Ambedkar’s paradox of differentiation: Language, nation and recognition of states in post-colonial India

Set against the backdrop of the linguistic states movement in the Telugu-speaking regions that would eventually come to form the state of Andhra Pradesh in 1956, this article explores Ambedkar’s views on state formation as articulated during the worst periods of unrest. Apparently driven by language, the Andhra movement of the first half of the twentieth century was an exercise in the self-definition and empowerment of an increasingly self-conscious political community. Ambedkar viewed the demand for linguistically defined states as comparable to the Muslim League’s demand for a separate Pakistan in the manifest desire for cultural recognition and self-determination. His proposed resolution against the potential threat to national unity posed by recognising language as a factor in state formation was twofold. One, he emphasised the idea of ‘one state, one language’ originally proposed by the States Reorganisation Commission, arguing that multiple states sharing a common language would be less likely to see themselves as a ‘nation’, with the added advantage that the majority-to-minority ratio would remain reasonable. Two, the language of administration should be common irrespective of the linguistic identity of the state, and that this should be English until Hindi became universally acceptable. As he saw it, the thoughtful implementation of such a solution that compromised on certain notions of the ideal could paradoxically facilitate the unity of the post-colonial republic, by recognising anxieties of minority groups, whether religious, linguistic or of another kind, and protecting them.