(V) Social Movements in Modern India: (A) Peasants and Farmers Movements

Unit-C (Social Changes in India)
(v) Social Movements in Modern India:
(a) Peasants and Farmers Movements:
Peasants and Farmers Movements

Peasant is a broad usage of the term. It means who are dependent on agriculture for their
livelihood. But Eric Wolf has defined it in a narrower sense, referring to the population
that are existentially dependent on cultivation and make autonomous decisions regarding
cultivation. This definition excludes landless laborers, because they can’t take
autonomous decisions. So, he refers to a peasant as any small and middle land holding
farmer.
As far as peasant movements are concerned, scholars tried to divide Indian society pre-
modern and modern times. In pre moderns times Barrington Moore Jr and Eric Stokes
have tried to portray an image of peasantry as a largely passive and docile. Caste system
emphasis more on duties them rights, Peasantry is a class based identity in a caste based
society. It was an identity where there were many castes. For all these people peasantry
was a class. So, they say that peasant movements belong only to modern times.
But scholars like Kathleen Gough, A.R. Desai, and D.N.Dhanagare challenge this view.
They are of the view that in pre-modern times, in India, there were atleast 77 revolutions.
For example: - Jat uprising, Maratha uprising, Santhal uprising etc. These scholars also
say that, in atleast 12 revolutions, out of the 77, peasants were mobilized in thousands we
can’t say that peasantry was ‘passive and docile’ they say that, peasant movements
existed even in pre-modern times.
In modern times, peasant movements should be classified into two types.
(a) Pre independent peasant movement (Naxalbadi, Telangana).

(b) Post independent agrarian movements (Bhartiya Kishan Union etc.)
Kathleen Gough classifies both pre modern and modern peasant movements into 5 types:
(a) Restorative movement

(b) Religious based movement
(c) Social Bandits movement
(d) Terrorist movement
(e) Mass insurrection movement
(a) Restorative movement: for example: 1857 revolution.
1
Call: 09540865705, Email: info@sociologyias.com, Visit: www.sociologyias.com
Sociologists say that 1857 revolutions involved lot of peasant unrest. In Awadh and
other areas, mobilization of people was due to class based interests. Santhal rebellion
of 1856 was tribal in nature, but the fight was on the issue of land alienation.
(b) Religion based: Most of the Muslim peasants were mobilized on religious basis.
Moplah uprising in Kerala, Wahhabi movements, Farsi movement in East Bengal
were on these lines.
(c) Social Bandits: Social bandits were called Bagis not Dakus. They enjoyed social
support. They fought against exploitations landlords.
(d) Terrorists movements: Khalistan movement
(e) Mass insurrections: Telangana and Naxalbadi movements.
On the basis of comparative study of various movements, sociologists identified

various causes for peasant movements.
(1) Arbitrary eviction of tenants, so demands by tenants for security of tenure.

(2) Rack renting
(3) Exploitation of share croppers (Tebhaga movement)
(4) Arbitrary taxation (Kheda Bardoli)
(5) Demands for redistribution of land. For example: Naxalbadi movement, Ultra left
movements CPI (MC), PWG
(6) High price rises of food grain and living expenses.
(7) Sexual abuse of peasant women.
(8) Protest against practices of bounded labor (Vethi)
(9) Most of peasant movements in rice growing areas than wheat growing areas. 80%
of small farmers tended to be higher here and also it was labor intensive.
(10) Peasant movements were more successful where there were alliances
between peasants and political parties, particularly with those of left ideology.
Most of leadership came from middle peasants.
(11) Mutiny in Awadh Area. Kisan Sabha movement in Uttar Pradesh, Santhal
Rebellion, Krishak Sabha movement
Indigo revolution, Farsi in Bengal/ Bandoli, Kheda/ Pabna movement, Wahabi in Bihar,
Maratha rebellion of 1875 Moplah Preferably.
Since the early 1970’s the farmers movement has become one of the most important non-
parliamentary political forces in India. From one state to another, farmers have formed
organizations for better economic conditions in an increasingly commoditized agriculture
economy. Their main target has been the state which intervenes in the agrarian economy
by supplying agricultural inputs and regulating the markets. The farmers demand higher
subsidies on inputs like seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, electricity and water. They also
demand lower taxes and debt relief. Likewise, they demand higher prices for their
2
products such as grains, cash-crops, vegetables and milk. They argue that terms of trade
between industry and agriculture is increasingly favoring industry as against agriculture.
The farmers movement began in Tamil-Nadu and Punjab in the early 1970’s and later
spread to Karnataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Haryana, Western Uttar Pradesh and some
neighboring regions. Today the most important movements are Shetkari Sanghatana in
Maharashtra, and Bharatiya Kisan Union in Punjab and Western Uttar Pradesh.
Their central message is symbolized in simple and powerful slogan: Bharat against India!
Sharad Joshi leader of farmers’ movement in Maharashtra says “The real contradiction is
not in the village, not between big peasants and small, not between owners and landless,
but between agrarian population and rest of society.”
The strong populist appeal has enabled the mobilization of broad rural masses. The
strength of the farmers union is considered by many to derive from their concentration on
one single issue i.e. economic remuneration of farming. It has taken hold of vast groups
of rural people belonging to diverse castes, religions and classes and has grown into
movements that challenge the existing state and the way politics and economic
negotiation are transacted.
But this shouldn’t mean that farmers’ movement equally represents the interest of all
rural class and strata. Behind the appeal, there is a definite class basis, of rich and
capitalist farmers in alliance with middle and even poor peasants, who rally behind these
movements because of their precarious position in an increasingly commoditized
agriculture economy, in which prices to a large extent politically determined via state
intervention. Rural laborers are only indirectly benefitted.
Telangana Movement
This was a ‘communal lead mass insurrection’ which took place in Telangana part of
Andhra Pradesh in erstwhile state of Hyderabad between 1946-51. The state of
Hyderabad was established by Asaf Jahi Dynasty by the then Nizam-ul-Mulk of Mughal
emperor in 1724. It consisted of 16 districts, out of which 8 belong to Telangana region.
Other 5 districts are presently in Maharashtra, 3 are in Karnataka.
50% of population consisted of Telugu speaking people. There are certain factors which
facilitated rise of Telangana movement.
(1) Case of religion - linguistic domination:

While more than 85% populations were Hindus, political rule was exercised by
Muslims dynasty and the entire nobility consisted of Muslims. Entire civil and
police administration was dominated by Muslims. So, there was demand for
representation, according to population.
3
(2) 60% of the area was under Ryotwari system. 40% land was controlled by Nizam
and his Jagirdars. Land under Ryotwari System, in practice came to be controlled
by big landlords belonging to dominant castes like Brahmins, Velma’s, Reddy etc.
Another problem was that landlords were also supporting Nizam against peasants.
(3) Telangana was a backward region as spread of education was low. Literacy rate
was 10% and degree of urbanization was only 6%. It was overwhelmingly a rural
agrarian society.
(4) Also there was a grievance related to language that, Urdu was the medium of
instruction and also the official language. Telugu was not given any official
status. There were other practices like ‘Veethi’ (Bonded labor). There were no
political and civil rights and also no political activity was permitted within the
state. Though after GOI Act of 1935, due to provincial autonomy, representative
governments were formed elsewhere, but not in state of Hyderabad.
Representative Governments were not formed in ‘State of Hyderabad’.
Going by ‘Neil Smelser explanations’, initial precipitator of movement came for a social
conference in city of Hyderabad where the speaker was not allowed to speak in Telugu.
This created lot of resentment, particularly in the urban educated elite.
After this, they found an organization called ‘Andhra Jana Sangham’ to promote Telugu.
Journals and weeklies were started and soon this became a social reform movement.
Practice of ‘Veethi’, ‘Purdah’, and ‘untouchability’, ‘Child marriages’, prohibition of

