TOPIC-06- Social classes in India
Agrarian class structure
Different divisions
Revenue assessment of land- Zamindari, Ryotwari, Mahalwari.
Zamindari- Zamindar, tenants and agricultural labours ;Ryotwari- landlord and peasants; Agrarian
class-Feudal character- Zamindars collected tax- non working owners of the land- peasants were
having no security of tenure.
o Daniel Thorner Marxian approach- Even after land reforms measures- peasants continue to
suffer more and the Maliks are enjoying the dominant position- has social relationships- the
lower caste works as land less labourers- the landowning belongs to higher caste.
o PC Joshi 3 trends in agrarian class- declining feudalistics and customary tenacy- rising of
commercially oriented landlords- it increased the efficiency and productivity, but the conflict
between the poor peasantry and the agriculture labourers are in rise.
o TK Oommen- 5 Categories of classes in rural agrarian India- landlords- rich farmers- middle
peasants- poor peasants- landless workers.
o Andre beteille- Liberal point of view- Ownership- Control- Use of land.
o Ownership: Entrepreneurial landlords- big owners- found in green revolution belt- profit
motive.
o Medium land lords- land is family property- for namesake they keep themselves attached to
the land- absentee landlords
o Small owners- dont go for self cultivation for culturl bondage- Cultural landlords
o Controller- Some one who sees the land in the absence of the actul landowner-one can be
owner, controller and user at the same time.
o Users- No ownership- no controlling rights- work there for earning livelihood.
o Beteille pointed out how in bengal after land reforms the number of small and marginal
farmers expanded, who were earler share croppers.
o Marxist -classes- conservative and radical- radical can bring revolution.
o ARDesai upper class- middle class- lower class.
o Utsa Pattnaik- studied Punjab and Haryana- 5 types- big land lords, rich farmers, middle
peasants, small peasants, agricultural labourers. Big landlords- 50 acres or more, profit
motive, technology, politically active, use hired labour. Rich farmers- 20 to 40 acres, highly
ambitious, hired labours, at times family labours. Middle Peasants- 10 to 20 acres, family
labour, little surplus. Small farmers- 5 to 10 acres, marginalised farmers. Agricultural
labourers- land less labourers. The first 2 types big land lords and the rich farmers are
controlling all the means of production and conslidatingthem.development of capitalist
agriculture. In the GR belt polirisation becoming more prominent.
o Neo Marxist view: Agrarian class structure cant be studied in isolation with the non-agrarian
class. Money lenders, merchants, traders living in urban areas-linkage with the village land
lords- procurements in the harvesting season from the small and medium peasants- they
dont have voice to raise against them- - Exploitation Migration- suicide.
o AnandChakravarty- under class- cant fight against hegemonistic domination of landlords,
police and legal courts- they accept inequality and start rebellion.
108
Tusharanshu-goias.in
o Liberal sociologist- consider the elements like feudalism, semi feudalism, semi capitalist,
capitalist and caste class nexus- Nexus between agarian class and non-agarian class makes
the situation complex- government programmes should take the holistic view before coming
up with any plan.
Agriculture structure contd..
Like all other economic activities, agricultural production is carried out in a framework of social
relationships. Those involved in cultivation of land also interact with each other in different social
capacities.For example, in the old system of jajmani relations in the Indian countryside.
The most important aspect of the institutional set-up of agrarian societies is the patterns of land
ownership and the nature of relationships among those who own or possess land and those who
cultivate them.The terms of employment of labour also vary.
Marx and Weber on Class
Marx: “Marx’s philosophical outlook was largely influenced by both Hegel and Hegel’smaterialistic
successor Ludwig Feurbach. Thus Marx put forward a view of history known as economic
determinism. ‘Classes’, in the Marxian framework, are thus defined in terms of the relationships that
a grouping of people have with the ‘means of production’. Further, in Marx’s model, economic
domination is tied to political domination. Control of means of production yields political power.
