It is generally taught in all Indian schools that the British taught English to the Indians to make them their slaves, and to make them better clerks. This idea may also be understood in the same manner in England also. For the current British understanding of the British rule in India is remarkably similar to what is indoctrinated in India.

The India (or rather the geographical area currently called Pakistan, India & Bangladesh) that was seen by the British officials who lived in India was quite different from that understood by the stay-at-home Britons over there in England/Britain. For the stay-at-home Britons, India was just another place where nice people lived, and were subordinated by the British colonialists. However, to the Britons who lived in British India, the reality that they saw was remarkably different.

One of the major observations was the satanic nature of the Indian social arrangement and of social communication. Communication was absolutely different from English. In fact, in the Indian languages, human beings appeared in a variety, shaded by differing diabolic features. The main reason for this was the feudal content in the languages. All Indian languages have this feature, but the codes may slightly differ, as one move from North Indian languages to South Indian languages.

Since I have made a lot of studies and observation about this issue in Malayalam, let me try to explain this by Malayalam codes. The word You can be translated as Nee, Ningal, Thangal (Sar) etc. at a minimum. There are other words also. Now all these words do mean You. Yet, they do not mean the same. Each word is connected to a particular level, higher or lower.

Similarly the word He can be translated into Avan, Ayaal, Adheham (Avar) etc. She can be translated into Aval, Avar etc.

Viewing from English, it may seem that the society is structured similar to a military arrangement. That is, with Adeham at the top, Ayaal next below and Avan at the bottom. However, this is not precisely the case.

The arrangement is not at all like this. The arrangement is like a pyramid. There is a person on top, who using the force in the words, brings persons to exist below him. To him, they are Avan, and Nee. Now, each of the below persons strive forcefully to bring others to his or her subordination by means of the forceful words Nee, Avan/Aval.

Now, in this pyramid, persons are arranged into a pyramid-like formation. Yet, this arrangement is recognised only by persons inside this particular pyramid. Meaning that, a respected person in this pyramid need not be thus acknowledged by another person in another pyramid. He may or may not concede the same level of respect to this man, depending on what the other man can bring in as introduction or make visible.

Now, these words of subordination are not only words that can subordinate, but also what can make a person despoiled by forcefully making him to go below. Moreover, the words can also make him or her equal to others placed at that word level.

Now, this is a very strange social communication system. People generally do not move around beyond the levels of acknowledged respect levels. That is, a person would move and communicate only with persons who would acknowledge his or her level of respect that he or she wishes to be acknowledged.

All these sly codes makes the individuals persistently crave to monitor others in the social system. The relative rising of another person is seen as a real threat to his or her social security. The fall of another person is truly celebrated.

Now, the same words of differing levels for You, He, She, His, Her, Hers etc. are used variously. For example, Nee (You) can be used as a term of endearment, intimacy, friendship, subordination, snubbing, insult etc. It is here, the issue becomes really complicated. People do use sly techniques to use the word initially in one sense, and then gradually shift it to another sense. Beyond this, when one person uses this in one sense, another person who hears this may use the same word to bring about another affect.

There is a terrible level of oriental treachery practised incessantly by the people of this geographical area, to use sly cunning to subdue others. In introductions, when referring to others when the other person is not physically there, when conveying information, giving opinion etc. and many other areas, people cunningly select the suitable word to either bring about that person’s social destruction or social eminence. In other words, the other person has a great say in what each person is. Moreover, the lower person has the power to lend respect or to delete respect. The lower person has great power in this social communication.

For example, the lack of respect shown by a senior officer’s servant is more deadly than the lack of respect shown by the senior person himself. For example, if an IAS officer addresses another socially strong person with a Nee, and refers to him as Avan or Ayaal, there is a definite amount of despoiling of that person socially. Or it can mean some type of intimacy. Yet, if the IAS officer’s servant uses the same words, then the amount of despoiling that takes place is of the nth degree.

The complete affect of this social communication system is not easily conveyable here. Yet, let me try one more example. It is in the concept of equality. Equality in feudal languages is not a theme that can be understood in English. In English, it was argued that the Blacks are equal to the English Whites. Well, it was a very stupid understanding, but one needn’t go into that here.

In Indian languages, the concept of equality doesn’t reach anywhere there. Here there are different levels of equality. For example, the peons of the IAS officer are equals to each other at a particular level or particular angle of viewing. However, in fact, they wouldn’t be that equal, due to the fact that there would be the issue of differing age levels, financial levels, position levels etc. Each one of these issues would bring in sharp differences in the words associated with them.

The IAS officers are equal. Well, that also may not be true. For, among them also the same issue of age, official position etc. would bring in sharp differences in the feudal word codes associated with them.

Now, it may be said that the Indian society is similarly cordoned into different levels of equality. If a quality person is forcefully pushed into the levels of the peons, he would react with repugnance. The others, who want to see him subdued, would forcefully strive to bring him into that level of equality. This is done by simply perching such words as Nee, Avan etc. on to his individuality. If he does not belong to that level mentally, he would strive continuously to shrug off the perching words. At this moment, others can, with sly cunning, define him as mentally instable, snobbish, having false superiority complex, and such other things.

At the same time, there would be certain persons who would strive to enter into the higher echelons of social levels. For example, a person may strive to show that he is equal to the IAS officers. He may then try to use such words as Nee, Avan etc. with regard to the IAS officers, provided he has the social and financial acumen to get away with it. {It may be understood that equality can be reached by using higher words also. That is another plane of equality}. The effect here can be either equality or superiority over the IAS. It depends.

If he can successfully get it done, without causing much discomfort to the IAS officers, he has reached equality with the IAS officers. It depends on how they view his accomplishments. If they perceive him to be lower in social level, intellectual levels, financial acumen, political connections etc., (it depends on what they are focusing upon) they would not allow him to occupy this kind of equality that he strives to establish through words. In which case, they would forcefully shove him down the staircase.

Well, the understanding that I have conveyed here is quite minimal. For, this feudal or structured arrangement of words really brings in complications in almost all arenas of human association, including that of teacher-student, husband-wife, public authority-common man, police-common man and to such things as township planning, civic neatness, collective intelligence, allowable efficiency and much more.