widow remarriages etc. were taken up as agenda. Slowly this social reform movement
also entered into political arena. By 1930, they also started making various political
demands like representation of Hindus in administration etc.
In 1930, they formed a new organization called ‘Andhra Maha Sabha’, which was more
‘militant’ in character. It was explicitly a social reform organization. They made direct
demands for abolition of social evolutions.
Initially, as a response to these demands, Nizam brought a law to abolish Veethi but due
to opposition from landlords, it was never practiced. So, discontentment became more.
Also, Nizam didn’t allow elections in Hyderabad, where as in other parts of country
elections were being held based on GOI Act of 1935.
Nizam also became suspicious of Andhra Maharashtra Sabha (AMS) demand for a
separate state of larger Andhra. He developed a negative attitude towards them. At the
same time AMS also became more militant. They raised political demands and wanted to
abolish Nizams rule. Thus from a socio-religious movement it became a political
movement.
4
Supporters of Nizam, who are present day MIM members, demanded that in every
school, there should be prayers for eternal life of Nizam. AMS retaliated and launched
Vande Mataram movement. So, there was pressure on Nizam to join Indian mainstream.
All this led to confrontation with Nizam. Meanwhile large number of youth joined AMS.
A firebrand youth leader ‘Raavi Narayan Reddy (RNR)’ emerged. He was a Marxist from
Vijayawada. This led to radicalization of AMS, but there were some moderates also in
AMS.
In 1940, session, where Raavi Narayan Reddy (RNR) was presiding, they moved a
number of resolutions which were directly political in nature. They raised demands
regarding redistribution of land and giving land to landless. So, those members of AMS,
who were sizeable land owners side lined.
In 1944, in Bhongir session there was split in AMS. Non-Communist didn’t attend
session. So, AMS became wholly communist. Moderates joined INC. There were other
problems in war years. Price rice and ‘government policies of ration’ affected peasants.
So, communists raised issues of problems of peasants, landless laborers, overthrow of
Nizam rule etc.
Another ‘precipitating event’ was the Nalgonda Incident. A ‘Deshmukh of Bisalwar’ who
held 40,000 acres of land in Tasgaon Taluka was trying to grab land of washerwomen.
AMS fought for them. The land lords murdered Dodi Kumariya of AMS. So, AMS
retaliated. Police protected landlords. So, there was direct confrontation. By 1947, control
of AMS extended to about 3,000 villages. Communist took to guerrilla warfare. Nizam
had no army. Communists came to be popularly known as ‘Cheekati Dhoralu’. Nizam
raised an irregular force called ‘Razakars police Thugs. Razakars’ fought against
communists.
This movement had a dual character:
(1) It was a movement of ‘rights of peasant’

(2) It was a seeking liberation from Nizam.
Nizam committed a political blunder by declaring not to join the Indian union due to
infeasibility. After this declaration, communists were joined by moderates and
nationalists. The struggle went on till 1948. By 1948 more than 3000 villages and more
than 16000 Square km of land was freed from Nizam. Guerrillas came to control this
area.
In areas controlled by Guerillas:
(1) Veethi disappeared

(2) Agricultural wages have raised
(3) Unjustly grabbed land was returned to peasant holders.
(4) Steps were taken to redistribute waste land.
5
(5) They also introduced land reforms. (10 acres limit for wetlands/100 acres limit for
dry lands)
(6) Schools were opened.
(7) Irrigation facilities were sought to be developed
(8) Communities were mobilized to fight against diseases like cholera.
(9) Status of women improved
(10) Untouchability removed
(11) Revolutionary values were propagated through folk songs and plays.
At this time government of India intervened not only against Nizam but also to check
spread of communists. Indian Army was sent to restore peace. Qasim Razvi was given
the option to migrate to Pakistan.
One section of communists didn’t want mass insurrection to continue but another Section
wanted to continue till agrarian relations are transformed. So, half of the communists
deserted. GOI intervened and ruthlessly suppressed communists. RNR admitted that
continuing armed struggle was a strategic mistake. So, by 1951, entire revolution was
crushed.
But the movement led to political consciousness. ‘Chenchus and Koyam’ of Godavari
valley supported guerrillas and they emerged as people's war group (PWG). In the
process Telangana movement threw up Bhoodan movement by INC, as a healing touch to
the wounds inflicted by Indian army. Vinoba Bhave was sent who was the second best
totem to Gandhi on a Padayatra to Telangana region.
In Pochampally village Nalgonda District by giving a speech he said to abjure violence

and give peace. But a Dalit peasant said that, peace will not fill their stomach. So, this
made Vinoba Bhave seeking voluntary land donation.
A landlord called, Rama Chandra Reddy donated 100 acres of land. This sparked
Bhoodan movement.
So, a ‘norm oriented movement, led to a value oriented movement’ through communist
ideology. Again this value oriented movement led to a norm oriented movement through
Bhoodan movement.
According to Neil Smelser, a norm oriented movement wants gradual change through
peaceful means. A value oriented movement questions the fundamental values of existing
social order and demands revolutionary transformation.
6
Naxalbari Movement
Naxalbari movement is a name given to mass insurrection by the peasants between May
to Sep 1967 in Naxalbari area of Darjeeling district in West Bengal.
Background
The nature of agrarian relations in West Bengal that developed over a period of time was
based on the system called Jothidar (Landlord) — Adhyadhari (tenant) system. This has
crystallized into most parts of West Bengal. As the name suggested, they were allowed to
retain ½ the production.
However in practice this system became very exploitative. Often share of share cropper
though supposed to be ½, in practice tended to be less than 1/4th. If cattle and plough was
supplied by the land lord, then there was a deduction of 8 Mands (1 Mand=40 Kg). So,
there were many deductions like change for storing grains, for loans etc. The position of
share croppers was still more vulnerable. A single famine/drought/bad monsoon would
perish all the farmers.
In 1942-43, after the Bengal Famine, Tebhaga movement was led by communist
ideology. Tebhaga movement challenged the authority of British. Though the movement
was suppressed, it remained active in ‘Darjeeling and Cooch Bihar’. Its influence was
most conspicuous there. The percent of share croppers in that region was highest. This is
how agrarian relations came to the forefront in 1940’s.
Left parties were active in mobilization of people against Pannudann (8 Mand deduction)
this success led to spread of communist ideology. Later on communists also took issues
related to workers of Tea estates. They created a joint mobilization for workers and
peasants. They later on took up cause of Benami holdings for land peasants. This is how
communist party continued to show its presence amongst poor.
By 1960’s communist parties understood that the land question can’t be resolved within
the purview of law. So, they resorted to revolutionary action. CPI also didn’t want to
retaliate progressive bourgeoisie. CPI was progressive, ‘reformist’.
CPM continued to emphasis on mobilization of peasants and transforming agrarian

relations so much so that in Bengal top CPM leaders attempted at radicalization of
cadres. ‘Hare Krishna Konar and Das Gupta’ said that parliamentary democracy is
nothing but mere ‘Bhovant Bhaji’. He stated that their real objective is armed revolution.
So, they started organizing peasant for armed revolutions.
In 1960’s there was massive famine. Rural poverty increased. There was discontent and
price rise. A situation of unrest developed. At this juncture 1967, there were elections for
union and state. At this time communist party was ready for armed struggle which they
thought to execute after elections.
7
But in 1967 election, CPM was voted to power in the state. This applied brakes to the
party, as they can’t revolutions against themselves as they were in government. This led
to massive revolution against CPM. Youth wing who were highly idealistic and wanted to
transform agrarian relations revolted. So, there was a split in the party.
CPI Splitted as this was the 2nd split
 Naxalbari Krishak Sangram Samiti (NKSSS).

