The 'Good' Legitimacy; The 'Bad' Legitimacy

Abstract

2017 marked the five decades of the Maoist conflict within the central heartland of India. Its participants primarily include the marginalised and deprived sections of the society like the Adivasis and lower castes who have faced structural neglect and systematic discrimination for decades. Despite myriad attempts by the government in the last fifty years to address their demands, the conflict does not seem to be drawing to an end any time soon. <br /> The aim of this study is to find the reasons for this prolongation of conflict and through it understand the clash of legitimacy between the conflicting parties to win over the support base of those participating in it. In this process, the study attempts to underline the role of central government responses in this prolongation. Data has been collected both from primary and secondary sources. Primary sources include interviewing respondents on the field for a period of eight months and secondary sources comprises various government reports, Maoist literature and literature on Maoism for references. This study has used thematic analysis to analyse the data and draw inferences. <br /> This study has contributed to understanding the role of the central government responses in prolonging the conflict by drawing some distinctive conclusions. Government responses towards dealing with Maoists suffers from some fundamental structural maladies. Over the period, central government has gradually centralised the authority in such a way that the decision making powers in case of implementing responses towards Maoism rest with it. The various state governments merely follow the framework within which the responses have been designed. This schism has resulted in securitising the conflict which often overlooks grassroot issues like good governance and basic facilities to the most marginalised section of the society. <br /> This study has also demonstrated, how the Maoists are using the government responses and its plethora of inadequacies as sources of legitimation, thereby challenging the steps taken by government to bridge the divide. This conflict is a clash of legitimacy between the conflicting parties – government at the centre and the Maoists. <br /> This study highlights the clash between two kinds of legitimacy where the idea and definition of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ becomes ambiguous. The idea of legitimacy argues whose legitimacy the parties in a conflict are fighting over. This opens a space where the marginalised supporting the Maoists applies their own agency to decide which side they would want to continue.