| In my dissertation, "A Piece of Land to Call One's Own: Multicultural Federalism and Institutional Innovation in India," I ask why some political communities seek federal statehood (a piece of land to call their own) rather than substantive accommodations within existing state legislatures. Further, I ask why and how is culture used as a frame for social mobilization to achieve these ends. To the first question, I argue that under specified conditions in federal systems, their state government may systematically neglect regions within states. They have recourse not only to standard mobilization within their state institutional context, but also for substantive as well as institutional redress from the federal government---that is, either substantive accommodations or the redrawing of state boundaries such that they contain more "tractable" constituents.;The locus of mobilization for such movements, particularly of socially, economically, and politically weak groups, is highly contingent on their ability to engage in political dialogue in existing institutions. Institutions, however, consist of social content as well as formal architecture. I argue that some claims to redress are recognized as more legitimate than others. In India, the redrawing of state boundaries or the provision of special benefits has historically been undertaken only to recognized cultural groups to redress perceived inequalities. Moreover, some concepts of "culture" are recognized as more politically legitimate than others. For historical reasons, region and religion have not been given the same consideration as ethnolinguistic identity. Consequently, as I show, social movements organize themselves in ways that conform with existing notions of legitimate cultural dialogue as well as formal political access. Specifically, I analyze the way "tribe" has been institutionalized in the constitution and India's federal structure. I then show the political impact that "tribal access" and "regional neglect" have had in both Meghalaya and Bihar. Each of these case analyses stands on its own, but together they also tell a story of institutional learning and the politics of social mobilization as a historical process. |
