\n\n<\/span>Peasants and Farmers Movements<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\nUnderstanding Social Movements<\/span><\/h3>\nPeople may damage a bus and attack its driver when the bus has run over a child. This is an isolated incident of protest. Since it flares up and dies down, it is not a social movement.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n\n- A social movement requires\u00a0sustained collective action over time.<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n
- Such action is\u00a0often directed against the state and takes the form of demanding changes in state policy or practice.<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n
- Spontaneous, disorganized protest cannot be called a social movement Collective action must be marked by\u00a0some degree of organization.<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n
- This organization may include\u00a0a leadership and a structure<\/strong>\u00a0that defines how members relate to each other, make decisions and carry them out<\/span><\/li>\n
- Those participating in a social movement also have\u00a0shared objectives and ideologies.<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n
- A social movement has\u00a0a general orientation or way of approaching to bring about (or to prevent) change.<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n
- These defining features are not constant. They may change over the course of a social movement\u2019s life.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
Social movements often arise with the aim or bringing about changes on a public issue, such as ensuring the right of the tribal population to use the forests or the right of displaced people to settlement and compensation; While social movements seek to bring in social change, counter movements some times arise in defence of status quo. There are many instances of such counter movements.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n\n- When Raja Rammohan Roy campaigned against sati and formed the Brahmo Samaj, defenders of sati formed Dharma Sabha and petitioned the British not to legislate against sati.<\/span><\/li>\n
- When reformers demanded education for girls, many protested that this would be disastrous for society. When reformers campaigned for widow remarriage, they were socially boycotted<\/span><\/li>\n
- When the so called \u2018lower caste\u2019 children enrolled in schools, some so called Tipper caste\u2019 children were withdrawn from the schools by their families.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Peasant movements have often been brutally suppressed<\/span><\/li>\n
- More recently the social movements of erstwhile excluded groups like the Dalits have often invoked retaliatory action.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Likewise proposals for extending reservation in educational institutions have led to counter movements.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
Social movements cannot change society easily Since it goes against both entrenched interests and values, there is bound to be opposition and resistance. But over a period changes to take place.<\/span><\/p>\nSocial Movement and Social Change<\/span><\/h3>\n\n- It is important to distinguish between\u00a0social change in general and social movements. Social change is continuous and ongoing process. The broad historical processes of social change are the sum total of countless individual and collective actions gathered across time and space. Social movements are directed towards some specific goals. It involves long and continuous social effort and action by people. Sanskritisation and westernization are examples of social change and the 19th century social reformers effort to change society are examples of social movements.<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n
- Social movements in India have not only been protest and dissent movements but also reform and reaction aryas well as socio-religious and freedom movements.<\/strong>\u00a0These movements defined as\u00a0\u201ccollective effort to promote\/resist change\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>came into origin only after uniformity in intellectual orientations, social structures, ideological presences, and perceptions of truth came into existence. It is a well-known fact that characteristics of society shape the styles of movements. Therefore, the elements of social structure and the future vision of society provide the focal point of analysis of social movements.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
The orientation of social movements:<\/span><\/h4>\nTill the British period, the orientation of social movements in our country was religious, though national liberation movement also emerged after the 1930s which was overtly against the forces of imperialism and colonialism. But, after independence, the new situation that emerged led to divergence in the targets of attack, say political authority, economic exploitation, cultural domination, male domination and humiliation of women and so forth. This led to proliferation of diverse movements.<\/span><\/p>\nClassification of Social Movements:<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- Social movements have been classified on the basis of numerous criteria.\u00a0Nature of change intended, organizational mode and strategy, nature of demands, groups and collectivities involved\u00a0<\/strong>are some of the major criteria used for the purpose, e.g., tribal movement, Harijan movement, women\u2019s movement, peasant movement, student movement, industrial workers\u2019 movement, and on the basis of the nature of collectivities against which they are led, e.g.,anti-Brahminism, anti-leftist, anti-Dalits and so on.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Yet other basis of classification is their territorial anchorage,\u00a0<\/strong>e.g., locality in which they originate and operate, e.g., Vidharbha movement, Telangana movement, Chhattisgarh movement, Jharkhand or Vananchal movement, Uttaranchal movement, and so on. Such names indirectly point out the goals pursued<\/span><\/li>\n
