Dalit Social Mobilization and Bloc Voting

The availability of ethnic blocs is a prerequisite for the success of an ethnic party. This chapter illustrates how Dalits’ historical social mobilization weakens bloc voting. Dalit social movements generate mobilizers and mobilization symbols that increase competition for Dalit votes at the locality-level, lower the utility of caste for differentiating among parties, shift the emphasis to material goods over symbolic goods, and split Dalit voters’ party preferences. Non-movement states were denied these electoral effects of Dalit social mobilization and hence preserved the possibility of bloc voting. The chapter concludes by reconsidering some of the explanations for ethnic party success.

Dalit Party Performance and Bloc Voting

This chapter outlines the electoral performance of Dalit ethnic parties. In non-movement states, Dalit ethnic party vote shares have been higher, and Dalits have won more seats in state assembly and parliamentary elections than Dalit ethnic parties in movement states. The chapter process traces Dalit electoral mobilization by ethnic and multiethnic parties across the two sets of states. It proceeds to show that Dalits’ ethnic party performance is explained by Dalits’ attitudes toward bloc voting and, that importantly, voters’ attitudes vary significantly across movement and non-movement states. Dalits in Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra are far less inclined to vote with members of their caste than Dalits in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

The Effects of Historical Dalit Social Mobilization

Much of the anticaste historical mobilization was aimed at social transformation. Did mobilization actually achieve this, though? To what extent can we measure the ideological penetration of movements among Dalits? Among non-Dalits? To what extent do we detect any behavioral changes among either group? This chapter turns to a set of survey-based and qualitative indicators to measure the effects of Dalits’ social mobilization on Dalits and non-Dalits. These indicators, this chapter shows, vary between movement (Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra) and non-movement (Uttar Pradesh and Bihar) states. These factors include the familiarity with Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, including the ability to recognize his picture; attitudes toward policing caste boundaries via issues such as intercaste marriage and conversion; and attitudes toward the practice of untouchability.

Conclusion: Whither Dalit Politics?

This chapter summarizes the key arguments related to the mobilization of the marginalized. It considers how the experience of Dalit mobilization informs a larger research agenda on democratic mobilization of marginalized groups, ethnic politics, social movements, and political parties. Dalit parties, the chapter reiterates, represent the voice of the marginalized; however, the voice comes at a price: electoral choice. The chapter goes on to argue that the presence or absence of Dalit parties in legislatures is increasingly an incomplete indicator of the vibrancy of Dalit politics, because Dalit politics is taking root in new dimensions of the public sphere: organizations in new sectors, an online Dalit public sphere, and a Dalit diaspora.

Mobilization and the Marginalized

This chapter explores how, given an electoral opportunity in a multiethnic democracy, a marginalized group comes to be mobilized by ethnic parties in some cases and by multiethnic parties in others. It outlines the prerequisites for the mobilization of a marginalized group. It then describes how marginalization influences the process of mobilization by multiethnic and ethnic political parties. The chapter clarifies the relationship between two common forms of mobilization—social movements and political parties—and discusses the effects of the sequenced appearance of social mobilization of a marginalized ethnic group and its ethnic party.

The Identity Trap

Ethnic identity, scholars remind us, is only one among the wide repertoire of identities to which an individual has access. Still, the marginalized struggle to break free of a single stigmatized identity. This chapter returns to Dalits’ choice of social identities. It argues Dalits’ ability to adopt new social identities is highly constrained because their social exclusion and material deprivation are self-reinforcing. When Dalits are able to choose alternate social identities, other groups do not recognize these identities. Dalits’ experience with stigma illustrates that it is difficult for a marginalized ethnic group to leverage political equality to remedy social inequality because the social stigma associated with a marginalized ethnic identity changes slowly.

How Mobilization Type Shapes Dalit Welfare

When the social mobilization and electoral mobilization of the marginalized occur, they represent their political assertion. Why, then, should we care about the type of collective action that mobilizes the marginalized? This chapter argues that variation in welfare provision at the state level turns on a distinction in types of mobilization. When Dalits act collectively as a bloc, this has different consequences for the social sphere as compared to the electoral sphere. In the social sphere, bloc behavior articulates demands, pressurizes bureaucrats and politicians, and monitors the quality of goods and services provided by the state. Democratic accountability is increased. In the electoral sphere, however, bloc behavior has two especially negative effects. First, it transforms Dalits into weak clients, and second, it increases the probability welfare schemes will be disrupted or dismantled with electoral transfers of power. Democratic accountability is decreased.

Historical Dalit Social Mobilization

To explore the sequenced process of Dalit mobilization, this chapter presents the historical account of Dalit social mobilization. It explains how Dalit social movements emerged and gained strength in Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra but remained relatively weak in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. It identifies the variety of factors responsible for the difference in the strength, influence, and goals of Dalit social movements in the two pairings of states. In its conclusion, it explores the impact that Dalit social mobilization’s adoption of a decidedly anticaste character had in the movement states, as the anticaste movements influenced social attitudes even among non-Dalits by challenging some of the foundational beliefs on which the caste system rests.

Introduction

Dalits, the world’s largest marginalized group, have mobilized socially and electorally. This chapter introduces the puzzle of Dalit mobilization in India. It defines the three research questions central to addressing the puzzle. What factors shape the nature and the prospects of a marginalized group’s mobilization? How do social movements affect political parties? When does ethnic identity influence voting? It outlines the argument, and explains why mobilization of the marginalized matters. The chapter provides an overview of the social and institutional context for Dalit mobilization. It enumerates the research design, including the strategy for case study selection, and highlights the contributions of the book.