Introduction
Peasant movements in India have historically mirrored transformations in the agrarian political economy, transitioning from anti-feudal and anti-colonial struggles to market-oriented assertions against neoliberal policies. Contemporary mobilizations, such as the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM) protests demanding a legally guaranteed Minimum Support Price (MSP), underscore the continuing role of agrarian mobilization in reshaping state-society relations.
1. Theoretical Frameworks and the Tribal-Agrarian Nexus
Sociological understanding of peasant struggles draws upon diverse structural and subaltern perspectives:
- Kathleen Gough’s Typology: Gough categorizes Indian peasant revolts into five distinct types—restorative, religious, peasant uprisings, social banditry, and terrorist vengeance—highlighting their varied structural motivations and ideological moorings.
- Subaltern Agency: Ranajit Guha critiques elitist nationalist historiography, arguing that peasants possessed an autonomous political consciousness and agency rather than merely serving as passive instruments mobilized by metropolitan elites.
- Tribal-Agrarian Nexus: Early revolts fused ethnic identity with peasant class struggles against colonial-feudal exploitation. The Santhal Rebellion (1855) and Birsa Munda’s Ulgulan (1899) targeted Dikus (exploitative outsiders, moneylenders, and landlords), demonstrating that tribal identity and agrarian distress were structurally intertwined.
2. Shift from Old Peasant Movements to New Farmers' Movements
Sociologists such as T.K. Oommen and Gail Omvedt differentiate between two historical phases of rural mobilization:
- Old Peasant Movements (Pre-1970s): These were defined by class-struggle orientations against feudal landlordism and colonial revenue extractions, such as the Tebhaga Movement in Bengal and the Telangana Movement. Organized primarily by Left-wing Kisan Sabhas, their primary demands centered on radical land redistribution, abolition of intermediaries, and tenancy security.
- New Farmers' Movements (Post-1980s): Led by groups like the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU) and Shetkari Sanghatana, these aligned with what Lloyd and Susanne Rudolph termed "bullock capitalists". Operating within a New Social Movement (NSM) framework, these mobilizations focused on terms of trade, remunerative input-output pricing, electricity subsidies, and resistance to free-market liberalization rather than land tenure.
3. Neoliberal Crisis, Gender Dynamics, and Class Cleavages
Contemporary peasant mobilizations reflect multifaceted contradictions within the rural social structure:
- Agrarian Crisis and Price Policy: Utsa Patnaik links neoliberal market reforms to an aggravated rural distress driven by export-oriented cash cropping, while Jayati Ghosh highlights systemic agrarian indebtedness. The demand for an MSP calculated using the Swaminathan Commission's C2+50% formula directly responds to this structural vulnerability.
- Feminization of Agrarian Distress: Despite pervasive patriarchal norms, the structural withdrawal of male labor has brought women to the forefront of agrarian mobilization. Formations such as the Mahila Kisan Adhikar Manch (MAKAAM) assert women's identity as autonomous farmers holding land and credit rights, rather than merely domestic dependents.
- Intra-Class Cleavages: Tom Brass emphasizes that the peasantry is not a homogeneous collective. Contemporary movements are predominantly spearheaded by rich, market-oriented landowning farmers. Consequently, demands for higher output prices can run counter to the immediate welfare of landless agricultural laborers—disproportionately from Dalit communities—who are net food consumers.
Conclusion
Peasant movements in India have evolved from radical anti-feudal struggles into sophisticated policy-advocacy networks challenging neoliberal agrarian restructuring. Their enduring sociological significance lies in their capacity to hold the state accountable and deepen rural democracy, though their long-term efficacy depends on bridging the structural divide between rich landed peasants and marginal, landless, and women agricultural workers.