Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Session Type
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Access for All
Exhibit Hall
Hotels
WiFi
Search Tips
Why do parties with explicit commitments to transcending identity politics often reproduce dominant social cleavages? Existing theories emphasize either structural determination or party agency but undertheorize the mechanisms linking actor composition to articulation possibilities. This paper develops a field-embedded theory of political articulation, integrating insights from articulation theory and Bourdieusian field theory to specify when and how parties can successfully construct alternative political identities. I argue that parties' capacity to articulate identities depends on three interacting mechanisms: the habitus of actors composing the party shapes what articulations seem imaginable; the degree of field autonomy determines whether field-specific capital can operate independently of external capitals; and parties' positions within political fields constrain viable strategies. Drawing on 56 life history interviews, 134 semi-formal interviews, and 12 months of ethnographic fieldwork with India's Aam Aadmi Party between 2022 and 2025, I demonstrate how AAP's transformation from anti-corruption movement to Hindu nationalist-aligned party resulted from homogeneous middle-class, upper-caste habitus making identity-based representation unintelligible, low field autonomy destabilizing expertise-based positioning, and capital crisis under BJP hegemony, making Hindu identity adoption seem rational while coalition-building with marginalized groups seem impossible. This analysis advances articulation theory by specifying scope conditions for successful identity construction, by theorizing enabling field conditions, and demonstrates that structural explanation and organizational responsibility are complementary. Understanding how privilege reproduces through field mechanisms reveals what organizational interventions progressive politics requires.