- Movements are also named after the issues they pursue,<\/strong>\u00a0e.g., Anti-Hindi movement, Anticorruption movement, Movement are named after their initial or top leadership too, e.g., Gandhian movement, Ramakrishna movement, J.R (Jayaprakash) movement, etc. M.S.A.Rao has talked of three types of movement-reformist, transformative, and revolutionary.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
All these movements are characterized by five elements<\/span><\/h5>\n\n- Collective goal<\/span><\/li>\n
- Common ideology of widely accepted programme<\/span><\/li>\n
- Collective action<\/span><\/li>\n
- Minimal degree of organization and leadership.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Thus, a \u2018social movement\u2019 with above characteristics is different from \u2018agitation\u2019 as the latter has no ideology and no organization.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Ghanshyam Shah<\/strong>\u00a0holds that some co-active actions termed by some scholars as \u2018agitations\u2019 are considered by others as movements; e.g., demand for the formation of linguistic states. Shah himself considers them as \u2018movements\u2019 or a part of a social movement of a particular stratum of society. Thus demand for Jharkhand in Bihar, Uttaranchal in Uttar Pradesh, and Chhattisgarh in Madhya Pradesh can be described as social movements according to him.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Desai held that<\/strong>\u00a0some movements are caused by the inability of our Constitution to protect the civil and the democratic rights of people.\u00a0Rajni Kothari<\/strong>\u00a0is of the opinion that failure of the state in \u2018social transformation\u2019 of society in which repression and intimidation of large masses of people has become common compels people to assert their rights through various struggles.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Gurr and M.S.A. Rao<\/strong>\u00a0have explained social movements in terms of \u2018relative deprivation.\u2019 Rao focuses on the \u2018possibility of doing something by the sufferer\u2019 along with relative deprivation.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Ghanshyam Shah and T.K. Oommen do not accept Relative Deprivation Approach\u00a0<\/strong>in explaining social movements. Oommen\u2019s argument is that deprivation theorists do not view movements as \u2018ongoing process of change\u2019. They also do not deal with the sources of deprivation. Shah holds that deprivation theorist ignore the importance of consciousness and the ideological aspects of the participants.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
<\/span>Peasant and Farmers Movements<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\nThe study of peasant movements has emerged as an important area in the study of social movement in India. Since India is essentially an agrarian country, it is natural that the study of agrarian problems has assumed a central place in sociological issues.<\/span><\/p>\n\n- Patterns of landownership, tenancy, use and control of land, all reflect the complex nature of agrarian structure.<\/strong>\u00a0The complexity of agrarian structure is also manifested in the agrarian class structure which has existed since long in rural areas. The diversity of land systems and agrarian relations has produced an elaborate structure of agrarian classes. The later vary from one region to another. However, based on the nature of rights in land and the type of income derived from it, Daniel Thorner has identified three major agrarian classes in India. They are Maliks, Kisans and Mazdoors. Big landlords and rich landowners are included under the category of Maliks. Kisans are inferior to Maliks comprising self-cultivating owners of land They are small landowners and tenant Mazdoors earn their livelihood from working on others lands. This category includes poor tenants, share-croppers and landless labourers. This classification of agrarian classes broadly reflects the Indian reality.<\/span><\/li>\n
- But it needs to be recognized that the agrarian hierarchy, Corresponds with the caste hierarchy which we find in different parts of the country.<\/strong>\u00a0The rich landowners and moneylenders mainly belong to the upper castes. The middle and small peasants come from the traditional peasants castes. The landless labourers belong primarily to the lower classes. Such a position merely shows a pattern. It does not refer to the exact situation in the rural areas.<\/span><\/li>\n
- The nature of agrarian class structure has been mentioned here to understand the structural background in which movements have been launched by different classes of peasantry. D.N. Dhanagare\u2019s study of peasant movements<\/strong>\u00a0in India helps us to know the nature of these movements. According to Dhanagare, the term \u2018peasant movement\u2019 refers to all kinds of collective attempts of different strata of the peasantry either to change the system which they felt was exploitative, or to seek redress for particular grievances without necessarily aiming at overthrowing the system. Peasant movements thus include all kinds of movements, violent and non-violent, organized and specific.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
Issues Involved in Peasant Movements:<\/span><\/h3>\n\n- Some were related to conflicts between tenants and landlords; some were because of the oppression by zamindars of majority religious community (Hindus), and<\/span><\/li>\n
