Download - Abstractabstract of sociology
“Changing Political process and the power structure as the
motivator of peasant mobility: A critical review from Bangladeshi
peasant society”
Abstract
The political process and power structure play an important role in the peasant
society. Over a long period of time it had been stagnant and operated within the
village community in Bangladesh. As the trend tended to be changed and the local
power structure came to the touch of national politics, the power structure turned into
a new shape. The social mobility of the peasants started to be mobile again and new
classes emerged. The land distribution, changes in size and tenure structure of the
peasants went to a new level. There came a shift from farm to non-farm occupations
also. Land distribution pattern and size holding reflected the growth rates of owned,
operated and cultivated land.
The interrelationship between peasant household mobility and the class formation of
the peasantry are tried to reveal in an authentic and analytical way in this paper. By its
nature, specific case studies have been initiated by profound researchers and
organizations that show the subtle change in the rural peasant politics. Indigenous and
peasant struggles for political power are not simply products of recent reforms but
have deep historical roots in broader struggles for political autonomy and territorial
control. While indigenous and peasant control of political power represents an
important scaling-up of rural struggles in many locales, it carries with it serious
dangers of bureaucratization, co-optation, and the fragmentation of indigenous and
peasant struggles (Karim, 1980).
For the purposical interest of being a sociologist, there came the issues of who owns
what, who gets what and what do they do with it? Social relations, notably class and
gender and politics (both of the state and wider social movements), inevitably govern
the distribution of assets, patterns of work and divisions of labor, the distribution of
income and the dynamics of consumption and accumulation in peasant societies.
However, the whole aspects make an interrelation among the political process, power
structure and social mobility of the peasants that reflect the culture of peasant society.
1
Key words
Peasant politics, Power structure, Peasant mobility, Peasant culture.
Key sentence
“The Political process and power structure affect the mode of mobility of peasants in
Bangladesh.”
Introduction
The political process of the peasant society has historically been different from that of
the urban politics. In a sense, the rural political process can also be called as the
peasant political process. As we see, over the last few decades Bangladesh has
become gradually, incorporated into the World Capitalist System. The peasant
economy and society, in particular has been subjected to the `riles of modernization'
by international agencies and successive governments. There have been various
programmers to spread the Green Revolution to assist the Poor and to accomplish
bottom-up development. The extreme peripherality of Bangladesh and motions of
developmentalism engendered by World Capitalism and the state is likely to have
specific consequences on the peasant power structure in Bangladesh. The area of
community power in rural Bangladesh has increasingly attracted the attentions of the
social scientists during the last fifteen years. This literature has grown out of surveys,
case studies and anthropological research. A serious shortcoming of a large majority
of these studies is that they attempt at exploring the complex phenomenon of power at
a very superficial level. Surveys have mainly focused upon the Socio-economic
background of the leaders. Anthropological studies have viewed power as
epiphenomena, an adjunct to stratification. Even this stratification theory of
2
community power (Polsby, 1970) it rarely spelt out clearly at analytical Most of these
studies are descriptive and deal with limited aspect; of power. Therefore, this paper
aims at presenting the political process and power structure change more deeply and
the mobility as a result in the peasant society.
Meaning of Power Structure
The term ‘power’ has come from Latin word "potere" meaning to be able and its
general meaning is affordability. It also means to impose ones will to another. In the
word of Max Weber power means “…such a scope within social structure where one
can perform his desire.” Generally, the basis of the power can be propaganda
influence skill direction & sometimes coercion. To refer peasant power structure, we
understand the system by which the system by which peasant society is predominated
and certain authorities are established.
In another view of Weber the synthesis of those people who exerting influence in the
production system, administrative and judicial system and how they do it and which
components help to organized it, is called power structure.
The power structure is not the same in every peasant society as it rests on
administrative unit. As Bangladesh has been invaded by several countries, the power
structure of our country is of various types. Mainly we understand the peasant power
structure as the daily interaction of rural peasant life that is conformed to rural rules
and regulations and maintained by a special way in which the standard of the peasant
life becomes unbroken.
Political process and power structure in Bangladesh: A critical
review of the Contemporary context
After the liberation of Bangladesh, power structure shape in the peasant society
started to change again. Union Councils were renamed Union Parishads and then
abolished in 1975. It was revived shortly afterwards. A new institutional experiment
for local government and development was started through the promulgation of
Sawnirvar Gram Sarker Rules, 1980. It provided for the constitution of a Sawnirvar
Gram Sarkar in each village. It was an ambitious institutional framework which aimed
3
at ensuring political stability and economic transformation of the rural society- Thana
Sarkar was introduced all over the country, but abandoned within two years shortly
after the death of President Ziaur Rahman who happened to fancy it.
