UC Santa Barbara

Coalitions are important mobilization tools that can help build powerful movements and help achieve political outcomes. However, coalition formation is not equally feasible within all social movements. Indeed, existing studies show that intergroup antagonisms stemming from identity-based differences, power asymmetries, and legitimacy concerns impede collaboration within structurally divided movements. What conditions facilitate coalition formation within structurally divided movements? To answer this question, this project examines coalition formation in a particularly hard case, namely the Indian farmers movement. The deep-seated caste, class, and ideological divisions have historically impeded coalition formation within the movement. Yet, in the recent past, large, diverse coalitions have emerged despite the persistence of structural divisions. Drawing on extensive fieldwork (200+ interviews and participant observation of 19 key events) and secondary sources, I argue that mobilizing structural networks have a paradoxical effect on inter-organizational collaboration. A high capacity to mobilize structural networks help organizations attain their objectives, while also exacerbating divisions by giving them the ability to threaten each other’s interests and assert their identity. Conversely, a reduction in the capacity to mobilize structural networks creates greater space for alternative strategies and actors and modify inter-organizational dynamics to make structural divisions less pronounced. Specifically, in the Indian case, the declining capacity made the broader movement environment conducive for coalitions by reducing power asymmetries, delegitimizing structural identities as viable frames of mobilization, and creating more space for new organizations that mobilized beyond structural identities and used collaboration from the very outset. This enabled organizations to first engage with each other on ad-hoc basis, which in turn had a reinforcing effect leading to ties among disparate movement actors. These interconnected organizations coalesced into large, diverse coalitions to confront an oppressive and negligent government. Ultimately, this study sheds light on a potential collective action paradox inherent in divided movements. It reveals that factors enhancing the collective action capacity of individual organizations may simultaneously impede collective action between organizations. As exemplified by the Indian case, this study also underscores that coalitions are a powerful mobilization tool that authorities cannot dismiss as routine opposition, especially so for divided groups.