T. Lakshminarayana
India
is a very big country with wide regional variations in the socio-economic
conditions. In agriculture there are similarities, variations and differences
between the states and regions. Today, agrarian economy is facing alarming
situation and going through perpetual and deep multi dimensional crises.
It is very important to study in depth and analyze to arrive at a comprehensive
understanding on agricultural sector from the critical angle of Marxist thought.
During
the British rule Indian economy remained backward; it was dependent
and colonial in character.
But imperial interests dictated the need for a certain measure of capitalist
development though superimposed on a feudal-landlord
base in the country.
In
independent India, no doubt tremendous and radical changes have taken place in
the agrarian sector which resulted change in the production and production
relations. All those positive changes in agrarian sector were achieved through
mass struggles only. Now, some of them have been reversed and attempts are
underway by the state to revert in favor of Multinational Corporations as well
as Indian Corporate and big business houses in the present era of
neo-liberalism.
Abolition of Intermediaries: In
the Pre- Independence era there were three principal types of land tenure i.e.
Zamindari, Ryotwari and Mahalawari systems. About 50% of the country was under
Zamindari and other feudal systems. Under Zamindari system feudal landlords
were the proprietors of the estates and the peasants were obtaining the
holdings by leasing the same from the landlords. The remaining 50% was under
Ryotwari and Mahalawari systems. The major part of the land was belonged
to rent receiving landlords, who were not the tillers of the soil. Other than
land, labour and the means of production were supplied by the peasant
cultivators. The profits were grabbed by the feudal landlords contributing
neither capital nor labour to the production process. The peasants were the
victims of the combined oppression and exploitation of the landlords (Zamondars,
Jagirdars and Inamdars etc.), merchants and usurer capital under British Rule.
In that background, two popular slogans of peasant
movement were put forwarded; they are “Abolish the Zamindary System” and “Land
to the Tillers”. These slogans underlined the anti-feudal and anti-imperialist
character of the movement and made it an integral part of national liberation
struggle. In the
midst of the bitter struggles the All India Kisan Sabha was founded in 1936 and
it spear headed the movement. These heroic peasant’s struggles
spread over throughout the country. The heroic peasant’s armed
struggle in Telangana was pioneer in that movement.
After
independence the Indian bourgeoisie class headed by ruling Congress Party pursued
policies directed towards capitalist path of development. In
order to expand the internal market and to mobilize capital resources, it was
also vitally necessary to carry out a certain measures of land reforms and
restrict feudal relations in agriculture. This came in to conflict with the
interests of the landlords and princely houses. It had to be anti-feudal in its
direction. Though the demand of “Abolish the
Zamindary System” had emerged during the national liberation movement, the
bourgeois leadership was not prepared to carry out this to its logical
conclusion. It displayed strong vacillations and compromising policies on vital
aspects which signified a retreat from the programme of the national liberation
movement. But in its class interest for industrial and capitalist growth, the
bourgeoisie government had abolished princely states and intermediary tenures.
However the ruling class compromised with feudal landlords and Paid huge
compensation of about Rs.600 crore and allowed them to retain lakhs of acres of
land in the name of self-cultivation and home land properties. As a result of
that, there remained strong remnants of semi-feudal exploitation. But, the
system as such was abolished. As a result the statutory feudal relations and
forms of production were removed by and large. About 2 crores of peasants
(tenants) become free and owners of 17.3 crore of acres of land which they have
been cultivating. They got direct relation with the state. And also crores of acres
of waste lands, community lands, forestry and other lands were liberated from
the ownership and hold of Princes, Zamindars, Jagirdars and Inamdars etc. It
was a big blow to feudalism.The long cherished anti feudal struggle of peasants
succeeded in the abolition of feudal system. Undoubtedly the breaking up of the feudal statutory landlordism is a
first and foremost radical change in the cruel feudal relations of production
in India as well as paved the way for favorable conditions for the development
of capitalism.
The rulers of
princely states and the feudal landlords had constituted the crucial social and
political base of colonial power. It was, therefore, expected that in
independent India no place will be given to them in political and economic
spheres. This did not happen. The ruling bourgeoisie continued its alliance
with the landlords as well as the dislodged rulers of princely states. The
landlords were also given an opportunity to become capitalist (farmer)
landlords and evict thousands of “tenants-at-will” in the name of resuming
self-cultivation. The feudal landlords transformed and developed as
capitalist landlords with the money and land which they got from the state. The capitalist
landlords and the new stratum of rich peasants formed the political base
of the new ruling class in countryside.
Land reforms: Along with abolition of
intermediaries the land ceiling laws were enacted during 1950s & 60s. The provisions
for imposing ceiling on land holdings and protecting tenant farmers from
exploitative land leasing practices were included. The level of ceiling was
very high, with number of loopholes and exemptions from ceiling. The definition
of family was ambiguous. In 2004 the Union Govt. informed Parliament that the
land declared surplus in the country was 7.3 million acres, land acquired by
state governments was 6.5 million acres and the land actually distributed was
only 5.3 million acres (most of this was done in the states of West Bengal,
Kerala and Jammu Kashmir). The land lords are allowed to dispose their
lands above ceilings through various methods of sales, benami transactions,
transfers and exemptions etc. it wants to develop capitalist landlordism and
rich farmers in order to develop capitalism and capitalist relations of
production.
The expectation
of landless peasantry was belied and in 60s and 70s land struggles took place
in many parts. The heroic legacy of anti-feudal struggle was carried
forward with the slogan “land to the tillers”. The Communist
Party of India headed by its then General Secretary Com. C. Rajeshwar Rao
carried out several militant land struggles for breaking up large estates under
the occupation of big landlords like Challapalli Raja. Several thousand acres
of land was occupied and distributed among landless peasants and agricultural
labour. In many cases the farmers or their children are still cultivating the
land, which they had taken possession of in 1960s and 70s. Though the peasants
occupied and cultivated Challapalli Raja’s lands after a long and bitter
struggle, they got legal entitlement only in 1980s. The Naxalbari
Movement also rose in 1967 calling for land redistribution. The bourgeoisie was
forced to understand the militant struggles of the rural poor and was forced to
amend ceiling laws radically in 1972, though- not implemented sincerely. More over the state compromised with the landlords
and sabotaged its own laws.
Therefore the internal market did not expand to the desired extent. The
obstacles that stand in the way are precisely because of the capitalist path
pursued by the bourgeois - landlord dispensation at the helm of the state,
which in addition to its compromise with semi-feudal elements also has links
with foreign monopoly capital.
Green Revolution: It was introduced in mid-sixties in the northern states. The government
invested a great deal of resources in HYV programme. The necessary physical and
market infrastructure was provided on subsidized rates to the well endowed
farmers of Punjab, Haryana and western U.P. Productivity increased many-fold
and the class of resource-rich capitalist farmer was consolidated. At the same
time a large number of small and marginal farmers moved out of agriculture in
these states. The Green Revolution increased disparities both between regions
and within regions. It needs to be noted that notwithstanding the emergence of
a powerful capitalist farmers lobby, the semi-feudal production relations
survived the entire period of the green revolution prosperity.
Tenancies: The national bourgeois wants to eliminate tenancy system because it
contains feudal and semi-feudal relations of production and it is an impediment
in the way of capitalist mode of development in agriculture. But at the same
time it does not want to eliminate the land owners as property holders. At the
same time it cannot directly expropriate the tenants who are in millions and
struggling for the rights. So, the state created legislative and administrative
pressure on the land owners so that they take away land from tenants and become
cultivators or sell away to tenants or others. The state acted more favorably
to the land owners. It is only in Kerala under the Chief Ministership of
Achuthamenon tenancy was by and large abolished and sincerely
implemented the law with all sincerity and 35 lakh tenants were given land.