A new scheme for administrative devolution was launched in 1982 which made old
Thanas the centre of local administration, planning and development. Under this
scheme old thanas have been upgraded as Upazilas. The Ordinance of 1982 provides
for the revolutionary administration to be run by Upazila Nirbahi Officer (UNO) and
the development administration by Upazila Parishad. The Upazila Chairman is to be
elected directly on the basis of universal franchise. The Upazila Parishad enjoys
strong administrative and financial support and is responsible for all local level
development activities.
It is apparent from this short overview of the history of local administration and self-
government that after a very long period of n6glect, there has been a series of
experiments with local administration. Ambitious schemes have appeared and
disappeared with the change of political regimes. These experience merits have been
imposed from the above which have allowed little scope for stability and evolution of
local institutions.
While studying on the power structure in the peasant societies, the researchers and
authors have generally adopted micro level studies. This gives us a good specific idea
of several power structure patterns in the agrarian societies.
Micro-level studies of power provide us with an insight into the way power is
structured and exercised. But as it has been pointed out earlier, such studies are
unrepresentative and often incomparable. Surveys, although limited in depth, bring
more representative data. An analysis of several such studies will be discussed below.
Ahmed (1983) conducted an anthropological study of the peasant politics and power
structure of a village called Bijna located in Brahmanbaria, Comilla in 1978-79.
According to Ahmed there were six major factions in the village co-terminus with six
major lineage groups. The Talukdars were the oldest land-owning Muslim lineage in
the village and became the most dominant 'feudal' aristocracy of the locality after
migration of the Hindu zamindars. But their Power slowly decreased following the
1950s and later time.
From Ahmed's highly descriptive account, several implicit ideas emerge. First, the
domination of a single lineage simply gave way to the combined domination of
4
lineages within the village power structure. Secondly, lineages used different
combination of resource to gain an access to the power structure.
BRAC’s (1983) study conducted in 1979 provides a graphic picture of the way power
is generated and retained through coercion crime and corruption of power structure of
ten Villagess in border and forest region of Mymensingh As it was mainly an area of
new settlement, it gives a rare example of the way. The powerful men in the area
attained their power. The study reveals that most of the 39 local potentates had achie-
ved their power through government land-grant, land-grabbing. smuggling, cattle-
lifting and even dacoity. In there village’s powerful men were organized into factions,
bad maintained good relationship with the local bureaucracy through bribery and were
linked to political parties and mainly to the party in state-power.
In 1978 SIDA undertook well-irrigation in the former district of Bogra (Chisholm,
1984). It included an exploration into the relationship between new technology and
power structure. The study found that the impact of the new technology was more
complex than it is generally assumed. The rich peasants were threatened by the new
technology as it was likely to erode the customary bases of power. One typical
response was to capture the technology and to exclude the small and middle peasants
from its benefits. It exemplified the anti-production attitude of the rich peasants. The
second type of response was To run the machine efficiently for the mutual benefit of
the surplus peasants. Even in the pump groups dominated by small leaders who
sought to establish their power of the new technology. The well became a of factional
rivalry as various sought control over it not emerge any broader participation or co-
operation the peasants. It was mainly because the small peasants and tenants had
limited ability to contain the arbitrary actions of' the managers. But they could bring
pressure upon the management for better operation of the machines. Thus the new
technology did bring some benefits to the poor, but not much. It did not increase the
bargaining power earners. As Chisholm points out:
“An unequal social structure preoccupied with competitive struggles for survival was
the setting for a technology seemingly requiring social cooperation, It would appear
to be a rural development model with store prospect of entrenching than transforming
existing social hierarchic.”
5
During 1984-85 Karim (1980) undertook an intensive study of changing leadership
patterns in two Villages of Puttia Upazila of Rajshahi. Karim found that Samaj (or
society) constituted the traditional and non-formal institutional basis for the exercise
of power in these two villages. The Samaj was headed by one or more Pardhans or
Paramaniks. Their position was hereditary, but the members of the Samaj had power
to elect leaders under specific circumstances. The formation of Samaj in both the
villages could be traced to persons who were connected with revenue collection
during the Raj. By the middle of 1980S there were 10 Samajes and 31 Pardhans and
Paramaniks. The Samaj often mainifested a precarious unity as it, in one instance,
underwent fragmentation over the issue of a few stolen hens. One Yea-son for the
fragility of Samaj was possibly the scheming of aspiring leaders who could be
benefited by its multiplication. The importance of Samaj, in spite of its fragility, lay in
the fact that it served as a vital mechanism for conflict resolution and. patronage.