Weber: Unlike Marx, he argues that classes develop only in the market economies in which
individuals compete for economic gains. Thus, class status of a person, in Weber’s terminology, is his
“market situation” or, in other words, his purchasing power. The class status of a person also
determines his “life chances”.
Notions of Agrarian Societies: The nature of agrarian class structure varies a great deal from region
to region.Thus, no single model of agrarian class structure that can be applied to all societies.
The Classical Notion of Undifferentiated Peasant Society:Peasantry, in this anthropological
perspective, was essentially an undifferentiated social formation. In terms of their social and
economic organisation, peasants were all similar to each other.Robert Redfield, - pioneered
anthropological research on peasantry, argued - “the peasantry wa universal ‘human type’. They -
attached to land through bonds of sentiments and emotions.
Following this “classical discussion”, Theodor Shanin developed an “ideal type” of peasant society. -
defined peasants as ‘small agricultural producers, - with the help of simple equipment and the
labour of their families, produced mostly for their own consumption, direct or indirect, and for the
fulfilment of obligations to holders of political and economic power’.
But reality not same everywhere: For eg: India- the rural society was divided between different caste
groups and only some groups had the right to cultivate land while others were obliged to provide
services to the cultivators.
Feudalism as a Type of Agrarian Society
Compared to the concept of ‘peasant society’, the term feudalism conveys a very different notion of
agrarian class structure. Cultivators in feudal societies were seen as a subordinate class. The land
they cultivated did not legally belong to them. They only had the right to cultivate. The distinctive
109
Tusharanshu-goias.in
feature of the agrarian class structure in feudalism was the structures of “dependency” and
“patronage” that existed between the cultivators and the “overlords”.The cultivating peasants had
to show a sense of “loyalty” and obligation towards overlords. System of begar popular in many
parts of India until some time back would be an example of such a system.
Contemporary Agrarian Societies
Two important changes in agrarian economy that came with industrialisation and development.First,
agriculture lost its earlier significanceand became only a marginal sector of the economy.In India, for
example, though a large proportionof the population is still employed in the agricultural sector, its
contributionto the total national income has come down substantially. The second important change
that has been experienced in the agrarian sector is in its internal social organisation. The growing
influence of market and money meant that the relations among different categories of population
become formalized, w/o sense of loyalty or obligation.
Class Analysis of Agrarian Societies
Over the years, the writings of Lenin and Mao have become the basis for understanding agrarian
class structures in different societies.Dev of capitalism in agri diff classes rich landlorsetc- 5-6
classes. but only transitory classes later polarize & form 2 classes- big capitalist landlords & rural
proletariats little evidence to support
Agrarian Social Structure and Change in India
Traditional Indian “rural communities” and the agrarian social structures were organised within the
framework of ‘jajmanisystem’. This was a peculiarly Indian phenomenon. Participation in this system
of reciprocal exchange was not on an equal footing. The caste system in turn provided legitimacy .
Agrarian Changes during the British Colonial Rule
agrarian policies of the British colonial rulers are regarded as among the most important factors
responsible for introducing changes in the agrarian structure of the sub-continent. These changes
led to serious indebtedness. peasants losing their lands to moneylenders and big landowners.
peasants had no motivation for working hard to improve their lands. -agricultural production
declined.big landowners gained at the cost of the small peasants.
Agrarian Changes after Independence
only in those parts of the country where peasants were politically mobilized and the local state
government had the right kind of ‘political will’, the land reforms could be effectively implemented.
These included the Community Development Programme (CDP), the Co-operatives and the Green
Revolution technology. Thorner:Capitalistic agricultural dev in socialist India
‘Green Revolution’ and Social Mobility: Yogendra Singh points out that the “Green Revolution”
signifies not merely growth in agricultural production but also the use of new technology and new
social relationships in production processes.resultedin social mobility, emergence of new power
structures and modes of exploitation of the deprived classes. -generated new contradictions in
society.