By and large Semi-feudal land relations had been gradually reduced. But
still tenancy system exists in various forms as clandestine tenants; informal
tenants and tenants at will have no records. There are other tenants under
religious and other institutions, having some records. Today in some districts
of coastal Andhra Pradesh 70 to 80% (21.82% in 1962 in the A.P.) of land is cultivated
by tenants. This development took place because of various reasons. The
educated and experienced landlords with their surplus money have entered into
industry, business, trade, transport services, contracts, construction,
real-estate, financial business and so on. The educated youth left rural areas
to join or in search of employment in government and private sectors in urban
areas as well as in abroad. As a result they have rented out their lands to the
tenants. Due to the crisis in agriculture and uncertainty caused by natural
calamities, the growing burden of indebtedness and the lack of employment,
there is large-scale migration from the rural to the urban areas in search of
work and better opportunities of livelihood. The industrialists, contractors,
businessmen, doctors, engineers and other urban rich and wealthy sections
purchased agriculture lands in order to get income tax exemptions and rented to
tenants. Most of the tenants are agricultural labour, marginal and small
peasants. So, absentee landlordism continues to exist. The contradictions and
interests of classes also continue to exist between land owners and tenants.
Growth
of marginal and small farmers: After
independence the ruling class faced serious challenges, one is scarcity of food
due to agrarian crises, another problem is growing Population. To overcome the prevailing
situation the bourgeoisie decided to cultivate millions of acres of cultivable
waste lands by involving rural poor in order to produce food grains as well as
raw materials to the industries, which helps to build capitalism in the country.
The bourgeoisie understood that without providing employment to the vast rural
masses it is not possible to expand internal market for their industrial goods.
So, for the growth and expansion of industry and in its own class interest it
did not expropriate the rural poor from land and also encouraged with some
supporting schemes like IRDP etc.
Role
of Technology: Capitalism took roots in agriculture using the
achievements of Science and Technological Development. Water is the most
essential input in the development of agriculture. The construction of Major
and medium irrigation projects led to massive growth in agriculture. Multi crop
areas and Production and productivity increased. Technological development has
brought modern equipment to agriculture, such as Electricity (Pump sets etc.), Farm mechanization (tractors,
fertilisers dispensing machines, other equipment that safeguards crops, plowing
and weeding machines, JCB machines etc.); the wider availability of fertilizers, High yielding Seeds, Pesticides,
Credit facility etc. - all of them played vital role in the development of
modern agriculture. Ofcourse large, medium and Semi-medium peasants benefited maximum with this technological
development. The marginal and small
farmers could not benefit much because their size of land holdings is small and
financially weak. So attributing this weakness the state is discouraging small
and marginal framers by saying cultivation in small land holdings is not viable
and trying to eliminate poor peasants from farming activity. At the same time
promoting contract and corporate farming as part of their game in strengthening
capitalism in agricultural sector.
The medium and semi-medium farmers generally follow the lead provided by
the big farmers in switching over to new technology, new cropping pattern and
new production arrangements. Sometimes they do it willingly in the hope that
the returns will be high. More often it is done under compulsion because
earlier infrastructure has been dismantled. In 1980s and 90s the medium and
semi-medium farmers shifted to new cropping pattern and new technology. As a
result the spate of farmer’s suicides has become a matter of great concern. The
beginning of the 21st century has been greeted by a pervasive
and intractable agrarian crisis in Indian economy. More than two lakh farmers
have committed suicides. Agricultural growth has stagnated. The share of
agriculture in GDP has come down to 12%, whereas its share in workforce still
remains as high as 58%. The cumulative effect of neo-liberal
policies is that the goal of Food sovereignty is under serious
threat. Nation cannot afford to depend on food imports to feed its
people. Food export is used as a political weapon by imperialist
countries.
In
spite of multi-fold attacks, agriculture still managed to survived,
contributing 18.7% (58.8% in 1960-61 & 46.62% in 1980-81) income to the
state Gross Domestic product (SGDP) and providing about 60% of the total employment. Expansion of farm incomes
continues to be an effective weapon for reducing poverty. Rapid and sustainable
growth in Agriculture has been identified not only as a key driver for economic
development but also for achieving self sufficiency and ensuring food security
to the people. Andhra Pradesh over the decades has witnessed gradual transformation
of the agricultural sector. The nature of the transformation itself has
undergone change overtime. During 1980s, there was a shift in agriculture from
traditional cereal-based system towards commercial commodities.
