The most important is that, like it or not, it is increasingly the language of international business. The internet, with its distinct English bias, has only strengthened this tendency. Even France, long opposed to English as a, well, lingua franca, has given up. Should India, with all its historic advantages with the language, attempt futilely to swim against the tide? After all, even China - hardly a country with disdain for its own cultural traditions - has made the spread of English a priority in a manner that the British Council suggests that there may now be more English speakers in China than in India. In any case, any battle against English would be the preoccupation of those who can afford it. For the vast majority of young, aspirational Indians, English is seen as the vehicle to fulfilling those aspirations. No number of reminders about India"s rich pre-colonisation cultural heritage is likely to alter their point of view. So, if the BJP genuinely wishes to mop up their votes, it had better change its point of view on English as far away from those of Mr Singh and the RSS, as possible.
The concern about creeping Westernisation, or Anglicisation, is also one that deserves to be unpacked. A positive expression of pride in Indian history and tradition is very different from the concern about changing values that underpins such statements - a concern that frequently manifests itself in less-than-progressive attitudes by political parties to various issues. This is the frame of mind that has led to insufficient attention to women's safety in public places; bans on dance bars; raids on coffee shops and private parties; and reproving comments about what women wear or choose to do. Again, if the BJP expects to win urban areas in the coming elections, its president should learn the lessons of Karnataka, where as culturally nationalist a government as anyone could wish was thrown out by urban voters.
Mr Singh's comments also had a further dimension: he said that "hardly any people" spoke Sanskrit any more. It is unfortunate that, instead of a positive plea for the preservation of Sanskrit as a living language, Mr Singh instead framed it negatively as a confrontation between Sanskrit and English. This is hardly fair to the language that forms the backbone of those that most Indians speak, and which contains some of India's greatest poetry, drama and prose. In framing it thus, Mr Singh has done a disservice to the cause of Sanskrit, which should not be the preserve only of those who look backwards but, as is the case with other such classical tongues, of those who seek insight from the experiences and inferences of those who have gone before. Mr Singh's statement leads Sanskrit to be seen as somehow less than modern - the very opposite of a living, breathing tongue. All in all, if the BJP cannot reframe its supposed "cultural nationalism" as something inclusive and forward-looking, it will very soon discover that India has, in fact, left it behind.