When Pardhans and Paramaniks were asked to list the activities for which people
came to them, a rank -order emerged. These were mainly conflict resolutions, advice
and negotiations for marriage help in litigation; advice for- vote advice on religious
and ritual affairs help for meeting funeral expenses; and economic assistance.
According to Karim, there was a continuation of traditional leadership in the less
developed village. In the more developed village, formal authority was exercised by
new leaders who were young and educated. In this village there was a combinations
of old and new leadership. But Karim emphasizes that control of Samaj and formal
organizations were held by same families and gosthis. The new leaders were younger
kindsmen of the traditional leaders and thus there was no conflict of interest between
the old and the new leaders. Dominant families and gosthis were able to enjoy a lions-
share of the flow of government resources into the villages through the net -work of
kindship.
Though some dashing efforts were taken by the above authors and organizations, it
has hardly been studied in depth or detail or meaningful theoretical contexts. Most of
the studies have focused upon selective aspects of power structure. Again most of the
micro level studies have concentrated on one or two villages and unexplored the
6
politics at the level of Union Council or Parishad which is a crucial locus of power in
rural Bangladesh. These studies also provide us hardly any knowledge of ideology of
the powerful or the skill or strategies with which they rule the country. However,
these are very optimistic approaches that will lead us to further interests.
Peasant mobility: A result of the change in power and politics
‘Mobility’ means the movement of position of an individual or a group of people in a
given social hierarchy. ‘Peasant mobility’ refers to the social mobility i.e. movement
up or down in a stratification system) of the peasants. Traditionally, the peasants are
not willing to change in the peasant society. For this reason mobility comes in a slow
pace in the peasant society. One main reason for this is the self-sufficiency of the
peasants. Also they are conservative in attitude. However, over time, the power
structure of the peasant society made some mobility among the peasants.
Historically, as mentioned at first, the peasants were self sufficient in the early village
communities of Bengal. The changes came in 1758 with the British rule in vogue. For
their own necessary this made a break in of the agrarian structure. The pressure
created by the British led towards the famine of 1770. The British then introduced the
permanent settlement act in 1793. This made the zamindari systems introduction with
it. The Peasant mobility still did not came as the landlords only sought their own
interest.
In the first quarter of the 20th century the mobility started among the peasants. Some
people of the peasant society became educated; they took some initiatives to mobilize
the stagnant society. Schools, Madrarsah and other institutions made profound
change. Also in that time the jute production increased and the price was good for the
peasants. Peasants regained economic sufficiency again.
Some peasant movements occurred for the rights of peasant. mobility came through
this social changes also. Green revolution was another movement that made a
profound effect on the mobility of peasant society.
7
Changes of Peasant Mobility in Bangladesh
There came numerous changes in the peasant mobility pattern in Bangladesh over the
last few decades. One of the basic influential reasons for this change is the changing
power structure discussed earlier. The National Agricultural Census undertaken in
1996 is now published to satisfy the growing demand lion data pertaining to the
structure and organization of agriculture and other related aspects of peasant
households for the entire region of Bangladesh. The earlier agricultural census was
undertaken In 1983/84. These two Censuses adopt similar concept, for categorization
farm, non-tarn, and tenure and for this reason, data pertaining to these variables are
directly comparable. The analysis of data generated by v these two censuses can
obviously provide a basis for showing both the direction as well as magnitude of
changes in the structure and organization of the agricultural sector in Bangladesh
(Saha, 2001).
Now we shall analyze the pattern of Farm and Non-Farm household pattern change of
the peasant society below.
There has been a shift of peasant households from farming to non farming
occupations. From the table below, it can be seen that the percentage of households in
farm sector decreases from 73 to 66 per cent, while in non-farm sector, it increases
from 27 to 34 per cent. Over .the span of twelve years, the non-farm households
grows at a rate of about 4 per cent per annum double of that of all peasant households.