 Commune group
 Maoist communist centre
 Red flag group
NKSSS was the most radical group. Sushital Roy Chowdhury, Panchan Sarkar etc. were
important leaders. Commune group wanted a revolution through Guerrillas warfare, as
suggested by Che Guevara of Cuba
1st Split: CPI—CPI (M) = CPM in 1964 Marxist—CPI (Ml)
CPI Marxist (M) were pro capitalistic yet reforming,
CPI (ML) wanted arms revolution Mao Leninist.
The breakaway groups wanted immediate settlement of land issue. But CPM wanted to
settle land issue but it wanted peace and order to restore. Negotiation between Hare
Krishna Konar and NKSSS started but failed.
So, NKSSS started their movement who were called Naxals. Naxals gave following
instructions to peasants:
(1) If your cattle plough is taken by Jotedars, take his cattle plough
(2) If no food, go and ask food. If he refuses, take food
(3) If jotedars attacks forcefully, take away his guns.
A village called Burraganj was declared as Muktanchal. So, totally village came under
peasant organization. Police intervened, Naxals retaliated. Other factions also landed
support to NKSSS. Leaders like Charu Majumdar walked out of CPM. All faction
coordinated and formed coordination of committee of communists’ revolutionaries
(CCCR).
It was extended to WB CCCR. By 1969 an All India CCCR was established. CPI (ML)
and its members were referred to as Naxalaites popularly by English press.
Different demands of peasants were like
(1) Cease the land of landlord.

(2) Give him only 1/3rd of share
8
(3) Store harvest in own store houses
(4) No pannudan
(5) Only 25% interest on paddy loan.
The new party thought of bringing revolutionary transformation in society. They declared
that Chinese path is path of liberation in India. They declared that agrarian revolution can
be completed only through armed struggle and that they should build a secret party
organization to propagate its policies.
They didn’t encourage mass mobilization. Rather they placed their agenda on liquidation
or annihilation of class through Guerrilla warfare. They went in murder of landlords.
They rejected Mao’s strategy and supported Ling Peao. So, unlike Mao who went for
mass mobilization, they adopted ling Peao strategy of selective nerds. This made them
unpopular.
Meanwhile there was Bangladesh war and in 1971 election Mrs. Gandhi came back to
power. INC won even in West Bengal, Siddhartha Shankar Roy was made chief minister
of West Bengal. Who ruthlessly suppressed CPI (ML) Hardcore members were liquidated
and others were jailed
In 1977, CPM came back to power. CPM came to realize that there can’t be enduring
peace in Bengal unless the land issue is settled. So, in 1975, operation Benga was
launched. The rationale of armed rebellion disappeared. Naxalaites disappeared from land
of their origin and remained in parts of Bihar and Orissa – with HYV of rice called
‘BORO RICE’ there was massive agricultural prosperity. Peace restored in West Bengal
only to be disturbed by Singer and Nandigram issue.
9
Women’s Movement
It can be broadly classified into two types according to Gallombelt, a Swedish scholar
settled in Maharashtra.
(1) Equality movement

(2) Liberation movements
Equality movements are moderate in character. They don’t question the existing socio-
economic structure. They don’t’ seek drastic changes. They are concerned primarily with
extension of rights to women. They accept that men and women are different, but by
virtue to being a human, she has to enjoy certain rights.
Liberation movements challenge basic structure of family, distinction of sexual division

of labor including mothering role.
Indian feminism has been largely confined to equality movements. According to Romila
Thapar, reason for this is that in West there is a large section of professionally qualified
women seeking high ranking jobs. And the traditional family role is acting as a barrier.
So, they are questioning the fundamental sexual division of labor.
Unlike that, in India, as education among women is restricted, Indian feminism is

discouraged, and has been primarily concerned with equality movement.
Women’s movement can be of two types:
(a) Movements for women or which involve large scale participation of women but
not necessarily led by women
(b) Movements for women led by women, where they also present an alternate
ideological world view.
Most movements in India fall in the first category. This is the reason for not having
genuine women movements in India so far. Most conspicuous character of women
movement in India was around following:
(1) Caste based oppression

(2) Hindu religious beliefs
(3) Colonial rule
(4) Joint patriarchal family
These are the factors which dominated the discourse in wake of women’s movement. The
early phase of movements was socio-religious reform movements where social hierarchy
and Hindu religion were the main issues. The major thrust of these movements was fight
against inhuman practices like Sati, denial of widow remarriage, fight against Purdah,
right to education etc.
10
Justice Ranade’s Sarvajanik Sabha, Periyar’s Dravidian movements were fights against
inhuman practices on women concerning infanticides, child marriages etc. All men
leading these movements except, for Pandita Rama Bhai.
Men who led these movements were mainly from upper caste. They didn’t question the
patriarchal caste structure. Movements were more of a gesture of humanism that guided
them.
These movements were confined to elite in urban areas. Generally oppression of women
was high in Dwija Castes. In Non-Dwija castes, there was not high discrimination of
women. So, movements were led by men and Dwija castes and they hardly touched 2-3%
of population. Others remained oblivion of these movements.
After these movements, colonial rule dominated the discourse. Gandhi played a very
important role. Feminists like Devaki Jain, Vina Mazumdar etc. regard Gandhi as a great
liberator. Women adopted an active role in freedom movement, Swadeshi movements
and picketing of liquor shops etc. women, now for the 1st time moved out of family to
fight for cause of nation.
But more radical feminists say that Gandhi was also insufficient. Though Gandhi wanted
women to be active in community life, yet he also didn’t challenge the patriarchal
structure.
Women in freedom movements were helpers than comrades, even in other movements
like Tebhaga movement, Telangana movement, Naxalbadi movement etc. there were
attempts to mobilize women. Azad Hind Fauz of S.C. Bose had women’s wing. In all
these movements’ women played a supportive but not equal roles. Number of individual
activists like Sarojini Naidu, Nalini Dutta, Sucheta Kriplani etc. emerged as leaders in the
freedom struggle. Even after independence, women participated in many number of
issues, but they were not women related issues. For example: Chipko, Appico, and
Narmada Bachao Andolan movement saw rise of eco-feminism in India. Women
participated in issues of environmental degradation, drought relief movements etc. they
were also seen in tribal movements, trade unions etc. in all these movements there is no
direct focus concerning women’s problems.
Today, number of autonomous, agitational and conscious raising groups emerged. They
are grass root and mass based organizations fighting on issues of tribal rights, women
head load workers. Some organizations are working to provide emotional support to
women. There are also professional women organizations of lawyer, professors and
Journalists etc. there are also women’s wing of political parties.
According to Rohini Sujatha and Neelima women’s movement, now, follows 3 different
patterns or norms:
(1) Fight of woman against atrocities like Rape, pornography, and prostitution etc.
11
(2) Fight through unions for improvements in standards of life and conditions of
work. They also participate in general movements like price rise, ecology issue
etc.
(3) Social organizations which demand social recognition their of role as house
wives.
Madhu Kishwar identified contemporary issues for which women are fighting.
(1) Rape, wife beating, harassment on street and public transport

