RAMKRISHNA MUKHERJEE
RAMKRISHNA MUKHERJEE
THE
DYNAMICS OF A RURAL SOCIETY
Born in 1917
(Bengal)
Died in 2015
Belongs to an educated middle class Bengali family.
Pursued M.Sc. in anthropology
Completed his PhD from Cambridge University
Very urban person as he had not visited any village
till the age of 20.
Books
The Dynamics of
A Rural Society (1957)
Six Villages of Bengal (1957)
The Rise and Fall of British East India Company
Sociology of Indian Sociology (review)
Systematic Sociology
Quality of Life
The
Dynamics of A Rural Society
Three context to understand any society
Biographical context
Social context of that time
Historical context
He
was definitely an urbanite. His first visit to the village was in 1935. After
earning his M.Sc. in 1941, he believed he was required to go to the village. It
occurred during the Second World War, which affected both India and Europe.It
was a really disturbing period. People were being exploited by the British
Colonial system, suffering from unemployment and poverty. In rural society,
there were a number of problems. 1942 saw him visiting a village. He met with
members of the Kisan Sabha, which at the time was inspired by CPI philosophy.
He associated himself with that Sabha; it is currently called the All India
Kisan Sabha. He was in the village for a minimum of two years. Famine strikes
the villages of Bengal during this period. Bengal was divided into East Bengal and
West Bengal provinces at that time. Twenty to thirty lakh people died as a
result of famine. Not only did people die from starvation, but also from the
spread of infectious diseases like malaria and cholera.
He returned to the city
after become extremely troubled by the circumstances. But he made the decision
to study the villages of Bengal. He was prompted to do such study by the
circumstances at the moment. The Indian government started Community
Development Programs and Rural rehabilitation Programs for rural development
after independence. Studies on rural areas have been conducted and published by
scholars like Prof. B.R. Chauhan, M.N. Srinivas and Prof S.C. Dube.
Functionalism seemed to
be popular at that point in time. Villages should be analyzed as a whole,
according to the functionalist viewpoint. All the social institutions and
structures of village helps in maintaining the village society. Each and every
study done at that time used a functional approach to examine the village.
According to Dr.
Mukherjee, functionalism is not the only viewpoint or method that may help us
understand villages in greater depth. The alternative approach offers a better
way to measure the economic crisis and village life. He studied Indian villages
using an alternate perspective, which has been acknowledged as being the first
of its kind. A historical and economic analysis of the village should be
conducted using Marxist tradition he asserts. Instead of focusing on the socio-cultural
framework, as functionalists had already done, he examined the economic
structure of rural communities.
Dynamic of Rural
society studies village by economic and historical perspective.
For Dr. Mukherjee,
studying a single village alone is insufficient to give precise knowledge,
comprehension, and insights about Indian villages. At that time, several
villages were connected. The social and economic structures of these
settlements were intertwined as well. So more villages should be included in
the study.
Dr Mukherjee was a very
good Statistician. He worked with P.C. Mahalanobis founding father of Planning
commission.
Dr. Mukherjee chosen
six villages of Bengal. These villages were used as samples. The social and
economic structure of the whole Bengal region is reflected in these villages.
He conducted his research using a survey method. He collected as much data as
he could from the inhabitants of the village, government documents, government
employees, and accessible historical documents. He wrote the book Dynamic of a
Rural Society following the data analysis. There are just two chapters in this
book:
Chapter 1: about the economic
structure
Chapter 2: about the social
structure
When he was studying
economic structure he examined:
What kind of economic
groupings exists in village?
What kind of occupation
they had?.
Interpersonal relations?
The role of different
groups in occupation?
What were the main
economic activity people were doing in village those we can say occupation. He
explores that there are nine different kinds of economic groupings or functions
that exist in these villages of Bengal:
1
Landlords (Jotedars)- Through permanent
settlement British government distributed all the land of Bengal to few
landlords
2
Big farmers (Supervisory farmers)- Some
people purchased the lands of Jamindars or Jamindars had given their land to
their relatives.
3
Cultivators- Small land owners who were
self cultivating their lands
4
Sharecroppers- Adhiyar, Bargadars (non
owner of land)
5
Agricultural labors (marginal farmers) –
Works on others land
6
Traders – Village grocers etc
7
Artisans- Like jute artisans etc
8
Service providers – Washerman, watchman
etc
9
Beggars and those who live on charity
Dr Mukherjee studied
the income structure of these nine categories. He said that in accordance to their
economic activity these nine categories can be classified under three classes:
Class I: Land lord and
Supervisory farmers
Class II: Cultivators,
Artisans and Traders (they own their means of production and control their work
themselves)
Class III:
Sharecroppers, Labors, Service providers and Beggars or people who live on
charity
He said that although
these three categories did not exist only in these six villages, all villages
of Bengal have similar economic categories. All these three categories existed
during 200 years of British rule.
What about before 200
years when British rule was not there, he questioned?
He said that before
British rule these economic categories were not existing in villages of Bengal.
And this was not only the situation of Bengal, but similar situations were there
in Karnataka and other states of India.
The structure of
villages in ancient India (during the reign of Hindu rulers) and during the
Turk, Afghan, and Mughal regimes was community village, which meant that
private property ownership was nonexistent. Village seemed much like a
community (Baden Powel). Despite the fact that each village controlled its
whole land, there was no such thing as private property. However, villager were
not permitted to sell the land on their own. If they want to gift land to the
Brahmins they had to let the King's officials know that they wanted to grant
land to the Brahmins. The king owns the land, but he did not control how it was
used. People had the right to utilize land for their individual purposes. The
village council approved the tax's imposition.
Following the British
arrivals, agricultural land is turned into property. A new economic system
develops under British administration. New categories appear when policies
change. The way that villages change makes economic structures more
exploitative. The agents of exploitation were the supervisors and landlords.
Following the Bengal famine, the Tebhaga movement started when he was studying.
2/3 of the produce was desired by farmers. Thus, throughout the British era,
these kinds of dynamics evolved.
Social organization:
Four Varnas (many caste comes under these varnas).
To understand caste,
economic structure should also be examined. Dr Mukherjee said that the caste
must be classified in three sections.
1st class-
Usurping caste : Before British rule there were basically three caste groups
were existing in Bengal- Brahmin, Kshatriya and Kayasthas. Till Mughal period
they did not had ownership of land. They were working under the patronage of
King. Mostly they were tax collectors. For example Tallukedars (representative
of kings)
They took control of
the land, taking it from any farmer they could find, but they did not own it;
the British government had granted them land ownership rights for the first
time, and the majority of land lords were agents of the British government. As
a result, these landlords started taking other people's land.
Comments