Answer:

The ‘sons of soil’ or nativist movements emerged in the sixties and seventies in some parts of India. The ‘sons of the soil’ began to demand that they be given the major, if not the sole, right to work on the soil of their linguistic states and reap the economic benefits therein without interference from people belonging to other linguistic communities. The demand was economic but was mediated through specific linguistic identities. The Shiv Sena of the sixties and seventies and the Assam movement, which culminated in 1985, may be considered to belong to this genre. In both cases the enemy is within, the ‘aliens’, who by careful manipulation deny the native sons of the soil the benefits of economic advancement that their native state offers.

These movements thus carry with their economic demands a vital linguistic element, and it is on the basis of discrimination on linguistic grounds that the economic demands are sought to be worked out. Other states and that too, some linguistic groups from these other states are seen as threats by the natives and singled out as particularly offensive. Never is the whole country held responsible. They acknowledge that it is only through the machinery at the Centre that their grievances can be redressed. Though these movements usually have strong popular support, but they lead to an intractable conflict as they press actively for discrimination against other citizens who, in principle, should enjoy equal rights in matters of state employment.

Factors responsible:

Socio-cultural and demographic factors:

♤ Cultural prejudice can be one of the reasons behind the rise of nativist movements. More dissimilar the immigrant population is ethnically or culturally, stronger is likely to be the opposition.

♤ It is possible that racial and cultural prejudices that inform opinions on immigration are really epiphenomena of economic self-interest concerns.

♤ Normally, an increase of labour supply, such as that due to immigration, increases labour competition and depresses wages, hurting the low skilled most. That union

members, in some cases, have been found to favour immigration restrictions supports this line of argument. Further, it has been found that less-skilled want more restrictions on immigration and the more skilled want fewer.

♤ As communities and groups that were once backward in education become educationally more advanced, they could demand that their states ensure them a larger share of jobs in public services.

♤ Areas with nativist movements are found to be mainly those which have experienced a rapid growth of educational opportunities for the lower middle classes.

♤ Political Competition is another factor. The desire of regional elites to capture power has also led to the rise of nativist movements. Many states in India have more than two significant parties and interstate migrants often are an ethnic minority, living amidst a native, ethnic majority. In such a situation, a party may seek to make ethnic identities relevant through actions against a minority.