An Accusatory Perspective on the English Proficiency Debate In recent years, the issue of English proficiency has become a hot topic in international circles. While many view the English language as a necessary tool for global communication, the debate on the extent of proficiency that is required has become increasingly polarizing. Some argue that a basic understanding of English is sufficient, while others insist on near-native proficiency. However, it is the latter group that is responsible for stirring up contention and causing harm to non-native English speakers around the world. The first issue with the push for near-native proficiency is the unrealistic expectations it sets for non-native English speakers. This expectation demands that non-native speakers achieve a level of fluency in English that is equal to that of native English speakers. This is not only impractical but extremely unfair. Non-native English speakers are faced with challenges such as learning new vocabulary, grammar rules, and even cultural contexts that native speakers do not have to worry about. The expectation for near-native proficiency implies that non-native English speakers are deficient in some way or that their language skills are inferior to those of native speakers. Moreover, the insistence on near-native proficiency is exclusionary and discriminatory against non-native English speakers, particularly those from non-English speaking countries. This rhetoric overlooks the fact that English is a foreign language for these individuals and places an undue burden on them. Many non-native speakers are not exposed to English until their adulthood, and this makes learning a new language more difficult. Forcing these individuals to achieve a level of proficiency that is akin to that of native speakers is not only unrealistic, but it is also a form of cultural oppression. Such a demand puts non-native speakers at a disadvantage, particularly in academic and professional settings, and can damage their self-confidence. Finally, the push for near-native proficiency in English is indicative of the continued hegemony of English language and Western culture. We live in a globalized world, and English has become the lingua franca of international communication. This, however, does not give native English speakers the right to impose their language and culture on non-native speakers. The demand for near-native proficiency only serves to further entrench the dominance of English language culture and marginalize local languages and cultures. The insistence on near-native proficiency perpetuates the notion that only Western knowledge and culture are valuable, while languages and cultures from other parts of the world are less important. In conclusion, the push for near-native proficiency is at best naïve and at worst exclusionary and oppressive. It is unfair to demand that non-native English speakers achieve the same level of fluency as native speakers when English is a foreign language for them. The insistence on near-native proficiency is also exclusionary and discriminatory and perpetuates the hegemony of English language and Western culture at the expense of local languages and cultures. English proficiency is important for global communication, but we must recognize the challenges that non-native speakers face and set realistic expectations at a level that allows them to communicate effectively without undermining their identity and culture.