• Ethnic nationalism holds that nations are defined by common ancestry, language, and beliefs. Ethnic nationalism is based on the idea that ethnic groups have the right to self-determination. It has some similarities to nationalism, but is loyalty to a particular ethnic or racial group rather than to a nation. In the multi ethnic environment of the United States, however, ethnonationalism may cause relative division between various ethnic or racial groups. Certain groups may believe that, due to their common ethnic or racial origin, members have the same ancestors and can be regarded as “relatives.”
• Examples of ethnonationalism include the differentiation between the Gujarat and Punjab tribes of India, Croatians, and Bosnians of the former state of Yugoslavia (now divided into several countries) and the Hutus and Tutsis of Rwanda, where ethnonationalism had devastating consequences for part of the national population.
• An ethno-nationalist education not only creates resistance to cultural and educational imposition by other groups; it also uses it positively to preserve and extend the particular ethnic group’s identifying characteristics. One way that ethno-nationalism is preserved in education is to use the ethnic “mother tongue” rather than the official national language in the classroom. Another way is to include the ethnic group’s literature, history, and traditions in the curriculum.

Factors responsible for tribal discontent in India

• Administrative segregation – British policy towards tribes aimed at isolating tribals from the mainstream. Government of India Act of 1870 provided some protection and Scheduled Districts Act of 1874 led to the creation of certain scheduled tracts. 1919 Act created Excluded and Modified Excluded areas with a different administrative structure than the mainstream which was later slightly modified in 1935 Act as Excluded and Partially Excluded areas.
• Proactive forest policy – Forests have been the traditional lifeline of tribes as they were a source of their livelihood apart from having a cultural significance. However, a proactive forest policy, aimed at maximising economic gain at the cost of tribal welfare and alienated tribes from forests. In forests, they saw valuable resources and they passed exclusionary laws like Forest Act of 1865, which took away traditional forest rights. Forest Act of 1878 further tightened the grip of the rulers on forests and it radically changed the nature of common property and made it a state property, thus, declining the tribals, their traditional rights on the forests. Etc. According to Vidyarthi, alienation from forests was not only economic, but also emotional and cultural. Trees, rivers and mountains carried symbolic and religious meanings for tribals.
• A reformist approach– British also assumed redemptory role wherever they went. Some British Christian missionaries sincerely believe that the onus is on them to uplift the fallen and the laggards. It manifested in the form of various propositions like The White Man’s Burden. British policy to allow Christian missionaries to proselytise tribals also led to a gulf between mainstream Hindus and tribes, thus, creating further social divide in an already divided society.
• Over-exploitation- According to Buddhadeb, in his book – Tribal Transformation in India, 1992, expansion of railways broke down their historical isolation and initiated a process of unchecked and indiscriminate assimilation leading to detribalisaiion of tribes. Issues of tribal development, integration and autonomy had been highly convoluted right since the inception of British rule in India.
• Power and Powerlessness: Development Projects and Displacement of Tribals, 1991, around three crore people have been displaced by developmental activities in the past 50 years and 42 per cent of them were tribals.
• Many tribal concentration regions and states have also been experiencing the problem of heavy in-migration of non-tribals in response to the pressures of development.
• The advent of the concept of private property in land has also adversely affected tribals. The policy of capital-intensive industrialisation adopted by the Indian government required mineral resources and power-generation capacities which were concentrated in Adivasi areas.