(2) Violence in family
(3) Demand for common civil code to ensure gender justice
(4) Problems of working women
(5) Protests against trafficking in women
(6) Exploitation of women belonging to Dalit and minority communities.
(7) Pornography, obscene portrayal of women, issues of commodification of women
(8) Problems of women in slums, in informal sector etc.
(9) Protest against system of temple prostitution for example: Devadasi prostitutes
(10) Superstitions and witchcraft where women are accused as witches.
(11) Issue of female feticide.
Though there is ample proof of ingenuity and commitment to women, yet autonomous
women’s movement have not taken a stable form in India.
According to Rohini Sujatha and Neelima, at the ideological level, identification of

women as an oppressed group which becomes a rallying point for mobilization has not
yet emerged in India.
Shared oppression does give women a strong sense of cohesion, but that itself can’t give
sense of power and strength to prolong a sustained fight against this oppression in
absence of a stable organization. Women movements are only a reactive response rather
than a sustained fight in India.
12
Backward Class Movements
Backward class has a confusing meaning. In one view of Backward class it refers to all
‘socially and economically’ deprived sections of society because the word used here is
class. However, other sociologists point out that this meaning is too large. They say that,
meaning should be restricted. They say that, the word class was not used by British in
Marxist sense.
They used two terms:
(a) Depressed classes

(b) Other backward classes (OBC)
Supreme Court in its judgment clarified this issue, saying that, the term ‘classes’ cannot
be equated with castes. So, British usage of depressed class is with regard to SC and ST
as per schedule attached to Government of India Act 1935.
Other sections which were also victims of ‘socio-economic deprivation’ of hierarchical

society in India came to be referred as OBC.
OBC today means castes belonging to middle rung. They are ‘neither Dwijas nor SC’.
That is how ‘BC or OBC’ came to be accepted. [BC—OBC—MBC]
These backward class movements are a term used to refer to movements led especially by
members of Non-Dwija castes and non-SC castes though sometimes they tried to
incorporate SC also within them.
Most of backward class movements were in Western and Southern India, while in North
India there have been backward class mobilizations, but no backward class movements as
such: why?
(1) Traditional caste hierarchy particularly in ritual dimension referring to ‘purity-

pollution’ dimension was never rigid in north compared to south.
(2) In North, after rise of Bhakti movement and Islam rule traditional notions or
‘purity-pollution’ came to be weakened Sikhism had no practice of untouchability
which is a result of Bhakti movement.
(3) Caste system has two dimensions:

(a) Ritual/religious dimension
(b) Secular dimension
Secular dimensions means w.r.t. ownership of land, access to education, high ranking
occupations etc. Religious dimensions are w.r.t. purity-pollution notions.
13
So, in the North, domination in secular hierarchy was not consciously narrowed in hands
of Brahmins only who were considered as chief ideologists of socializing and
legitimizing caste system. In many professions like law, teaching, journalism etc. that
emerged, Brahmins were dominant, but they weren’t alone. Secular hierarchy of power
and prestige was shared with number of people.
(4) In economic dimensions, land was rarely owned by Brahmins. ‘Thakur’s and
Ashraf Muslims’ were dominant landlords in North India.
(5) As far as commercial capital was concerned, it was largely controlled by members
of ‘Vyshya community’. So, there was a ‘dispersed stratification’ in North India.
In south India, in Madras presidency, ritual hierarchy was very rigid. In Kerala at one
time there were strict rules that distance between ‘Dalit and Namboodari’ Brahmins
should be 36 meters. Dalit were not allowed to wear slippers and were not allowed to
cover upper portion of body.
Even secular hierarchy tended to be cumulative rather than dispersed. Brahmins who
dominated ritual hierarchy also dominated secular hierarchy. They were leading in
education also. In Madras presidency, Brahmins constituted 3%, but more than 2/3% of
graduates were Brahmins. In many districts of south India, sometimes entire
administration used to be controlled by Brahmins and sometimes from same lineage.
Brahmins also dominated in political sphere. They were the middle men, who aided
British to consolidate their kingdom. Iyers and Iyengars totally dominated the scene from
1840-1920. As, being powerful both as a community and also because entire lineage was
involved, tracing of problem and prevention of mal-administration became a challenge
for British.
By this time politics was becoming Pan-Indian and militant, even congress leaders were
mainly Brahmins in South like T. T. Krishnamachari, Chakravarti Rajagopalachari. So, in
response to them, anti-caste, anti-Brahmins movements developed. For example:
Dravidian movement, Satyashodhak Samaj, etc. British also promoted these movements.
They had a vested interest to divide society and so it encouraged.
In entire Tamil-Nadu of today, there is no Kshatriya, Dwija or forward caste exercising

political power. This is due to these movements. Today power is mainly exercised by
OBC and thus they are referred to as forward Shudras’. Except for ‘Chettiars and
Reddiars’, there is also novysya linked caste.
In Maharashtra, after establishment of Maratha confederation headed by Peshwa based at

Pune, Brahmins came to dominate politics. Even in Maharashtra, there were no Kshatriya
caste dominating.
Kerala also saw domination of Brahmins. Brahmins and Nair communities jointly
controlled everything. So, because of overlapping of secular and ritual basis of hierarchy
any attempt towards equality would mean attack on caste system. As caste system was
14
subscribed by Brahmins. So, there were many Anti-Brahmins movements and Anti-caste
movements in all these areas.
Unlike South, as said earlier, in North India, Brahmins was dominant only in the ritual
dimension. Through movements like Kisan Sabha etc. INC was also taking care of
secular interests of middle class. Sardar Patel, Nehru, Rajendra Prasad emerged out of
Kisan movements only. Also, the ritual dimension was not so obnoxious, so, not many
backward class movements in North India.
Backward class movements were mainly concentrated in Bombay and Madras

presidencies. There was also an ideological similarity in these movements. Both these
movements took aid of ‘Racial caste theory’ given by oriental scholars like H.H. Risley,
Max-Muller etc.
It says that caste system in India developed due to racial divide which developed due to
migration of Aryans from central Europe and racially indigenous people. Migrant Aryans
belonged to different stocks. For example: Rig-Vedic.
Study from Andhra University also confirms this. Study shows that, gene of father in
European, but gene of mother is Asian. Migrant Aryans were women deficient. Aniloma
was promoted but Prathiloma was prohibited.
In Aniloma, Aryan men could marry local women. But Pratiloma meant Non-Aryans men
marrying Aryan women. Which was not allowed, this racial theory made caste hierarchy
to develop?
Later on they say that race component became less important after inter caste marriages
began. Racial divide was weakening. Most gods were dark colored. Krishna and
Ganesha, due to their dark complexion were called Shudra gods and later accepted by
Brahmins.
Those who controlled political and economic power became upper castes and those were
subjugated became lower castes. Aryans were called descendants of Manu.
Later on hierarchy became dependent on ritual dimension. This racial theory was made
use by different people for different theorists.
Tilak used to inculcate it for self-confidence. Lower castes made use of theory, to say that
we are the real sons of soil.
So Adi-Dravidain, Adi-Andhra, Adi-Kannade movements among Dalits claiming their

rights as original inheritors. This theory was made use even by Backward class
movements and its leaders, particularly in the two most prominent ones:
(a) Satya Shodak Samaj (Pune)

(b) Dravidian movement (Tamil-Nadu)
15
H.H. Risley puts his theory in the form of a law of race contact. It runs roughly as
follows: white men in contact with people of color will take women from the colored
group but will not give their own women. When the whites have bred enough white
women, “they will close their ranks” and form a superior caste. The mixed bloods will
then close their ranks, forming additional castes with degree of superiority based on
lightness of color.
Color question was at the root of the Varna system is apparent from the meaning of the
word Varna (complexion) and from the great emphasis with which the Vedic Indians
distinguished themselves from Non-Aryans in respect to color. The class which retained
the utmost purity of color by intermixture naturally gained precedence in the social scale.
Brahmins: white
(From Mahabharata)
Kshatriyas: Red
Vaisyas: because of large absorption of black blood were yellowish like mulattoes of
America, Sudras: Black.
Mahatma Jyotiba Phule was inspired by racial ideology and launched a movement called
Satya Shodak Samaj. The movement was against domination of Brahmanism in political
and caste system in general. He tried to spread the message that:
(1) He made a distinction between original inhabitants and outsiders