- Some were because of the factors like communal outburst, provocation by government officials and police etc., for improving economic conditions, demands for higher wages, forced labour (beggar) and so on.<\/span><\/li>\n
- It is held by some writers that Gandhi mobilized the peasantry for the cause of national freedom and not for fighting against zamindars and money lenders.<\/span><\/li>\n
- There are other writers who suggest that the relationship between peasant movements and the national movements was one of reciprocity, i.e., give and take. The tasks of taking up peasants class demands as well as fighting against imperialists were dealt with simultaneously In any case peasants specific needs and interests of security of tenure, debt relief and cheap credit etc., could not be emphasized strongly by the nationalist leaders.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
After independence, however, the leaders tried to mobilize peasantry against zamindars and landlords. The exploited peasantry was not a united group as they were vertically aligned with the masters through factional ties. Initially, the poor peasants were least militant but as the anti-landlords and anti-rich peasant sentiment was built up by the middle peasant, the revolutionary energy of the poor peasant was transformed into a revolutionary force. But peasants taking up revolutionary action were not on all India basis. It was only in some regions.<\/span><\/p>\nSix different viewpoints of the agrarian movements in India have been studied by sociologists:<\/strong><\/span><\/h6>\n\n- In terms of their functioning as associations at micro levels;<\/span><\/li>\n
- Relationship between politics and agrarian movements, i.e., mobilizing peasants by political parties like Congress, communists etc.<\/span><\/li>\n
- Relationship between social structure (caste, class and power) and agrarian movements;<\/span><\/li>\n
- Relationship between the green revolution and agrarian movements. (The green revolution not only affected the traditional agrarian relations but it also accentuated economic disparities and accelerated social aspirations of villagers);<\/span><\/li>\n
- Relationship between agrarian legislation and movements (i.e., movements causing legislation and legislation causing movements); and<\/span><\/li>\n
- Relationship between mobilization and organization of movements. Some movements for the welfare of peasants were organized on Gandhian principles. Two such movements were Bhoodan movement of Vinoba Bhave and Sarvodya movement of Jayaprakash Narayan. The immediate objective of the Bhoodan movement was collecting land from the rich and its distribution to the poor. However, this movement failed in achieving its goal.<\/span><\/li>\n
- India has a long history of peasant movements. The nineteenth century India is considered a treasure house of materials on peasant heroism. The movements in the period between 1858 and 1914 tended to remain localized disjointed and confined to particular grievances. The most militant peasant movement of this period was the Indigo Revolt 1859-60 in Bengal. Only a decade later, similar violent disturbance took place in Babana and Bogara in Bengal in 1872-73. These struggles were directed against Zamindars who were the symbols of exploitation and atrocities.<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n
- The landowning and money-lending classes had consolidated their position not only in zamindari areas but also in Ryotwari and Mahalwari areas.<\/strong>\u00a0The small landholders, tenants and share-croppers were the victims of the moneylender\u2019s tyranny. Accordingly, the peasants revolted against the oppression of the powerful agrarian classes. One of such revolts in Ryotwari area is known as the Deccan Riots of 1875 that occurred in western Maharashtra. A series of Moplah uprisings in Malabar region of southern India also took place throughout the nineteenth century. They were expressions of long-standing agrarian discontent among the poor Moplah peasantry.<\/span><\/li>\n
- It is fascinating to note that peasants\u2019 grievances also became a component of the India\u2019s freedom struggle during the early twentieth century.<\/strong>\u00a0The Champaran Movement in 1917, the Kheda Satyagrah of 1918 and Bardoli Satyagrah of 1928 were the major non-violent anti-British struggles. Since Mahatma Gandhi was involved in these satyagrahas, they are popularly known as Gandhian agrarian movements. Most of these movements took up relatively major agrarian issues but they succeeded in arousing political awareness among the masses. Thus, the most significant aspect of these movements was their simultaneous involvement in the nation-wide struggle for freedom.<\/span><\/li>\n
- However, peasants in other parts of the country were not inactive.\u00a0<\/strong>They were equally restive and raised their grievances. Between1920 and 1946 several peasant organizations and movements emerged in Bihar and Bengal which protested against the deplorable condition of the middle and poor peasants. The first organization to be founded was the Bihar Provincial Kisan Sabha and in 1936 the All India Kisan Sabha.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
The peasants organized by the Sabha. The peasants organized by the Sabhas demanded freedom from economic exploitation for peasants, workers and all other exploited classes. The more important peasant movements in different regions were: Tebhaga, Telangana and Naxalite. The Bhoodan and Sarvodya movements also took up peasants interests but they were taken up not by the peasants themselves but by Vinoba Bhave and Jayaprakash Narayan.<\/span><\/p>\n |
![\"Triumphias:](\"https:\/\/triumphias.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/WhatsApp-Image-2024-09-10-at-14.59.19-3-150x150.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n