Son of Soil 

The "Son of the soil" concept is a form of regionalism that is based on the belief that a state belongs exclusively to the people who are native to that region or state. According to this concept, individuals who are born and brought up in a particular region have a stronger connection to that place and are more entitled to its resources and benefits than those who come from other regions. This concept often leads to demands for regional autonomy and can give rise to conflicts with outsiders or people from other regions. The "Son of the soil" concept has been a major factor in many regional movements in India. 

For example, anti-migrant or implementation of Sons of the Soil doctrine was a movement led by Shiv Sena and MNS which appealed to regional chauvinism. 

Dravida Nadu- a classic case study 

The demand for Dravida Nadu was a political movement in South India that sought to create a separate sovereign state for the Dravidian-speaking people of the region. The movement emerged in the 1930s and gained momentum in the 1940s and 1950s, with the formation of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party in Tamil Nadu. 

The proponents of the Dravida Nadu movement argued that the Dravidian people, who spoke languages such as Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, and Malayalam, had a distinct cultural and linguistic identity that was different from the rest of India. They claimed that the Dravidian people had been oppressed and marginalized by the ruling elite, who were predominantly from the northern parts of India and spoke Indo-Aryan languages. 

The demand for Dravida Nadu was based on the idea of self-determination, which is the right of a people to decide their own political status and form of government. The proponents of the movement argued that the Dravidian people had the right to self-determination and should be allowed to form their own separate state. 

However, the demand for Dravida Nadu did not receive widespread support and was eventually abandoned in the 1960s. The DMK party, which had initially advocated for the creation of a separate Dravida Nadu state, later shifted its focus to promoting the interests of the Dravidian people within the framework of the Indian federal system. Today, Tamil Nadu remains an important center of Dravidian politics in India. 

Khalistan- from past to present 

The demand for Khalistan refers to the movement for a separate Sikh state in India, which emerged in the 1970s and gained momentum in the 1980s. The movement was driven by a sense of political, economic, and cultural marginalization of Sikhs within India. 

In 1947, when India gained independence from British rule, the region of Punjab was partitioned into two separate countries, India and Pakistan. The Sikh community, which had played a significant role in the Indian independence movement, found themselves divided between the two nations. Many Sikhs felt that their interests were not adequately represented by either India or Pakistan, and the demand for a separate Sikh state began to emerge. 

The demand for Khalistan gained momentum in the 1970s with the rise of Sikh militancy in Punjab. The movement was led by Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, a charismatic preacher who advocated for the establishment of an independent Sikh state. In 1984, the Indian government launched a military operation to oust Bhindranwale and his followers from the Golden Temple complex in Amritsar, which is considered the holiest shrine in Sikhism. The operation, known as Operation Blue Star, resulted in the deaths of hundreds of people, including Bhindranwale. 

The aftermath of Operation Blue Star led to a period of violence and unrest in Punjab, with Sikh militants carrying out a series of assassinations and bombings in retaliation for the government's actions. In 1985, Sikh separatists hijacked an Air India flight from Toronto to Delhi, which resulted in the deaths of all 329 people on board. The incident was widely condemned and led to a crackdown on Sikh militancy by the Indian government. 

Since the 1980s, the demand for Khalistan has diminished, but it remains a contentious issue in Indian politics. Some Sikh groups continue to advocate for an independent Sikh state, while others seek greater autonomy for Punjab within the Indian federal system. The Indian government has maintained a hardline stance against the demand for Khalistan and views it as a threat to national unity and territorial integrity.