(2) Upper castes are outsiders and most importantly Brahmins are outsiders.
(3) He wanted to unite rest of the population who are actually Non-Dwija castes. He
wanted Shudhism—Athishudhism unity. Rationale for that is, they were all
original inhabitants.
Mahatma Jyotiba Phule wanted to reform the society by attacking Brahminical Hinduism
and assaulting Brahminical power clout. He wanted large unity among all Non-Brahmins.
He attacked brahminical movements of Maharashtra like that of Ranade’s Sarvajanik
Sabha. He also attacked nationalistic movements saying. Nationalism should wait till
Dalits get uplifted. He criticized them as pro-upper castes. He referred to carrion (dead
meat) eating by Dalits due to their poverty. He considered Brahmins more dangerous than
British and so he aligned with British.
He said that Aryans were Brahmins who robbed land, political and economic power from
natives. He said that-Shudras, Athishudras, Malis, Bheeds, and Mahars etc as original
inhabitants of the land. He says that all these sections were exploited by conquering
Brahmins and hence should be freed.
16
He wrote a book called ‘Shetkaryacha Asooth’ which literally means predicament of
peasants. He simultaneously presents a critiques, British government and Brahmins
system. He attacked both ritual and secular dimension of caste system.
According to Gail Olvrdt, she says his solutions are strikingly modern and ahead of his
times. He suggested biotechnology and watershed development. He suggested building
dams and canals. He talked of returning land to tribal occupied by British. He spoke of
interbreeding of cattle to produce high yielded milk and both. He held agricultural
exhibitions and training program for peasants. He also talked of paid employment to
farmers. He emphasized Vidya as opposed to shastra. He defended and praised Pandita
Ramabai and thus emphasized gender equality. He laid down a new system called
‘Sarvdhanik Satya Dharma’. Which was a simple religious practice, which was ritual free
and no Brahmins was required to practice. He advocated simple marriages to be
solemnized without Brahmins.
Backward Class Movement in Madras Presidency

Initially because of domination of Brahmins, both in politics and new professions like
law, journalism, teaching etc. there started growing resentment. Resentment was due to
following reasons:
(a) Administrative reasons

(b) Political reasons (Freedom movement was dominated by Brahmins; they wanted
to discredit freedom movement as Brahmins movement)
(c) Excessive domination of Brahmins in all professions.
In 1916, with encouragement from British, urban educated published non-Brahmins

manifestation. They founded an organization called South Indian liberal association in
1917. Their demands were, primarily to give representations to non-Brahmins in
government positions. This was actually a mobilization of urban elite among non-
Brahmins castes, who constituted 25% in Tamil-Nadu.
When GOI Act 1919 was passed, they converted themselves into a political party and
called their party as Justice Party. It pressurized government to reservation for backward
classes in proportion to their population.
The government provided to reservations to various communities like Brahmins, Anglo

Indians, Dalits including backward classes. This was their major achievement. In spite of
these achievements, they didn’t develop any mass appeal. They had no support outside
city of Madras, except for few urban centers. It was because; all issues they were
addressing were predominantly elitist in character.
National movement acquired great momentum with arrival of Gandhi and also with his
Non-Cooperation movement in 1920. Erode Venkata Ramasamy, Naicker, a young leader
from a landlord family (3000-4000 acres of land) emerged and joined INC. He came an
17
important leader of TNCC, which was otherwise dominated by Brahmins. Erode Venkata
Ramasamy was at forefront of Vaikom Satyagraha. He launched movement for temple
entry under leadership of T.K.Madhavan. Ezhavas of Kerala were mobilized for
this and under SNDP movement; congress provided full support to this.
But he realized that there was too much Brahminical domination and that his goals can’t
be realized within goals of congress. In Tamil-Nadu, some of Brahmins leaders started
schools called Gurukulams. At the same time Gandhi was fighting for untouchability.
Schools started dual mess system where Dalit students were not allowed, which Erode
Venkata Ramasamy protested. Here he wanted more of non-Brahmins opposed to it.
Gandhi didn’t lend his support to Erode Venkata Ramasamy, as it would threaten unity of
congress.
In 1925, he walked away with his manifestation: “No God, No Religion, No Brahmins,
No congress, No Gandhi”.
He said that nationalist movement is another guise for Brahmins domination. For him
primary objective was social freedom and it scored more importance than national
freedom. He became an atheist. He said that, Hinduism is nothing but a story of
domination of Brahmins over Dravidians. In category of Dravidians he included all Non-
Brahmins and Dalits. He also said that Ramayana is a story of Aryan domination over
Dravidians. He said that, it was a story of an Aryan king to defeat Dravidian king. Along
with this he attacked Sanskrit. Instead he emphasized on Tamil. He also raised issue of
gender justice. He ridiculed Hindu notions that degraded status of women and
condemned the attitude that a woman is fragile.
He even encouraged women to beat up their husbands if they are unruly. He broke sacred
thread of Brahmins. He organized self-respect marriages where all symbols of women
enslavement to men including Mangal Suthra were removed. He campaigned for right of
widow remarriage, against abortion etc. He fought for equal rights to women. He called
for increase in age for marriage in girls. He suggested a casteless society. He rejected
idea of god and mysticism and advocated rationalism.
He said that Brahmanism is nothing but a justification of an unequal social order. He

rejected the economic basis of caste.
He resorted to extreme politics, where he humiliated Brahmins, rubbing of Tilak, beating

Brahmins with shoe. Such kind of military approach had support of poor. All this was
under self-respect movement.
Justice party and Self Respect movement merged and it was called Dravida Kazhagam.
He was bestowed title of ‘Periyar’. There was issue about political participation of DK in
politics. But Periyar was more concerned about social reform than political participation.
But young leadership wanted active political participation as well. One of the major
success of Self Respect movement was that, it was able to enlist support of educated,
actors, journalists, poets, artists etc. All, joined Dravidian movement.
18
One such young leader was C.N. Anna Durai. At this, both Periyar and Anna advocated
secessionism from India and demanded a Dravida Nadu.
At this time, there developed internal dissent within party over issue of participation of
elections. But real reasons was marriage of Periyar with Maniema (below 18 years). He
was against Kanyasulkam but he himself did child marriage.
Annadurai led the revolution and majority of DK leaders walked away with him to form
DMK. Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam. {Munnetra—progressive—Kazhagam—
Federation}
But slowly DMK increasingly became a party of wealthy Non-Brahmins castes. It lost its
reformist zeal, as it entered politics. They switched over to populist measures to destroy
economic basis of inequality, but didn’t succeed.
Annadurai popularized Sangam literacy texts like SILL APARTHIKARAM, PURA

