Year: 1979
Type: article
Abstract: A Note oh Recent Trends Tenancy was abolished in Kerals through the Kex%la land Refoms Amendment Act (1769).In other S a t e s similar A c t s , concerhed.more w i t h the regdhtion of tawcy than i t s todl sholition, passed during recemt times, have meant t b i r d s t e n c e merely on stetute books but in, reality led to diverse forms of concealed arrangomerrts between landlords and tenants, usually enforced by the fomer to p r a t e d their o m interests which were threatened by tho l a w .In Kerak , hovever, the abolition of tenancy' i s widely believed t o be on acsmpliahed fact.Effective implementation of the law was possible largely due to the organis& strength of the, l e f t novement and the related fact that lanC reforms were' implemented by left-orislted Govenrments, unlike in ma& other States wlvere the refo-were sou@ t o bb Mzbduced fmn 'above' bofore the peasant masses were politically o r m s e d to fight for .theirrights.An important aspect of the Kexala scene in t h i s context is the conferment of ownershi$ rights on hutment ihellers, xl-iich also tni s the outcame of intense polltical strugss an8 effective l c g i s l a t i ~n ./ The movement ~rl;ich developed since thm'abolition ol" tenancy has three main components: a successful stny;& for higher wages (for a g r i c u l t u a l labourers); an espousal of the c i e s d for ' f a i r ' prices f o r fan1 products which .does rot, require s t r ~g l e (the p s a n t interes% in this respect being sought t o be protected by all p o l i t i d parties): a d the etmggle.f o r land which has not been very succeaeful.\This note i s an attempt to understand these recent-trends in the l o f t movement in ,the l i g h t of long term changes t m t have taken place in the agrarian rslations.Sectior.I deals trith some aepects of the class structure a2d Section I1 with t h e strategies of the C o r m m i s t Party of India (Marxist), the.strongest represer.tati v e of t h e Iaft, on agmrian issues.The most strc;w feature of agrariw.c!lange in recent t&es k ~~l a , &I i n o t l s r prts of the count'ky, i s the c&tinuous g&h of rural wage labour in its' worl-w population.A sigrificrult pro- portion of t h e labourers in r u r a l brala .areengaged, unU-e in otk er region8 of India, in sectors o&e r f;lxm a g r i c a t u r e , especially in t h e pri.xmr3i: pmces'sing of agricultural products mch a s coir spinning and mnufactures.Ilo'zrever, even w i t h i n the agricultural sector, t h e mtio of cultivators to agrinlltmi labouxdv has tended t o dedrease continuouely a t lea& f'rom 1921.Trends i n the comymition of the'workine population show a f a l l in tb proportion of culti-T h i s i s no doubt due, in par',, to the disposskssion of Yae tine in +,he history of the regions c q r i s k ~ Kerda.But to w!mt p. wise d e n t it i s associaSed with t,ha dwelopment of' c a p i t a l i s t agriculture is-hard t o jurlye on the h s i s of avail.zbSa&ta.most recent period, i. e ., a f t e r h d refonna (fhe natule' of which w F U be dismaod bebw) have been implemented two counteracthg forces h v e been a t work.C ! n the one b n 3 , rights t o ownership of k d have beern conferred not only on the =~j&amuFars (hutment dwellers) but d m ; a8 a result of tenancy le&letion, on poor peasants,.who used to d t i v a t e b-dlords' lend ur.kr' various farms of ta?ancy arrangsncnts .bn the otiler, the Ecr p o a m t s !mve nct in genemJ.been able to miso the pmductivity of their IrJlde ord t!lcrir living 8tanc'ards f o r obvious reasons.The questio~ rah+,in.sta the extont of proletarianization resulting fmm the direct alienation of land f m m the poor peaeante i r ., ~e d during the period 1556 t o 1 9 1 .Y .Ib understand tho significance of the under-&atistics we new3 to, consicbr the.fat.that hut--?, d w d l e r s , who are now tiowners;' . of land, u e m l l y pu'J their l i t t l e b i t s of lands to a g r i c d t w a l w e (coconut and tapioca being the cammon crops) and hence qudWy,for statistid purposes, as 'landed' agric u l t u r a l labourers.This cannot, however, whoU?enplain the decline \ landlesmess f o r tohere i s a distinct possibility of grmth in --.n v b e r s -. -.. of poor peasants, cultivating b i t s of land but depending on ' h i e s , within agricultula and oLiwr sedon of ti8 rum1 ecmomy, for the major part of their sdsietence neede.Inded, thme i s quite 00-irig evidence +.kt puperimtion of the peasants has .talPsnplaco on a wide scale and that tb.9 pmcons has been continuous during this century.
Author: N. Krishnaji
Language: English
Subfield: Development
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W638440909