SOCIAL CLASSES IN INDIA
The impact of British rule in India has brought about far-reaching changes in Indian
society. The class structure in India has been interpreted by employing different theoretical
orientations by the Indian sociologists. Sociologists like A.R. Desai has utilised Marxian theory
while analysing the Indian class structure in agrarian relation. However, attributes such as income,
occupation, non-agricultural modes of earning are used to the studies on caste, class is, however,
not substantial. The reason is partly historical and importantly, it is because of the continued
overlapping between the caste and class status situations or interactions in Indian social
stratification. Often, it is difficult to draw a sharp line where caste principle of stratification ceases
and the class principle begins. Caste and class are two principles of stratification which age
persisted in the Indian social systems in a dialectical relationship.
The sociology of Indian class stratification should not only take into account the present
day processes among the various class strata but also analyse them in the historical contexts of
change. Studies which throw light on the class structure and its processes in the traditional Indian
society reveal that class structure was related to the modes of production and ownership.
Kings, feudal chiefs, traders, artisans, peasants, labourers and the social relationships of
these groups assume significance for understanding the Indian class structure.
The king occupied the highest position with so many loyalties and vassals and his subjects
owed allegiance to him and in turn the king was responsible for the welfare of his people. The
merchants, the business class were the most mobile. Here wealth and economic factors played
important roles in determining one's class position and in that context one's social position based
on caste became weakened. The establishment of various economic and political institutions by the
British enhanced the mobility of these groups of people that they could mobilise economic
surpluses from village to towns and cities.
SOCIAL CLASSES IN RURAL INDIA
T.K. Oommen lists the following five categories.
(i) Landlords, who own but do not cultivate land, either employing intermediaries or leasing out
land.
(ii) Rich farmers, who look upon agriculture as a business proposition, produce for the market and for
profit, employ wage labour, and supervise rather than cultivate.
(iii) Middle peasants, who cultivate their own land and hire labourers only for certain operations or at
certain points of time.
(iv) Poor peasants, who own small and uneconomic holdings and often have to work as parts
labourers or as sharecroppers or tenant.
(v) Landless agricultural workers who sell their labour and fully depend on the first three categories
for their livelihood.
The Indian Communist parties give a fivefold classification.
(vi) Landlords (feudal and capitalist), who do not take part in manual labour;
(vii) Rich peasants, who participate in manual work, but mainly employ wage labour;
(viii) Middle peasants, who own or lease land which is operated predominantly by their family and also
by wage labour.
(ix) Poor peasants, whose main income is derived from land leased or owned, but who employ no wage
labour.
(x) Agricultural labourers, who earn their livelihood mainly through selling their labour in agriculture
or allied occupations.
Hamsa Alavi adopted the three-fold classification of peasants under the heading of rich,
middle and poor peasants.
In rural areas, classes consist principally of (i) landlords, (ii) tenants, (iii) peasant
proprietors, (iv) agricultural labourers and (v) artisans. Now let us examine each of them one by
one.
LANDLORDS
Types of Landlords: Broadly, there were two types of landlords: (i) the zamindars/
taluqdars (old landlords) and (ii) moneylenders, merchants and others. Those who held such
ownership of tenure rights (in zamindari areas) were often referred to as intermediaries. These
intermediaries were of various categories known by different names and found in various regions
of U.P., Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. Taluqdars were inferior intermediaries whom the large
zamindars created out of their own zamindari rights. Jotedars found in some parts of Bengal were
substantial landholders who held land direct from the zamindars. They got land cultivated by
subletting to the tenants on a 50: 50 share. Similarly, Pattidars held permanent leases at fixed dues
under the zamindars. Ijardars on the other hand were those to whom the revenue of an area was
hired out on a contract basis.
PEASANT PROPRIETORS
Another settlement made by the British is known by the name of Ryotwari Settlement. This
was introduced in Madras and Bombay Presidencies in the nineteenth century. Under this
settlement, ownership of land was vested in the peasants. The actual cultivators were subjected to
the payment of revenue. However, this settlement was not a permanent settlement and was revised
periodically after 20-30 years. It did not bring into existence a system of peasant ownership.