NAANOORU, and TIROKURRAL etc.
Idea of Self Respect movement changed to notion of ‘Maanam’. Leaders acquired special
titles like kavya, Neduchivan, kalaignar etc. Entire reformist agenda was lost. It simply
became a populist movement concerned with Tamil Nationalism. They were not able to
create a rational and humane society. They weren’t able to provide any justice to Dalits
also.
Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam became Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam because of its

populist measures. Land of anti-caste movements witnessed resurgence of casteism.
Periyar in 1957 campaigned for T. T. Krishnamachari (Brahmin from INC) against Bala
Subramanian who was a Stalwart of anti-Brahmins movement such were his
contradictory moves.
Dalit Movements
What is meant by Dalit?
19
Dalit means ‘oppressed and exploited’. It was a Sanskritic word. Many sections of Indian
society are Dalits. SC/ST/Women/minorities like Muslims etc. are also Dalits. So, Dalits
refer to all exploited sections of society.
Initially, the terms was interpreted in broad sense but later on the term came to be used in
restricted sense only SC (Scheduled Caste). SC are certain caste which are enumerated in
constitution. They are referred to as Panchamas (5th category), Athi-Shudras (by Phule),
Exterior castes (by Horton), Harijans (by Gandhi), Depressed classes (by British),
untouchables (by Maharaja of Baroda).
Today sections of society are called Dalits. This term is a recent addition to labels used to
refer them. It was first used 1870’s when there was a movement in Maharashtra led by
educated Mahars. Following the example of U.S.A, where there was a movement of
blacks called ‘Black Panther movement’, they launched a ‘Dalit Panther movement’ in
India which initially incorporated all suppressed classes.
Later on, due to political compulsions, they included only SC’s under name of Dalits.
Why they needed a new name? Dalit is a consciousness and it signifies a new
consciousness, a new level of awareness and an attitude of militancy to fight against
various injustices. These sections suffered from cumulative deprivation. They had a
degraded social status which involved socio-cultural deprivation. They were termed as
untouchables which excluded them from mainstream. They belonged to marginalized
group, denied school education, access to temples, wells etc. They were also denied
representations in community institutions like Panchayats. Most of them didn’t have any
economic resources like land. Thus their condition as untouchables was most humiliating.
They were also politically powerless. Also, they were not a homogenous community in
term of economic deprivation. Mahars in Maharashtra, Malas in Andhra were relatively
better off than other Dalit. But these kinds of castes were few and most of them lived in
chronic poverty and had no dignity of human life.
In history of Dalit protest, initial phase of protest was against socio-cultural deprivation.
For example: Vaikom Satyagraha, temple entry movements etc.
Their struggle for removal of untouchability was also given legitimacy through Art 17 of
constitution. The word of untouchables was not mentioned anywhere in the scriptures.
As time passed by, socio-cultural deprivation of Dalit in urban areas vanished and in rural
areas it declined. This was no longer an issue. Now the fight moved onto political
deprivation. Earlier also they sought power, but due to dependence on dominant castes,
they had to be a junior ally of dominant castes.
Today, Dalit are becoming a rallying point for mobilization as they are a sizeable
number. Dalit identity is being arrested. Dalit today don’t accept the word Harijan.
Harijan means being under the tutelage of dominant caste. But Dalit signifies being
independent and to get politically mobilized against dominant caste.
20
They also abandoned the Sanskritizing trend. They don’t aspire to imitate the upper
castes. Mayawati says “Chamari Hoon, Kunwari Hoon, Tumhari Hoon”.
Though the Dalit label is recent, their discontents and protest is age old. Buddha was the
first who raised his voice against rigid hierarchy of caste which assigned a degraded
status to certain sections. Buddha said that, “No one is Brahmin/Shudra by birth, but one
is Brahmin/Shudra by deed”. Moderate protest against caste system as it accepts
meritocratic inequality. Buddhism did help in decline of untouchability.
But by 2nd century,A.D., Hinduism came back. Manusmriti says to subjugate Dalit.
‘Hiuen Tsang’ who visited during Harsha’s time confirmed to untouchability practices.
Next came the Bhakti movement. Ravidas was a leather worker and Kabir was a weaver.
They rejected brahminical rituals and suggested development as path of salvation.
But except for a few saints, largely most of the saints were from upper/middle castes. So,
they never challenged the secular basis of caste system. Later on these movements
formed multi caste organizations and turned into religious sections. There was not a
significant change in caste hierarchy and practice of untouchability.
During the British there were socio-religious reform movements led by Brahmins. But
they were mainly in urban areas. They attacked caste system. Conversion was another
route of protests. Many Dalit converted to Christianity. Today more than 60% Christians
in India are Dalit. On the other hand middle classes and artisans converted to Muslims.
After these, there emerged some movements which challenged brahminical authority in
various parts of India. For example: Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalan movement (SNDP)
in Kerala. It was by Ezhavas of Kerala who were Todi workers. After success of SNDP
movement, in Kerala, among Polyans, Sadhu Jana Paripalan Sangam emerged. There was
depressed class mission in Maharashtra by Shinde. There was also Mahar movement led
by Ambedkar. Dravidian movements also claim to be addressing to Dalit in order to
increase their members. But later on Dalit were disillusioned with Dravidian movement
as it catered to only upper and middle castes.
In Tamil-Nadu M.C. Rajah established depressed class mission. Ayyankali was another
leader from Travancore in Kerala. Some movements like Adi-Dravida, Adi-Andhra
movement etc. were also inspired by radical ideologies.
Even Gandhi joined Dalit and started living in Bhangi colonies and called them Harijans
during freedom movement. Gandhi made the upper castes, accommodative for demands
of lower castes. On the other hand Ambedkar made Dalit self-confident. This is the
reason why Dalit demands were accommodated with minimum violence. Thus roles of
Ambedkar and Gandhi in this issue were complimentary to each other.
Most of these movements were fighting against socio cultural deprivation and seeking
help from colonial state. After independence there was a ‘lull’ in 1950’s and 1960’s in
Dalit movements in hope of INC promise to uplift Dalit, But after 1960’s disillusionment
due to failure of leaders.
21
After 1960’s there was increasing tendency towards compromise and Dalit leaders took
to band wages politics. On these lines Republican Party in Maharashtra was established.
Due to spread of Western and secular education there emerged intelligentsia in Dalit who
propagated idea of ‘equality and liberty’. So, a literacy movement called Dalit Panthers
movement was started in 1970’s. K.S. Chalam and Suraj Bhan.
But spread of education touched only 1-2% of Dalit. Also scope of Dalit term got reduced
to SC only as other castes gained mobility. In 1980’s and 1990’s this spread of discontent
spread to many parts of India. This saw rise of parties like BSP by Kanshi Ram and
Puthiya Tamilagam by Dr Krishnaswamy.
Now Dalit movement entered second phase of struggle fighting for political
empowerment has not yet emerged and is yet to come.
Also there is increasing tendency of mobilization of Dalit by ultra left parties. Jehanabad
riots saw Dalit mobilization based on class and not on caste. So, there emerged a Dalit
movement under an ultra left ideology. This is due to extreme inhuman lives.
Though there is success in their movements, yet the problem is of fragmentation. Dalit
are fragmented among themselves as much against other castes. They are not being able
to influence adequately the national politics in their favor.
Environmental Movements
Environmental movements are attempts at social mobilization against various ecological
disturbances which result in wake of adoption of modern technology universally, we have
adopted capitalistic mode of production, development, where efficiency and profitability
determines rules of game. Technology which is driven by capitalist mode of
production/development is incompatible with ecological balance.
22
In fact in the entire economic theory, nature and natural resources have been treated as
free goods as if they exist in abundance. The entire outlook of industrial civilization is to
control and dominate nature rather than harmonies with it. Ideology of capitalism is never
ending search for profit. Never ending eagerness for profitability raises issue of
sustainability of this mode of development. Also this process of industrial development
came to be synonymous with nation building and development is also spreading
consumerist ethos which is creating various ecological imbalances.
Environment movements are associated around two issues in India:

