Search results

The history of the Communist(C) movement in Andhra provides an interesting example of the exploitation of caste to pol'al ends. The balance of pol'al forces in Andhra is dominated by the rivalry between two castes of well-to-do landowners, the Kammas & the Reddi. C'ism first implanted itself as a serious rival of the Congress Party in the rice delta in the center of the State, where intellectual & pol'al fermentation had always been greatest & where there existed large numbers of landless laborers providing material for a mass movement. However, the cadres of the Andhra C Party have always been supplied by the Kamma landlords; in reaction to this, the Reddi generally support the Congress Party. From 1947 to 1950, the Andhra C Party supported a policy similar to that of Mao Tse-Tung regarding the role of patriotic capitalists & rich peasants in 'New Democracy', thus incurring the wrath of the Central Committee of the Indian C Party, which followed the Moscow line. Released from prison shortly before the 1951 elections, Andhra C leaders were able to profit from a serious split within the local Congress Party, & from their support for a linguistic state. They also benefited in the Delta from the influence of their fellow Kammas occupying positions of authority in the villages. In 1955 the unity of the anti-C forces had been re-established in the form of the Congress United Front, & the linguistic state, having already been achieved, was no longer a burning issue. In these circumstances, the number of C's elected sharply declined, though they still obtained 38.7% of the vote in the Delta, as compared with 44.5% in 1951. There is no doubt that the C's will further exploit caste rivalries in their efforts to make a comeback. (AIPSA).

In 1956 there were 16.3 million agricultural labour households in India, roughly one out of three for Indian agriculture as a whole. Their number has been rapidly increasing; in 1900 only 12 per cent of the agricultural population were landless labourers. It is tempting to see the creation of this huge landless class as yet another verification of a general theory of development which seems to apply to Japan and to much of South-East Asia, as well as to a great deal of Western experience. Such a theory would explain the growth of this class in terms of the weakening of village communities, the breaking down of traditional patterns of land tenure, the spreading of indebtedness and the consequent dispossession of the peasantry, and it would find the chief cause of these changes in the monetisation of the economy.