Rural labour in agrarian transitions: The semi-feudal thesis revisited

Journal of Contemporary Asia

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 456-473

  Brass, Tom ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84937388092     PISSN: 00472336     EISSN: 17527554     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00472330280000311     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. This theme has been explored by me in some detail, in Old Conservatism in ‘New’ Clothes The Journal of Peasant Studies 1995 22/3 and in Peasants, Populism and Postmodernism:The Return of the Agrarian Myth (London, 2000).
2. See Reply to Utsa Patnaik:If the Cap Fits… International Review of Social History 1995 40/1 and “Immobilized Workers, Footloose Theory,” The Journal of Peasant Studies, 24/4 (1997).
3. Lenin, V.I., 1964. “ The Development of Capitalism in Russia ”. In Collected Works Vol. 3, Moscow Karl Kautsky, The Agrarian Question, 2 Vols. (London, 1988).
4. For the centrality of “semi-feudalism” to this link, see Tse-Tung Mao, The Chinese Revolution and the Chinese Communist Party Selected Works London19543 76ff 76ff
5. Stalin, Joseph. 1928. Leninism 124ff.–124ff. London 276ff.
6. cf. Lenin V.I., “The Land Question and The Rural Poor,” and “The Agrarian Question and The Present Situation in Russia” Collected Works Moscow196319 377 377 488
7. Kotovsky, Grigory. 1964. Agrarian Reforms in India New Delhi
8. Andre Gunder Frank. 1967. Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America New York Ernesto Laclau, “Feudalism and Capitalism in Latin America,” New Left Review, 67 (1971). For useful early surveys of the debate about the mode of production in India, see Doug McEachern, “The Mode of Production in India,” Journal of Contemporary Asia, 6/4 (1976); Ashok Rudra et al., Studies in the Development of Capitalism in India (Lahore, 1978); David Goodman and Michael Redclift, From Peasant to Proletarian (Oxford, 1981); and Alice Thorner, “Semi-Feudalism or Capitalism? Contemporary Debate on Classes and Modes of Production in India” Economic and Political Weekly, XVII/49–51 (1982). For reasons outlined in Brass, “Reply,” a later text edited by Utsa Patnaik, Agrarian Relations and Accumulation:The “Mode of Production” Debate in India (Bombay, 1990), is not as useful.
9. See Bhaduri Amit, A Study in Agricultural Backwardness under Semi-Feudalism The Economic Journal 1973 83/329 the various contributions by Patnaik to Rudra et al., op. cit.; and Pradhan H. Prasad, Lopsided Growth (Bombay, 1989), pp.37ff., 95ff.
10. For the categorization by them of unfree production relations in India as semi-feudal, and the consequent delinking of unfreedom and capitalism, see Byres Terry, The Dialectic of India's Green Revolution South Asian Review 1972 5/2 104 104 Jan Breman, Patronage and Exploitation (Berkeley, 1974), pp. 121–22, and Of Peasants, Migrants and Paupers (Delhi, 1985), pp. 131,306–13; John Harriss, Capitalism and Peasant Farming (New Delhi, 1982), pp.98,103–5; and the contributions in Utsa Patnaik and Manjari Dingwaney, eds., Chains of Servitude:Bondage and Slavery in India (Madras, 1985).
11. See, for example Patnaik Utsa, Ascertaining the Economic Characteristics of Peasant Classes-in-Themselves in Rural India:A Methodological and Empirical Exercise Rural Transformation in Asia Breman Jan, Mundle Sudipto, Delhi1991 418 420 in
12. The list of Marxist and bourgeois economists (and non-economists) for whom economic growth in the Third World was the sine qua non of development theory is a long one, and would include Lewis W., Arthur The Theory of Economic Growth Illinois1955 Barbara Ward, India and the West (New York, 1961); Kotovsky, Agrarian Reforms; Nicholas Kaldor, Essays on Economic Policy — Volume Two (London, 1964); Thomas Balogh, The Economics of Poverty (London, 1966); Maurice Dobb, Papers on Capitalism, Development and Planning, (London, 1967), pp.50ff.; Gunnar Myrdal, Asian Drama:An Inquiry into the Poverty of Nations, 3 vols. (London, 1968):Michal Kalecki, Essays on Developing Economies (Hassocks, 1976); Wolf Ladejinsky, on whom see Louis J. Walinsky, ed., The Selected Papers of Wolf Ladejinsky:Agrarian Reform as Unfinished Business (New York, 1977); and V.G.Rastyannikov, Agrarian Evolution in a Multiform Structure Society (London, 1981).
13. The debate at this conjuncture, which included contributions by historians such as Dobb Maurice, Hilton Rodney, Hill Christopher, Lefebvre Georges, Takahashi Kohachiro, Hobsbawm Eric, The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism Hilton Rodney, London1976 is collected in
14. See Hobsbawm Eric, Maurice Dobb Socialism, Capitalism and Economic Growth Feinstein C.H., Cambridge1967 7 8 in
15. For Asia, see Ward, India and the West New York1961 Myrdal, op. cit., and Walinsky, op. cit. For Latin America, see Werner Baer, and Isaac Kerstenetzky, Inflation and Growth in Latin America (Illinois, 1964), and Solon Barraclough, ed., Agrarian Structure in Latin America, (Lexington, 1973).
16. Hobsbawm. 1967. “ Maurice Dobb ”. In Socialism, Capitalism and Economic Growth Edited by:Feinstein, C.H., 7–7. Cambridge in