1) Stop the use of those aspects of environment which are causing damage to the
environment like mining, industrial deforestation, townships, etc.
2) Upgradation of environment like afforestation so that a better environment can be
developed.
Gadgil and Guha identified four Perspectives of environment movement in India:
(1) Gandhian Thought: Gandhi emphasized on moral necessity to restrain excessive

use of natural resources and ensure justice to poor and marginalized groups.
Gandhi was the first to question the desirability of industrial civilization. He
called it satanic civilizations. He said that industrial civilization leads to
debasement of human beings. He emphasized on ‘delimitation of needs’. More we
control desires more godly like we become. Inspired by Gandhian thought
(ideology) a number of movements developed. In other words, it emphasized
revitalization of environment by stopping excessive use and exploitation of
environment.
(2) There was also a ‘Marxian perspective’. It sees cause of ‘ecological imbalance’
and ‘environmental degradation’ in unjust social order (though Marxism was also
in practice state capitalism). It is on the line of Marx which is active against the
exploitative system and believes in control of the poor over the environment.
Tribal violent movements, on the issue of ‘Jad, Jungle, Zameen’ the main issues.
(3) Scientific community responses: It emphasized on use of appropriate technology.
They professed to build an indigenous technology to suit socio-political
environment. Upgradation of environment through afforestation, plantation,
stopping use of plastics.
(4) There were also spontaneous responses by people at grass root levels to protect
their immediate environment, for example: Chipko movement.
Accordingly Ghanshyam Shah, classified ecological movements into the following

ways:
(a) Protection and conservation of forest and land: Issues involved here are
conservation of forest resources, right of access to people for forest resources.
23
They were opposing the move to commercialize natural resource. Most
conspicuous example of this kind of movement, Chipko movement (1973) in
Gadwal by Sunderlal Bahuguna. One special feature of this kind of movement
is the active participation of poor and women to whom commercialization
would directly affect.
(b) Movement for prevention of land degradation: Excessive use of fertilizers,

and water lead to degradation of land. For example: Appiko (`to embrace`)
movement in Karnataka (1983).
(c) Regarding marine resources and Aquaculture: People were protesting against
trolling and commercialization of shrimp and prawn cultivation. They wanted
to protect and preserve their marine resources and for implementation of
coastal zone regulations. For example: Chilika Bachao Andolan in Orissa,
National Fishermen forum of Kerala fought for these.
(d) Industrial pollution: There were protests for strict pollution controls and
measures for providing compensation to victims. Zahiro gas Morcha in
Bhopal, Ganga Mukti Andolan in Bihar campaigned against reckless
expansions of industries. Also they focused on livelihood issues of local
people who get displaced and adversely affected. There were also movements
against pollution of Son River by Vidushak Karkhana group etc.
(e) Irrigation projects: Protests were mainly against dams. Issues involved were
regarding protection of tropical forests, preservation of ecological balance etc.
Also there was a concern about rise of seismic activity due to creation of big
dams/ reservoirs if there are fault lines. Also there was issue of displacement
and rehabilitation of poor. For example: Narmada Bachao Andolan, Silent
Valley movement in Palghat, Tehri Bandh Virodhi Sangharsh Samiti in
Gadwal etc.
(f) Power Projects: Jan Andolan in Dabhol protested against Enron, Koe-Kaio
Jan Sangathan in Bihar protested against mining and overuse of mineral
resources, Anti Bauxite movement in Orissa, Anti mine movement in Din
Nallely etc. There were also protest against military bases which threatened
ecology. There was Baliapal movement against Anti-missile test in Orissa.
There were protest against wildlife Sanctuaries regarding displacements and
rehabilitation of people in Sanjay Gandhi National Park and in Bhimashankar
region of Maharashtra.
24
There were also protests against excessive tourism in Himachal Pradesh and Goa due to
Smoking, littering etc. Himachal Pradesh Aandolan and Bailancho Saad in Goa
spearheaded these movements.
There were also movements for protection of urban environment although they didn’t
have any special organization. They used PIL as means for intervention of Judiciary for
implementation of ‘environmental protection Act of 1986’. ‘Mahesh Chandra Mehta
made remarkable contribution for introduction of CNG bus in New Delhi.
In India, environment has not yet become part of social ideology or way of life because
the country is struggling with the problem of population growth, unemployment and need
of infrastructure. Hence, on the one side environment or nature is required to be exploited
and on the other hand the need of future generation is also to be taken into consideration.
Hence, contradictory exploitation and goals, and it seem that priorities of future are
suffering because of the present needs. Hence, it is important that a balance must be
established between the present and future because according to the agriculture
department merely 1200 million hectare of land is left for Agriculture. The spread of
cities industries, roads, transport, are not only challenging the balance of environment but
also creating crisis for future needs.
Ethnicity and Identity Movements

Ethnicity is a socio-cultural expression of race. Hence, a group which is having common
language, culture, food habits etc. who belong to a particular race can be called an ethnic
group.
25
According to Ghanshyam Shah there are two approach to understand ethnic movement in
India:
1) Ancient approach, which believes that since a group of people having common
biological and cultural characteristics, emotionally associated themselves and are
not ready to tolerate outsiders and hence protest or oppose them is the reason of
ethnic or identity movement.
2) Instrumental approach, believes that every ethnic group wants special privilege
socio-economically and politically in a particular area and if they feel that their
privileged position is challenged, they unite themselves.
To elaborate, Ethnicity refers to identification of a group on the basis of certain

characteristics like race, culture, language, religion and even economic experiences. They
are a group of people who share certain characteristics in common. Often in ethnicity,
multiple criteria are involved.
Members of a group have similar racial characteristics. They are those attributes of
people which breed true. Breed true implies that they transmit from one generation to
another generation. For example: Blood group, Skin color, sometimes racial
characteristic may be too large. So, they are subdivided into many groups.
North East people in India are racially ‘Brachycephalic Mongoloids’. So, among
Mongoloids ‘consists of Chinese’, ‘Red Indians’, ‘Japanese’, ‘South-East Asia’ etc. But
among them they have many languages, identities, religious and customs. For example:
Nagas fight with Kukis.
Race is only one element but not the sole element. But it is the most important element
because people who share that tend to be an endogamous group. That is why similar
characters tend to continue and continue to be racially distinct.
In ethnicity multiple characteristics needs to be concerned. But in ethnicity mobilization

of certain characteristics are over emphasized. People are identified based on ethnic
characters. That is why there is an element of arbitrariness. What is ethnic identity
depends on leaders. It is constructed depending on situation and based on situation certain
attributes are highlighted and others may not.
Shiv Sena talks of Maharashtra for Marathis. But who is a Maharashtrian. Is it decided
based on ability to speak Marathi language? So, it all depends what characters leader use
to mobilize people. Certain primordial identities are highlighted in practice. Every
element is not taken.
Ethnic identities are difficult to define. It is difficult to classify people based on ethnicity.
For example: In Manipur there are Manipuri tribal, Naga, Kuki and also non-tribal
Manipuris; so very difficult to identify.
26
One thing universal to all ethnic identity is that it is a ‘primordial identity’. It is primarily
by birth and not by achievement and choice. It so happens that members of an ethnic
group may share common existential groups and form social interests shared in common.
In Assam fight against outsiders in because of massive, illegal migration of Bangladeshi.

