.
The need for national language
What defines a culture, if not its own language. The reason that the national language formed the most controversial topic during Constitution debates, should itself explain the important role of language for national polity. Given the high passions that marked these debates, the constitution assembly agreed to use English for fifteen years and then switch to Hindi. But when the time came for this switch, Lal Bahadur Shastri buckled under the pressure from Southern states.
Given that language evokes raw passions even today and forms an important part of identity, the debate on national language is even more relevant. English cannot embody the ethos of Indic civilization and is fast eroding native cultures around the world and not just India. It would not be an exaggeration to state that if you lose your language, you lose your culture.
The new language policy
Before starting any debate about national language, one needs to ensure that the existing local languages are given their proper due and the national language is not forced upon people in a top-down fashion.
The current policy that is used in the country is Local language+English i.e. people start with learning their local language and use English for administration and business purpose. But given the difficulty people face to learn a foreign language, the number of people actively using English fluently is still less than 10% of Indian population.
Given that learning outcomes are best in local language, it would be good to stick with local language as the first choice in every region. The new language policy should aim towards (Two Indian languages)+English as the goal for future students. Among the two Indian languages, the first should be the local language and second should be a choice among other Indian languages.
Sanskrit as the national language
The one language which best captures the ethos of Indic civilization is Sanskrit. The battle for Sanskrit will reach its definite conclusion only by adoption of Sanskrit as the lingua franca of India and its rejuvenation on national level.
Apart from the accolades showered on Sanskrit by modern linguistics, Sanskrit forms the bedrock of all Indian languages. It is only Sanskrit which breaches the language divide between North-South India.
Giving primacy to one language and imposing it on other regions usually generates hatred and seems imperialistic. But since Sanskrit is not spoken anywhere in India, it resolves this issue by default because unlike Hindi, even north Indians will have to make an effort to learn Sanskrit.
What makes this plan for Sanskrit really difficult is the feasibility and implementation since there are few Sanskrit speakers today and everyone else would have to learn it from scratch. There would be a backlash from people who already use English as according to many of them it would be a wastage of effort and energy when everyone else is switching to English in the age of globalization. This argument makes sense from an efficiency point of view but is efficiency a good measure when it comes to preservation of culture and nationhood?
No amount of GDP growth can compensate for the loss of culture and treasure trove of wealth that is currently hidden from Indians due to lack of Sanskrit knowledge. Also, revival of Sanskrit is one of the best ways to keep local languages alive due to its overlap with other languages while simultaneously fulfilling the goal of adopting a national language other than English and finally breaking away from colonial legacy.