110
Tusharanshu-goias.in
Agrarian Class Structure in India:
Though agricultural land in most parts of India is still owned by the traditional cultivating caste
groups, their relations with the landless menials are no more regulated by the norms of the caste
system.
D.N. Dhanagare, ‘the relations among classes and social composition of groups that occupy specific
class position in relation to land-control and land-use in India are so diverse and complex that it is
difficult to incorporate them all in a general schema
Ashok Rudra, while analyzing the class composition of the Indian agricultural population, observes
that there are only two classes in Indian agriculture -the big landlords, and the agricultural labourers.
I. David Thorner suggested that one could divide the agrarian population of India into different class
categories by adopting three criteria. First, type of income earned from land (- ‘rent’ or ‘fruits of
own cultivation’ or ‘wages’). Second, the nature of rights held in land (such as ‘proprietary’ or
‘tenancy’ or ‘share-cropping or ‘no rights ’). Third, the extent of field-work actually performed
• Maliks: property rights- keep rent high & wages low. 2 categories 1) big landlords-2) rich
farmers
• Kisans: working peasants- own small plots can be 1) small farmers or 2) substantial tenants
• Mazdoors:Donot own- work as wage labourers or sharecroppers.
Not very popular- most regions maliks- enterprising farmers-tenants/sharecroppers as wage
earners – midlle level cultivators swelled (come from upeer castes but own+family labour)
Landless labourers: Last category- poorest of poor- Pb&Hry 20-30% of workforce & AP-
50%.Though the older type of bondage is no more a popular practice, the dependence of
landless labourers on the big farmers often makes them surrender their freedom, not only of
choosing employers, but invariably also of choosing their political representatives.
3 categories:
II. Andre Beteille: Liberal approach -: On basis of ownership, control and use of land
• Owners- (a) Traditional L/L (b) enterprising L/L (c) Absentee L/L
• Controllers- managers/munims- mabe part owner/controller or contractual
• Users- Agricultural labourers working for rest
III.Marxist Approach: 1) Leninist (Kulak, Strendik, Bendik) 2) Neo Marxists 3) Marxist
1) Leninist: based on who’s using what kind of labour- level of exploitation
• Kulaks: Hired labour
• Strendiks- family labour
• Bendiks- hire themselves out.
UtsahPatnaik in Republic of Hunger and Bondage and servitude Initial phases of green
revolution middle class expanded. Later rich farmers took over all the benefits.
2) Marxist: Kathleen Gough: Village Kumbapettie (Thanjavur, TN) 1. Bourgeois (Rich farmers) 2.
Pettybourgeois 3.Semiproletariat 4.Proletariat.
111
Tusharanshu-goias.in
3) Neo-Marxists:Duzerfedt and Lindsberg:Debt trap- small farmers loan from bigger farmers-
distress sell produce to big farmers in return- they hoard and ask for higher MSPs.Thus, paradox of
development & benefitssuicides, unrest. tension& anxiety. Telangana last 5 months- 316 farmers
have died.
IV-Women and Land- 40 crore women live in villages and 79% women work in agricultural sector as
compared to 63% men. – feminization of Indian agriculture- Indian govt. recognizes farmer as
someone who owns the land and not worker on the land- Only 13% of women own land. Credit
schemes etc can be availed only by owner and someone with residence. Thus, women need to have
land- self respect& empowerment. What stops women from owning land? 1) patriarchal setup 2)
share in natal property seen as greed 3)stridhan at time of dowry only property 4) UN Women study
- 9 years after passage of Hindu succession amendment act- neither women, nor revenue admin
aware of it. Women Farmers Entitlement Bill, 2011 which makes wife half owner of husband’s land
pending.
Agriculture- Land Leasing in India- Either restricted or banned in India. Like j&K and Kerala ban
leasing out. 2) Punjab, Haryana, Gujarat, Assam not legally banned. Research studies- restrictive
tenancy laws have prevented optimum allocation of land resources and denied rural poor access to
land. Also, led to concealed tenancy.Why lease??
• Population pressure
• Better outside employment opportunities
• Fills demnd supply gap
• Acc to NSSO, 60th round- 36% tenant farmers are landless while 56% of tenant households
are marginal farmers (<1 hectare of land)
K.L. Sharma elaborates the second position, “caste incorporates the element of class and class has a
cultural (caste) style, hence the two systems cannot be easily separated even analytically”. They
were the three classes of the landowners (zamindars), the tenants and the agricultural labourers.
The landowners (zamindars) were tax gatherers and non-cultivating owners of land. They belonged
to the upper caste groups. The agricultural labourers were placed in a position of bondsmen and
hereditarily attached labourers. They belonged to the lower caste groups.
Land reforms led to the eviction of smaller tenants on a large scale. But the intermediate castes of
peasants, e.g., the Ahir, Kurmi etc. in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh benefited
P.C. Joshi has summarised in the following manner the trends in the agrarian class structure and
relationships.
• It led to the decline of feudal and customary types of tenancies. It was replaced by a more
exploitative and insecure lease arrangement.
• It gave rise to a new commercial based rich peasant class who were part owners and part
tenants. They had resource and enterprise to carry out commercial agriculture.
• It led to the decline of feudal landlord class and another class of commercial farmers
emerged for whom agriculture was a business.
Kotovsky has noted the process of increasing proletarianisation of the peasantry in villages. The
process of social mobility and transformation in rural India has been explained by sociologists by the
terms embourgeoisement and proletarianisation. Embourgeoisement refers to the phenomenon of
upward mobility of the intermediate class peasantry i.e., their emergence as new landlords.
112
Tusharanshu-goias.in
Proletarianisation describes the process of downward mobility, i.e., depeasantisation of small and
marginal peasants and a few landlords and their entry into the rank of the rural landless agricultural
labourers.
Industrial class structure
• St. Simon first to use word class for estates. Thus, pre-marxian idea
• Classes originated in society due to number of reasons. Some of the importantones being :
o i) Expansion of productive forces beyond the level needed for subsistence.
o ii) The extension of division of labour outside the family
o iii) The accumulation of surplus wealth
o iv) The emergence of private ownership of resources.
• There are specific characteristics of class: They are :
o i) Vertical order of social classes - heirarchy in terms of privileges anddiscrimination.
o ii) There is also a permanent idea of class interest.
o iii) Idea of class-consciousness, awareness of class, hierarchy, identity & solidarity Is
present
• Marx, Aristotle, Webe, giddens on class
• Industrialization -term that is specifically employed to indicate use of machines in
production process.
• what role colonization had on development of industries or de-industrlisation of existing
industries.
• Colonisation of India and Industrilisation: Before British, Habib speaks of‘multitudes of
artisans, peons and servants found in the towns … in 120 bigcities and 3200 townships (in
the second half of the 16th century)’. He addsthat ‘Agra &FatehpurSikri (twin cities) were
each larger thanLondon.
• ‘Economic Drain’ from India”
• Very few Indian entrepreneurs started manufacturing business as British policesdid not
favour them and they were reluctant to enter in to unknown fields
• There were however several business communities who were initially thecollaborators and
middlemen with the British, like the Parsis and Marwaris whoventured in to setting up
industries. The Marwaris of Calcutta moved frombeing traders to industrialist in the jute
business.
• The birlas started their first jut emill in 1919, whereasGoenka and Bangur started theirs after
WW-II
• part of the Parsee community was fast to recognise thatis was very useful to learn English, to
adopt British customs and to intensifytheir relation with the British in order to improve the
socio-economic positionof the community in West India.
• The Indiancapitalist organized themselves in to Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce
and Industry (FICCI) in light of stiff competition.