17. For the continuing importance to Dobb of a socialist transition, see for example his Political Economy and Capitalism London1940 270ff. 270ff. and Economic Growth and Underdeveloped Countries (London, 1963).
18. See, for example Myrdal, Asian Drama:An Inquiry into the Poverty of Nations London1968 1039ff. 1039ff. 3 vols. Balogh, op. cit., p.52, and Unequal Partners — Volume Two (Oxford, 1963), p.37; Kotovsky, op. cit.; Barraclough, op. cit., pp. 7–9,33ff.; and Walinsky, op. cit.
19. See Fogel Robert W., Engerman Stanley W., Time on the Cross:Volume I — The Economics of American Negro Slavery London1974 67 78 and Robert W. Fogel, Without Consent or Contract:The Rise and Fall of American Slavery (New York, 1989), pp.64ff.
20. See Cotlear Daniel, El sistema de Enganche a Principios del Siglo XX:Una Versión Diferente Lima1979 Pranab Bardhan, Land, Labour and Rural Poverty (Delhi, 1984), and J.-P.Platteau, et al., Technology, Credit and Indebtedness in Marine Fishing — A Case Study of Three Fishing Villages in South Kerala (Delhi, 1985).
21. See, for example Patnaik Utsa, The Agrarian Question and Development of Capitalism in India Economic & Political Weekly 1986 XXI/18 791 791 Prasad, op. cit.
22. See the review in The Journal of Peasant Studies 1992 19/2 345 345 346–7, by Byres of Patnaik, Agrarian Relations and Accumulation
23. For the background politics of the CPI, see Ghose Sankar, Socialism and Communism in India Bombay1971 395ff 395ff
24. On this point see New Farmers' Movements in India Brass Tom, London1995
25. See Naxalbari and After Sen Samar, Panda Debabrata, Lahiri Ashish, Calcutta19782 and Sumanta Banerjee, In the Wake of Naxalbari (Calcutta, 1980), pp.7,32–33.
26. Balagopal, K., 1986. Agrarian Struggles. Economic and Political Weekly, XXI:1402–1402.
27. Desai, A.R., 1984. India's Path of Development:A Marxist Approach 151–152. Bombay
28. For more on this particular issue, see Brass, Reply
29. That exponents of the semi-feudal thesis are hostile to Trotskyism and Trotskyist views of India as already capitalist is evident from, for example Patnaik, On Capitalism and Agrestic Unfreedom International Review of Social History 1995 40 79 79 and Terry Byres, “State, Class and Development Planning in India,” in Terry Byres, ed., The State and Development Planning in India, (Delhi, 1994), pp.37–8.
30. Andre Gunder Frank. 1969. Capitalism and Underdevelopment, and Latin America:Underdevelopment or Revolution New York
31. Cf. Kalecki, Essays and Desai, India's Path.
32. Byres, Terry. 1999. Rural Labour Relations in India:Persistent Themes, Common Processes and Differential Outcomes. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 26 (2–3)
33. Ironically, for Kotovsky, Agrarian Reforms in India New Delhi1964 157 158
34. See Byres, The Dialectic 105 105 108, and also his “The Political Economy of Technological Innovation in Indian Agriculture,” in R.S. Anderson, et al., eds., Science, Politics and the Agricultural Revolution in Asia (Boulder, 1982).
35. The kinds of difficulties to which this epistemology gives rise emerge most clearly in Byres, Rural Labour Relations in India:Persistent Themes, Common Processes and Differential Outcomes The Journal of Peasant Studies 1999 26 2–3
36. See Byres, The State 40 40
37. See Abdel-Fadil Mahmoud, Development, Income Distribution and Social Change in Rural Egypt (1952–1970):A Study in the Political Economy of Agrarian Transition Cambridge1975 and Terry Byres, “Agrarian Transition and the Agrarian Question,” The Journal of Peasant Studies, 4/3 (1977).
38. Byres. 1999. Rural Labour Relations in India:Persistent Themes, Common Processes and Differential Outcomes. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 26 (2–3)
39. See Byres Terry, Capitalism From Above and Capitalism From Below London1996
40. Byres. 1999. Rural Labour Relations in India:Persistent Themes, Common Processes and Differential Outcomes. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 26 (2–3):125–125.
41. Herbert, Ulrich. 1990. A History of Foreign Labour in Germany, 1880–1980 32–32. Ann Arbor 38–39
42. On these points see Herbert, A History of Foreign Labour in Germany, 1880–1980 Ann Arbor1990 16 16 44
43. Hence the endorsement by Byres, Rural Labour Relations in India:Persistent Themes, Common Processes and Differential Outcomes The Journal of Peasant Studies 1999 26 2–3 125 125
44. See Roth K.H., Unfree Labour in the Area under German Hegemony, 1930–45 Free and Unfree Labour:The Debate Continues Brass Tom, Linden Marcel van der, Berne1997 in
45. In contrast to the claim by Byres, Rural Labour Relations in India:Persistent Themes, Common Processes and Differential Outcomes The Journal of Peasant Studies 1999 26 2–3
46. For these and other examples, see Brass Tom, Slavery Now:Unfree Labour and Modern Capitalism Slavery & Abolition 1988 9 183 197 “Some Observations on Unfree Labour, Capitalist Restructuring and Deproletarianization,” International Review of Social History, 39 (1994), pp. 269–74, notes 33,34,35,38; and also Towards, Chapter 5.
47. Dobb, Maurice. Political Economy 332–332.
48. For the role of unfree labour in Punjab and Haryana, see Brass, Towards Chapter 3.
49. See, for example Haswell M.R., Economics of Development in Village India London1967 51 51