8
DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSEHOLDS BY FARM, NON-FARM AND AGRICULTURAL LABOURERS
Sector1983/84 1996 Annual growth rate in %
% of H/H % of Agri.Labourer H/H
% OF H/H
% of Agri.Labourer H/H 1/11
Household Agri. LaborHousehold
Farm 72.70 57.08 66.18 17.18 1.35 -0.20Non-farm 27.30 43.47 33.82 52.82 3.58 2.89
All 100.00 100.00 100.00 100. 00 2 15 1.28(13817646) (5495300) (17828187) (64014153)
Fig: Shift from farm to non farm occupations
Source: BB5 (1986. 1999).Note: Figures In parentheses Indicate Number of household
Here, the number of agricultural labor household in farm sector is also declining at the
rate of 0.26 per cent per annum, while it is increasing al 2.89 per cent per annum in
non-farm sector. The labourer household in talc non-farm sector constitutes 53 per
cent in 1996.
Land is an extremely scarce natural resource in Bangladesh. There has been a decline
of cultivated land from 20. 16 million acres in 1983/84 to 17.78 million acres in 1996
indicating that, on an average, nearly 2 lakh acres of cultivable land are going out of
agriculture every year. The 1996 Census reports that a substantial amount of land has
been diverted from cultivation to the physical area tender- cities, homestead, peasant
roads arid infrastructure. Thus, it is obvious that growth of population (though the
growth rate has now substantially declined) would lead to the decrease of per capita a-
availability of cultivable land.
The pattern of ownership of productive assets, particularly land releases a set of'
forces that determines the relationship between various groups of peasants centering
on land. 'Thus, land arid its distribution pattern plays the central role for determining
the changing peasant power structure that impinges upon Chang-es in the structure of
agrarian economy in contemporary period.
9
The patterns of land ownership and/or tenure relations in Bangladesh peasant society
reinforced the mobility of the peasants. The description of peasant Bangladesh as a
land of small peasants does not; conceal the complex reality that smallness may
coexist with in egalitarian land distributions. As a matter of fact, the small minority of
households who own over the major portion of the country's land are at the apex of
the structure of power in rural Bangladesh. The agricultural censuses of 1983/84 and
1996 provide Information on both ownership and operational land holding, the
distribution pattern of which can be seen in the below table. It appears that.
Bangladesh agriculture is overwhelmingly characterized by the prevalence of small
farms. This prevalence of small fauns can not, however, conceal the highly skewed
distribution pattern in both ownership and operational holdings in 1983/84 and 1996
censuses.
It has been observed that landless in smaller farms (up to 1.49 acre) constituting 53.71
per cent of households own 18.17 per cent and operate 14.04 per cent of land in
1983/84 census. In 1996, marginalization is intensified so much so that 64 per cent of
there are now observed to own 26.24 per cent and operat6 23.3 per cent. of land. Thr!t
is to say, at the end, the increase in households is associated with proportionate
increase in owned/operated land. Similarly at the upper end (above 2.5 acres), 29.66
percent of the households are observed to own 68.64 per cent and operate 71.01 per
cent of land in 1983/84. In 1996, 20.14 per cent of the households at the upper end are
observed to own 56.89 per cent, and to operate 58.81 per cent of land. This indicates
that the decreases in large farm: households go with proportionate decreases in land
so that relative positions of household vis-a-vis land remain the same. As a result,
distribution pattern of both owned and operated land, which is alarmingly skewed, has
not undergone significant, changes.
We can, thus, observe that a dramatic proliferation of small and marginal farms
relative consolidation of middle farms and relative decline of large farms.have taken
place over the span of twelve years (1984-1996). These changes take place within the
existing frame work of highly unequal land distribution.
For further scrutiny of the above observation, we can examine the annual growth rates
of households, owned, operated and net cultivated land by farm size categories
presented below. This table shows that growth rates of all different categories
farm/non-farm households up to 2.49 acres are positive, where as growth rates of all
10
these variables for larger farms (2.50 acres mid above) are negative. On balance, farm
households grow at a rate of 1.35 per cent and peasant households at the rate 2.15 per
cent. The number of households for these smaller farms grows at a higher rate than
the rate at which the amount of land under their control grows. For this reason,
average and per- capita land for them reduced as observed.
GROWTH RATES OF OWNED, OPERATED AND CULTIVATED LAND BY SIZE CATEGORIES IN 1996 OVER 1983/84
Size CategoriesIn Acres
Annual growth rates in % from 1996 over 1983/84Household Owned land Operated land Net cultivated
land
Below 0.05 3.99 1.47 3.69 1.370.05-0.49 2.77 1.67 3.08 3.040.50-1.49 2.89 2.08 3.28 3.281.50-2.49 0.95 0.74 1.:13 1.332.50-7.50 -1.27 -1.47 -1.46 -1.447.50-above -2.84 -2.86 -2.92 -2.81All peasants 1.35 -0.98 -0.95 -2.81All households
(Farm and non
farm)2. 15 -0.80 -0.87 -0.94
Fig: Growth rates of various types of Lands by size
Source: Estimates based on the previous table data
Peasant Class mobility System: The Changing Patterns
In the preceding pages, we have seen the structural changes of the peasant society. In
the following pages we shall discuss the rural class system in Bangladeshi society.
There is much controversy at conceptual level on the structures of caste and class. It is
argued by some social scientists that caste and class are not polar opposites. There is a
continuum between the two. Yet another argument often given is that there is a class
in a caste. The Brahmin is a caste, but there are classes of Brahmins—poor and rich--
11
in the Brahmin caste. Recently, a new controversy is raised by Dipankar Gupta, K.L.
Sharma and other sociologists.
We do not want to elaborate this controversy but would only say that despite
differences in the comprehension of caste and class the fact remains that the
Bangladeshi peasant society shall have to face for some time to come, social problems
relating the caste system. Louis Dumont is the chief architect of the caste as a form of
culture. However, it is not the point to enter into this controversy of caste as a form of
culture or a mode of production. We only wish to argue that class is not essentially an
urban phenomenon, nor the caste is restricted to peasant society. Both caste and class
as forms of stratification are found in peasant society.
Whenever social scientists and political and social workers including the agricultural
workers discuss about rural class system, a question is raised: Is a transition taking
place in the rural social structure of Bangladesh from caste to class? In other words,
the basic point of enquiry today is to find out whether caste is changing and taking the
form of a class. The question is important. It has taken a form of debate in rural soci-
ology. However, Andre Beteille has worked on the class types of the rural peasants as
the structure is followed.
Types of new classes of Peasants
Owners of Land/Peasant Proprietors Non-owners of land (Agricultural Tenants)
Large Middle Lower Land Land Landowners Share-cash Crop share Cash Agricultural owners owners tenants tenants tenants laborers
Fig: Types of new classes of Peasants
12
On one side of the debate is Andre Beteille who has argued in his article on 'Class
Structure in an Agrarian Society' says that the Jotedars of West Bengal, as an
agricultural caste, are moving towards the formation of a class. But the change from
caste to class is amorphous. By amorphousness Beteille means that the form of class
which is emerging among the Jotedars is not of any definite shape or structure of a
class. The movement from caste to class is not clear; it is much doubtful. Beteille
observes:
“It is frequently argued that in countries like India, the older system of
inequalities based on caste is being replaced by a class system not only in the
cities but also in the rural areas. If caste stands for a system of inequality in
which groups are sharply differentiated and at the same time organically
related, then clearly there is evidence of the decline of caste. If, on the other
hand, class stands for a system of antagonistic groups based on the
polarisation of consciously organised interests, there is no general evidence
that this kind of structure is emerging throughout the country: the
predominant impression is bone of amorphousness rather than structure.”
In the above statement Beteille is quite clear when he makes his observation. First, if
caste is defined as a form of structural inequality then it has died. Second, if the
meaning of class is taken as an antagonistic group then it is not taking a definite shape
of a class in village Bangladesh. This formation of classes, therefore, shows a lot of
mobilization of aspects like caste and social grouping inside the peasant society.
Conclusion
The peasant social mobility and change is lot more dependant on the political
variables that affect the power structure of peasant society. The study encourage for
further inquiry into how peasant power relations between classes and other social
groups are created, understood, contested and transformed. The paper reveals
questions of agency of marginalized groups in peasant societies, particularly their
autonomy and capacity to interpret and change their conditions. It will promote
contributions that question mainstream prescriptions or interrogate orthodoxies in
radical thinking.
13
Reference:
1. A.K. Nazmul Karim, “The dynamics of Bangladesh society”, 1980.
2. N. W. Polsby, “Reappointment in the 1970”, California Press, USA, 1971.
3. Max Weber, “Class, status and party”, Berlin, 1922.
4. Tepper, Elliot L. "The Administration of Rural Reform: Structural Constraints
and Political Dilemmas." P. 29-59 in Robert D. Stevens, Hamzi Alavi, and Peter
J. Bertocci (eds.), Rural Development in Bangladesh and Pakistan. Honolulu:
University Press of Hawaii, 1976.
5. S L Doshi and P C Jain, Rural Sociology, Delhi, 1999.
6. Khan, Azizur Rahman. The Economy of Bangladesh. New York: St. Martin's
Press, 1972.
7. Ahmed, A.B, “Bizna: A study of Power structure in Contemporary Rural
Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh, 1983.
8. BRAC, Power structure in ten villages, Dhaka, 1983.
14