“If the coloniser imposed their language on the colonised, why does the colonised need to prove language proficiency?”

Osayi stares at his screen in disbelief.

“We regret to inform you that your application has been rejected…”

But, his friend with less qualifications and less experience got his acceptance mail yesterday.

He scans the email, slower this time, then, he sees it. These people must be clowns.

“...your application lacked the required language proficiency tests results needed for this role. In…”

His disbelief switched to anger, then resentment. Anger because if the healthcare system worked, he wouldn’t have needed a job outside the broken country. Resentment because what do you mean he needs to prove he can speak English? English?!

Not French, Not German. English!

The same language he was taught in from kindergarten to medical school. The same language that is the societal marker of literacy. The same language he spoke his entire professional life. This has to be a bad dad joke.

But, sadly, it is not a bad joke nor is Osayi’s story unique. In recent years, the United Kingdom has required IELTSfor immigration, a requirement that may appear reasonable for non-English-speaking countries but is far more contentious when applied to many Commonwealth nations (nations where English was imposed through colonisation).

This raises the question of whether this is just a mere immigration policy or just control.

How Britain Imposed Their Language On Its Colonies

Let's rewind. Britain did not politely ask if Nigerians, Kenyans, or Indians wanted to speak English.

Colonial education systems were designed with surgical precision: erase indigenous languages, install English as the language of power, progress, and civilization.

Children were punished for speaking their mother tongues tagged, vernacular, in schools. Communities were told their languages were primitive, inferior and unfit for modernity.

Lord Macaulay's 1835 "Minute on Education" laid it bare: the goal was to create "a class of persons Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals and in intellect."

The same blueprint rolled out across Africa, the Caribbean, and beyond. This was not education, it was linguistic colonisation.

And it worked. Generations grew up speaking English as their first language, dreaming in English, thinking in English. English became the language of government, business, and upward mobility. Mission accomplished.

Now here is the bill.

The IELTS Industry: Who Profits from Language Testing?

Fast-forward to today, that same colonial legacy has been repackaged as the language proficiency industrial complex, and business is booming. IELTS alone generates over £400 million annually.

The British Council, the UK government's international cultural organization, co-owns IELTS. Let that sink in.

The descendants of colonisers are charging the descendants of the colonized £200+ to prove competency in a language that was forced upon them.

This is not just insult added to injury. It is extraction dressed up as policy.

For someone in Nigeria earning an average monthly salary of ₦77,000 (about £62), an IELTS exam costing £200 represents more than three months' wages. Add preparation materials, coaching classes for people anxious about artificial testing conditions, and potential retakes, and you are looking at a financial barrier that functions exactly as intended: as a filter, not a measure.

The mathematics is simple. Millions of people from former colonies need these tests for immigration, university admission, or professional licensing. Testing companies — Cambridge English, ETS, British Council — profit massively while colonial powers maintain gatekeeping authority over their own linguistic legacy.

You were forced to speak our language. Now pay us to prove you speak it. The audacity is breathtaking.

Why Indian English and Nigerian English Don't Count

But here is where it gets truly insidious. These tests do not just measure whether you speak English, they measure whether you speak the "right" English.

And "right" has a very specific accent: the R.P (Received Pronunciation) or nothing.

There are an estimated 230 million English speakers in India, 150 million in Nigeria, millions more across Ghana, Kenya, Jamaica, Trinidad, Pakistan. Yet Indian English, Nigerian English, and Caribbean English are treated as deficient versions, deviations from a "standard" that just happens to align with British or American pronunciation.

Never mind that Nigerian English has its own rich vocabulary, syntax, and expressions shaped by Yoruba, Igbo, and Hausa influences. Never mind that Indian English has been the language of groundbreaking literature, science, and business.

Never mind that these Englishes are spoken by more people than those who live in the United Kingdom. They are still wrong.

The racism embedded in "language proficiency" testing is thinly veiled.Accent discrimination is one of the last socially acceptable forms of prejudice.

Studies show that people with non-Western accents are rated as less intelligent, less trustworthy, and less competent even when saying the exact same words as someone with a British accent.

Real-world consequences follow. Qualified doctors, engineers, and teachers score lower on these tests than native English speakers they outperform in actual professional settings.

The absurdity is not a bug in the system, it is the system working exactly as designed.

And even when you pass, the goalposts shift. Score requirements keep rising.

A 6.5 becomes insufficient; now you need a 7.0, a 7.5. The standard adjusts to maintain exclusion because this was never really about communication. You can never be English enough because the measure of "enough" is designed to keep you out.

Why Don't British Citizens Take Language Tests?

Here is what you won't see: British citizens required to pass proficiency tests in Yoruba before immigrating to Nigeria. French citizens tested on Wolof before moving to Senegal. Americans examined on Navajo or Cherokee before settling on indigenous land.

The expectation of "integration" flows in exactly one direction. Former colonial subjects must prove mastery of imposed languages while colonial powers bear no responsibility for the languages they systematically destroyed.

Where are the proficiency requirements for the indigenous languages that were beaten out of children in residential schools, mission schools, and colonial classrooms? Where is the reparative language education for the tongues that were called primitive and banned from public spaces?

The burden always falls on those who were colonised. Learn our language. Speak it perfectly. Erase your linguistic identity. Pay for the privilege. And still be told you are not good enough.

This is the one-way street of the empire: take everything, give nothing back, then charge for what was stolen.

Why Language Testing Is About Power, Not Proficiency

Let’s be clear about what is happening here. These language requirements are not about ensuring people can communicate effectively. Osayi can communicate. He has been doing it his entire life. Millions like him can too.

This is about control. It is about maintaining colonial hierarchies through bureaucratic means. The empire did not end, it just moved into immigration offices and credentialing agencies.

Language proficiency tests serve the same function today that literacy tests served in the Jim Crow American South. They allow discrimination to hide behind the language of standards and merit.

The colonial project continues, just with better branding. Instead of soldiers and administrators, we have policy documents and test centers.

Instead of raw coercion, we have the coercion of necessity: you need this visa, this degree, this license, so you will submit to our linguistic authority.

You will pay our fees. You will accept our judgment that your English isn't English enough.

And you will do it because we have structured the global economy so that migration from former colonies to former colonial powers is often the only path to stability, safety, or professional fulfillment. The system knows you have no choice.

So we return to where we started: Osayi, staring at his rejection email, fluent in English but deemed insufficient. His anger is justified. His resentment is earned.

Because your English will never be English enough. Not because you can't speak it, but because you were never meant to belong.

The language was imposed as a tool of empire, and it remains one, just repackaged, monetised, and wielded to remind former colonial subjects that even in speaking the coloniser's tongue, they remain perpetual outsiders.

That is not a language policy. That is the continuation of colonialism by other means.