The Lok Sabha Secretariat has released a list of nearly 40 ‘unparliamentary words’ that will not be used in the parliament. While from a broader perspective, this s0-called language list does not sound like something entirely out of the ordinary, a closer look would probably shock you.
The parliament, in many ways, is one of the highest positions a civilian can hope to occupy. There are responsibilities and technically he is a servant of the people. But the servant gets paid well and not all of it is in pure cash.
The parliament proceedings are also televised, every detail recorded and stored in eternity. When people in 2050 look back to 2022, these parliamentary records are pretty much what they will have access to, to shape their thoughts, their minds on what will be, their history.
And while the list itself has been around for quite some time, often safeguarding the parliament and keeping it in an elitist section of society, the quality of words included in the list has deteriorated over time and in the latest version, includes some very common words.
Here’s a list of the words that are now considered unparliamentary.
Anarchist, dictatorial, Khalistani, bloodshed, bloody, abused, cheated, childishness, corrupt, coward, criminal, crocodile tears, disgrace, donkey, eyewash, fudge, hooliganism, hypocrisy, incompetent, mislead, lie and untrue, anarchist, lollypop, foolish, and sexual harassment are among other words and expressions listed as unparliamentary.
While some of the words clearly deserve to be on the list - you don’t want to see members of the parliament call each other Donkeys, there are many that do not.
Sexual harassment in particular is a very serious inclusion in the list, as it assumes, that no topic of sexual harassment will ever come up in parliament. More common are words like corrupt, mislead, incompetent, and hypocrisy. These are perfectly fine words to include in everyday language, and even parliamentary language. They are often used to describe another member’s performance.
Corruption in particular is rampant in India and all of a sudden, we can’t use corrupt in the parliamentary language? Really?
But the sensationalism of news channels also means that this topic is never going to be picked up. No one’s going to care whether this word has been included in the list or not. It doesn’t affect the ordinary man today. But decades later it will reshape the view you have of this period in India’s independence.
So when does the parliamentary language start dominating the direction of discussions in the parliament? And would you say, the language itself is an indication of how each successive government wants to portray its picture in retrospect.
But regardless of the potential of political manipulations that would dictate the direction of historical narrative, the problem at hand is when vocabulary essentially derails or curtails the freedom of expression and healthy debate in the parliament.
When members of the Parliament, come from hundreds of kilometres across the length and breadth of the country, it is difficult to have a one-suit-all vocab list. I would argue, Members of Parliament should be allowed to use these words - especially the ones like sexual harassment, corruption and more. Alowing their freedom of speech and freedom of expression is paramount to health discussion and a good understanding of the topic at hand.
But as we all know, that’s not always the case. History is shaped by narratives and 50-100 years is but a short span, even in terms of ‘modern India’. The course is set, ultimately, it does come down to what people want. And right now, what people want is right there in the power-centre.
Comments