The peasant proprietors, in the past as well as in the present, hardly constitute a
homogeneous category. They may be broadly divided into three categories, namely, (i) the rich,
(ii) the middle, and (iii) the poor peasants.
(i) Rich Peasants: They are proprietors with considerable holdings. They perform no
fieldwork but supervise cultivation and take personal interest in land management and
improvement. They are emerging into a strong capitalist farmer group.
(ii) Middle Peasants: They are landowners of medium size holdings. They are generally
self-sufficient. They cultivate land with family labour.
(iii) Poor Peasants: They are landowners with holdings that are not sufficient to maintain a
family. They are forced to rent in other's land or supplement income by working as labourers. They
constitute a large segment of the agricultural population.
TENANTS
The creation of zamindari settlement transformed the owner cultivators of pre-British India
into a class of tenants. The zamindars resorted to the practice of extracting an exorbitant rent from
the tenants. Those who failed to pay were evicted from land and were replaced by those ready to
pay higher rents. Similar practice prevailed in estates, which were leased out by the zamindars.
Broadly then there were two categories of tenants in zamindari areas - tenants under zamindars and
tenants under lease (tenure) holders during the British period. Tenants under tenure holders were
thus sub-tenants. Of course, various categories of tenants under subtenants too had grown up in
Bengal. The lowest in the hierarchy were sharecroppers.
AGRICULTURAL LABOURERS
Non-cultivating landlords, peasant proprietors and tenants are not the only social groups
connected with agriculture. Along with the swelling of rent-paying tenants there was also a
progressive rise in the number of agricultural labourers. The growing indebtedness among peasant
population, followed by land alienation and displacement of village artisans was largely
responsible for this. The agricultural labourers were and still are broadly of three types. Some
owned or held a small plot of land in addition to drawing \ their livelihood from sale of their
labour. Others were landless and lived exclusively on hiring out of their labour. In return for their
labour, the agricultural labourers were paid wages, which were very low. Their condition of living
was far from satisfactory. Wages were generally paid in kind i.e. food grains like paddy, wheat and
pulses. Sometimes cash was paid in lieu of wages in kind. A certain standard measure was
employed to give these wages. In fact, payment in kind continued alongside money payments.
There was another type of labour prevailing in many parts of the country. Their status was
almost that of bondage or semi bondage. Dublas and Halis in Gujarat, Padials in Tamil Nadu are a
few examples of such bonded labour existing in India. Such labour force exists in some parts even
today. The land reform programmes after Independence have done almost nothing to improve the
condition of agricultural labourers in India. Of course, the government has proposed to settle them
on co-operative basis on surplus or newly reclaimed or wasteland. Bonded labour was legally
abolished in India in 1972 and Government, as well as, voluntary agencies are doing serious work
in order to locate the bonded labourers and rehabilitate them. There has been considerable swelling
in the number of agricultural labourers in the wake of the land reform programmes. Resumption of
land by landlords for personal cultivation and eviction of tenants from their tenure have been the
factors leading to this trend. The process was further accelerated by the Green Revolution. Large
farms, being in conformity with the Green Revolution, has opened the way for greater
concentration of land by purchase, sale or through eviction of tenants. In the process the rank of
agricultural labourers has further increased. At the same time, there is very low rate of transfer of
the agricultural labour population to industry. Hence, there is little likelihood of radical change in
the social and economic situation of the agricultural labourers in most parts of the country. The
government has, of course, taken some steps towards protecting their interest. Legislation towards
abolition of bonded labour and minimum wage structure on the one hand, and employment
generating programmes on the other, reflect this concern. Such measures are, however, far from
effective. The agricultural labourers hence constitute the weakest section of the rural society.