• Industrialisation in Post-independent India:
o Nehru who was inspired by Fabian socialism and by the Russian example decidedto
adopt a socialist pattern of economic development.
113
Tusharanshu-goias.in
o Five year plans- industry PMF- 1991 crisis-
o Gandhi (Swadeshi&Khadi) versus Nehru (Socialist ideal of industrialization)
• Post-Industrial Society:Daniel Bell, a professor of sociology was the first to use the term
postindustrialsociety.title of his book Post-Industrial Society (1973).Therare three
components to a post-industrial society, according to Bell:
o a shift from manufacturing to services
o the centrality of the new science-based industries
o the rise of new technical elites and the advent of a new principle ofstratification
Notes
• Maurice Dobb- Industries developed in West in 2 ways 1) Traditional (rationally go for
expansion) 2) helpers of traditional workers- aspiration-entrepreneurship.
• Indian entrepreneurship-always restricted- 1)colonialism 2) post independence policies
• Worker- not much changed position; Post globalisation- managerial rev’n- focus back on
skills
Middle Class in India
• Karl Marx- MC will vanish(petty bourgeoisie, small merchants - own means of prod’n
• Marx Weber and Lockwood- MC population will grow- with industrialisation and
urbanisation- depends on skills- old MC(petty bourgeoisise)- new MC
• Talcolt Parson- Rise of MC in industrialised society- analysis of meritocracy society.
• Ordinary view- modern education- rational and competitive value- secularised in approach-
consumerist class- aspiring for the mobility- capacity of social change.
• A R Desai- talked about Indian mddle class and their role in indian nationalism- evolved from
caste structure- MCs role in bringing reforms in culture and religion- Social religious
movements are MC movements. British introduced press, railways, tv, radio, bureaucracy,
judicairy, education- gave birth to MC- fight against British. MC across caste and region line-
hence class unites and caste devides.
• D L Seth Article MC in Modern IndiaAfter independence the base of MC is expanding- In
western and south india, MC came out of reform movemnts like SatySodhakSamaj of MH,
Self Respect movement of Tamil Nadu, SNDP movement of Kerala- non-traditional and anti
Brahminic view- demanding equity and control over power struture. Indian MC grown out of
soil- hold tight to the tradition and culture and tries to get benefits from modern
institutions. Indian MC is keeping mix of modernity & tradition
• Andre Beteille : questions the genesis of indianMC- different sources at different point of
time- not homogenous like west MC. Habit of reading news paper- going for family
vacation- spending money on non consumption- are constantly increasing. But
interrelationship between a factory worker, a lower police man and a small trader takes
place in hierarchical manner. Indian MC has expanded but still carry hierarchical ideas in
contrast to YogendraSinghs view that with modernity class will replace caste.
• 1950-1980- industrialisation- modern education- modern jobs- bureaucracy- green
revolution- modern trade- led to massive employemnt- no wish to consolidate their
economic position- sound base to peasant mobilisaionnaxal movements - supported by
intellectuals - different spheres of life.
114
Tusharanshu-goias.in
• Anti-emergency movement by MC students, teachersetc.AfterglbalisationMCesexpanded-
interests spheres broadened- women &civil rights issues- env probe- rise of civil society
movements
notes:
• Weber, marx etc
• Franc Parkin- Book ‘Klass matters’: Mde class matters go for dual closurenot keen on
lower/upper
• Buffer zone theory- upper falls in middle. and solid like bedrock- values not very modern
• Noveaux Riche is actually MC.
• Ancient India (common structure); MC- Colonial construct essentially (product of colonialism
& drove it out)- Explain this in detail- education, industries etc; post independence& post
liberalization view
Concept of Class:
• Expansion of MC1) Expansion of DOL 2) Increased role of state- maintain bureaucracy
• Lipset and Bendix: Classes are distinguished from each other by the difference in their
respective positions in the economy
• Marx: laid stress on the importance of subjective awareness as a precondition of organising
the class successfully for the economic and the political struggle.