Abolition
of the system of Patel- Patvari or Reddy-Karanam: This system by
and large served the interests of the feudal and semi- feudal landlords in
Andhra Pradesh. It was used as a weapon to exploit and harass the small and
marginal farmers by bungling the land records. The abolition of this system led
to radical changes in the countryside and democratised up to some extent and it
gave great relief to the poorer sections.
Enactment of
MGNREGA: This Act is a progressive step in not only providing some livelihood and
implementing minimum wages, and it also liberated the landless agricultural workers
from semi-feudal exploitation up to some extant. Ensuring food
security and provision of gainful employment continues to be the essential
premise of socio economic development and employment guarantee schemes like
Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) and other
Rural Livelihoods programmes. But some contradictions have been arising between
peasants and agricultural labourers on the implementation of the Act in the
present form because of scarcity of labour. But the state never implemented the
minimum wages act in letter and spirit. The percentage
of population below the poverty line in the state are mostly the weaker
sections of the society i.e. SC’s, ST’s and other Backward Caste’s. The
development of society cannot be achieved without the development of these
oppressed people. Most of the landless agricultural labourers and small farmers
belong to this group.
Problem of usurers: Apart from forcible land grab
and introduction of contract farming by corporate houses, the farmers are
also subjected to an iniquitous credit system. Loans previously given to agriculture
as a priority sector are drying up. Once again the peasants are being thrown to
the mercies of the money lenders. It is estimated that while the banking system
as a whole financed 35.6% of the loans, private money lenders accounted for
25.7% of the loans advanced to farmers. With the intensification of the
agrarian crisis, features like usury, bondage and caste violence have
resurfaced aggressively.
Attack from Crony capitalism: The development of
capitalism in Indian agriculture is based on a compromise with feudal remnants
on the one-hand, and collusion with foreign capital on the
other. While semi-feudal production relations still dominate in many
parts in rural India, the doors has been opened for the multinational
corporations to enter the field and assume cardinal positions in certain
areas. IMF, World Bank and the WTO have played an active role in
this respect. The government has signed Indo-US Agricultural Initiative where
representatives of Monsanto, Cargill and other multinational companies
participate in joint committees to take important decisions on research and new
initiatives in Indian Agriculture. This is a clear indication of what role the
MNCs are going to play.
A new offensive was launched on the farm sector by corporate and industrial
units, land mafia, real estate developers and the government in the name of
Special Economic Zones (SEZ), Public Private Partnership (PPP) and other
developmental projects. In the name of industrial development and urbanization
the state is trying to grab the ‘patta’ lands from the farmers’ and assigned
lands from weaker sections. The state invoked antiquated Land Acquisition Act
of colonial era of 1894 to evict peasants from their land and hand over
the land to private companies and justified indiscriminate use of force against
peasantry and poor people. Under the neo-liberal frame, the state reversed the
clock of land reform acts. The SEZ Act
say’s no Indian law will apply to SEZ area and the land will be treated as
foreign land. In the process, several lakh acres of land have been
acquired and millions of peasants and others dependent on land have been
evicted and deprived of their livelihood. This is a crude and brutal
offensive of the bourgeois state led by the corporate houses and big business. As
a result bitter and often violent struggles by farmers resisting the forcible
acquisition of land by the state and the corporate entities with the active
help of the state have been taking place in many parts of the country. The
corporate sector has been allotted vast tracts of forest land and the so called
waste land and farm land. It has also got indirect control over farm land
through the provision of contract farming.
After
independence national bourgeois is engaged in the process of building
capitalism, abolished feudal landlordism and to expand internal market they
enacted land ceiling acts; when there was a food crises they promoted
green revolution; today as part of neo-liberalist policies, they have reversed
land ceiling acts and handed over lakhs of acres to Multinational companies, Indian
corporate and big business houses as part of building crony capitalism.
Land is the key issue. The land
problem cannot be resolved without severe class struggle in the countryside. This struggle should not only aim at the
dying semi-feudal system, but mainly targeting MNCs, Indian Corporate and big
business houses and their henchmen and ruling class. Certainly this struggle
will carry forward the object of achieving democratic revolution in our country.
