This article focuses on question of supposedly economically better off states being separatists, and also ignores the ills of the feudal political mafia of bimaru states that have done very little for bringing them back up. Migration of middle class and aspiring suits the said feudal mafia of the poorer states, since the land thereby belongs to few, as was achieved in Kashmir too via enforced exodus of minority via jihadists.
Once, ports mattered, and hence the three major - two coastal and one river trade suitable - British era main cities of India, while major cities of other states saw turn down from once rich history. But that has changed since. If Bangalore can, so can half a dozen cities each in every state, provided corruption is wiped out.
As for the separation of South, the false theory.
First and foremost, South India is not equal to tamilnadu, nor do they lead it - that's a misconception accepted for convenience by North and others, and this megalomania stems chiefly from the days of undivided Madras province before independence.
British support and encouragement of Madras above all others at expense of all others, was due to the victory in 1857 that was helped by Madras regiment.
Reality, every state has different character, and while similarities exist, it's not that different from the situation in any other region. Punjab and Kashmir are not same, Rajasthan is different from UP and MP, we can do this with every bunch of contiguous states out of 28 or 29 that are. That's a large number, so we'll leave it at that.
As to separate confederacy of South so to speak, jinnah was the one who publicly spoke in Madras encouraging them to separate, and to know that they are nothing like northerners, which is as silly and false as it gets.
So lot of them in Tamilnadu keep talking, hateposting etc about how northerners think southern people are dark and they are fair.
Not true. This idea was fostered by Brits along with racial separation of India in North and South. Just like the now proven false theory of Aryan migration, so all invaders and colonial enslaving was justified, fraudulently.
North knows only too well the reality of plenty of dark indigenous northern Indians; and the only reason tamilians ignore that there are plenty of light coloured skin, eyes at al amongst tamilians is an obstinate ignoring of reality, in favour of hate theories that were pushed by Brits and jinnah and political parties like dmk.
In short, this whole thinking about fracturing India is of India destruction origin. Diversity exists, yes, and that's the beauty of this rich land. Fracturing into races, you might as well claim concrete separation of oceans.
Responding to a comment below the original post in the article about Bangladesh being the inspiration:-
Kerala threatened secession while Jawaharlal Nehru was PM, long before any disillusionment set in in East Bengal about their separation from mainland India for sake of a fraud theory. As for '71, independence wasn't strongly proposed until Sheikh Mujib was thrown in prison in western half when he arrived elected by majority, and paki military set sail to "change DNA of them" via massacres and rapes , three million of former and half a million of latter, declared intentions prior to sailing albeit not by specifying numbers. But for India those numbers could be several times higher.
https://rightlog.in/2018/08/south-india-01/
