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.

India’s “official language controversy” spanned over two decades from 1946 to 1967, during which the proposal to replace English with Hindi met with resistance from various quarters. However, the inter-regional ethno-linguistic politics of India came together with the developmental vision for an industrialized postcolonial democracy to ensure its validation and continuance in as a co-official language of the republic. My analysis identifies a widespread perception, among supporters as well as detractors of English in India at the time, that the “international”/“foreign” credentials of the language made it an instrument of change across various regional, religious, caste, class, and ethnic communities. The language came to be reframed during this period due to the coming together of India’s colonial past and its distinct regional and community histories with the views of leading public figures. Perhaps most surprising, however, is the complex part played by a “hybrid” minority constituency in public debate: the mixed race Anglo-Indian community, in dissociating from the former “home” country of England re-defined itself and its relationship with the new republic, and ultimately served as a catalyst in reframing the language as not merely international or colonial, but as Indian.