ARTISANS
In rural areas the class of artisans form an integral part of the village community. They
have existed since the ancient periods contributing to the general self-sufficient image of an Indian
village. Some of these are like the carpenter (Badhai), the ironsmith (Lohar), the potter (Kumhar)
and so on. Not all villages had families of these artisans but under the Jajmani system, sometimes a
family of these occupational castes served more than one, village. Some social mobility did exist in
the pre-British period but, generally, these artisan castes did not experience much change. Due to
the advent of the British in India, this relatively static existence of the artisan castes suffered a
radical change. Indian economy became subordinate to the interests of the British trade and
industry.
SOCIAL CLASSES IN URBAN INDIA
In the urban areas social classes comprise principally (i) capitalists (commercial and
industrial), (ii) corporate sector (iii) professional classes, (iv) petty traders and shopkeepers
and (v) working classes.
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL CLASSES
Under the British rule, production in India became production for market. As a result of
this, internal market expanded and the class of traders engaged in internal trading grew.
Simultaneously, India was also linked up with the world market. This led to the growth of a class
of merchants engaged in export import business. Thus, there came into being a commercial middle
class in the country. With the establishment of railways, the accumulation of savings on the part of
this rich commercial middle class took the form of capital to be invested in other large-scale
manufactured goods and modern industries. Like the British, who pioneered the industrial
establishment in India, the Indians, too made investment initially in plantations, cotton, jute,
mining and so on. Indian society thus included in its composition such new groups as mill owners,
mine owners, etc. Subsequently, they also diversified the sphere of their industrial activity.
Economically and socially this class turned out to be the strongest class in India.
THE CORPORATE SECTOR
Any organisation that is under government ownership and control is called as public sector
unit and any organisation, which does not belong to public sector can be taken to be a part of
private sector. The firms and organisation which are owned, controlled and managed exclusively
by private individuals and entities are included in private sector. All private sector firms can be
classified into two categories, such as individually owned and collectively owned. Collectively owned firms are further classified into (i) partnership firms (ii) joint Hindu family (iii) joint-stock
companies and (iv) co-operatives. The most important of these is the joint-stock organization,
which is otherwise popularly known as corporate sector. Joint-stock companies which do no
belong to public sector are collectively known as private corporate sector.
PROFESSIONAL CLASSES
The new economic and state systems brought about by the British rule required cadres of
educated Indians trained in modern law, technology, medicine, economics, administrative science
and other subjects. In fact, it was mainly because of the pressing need of the new commercial and
industrial enterprises and the administrative systems that the British government was forced to
introduce modern education in India. They established modern educational institutions on an
increasing scale. Schools and colleges giving legal, commercial and general education were started
to meet the needs of the state and the economy. Thus, there came into being an expanding
professional class. Such social categories were linked up with modern industry, agriculture,
commerce, finance, administration, press and other fields of social life. The professional classes
comprise modern lawyers, doctors, teachers, managers and others working in the modern
commercial and other enterprises, officials functioning in state administrative machinery,
engineers, technologists; agriculture scientists, journalists and so on.
PETTY TRADERS, SHOPKEEPERS AND UNORGANISED WORKERS
In addition to the new classes discussed above, there has also been in existence in urban
areas a class of petty traders and shopkeepers. These classes have developed with the growth of
modern cities and towns. They constitute the link between the producers of goods and
commodities and the mass of consumers. That is, they buy goods from the producers or
wholesalers and sell it among the consumers. Thus, they make their living on the profit margin of
the prices on which they buy and, sell their goods and commodities. Like all other classes, this
class also has grown in scale in post-independent India.
WORKING CLASSES
Origin of the working class could be traced back to the British rule. This was the modern
working class which was the direct result of modern industries, railways, and plantations
established in India during the British period. This class grew in proportion as plantations,
factories, mining, industry, transport, railways and other industrial sectors developed and expanded
in India. The Indian working class was formed predominantly out of the pauperized peasants and
ruined artisans. Level of living and working conditions characterized their existence. A large
proportion of them generally remained indebted because of their inability to maintain themselves
and their families.
source: http://www.universityofcalicut.info/SDE/BA_sociology_indian_society.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment