[Answered] Examine the socio-cultural roots of ‘casual racism’ against people from Northeast India. Analyze how such prejudices escalate into systemic violence and evaluate the impact of this ‘internal othering’ on the constitutional ideal of Unity in Diversity.

Introduction

Despite constitutional equality, NCRB data and recurring cases like Nido Tania (2014) and Anjel Chakma (2025) reveal entrenched casual racism against Northeast Indians, exposing India’s unresolved socio-cultural fault lines.

Socio-cultural roots

1. Historical invisibilisation and Curricular marginalisation: School textbooks have historically prioritised the Gangetic heartland, rendering Northeast histories like the Ahom dynasty or freedom movements peripheral, fostering ignorance rather than familiarity.
2. Phenotypic stereotyping and Racialised identity: Mongoloid features are wrongly equated with “foreignness”, producing slurs like “chinky” or “Chinese”, reflecting a racial hierarchy inconsistent with India’s civilisational pluralism.
3. Cultural misrepresentation and Stereotype formation: Distinct food habits, attire and gender norms are exoticised or moralised, leading to hyper-sexualisation of women and dehumanisation of men from the region.

Escalation pathway

1. Casual racism: Everyday jokes and chants operate as micro-aggressions, lowering moral thresholds and legitimising disrespect, as highlighted by sociological studies on hate normalisation.
2. Dehumanisation to violence  and Psychological progression: As seen in Nido Tania’s murder, verbal abuse escalates into physical assault once victims are viewed as “lesser citizens”, consistent with Allport’s scale of prejudice.
3. Power asymmetry and Urban vulnerability: Migrants from the Northeast often work in hospitality and retail, facing landlord harassment and policing apathy, creating structural impunity for perpetrators.

Systemic failures: Institutional desensitisation

1. Policing deficit: Statements dismissing racial slurs as “jokes”, as in Anjel Chakma’s case, reflect lack of hate-crime recognition, weakening deterrence.
2. Partial legal response and Bezbaruah Committee (2014): While reforms like SPUNER, nodal officers and IPC amendments were initiated, implementation remains uneven and politically under-prioritised.

Impact on Unity in Diversity

1. Psychological alienation and Citizenship anxiety: Repeated demands to “prove nationality” violate Article 14 and 21, eroding emotional integration and fostering alienation from the constitutional mainstream.
2. Social fragmentation and Ghettoisation: Fear-induced clustering of Northeast communities in cities undermines multicultural interaction, contradicting the idea of composite nationalism articulated by B.R. Ambedkar.
3. National cohesion risk and Internal othering: Persistent racism fuels distrust in state institutions, indirectly affecting national security by weakening internal unity, as warned in 2^nd ARC Reports on Social Capital.

Way forward: Legal and policy reform

1. Hate crime framework: Enact explicit provisions criminalising racial abuse as non-bailable offences, building on IPC amendments and international best practices.
2. Educational integration and Curriculum reform: Mandatory inclusion of Northeast history, culture and geography across boards, aligning with NEP 2020’s pluralism mandate.
3. Institutional sensitization and Capacity building: Regular anti-racism training for police, universities and local administrations, treating racial violence as structural discrimination, not isolated incidents.

Conclusion

As Justice D.Y. Chandrachud observed, dignity is non-negotiable. True unity demands confronting casual racism through law, education and empathy—transforming connectivity into belonging, and diversity into lived constitutional morality.