Ambedkar's Political Philosophy: A Grammar of Public Life from the Social Margins

Ambedkar's frame of thinking was deeply influenced by a diverse range of epistemic sources. Key among these were the teachings of Buddha, the Kabir legacy, the ideas of Jotirao Phule, and the works of Western philosophers like John Dewey and T.H. Green. His background in Sakya Buddhism, the Self-Respect Movement, and the Adi-Dharam and Adi-Hindu movements also played a significant role. Ambedkar's approach was distinct from the dominant discourse of the Indian national movement in several ways. He emphasized the transformative potential of Buddhism, which he saw as a credible moral foundation for modern democratic publics. He also focused on the social and economic inequalities within India, advocating for radical reforms in the social order. Ambedkar's epistemic stance was more critical and transformative compared to the mainstream national movement's focus on political independence and cultural preservation.

Ambedkar conceptualized justice as the foundation for a transformed public life, emphasizing equality as its core. He believed in social justice, which entails treating each person as of equal value, recognizing their uniqueness and differences. This concept of justice was not just about redistribution of resources but also about ensuring equal access to public life and representation. Ambedkar's vision for a transformed India was rooted in his belief that justice and equality were essential for human flourishing and for creating a society where all individuals could participate and contribute. He advocated for a radical democracy that would enable this transformation, challenging the limitations of liberal democracy and Marxism. His ideas on justice and equality were central to his efforts to dismantle the caste system, promote the rights of the marginalized, and create a more just and equitable society.

Ambedkar viewed the state as a sovereign power with authority over a distinct territory and people, expressed through rule of law and government. He believed the state should be autonomous, unified, and pursue the common good. He saw the state as both a source of dominance and an enabling agency for social justice and equality. Ambedkar emphasized the importance of checks and balances to prevent the concentration of power and ensure the state served the common good. He advocated for a strong state capable of redistributing resources and protecting the rights of minorities and disadvantaged groups. Representation, according to Ambedkar, was crucial for achieving justice and equality, and he proposed various schemes, including separate representation and joint representation with reservation, to ensure fair representation for all communities. He believed that a state committed to social and economic equality could effectively address the root causes of injustice and promote a more equitable society.

Ambedkar's understanding of religion and its role in public life diverged significantly from other Indian nationalist figures like Gandhi. While Gandhi emphasized Hinduism's principles of non-violence and truth, Ambedkar criticized Hinduism for its caste system and untouchability. He advocated for Buddhism, which he believed offered a more egalitarian and rational framework. Ambedkar argued that Buddhism's emphasis on equality, rationality, and the rejection of the concept of a soul or God made it a suitable anchor for modern society. He believed Buddhism's principles could foster a just and equitable society, promoting human dignity and self-realization, which were crucial for modernity. Ambedkar's argument for Buddhism's necessity in modern society was grounded in its alignment with reason, its rejection of the oppressive aspects of Hinduism, and its potential to create a more just and equal society.