In the context of states in India evaluate the relationship between regional disparity and sentiments of regionalism. Is regionalism antagonistic to the idea of nationalism? (Answer in 150 words) 15 marks

Sometimes, regional disparity leads to regionalism

1. under developed state -> low self esteem -> demand from union for more resources -> regionalism

2. other more developed state -> fear of migrants taking away jobs/social security -> insecurity -> fear of local phenomena -> regionalism

(eg:) Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, etc

3. state with low connectivity -> ethnic sub-nationalism -> regionalism

(eg:) North Eastern states, etc

4. state with low development/high unemployment -> demand for local reservation in employment

(eg:) hilly states.

regionalism can also lead to regional disparity

1. regionalism -> exclusion and instability -> low development, state gets left behind

(eg:) Maharashtra "sons of the soil" movement has hurt development of the state as it has led to migrants going to Gujarat/Tamil Nadu/Karnataka instead

Thus, regionalism almost always leads to loss of the state itself.

2. similarly, regionalism in North East/J&K -> prevented integration -> poorest worst affected due to lack of development

No, regionalism is not antagonistic to nationalism always

In the positive sense, it can complement and become a force multiplier for nationalism,

In the negative sense though, it is simply a way of abusing the most vulnerable in society

Positive:

1. competitive federalism

(eg:) SDG India Index -> sound development

(eg:) ADP -> development of most backward districts

2. to fight for legitimate rights

(eg:) water supply.

Negative:

1. ethnic/linguistic exclusion

2. secessionism. (16th Amendment)