The Structural Adjustment Programme, which heralded the offensive of
liberalization, privatization and globalization, brought with it a new crisis
in rural livelihoods. The inclusion of agriculture in the Urguay Round of negotiations and
the so-called Free Trade Agreements with some countries under the new regime of
WTO has adversely affected our agriculture. All restrictions on external
and internal trade of agricultural commodities were removed and the agrarian
sector was exposed to unfair and unequal international competition. The big
farmer ‘lobby’ took an ambiguous stance towards the new regime. Initially, they
perceived trade liberalization and entry of agribusiness as programmes
advantageous to them. However, the deflationary trend in world market prices in
latter half of 90s and unequal bargaining power vis-a-vis the corporate lobby
made them uncomfortable. So contradictions between corporate and the big farmer
lobby developed.
The domestic and foreign multinational companies rapidly made deep inroads
in input and output markets. The supply of seeds, fertilizers and pesticides is
now largely controlled by MNCs. The recent mode of attack on Indian
peasantry is through forcibly providing genetically modified seeds by the seed
MNC’s in collaboration with government. This is creating havoc and instability
in agricultural production. The government intends to pass a ‘Seed Bill’ which
will give a legal basis to this attack on agriculture.
Agriculture is being drawn into the world
commodity market, subjecting land, water and other natural resources and
agricultural inputs and outputs to inexorable market forces. This signals
the growth and development of capitalism and capitalist relations of production
in agriculture. The growth of capitalism in
agriculture is sharpening all social contradictions. Superimposed on the ruins
of earlier modes, it accounts for the specific nature of the crisis in
agriculture, the widening disparities and the misery of the lower strata of the
working peasantry. Though capitalist
development has proceeded a-pace there is a mixture and co-existence of several
earlier social formations i.e. feudal, semi-feudal, tribal scattered across a
vast territory of the country.
********
Annexe: 1
Distribution of Land Holdings by Size Classes, 1956-57 and 2010-11 in
Andhra Pradesh
Size
Group No. of Holdings
(Lakh) % to Total Operated Area (Lakh Hect.) % to Total Average Size of Holdings (Hect.)
|
1956-57 2010-11 1956-57 2010-11 1956-57 2010-11 1956-57 2010-11 1956-57 2010-11
|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
|
Marginal
16.38 84.25 38.58 63.95 8.16 37.27 7.90 26.08
0.50
0.44
|
Small 7.75 29.18
18.25 22.15 10.00
41.20 9.67 28.82
1.29
1.41
|
Semi-medium
7.53 13.99 17.73 10.62 16.69 36.85 16.15 25.78
2.22
2.63
|
Medium
7.11 3.97
16.75 3.02 29.04 22.09 28.09 15.46 4.08 5.56
|
Large 3.69 0.36
8.69 0.27 39.48 5.52 38.19
3.86
10.70 15.33
|
Total 42.46 131.75
100.00 100.00 103.37
142.93 100.00 100.00 2.43
1.08
|
Source: Directorate of Economics and
Statistics. (Note: One Hectare = 2.47 acres)
Annexe: 2
Land Utilisation in Andhra Pradesh 2011-12:
The
total geographical area of the State is 275.04 lakh hectares. Out of this,
40.58% is under Net Area sown i.e. 111.60 lakh hectares (113.74 lakh hect. in
1956-57), 22.65 % under Forest 62.30
lakh hectares ( 55.55 lakh hect. in 1956-57), 8.26 % under current fallow lands
22.73 lakh hectares ( 17.85 lakh hect. in 1956-57), 10.19% under Land put
Non-Agricultural uses 28.03 lakh
hectares ( 15.24 lakh hect. in 1956-57), 7.36 % under Barren and uncultivable
land 20.24 lakh hectares (25.87 lakh
hect. in 1956-57) and remaining 10.96% is under other fallow land, cultivable
waste, lands like permanent pastures and other grazing lands and land under
miscellaneous tree crops and groves are not included in the Net Area Sown 30.14 lakh hectares (40.87 lakh hect. in
1956-57).
(Paper presented in the Debate on
“Indian Society – Evolution in Mode of Production” held at Vijayawada, Andhra
Pradesh on 29-30th March, 2013 organized by Leftist Study
Circle) evolution