• Weber: defined ‘ class’ as when 1) a number of people have in common a specific casual
component of their life chances in so far as 2) this component is represented exclusively by
economic interests in the possession of goods and opportunities for income and 3) is
represented under the conditions of the commodity or labor markets. In Weber’s theory,
class situation is ultimately the ‘market situation’
• Schumpeter- Class, as defined by Schumpeter, is more than an aggregation of class
members. A class is aware of its identity as a whole, sublimates itself as such, has its own
peculiar life and characteristic “spirit”. Classes, once come into being, harden in their mould
& perpetuate themselves, even when social conditions that created them - disappeared
Concept of the ‘MC’
• Anthony Giddens identifiesthree major classes in advanced capitalist society. They are upper
classbased on the ‘ownership of property in the means of production’, a MC based on the
‘possession of educational and technical qualifications’and a lower or working class based on
the ‘possession of manual labourpower’.
Evolution of the MC in India
• BB Mishra:The Britishrule - emergence of a class of intermediaries -- linkb/w people & new
rulers.
• Sanjay Joshi:Though economic background of the MC was important,the power and
constitution of the MC in India was based not on theeconomic power it wielded, which was
minimal, but on the ability of itsmembers to be cultural entrepreneurs
• Andre Beteille:Andre Beteille views MC in India as part of a relatively new social formation
based on religion,caste and kinship. In Beteille’s opinion, MC values in India aredifficult to
115
Tusharanshu-goias.in
characterise because they are still in the process of formationand have still not acquired a
stable form As such, theyare marked by deep and pervasive antinomies meaning
contradictions,oppositions and tensions inherent in a set of norms and values.
• Gurcharan Das: Commenting on the growing MC, Gurcharan Das (Das, 2000) statedthat
although the MC is composed of many occupations, commercehas always been at the
center- as the businessman mediated between thelanded upper classes and the labouring
lower classes. Calls MC open. dynamic, liberated and deritualized.
Modernity and the MC in Contemporary India
• According to Marshall Berman, to live in a modern world is to live in ‘a maelstrom of
perpetual disintegration and renewal, of struggle and contradiction, of ambiguity and
anguish’
• Lee-What is present is essentially, ‘fluidization of consumption’ i.e. freeing up the previously
static and relatively fixed spatial and temporal dimensions of social life
• critical aspect of a modern consumer society is the presence of an opensystem of
stratification with avenues of upward mobility being available toall.
• Modernityconfronts the individuals with a diversity of choices in all spheres of
life.Universalism, achievement and individualism are the important ingredientsof a modern
social order.
• Great Indian MC:The Indian MC is not just growing at a rapid pace, it has alsobecome the
segment driving consumption of “luxury” goods like cars andair-conditioners, according to a
survey by the National Council for AppliedEconomic Research (NCAER). AmartyaSen- India s
literacy campaign- transfering India into a knowledge based society- sustainable economic
growth.
• The Institute of Applied Economics and Research shows- 1947: 12% MC, 1957: 20%,
2001:58%, in 2020 it will be 70%.- middle class expanded- lower class is squeezed- upper
class is not hegemonistic- more inclusive india,dynamic, growth oriented
Values Related to Family, Marriage and Women’s Status Amongst the MC
Particularistic criteria continue to provide the normative basis for the formation of intimate relations
among people across all classes. There is ‘superficial emancipation’ as women are choosing clothes
that are in tune with the latest in the world of fashion. Since marriage and motherhood are
considered to be the most important goals, all decisions have to be in consonance with
these.Education is considered important in order to enable them to be better wives and mothers.
Also, while forming friendships, particularistic norms continue to play some role as such
relationships are based on class similarities i.e. similar economic background &value systems
116
Tusharanshu-goias.in
