Ethnicity in Indian Politics

• Intro: Ethnicity refers to a social group that shares a common and distinctive culture, religion, language. Political sociology approach of comparative politics studies interface of politics with societal factors like ethnicity,caste,religion,etc

• 
  Donald Horowitz-His book - ethnic groups and conflict
• said ethnicity was in the backwaters of social sciences. But now it is coming in forefront of democracy and politics.
• It is difficult to determine Ethnicity in the Indian context as it constitutes four dimensions – caste, religion, language and race. This reflects the multilayered or overlapping identities in the ethnicity of India.
• management of ‘ethnic’ conflicts has been possible due to a certain kind of political culture which exists in India, that is, a fluid sense of identity. Its implication being that no conflict can accumulate to the extent of completely damaging the democratic fabric
• 
  Paul brass in his book “ethnic groups and the state” mentions about the struggle of ethnic groups at three levels – within the group, between other groups and against the state. From the political perspective, struggle against the state carries more significance

• Causes of ethnic movements:

1. Charles Taylor- attempt of marginalized sections to assert their identity.
   
2. 
   Neera Chandhoke- against homogenizing and ethnic mapping by states.
3. S D Muni- end of ideology has led to identity mobilization based on ethnic grounds. Says India has successfully survived numerous ethnic movements because Indians do not have a single identity rather they have multilayered identities.
   
4. Dipankar Gupta- it is not a popular passion but a choice of elites to mobilize people.
   
5. 
   According to Kanchan Chandra in her work Constructivist theory of ethnic politics- mentions that political patronage is based on ethnic grounds.

• 
  Atul Kohli done detailed study- can democracy accommodate ethnic challenges-
• Result of Intro of democracy in prismatic societies like India 
• Mention that that there is no formal policy of the government but a trend is visible as follows
• Government is ready to negotiate within the Constitution, not outside
• There is no compromise on the account of territorial integrity
• Ethnic movements concerned with religious overtones are dealt with sensitivity
• Nonviolence is a precondition. If other party uses force, government retaliate with greater force
• He also believes that use of force by state apparatus or democratic handling depends on the choice of leadership and status of ruling party at the Centre. As Pandit Nehru used democratic tool of consensus while handling Tamil nationalism while Indira Gandhi used force during Khalistan movement due to sense of insecurity
• Said:
1. Ethnicity can be a challenge in the long term
2. In handling the challenge we require not less but more democracy. Democracy allows accommodation. Gives ex of Nehru in handling the language issue and Indira in handling the Khalistan issue.
3. Says when democracy is introduced in traditional- societies, elites go for mobilization on ethnic identities to preserve their hegemony.

• James Manor in his work: ethnicity and politics in India
• 
• 

• 
  Ashutosh Varshney- in his article “ethnic conflicts and civic life” calls for vigorous civic engagement among different ethnic groups.
• 
  Yogendra Yadav- India's model of state-nation rather than nation-state recognizes that citizens can have multiple, overlapping identities that need not detract from a larger sense of national unity.

• conclusion- Sarkaria comm- ethnic movements are never purely ethnic. They overlap political and economic deprivations. Democratic decentralization is the only way to handle such challenges.