They tended to develop a movement which involves ethnic Assamis. In this case it was a
common social interest. Same fear also exists in England that Asians will outnumber the
whites.
When one ethnic group because of common existential circumstances tends to develop a
commonality of interests and when they experience a common relative deprivation due to
threatening from other ethnic group or state machinery, ethnic conflicts arise.
When Maharashtrian attack Bihari migrants, it is fight against other ethnic groups. But
Khalistan movement, NSCN movement in Nagaland is an ethnic movement directed
against Indian state. Even issue of Kashmir is ethnic identity. Kashmir wants separation
from India and it is an ethnic movement directed against Indian state.
The perceived sense of relative deprivation may be real or imagined. In pre-independence

India, caste based or other primordial identities were used to undertake ethnicity based
movements. Dravidian movement is a movement based on Tamil ethnicity. Santhal, Koya
and Rampa rebellion are some of the ethnic based movements based on tribal identities.
In post-independence India, reason for cause of relative deprivation varied from

movement to movement. In the case of tribal movements, the reasons for relative
deprivation were:
(1) Land alienation

(2) Laws of political autonomy
(3) Dilution of traditional identities and culture.
In case of Dravidian movement, reasons for relative deprivation were:
(1) Lack of representation of Backward classes in government services.

(2) Socially humiliating practices even after the wake of secular egalitarian ideology,
after spread of British rule. It threw up a movement for self-respect (Ramaswamy
Naicker alias Periyar) to gain human dignity. So, there were only socio-political
factors. Economic factors were not involved.
But ethnicity based movements developed more conspicuously after independence.

North-East has witnessed so many particularly because of laws of political autonomy.
Mizos demanded a separate Mizoram.
In Nagaland the insurgency for a separate state is down but not out. Most important
leader was Fizo who initiated a movement for separate nation of Nagaland. Later on
27
Khasi and Garo also wanted to assert their distinctive identities. There has been a demand
for political autonomy and separate state.
Also in 1979-80, All Assam students union (AASU) developed an ethnic movement of
Assamese to drive out migrants. AASU was converted to AGPS, captured power in state.
After this the movement declined. But of these ‘Splinter movements’ developed. ULFA
demanded secession. BODOS and KHADVIS demanded a separated state within Assam.
BODOS were earlier part of AASU, but they have redefined their identity as BODOS.
Throughout 1980’s and early 1990’s we had secessionist movements in Punjab based on
Sikh religion and Punjabi language. Actually these movements grew out of relative
deprivation. In case of Punjab, numbers of factors were involved.
(1) Distortion in federal structure with arbitrary use of Article 356.

(2) Inequalities created by Green revolution. After initial prosperity it started
plateauing (reach a stable state of little change) and led to increase in incidence of
poverty and inequality.
Also influence of westernization and modernity led to alcoholism, disorganizations of

family life, lack of sexual morals etc., and the general trend was towards decrease in
traditional identity as a Sikh.
Kashmir continues to witness secessionism since 1989. This is also an ethnic movement.
Here the reasons are:
(1) Dilution of autonomy. India witnessed a centralizing tendency. Also there was
problem of widespread corruption.
(2) Abdullah family came as heroes, but after acquiring power, they degenerated to
like an autocratic patriarch. Sayeed Salahudeen who now runs a terrorist outfit
Pakistan was an ordinary politician in India (JandK) and was one of a key initiator
of peace process. But he migrated to Pakistan realizing as there was no hope for
fair politics in Kashmir.
The real causes for ethnicity based movements are different. Also distortions caused by
development, general neglect of agriculture, failure of Mahalanobis model to create
employment opportunity brought about rural poverty. So, there was an increase in
migration which led to over urbanization. These imbalances led to ethnic movements.
One of the prominent imbalances was demographic imbalance.
Ethnicity is seen as a type of populism. It has become a tool for political mobilization.
Most of these ethnicity movements emerged out of imbalances in nation’s development.
As people succeed in using these, they use it. Indian democracy has been degenerated
into competitive politics. Along with this ethnic consciousness there are deliberate
attempts to assert distinctive ethnic identities today.
28
These kinds of movements may tear the fabric of the country delicately woven for
centuries. Inclusive growth through inclusive governance is the answer.
‘Forest Rights Bill’ is one of the right steps that government took recently. Also
developing with region specific approach especially in North-East will bring them into
mainstream.
29

(V) Social Movements in Modern India: (A) Peasants and Farmers Movements

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(V) Social Movements in Modern India: (A) Peasants and Farmers Movements

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Unit-C (Social Changes in India)

(v) Social Movements in Modern India:

(a) Peasants and Farmers Movements:

Peasants and Farmers Movements

In modern times, peasant movements should be classified into two types.

(a) Pre independent peasant movement (Naxalbadi, Telangana).

(a) Restorative movement

(a) Restorative movement: for example: 1857 revolution.

On the basis of comparative study of various movements, sociologists identified

(1) Arbitrary eviction of tenants, so demands by tenants for security of tenure.

(1) Case of religion - linguistic domination:

Practice of ‘Veethi’, ‘Purdah’, and ‘untouchability’, ‘Child marriages’, prohibition of

This movement had a dual character:

(1) It was a movement of ‘rights of peasant’

In areas controlled by Guerillas:

(1) Veethi disappeared

In Pochampally village Nalgonda District by giving a speech he said to abjure violence

CPM continued to emphasis on mobilization of peasants and transforming agrarian

CPI Splitted as this was the 2nd split

 Naxalbari Krishak Sangram Samiti (NKSSS).

1st Split: CPI—CPI (M) = CPM in 1964 Marxist—CPI (Ml)

CPI Marxist (M) were pro capitalistic yet reforming,

CPI (ML) wanted arms revolution Mao Leninist.

Different demands of peasants were like

(1) Cease the land of landlord.

(1) Equality movement

Liberation movements challenge basic structure of family, distinction of sexual division

Unlike that, in India, as education among women is restricted, Indian feminism is

Women’s movement can be of two types:

(1) Caste based oppression

(1) Rape, wife beating, harassment on street and public transport

According to Rohini Sujatha and Neelima, at the ideological level, identification of

They used two terms:

(a) Depressed classes

Other sections which were also victims of ‘socio-economic deprivation’ of hierarchical

(1) Traditional caste hierarchy particularly in ritual dimension referring to ‘purity-

(3) Caste system has two dimensions:

In entire Tamil-Nadu of today, there is no Kshatriya, Dwija or forward caste exercising

In Maharashtra, after establishment of Maratha confederation headed by Peshwa based at

Backward class movements were mainly concentrated in Bombay and Madras

So Adi-Dravidain, Adi-Andhra, Adi-Kannade movements among Dalits claiming their

(a) Satya Shodak Samaj (Pune)

(1) He made a distinction between original inhabitants and outsiders

Backward Class Movement in Madras Presidency

(a) Administrative reasons

In 1916, with encouragement from British, urban educated published non-Brahmins

The government provided to reservations to various communities like Brahmins, Anglo

He said that Brahmanism is nothing but a justification of an unequal social order. He

He resorted to extreme politics, where he humiliated Brahmins, rubbing of Tilak, beating

Annadurai popularized Sangam literacy texts like SILL APARTHIKARAM, PURA

Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam became Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam because of its

Environment movements are associated around two issues in India:

Gadgil and Guha identified four Perspectives of environment movement in India:

(1) Gandhian Thought: Gandhi emphasized on moral necessity to restrain excessive

Accordingly Ghanshyam Shah, classified ecological movements into the following

(b) Movement for prevention of land degradation: Excessive use of fertilizers,

Ethnicity and Identity Movements

To elaborate, Ethnicity refers to identification of a group on the basis of certain

In ethnicity multiple characteristics needs to be concerned. But in ethnicity mobilization

In Assam fight against outsiders in because of massive, illegal migration of Bangladeshi.

The perceived sense of relative deprivation may be real or imagined. In pre-independence

In post-independence India, reason for cause of relative deprivation varied from

(1) Land alienation