| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The article examines why some ethnic groups seeking ethno-political autonomy engage in violence while others respond with relative quiescence. It compares and contrasts the ethno-political movements of the Bodos and Misings in northeast India and adopts an integrated approach in which the mobilizing structure and state responses assume equal and important roles that determine the correlation between the mobilizing process and levels of contention. A fundamental claim is that popular support and participation are crucial to shape the trajectories and strategies of ethnic movements. What determines the level of popular following is long-term commitment, legitimacy, and effective communicative strategies adopted by activist organizations. This in turn, generates collective mobilization and produces mechanisms for violence. The absence thereof leads to less disruptive contention. Further, the level of ethnic contention is determined by consistency and extent of ethnic accommodation and the nature of state repression. Consistent accommodation can have a countervailing effect on the activists to launch violent rebellion. Accommodation may range from implementing particular ethno-linguistic policies to selective incentives or cooptation of core political activists by the government. Contrarily, inconsistent accommodation and widespread state repression leads to high levels of violence.
|