Xorox University M Icrofilm * W North 1 M B Road Arm Arbor
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INFORMATION TO USERS This material mm produced from « microfilm copy of tho original document. While the moat advanced technological maani to photograph and reproduce thl* document have baan uMd, lha quality It haavtty dependant upon the quality of tha original td tn ttia d . Tha following explanation of techniques ft provided to halp you understand nw klnp or panama which may appear on thlt reproduction. 1. Tha slpi or "target" for pqps apparandy lacking from lha documant photovaphad it "M illing P**s(sK\ If it waa possible to obtain tha mining page(sj or section, thay art spliced into lha film along with adjacent pegM. Thii may haw necessitated cutting thru an Image and duplicating adjaoant pngai to insure you complata continuity. 2. Whan an imago on tha film » obliterated with a large round black mark, it It an indication that tha photopapher impacted diet tha copy may haw mowd during exposure and thus cause a blurred imaga. You wHI find a good im p of tha pega hn the adjacent frame. 3. Whan a map, drawing or oh art, etc., ww part of the materiel being photographed die photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" tha material. It is customary to begin photoing at tha upper left hand earner of e large theet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with i small overlap. If necwiary, sectioning b continued again — beginning below die first row and continuing on until com plete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content it of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be mad* from "photographs" if essential to tha understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs’1 may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, tide, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE; Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed a received. Xorox University M icrofilm * W North 1 M b Road Arm Arbor. Michigan 4S10S I I I 76-812 HE&SUR, Raghtvendra KAshavarao, 1936- SOCIAL MOBILIZATION, POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT AND CIVIL VIOLENCE IN THE INDIAN STATES. The American University, Ph.D., 1975 Political Science, general Xmrox UnlvmHy Mfterofllmi, AmiArtw.M+ohn^^io* THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION SOCIAL MOBILIZATION, POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT AND CIVIL VIOLENCE IN THE INDIAN STATES Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement* for the Degree of Doctor of Philoeophy: Government Raghavendra Keshavarao Hebeur January 1975 Accepted; Dean Date: (ZtfV p^rvC Committee chairm. THE iUERICAli UNIVERSITY LIBRARY TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES........... ............................. iii LIST OF FIGURES ......................................... iii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION........................................ 1 II. THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES AND HYPOTHESES . , 13 Theories of Civil violence..................... 15 The Impact of Social Mobilization ........... 3 2 The Nature of Political Development ......... 49 A Review of Findings of Empirical Studies * . 6 2 Study of Violence in India................... 76 The Context of the Indian States............ , . 8 3 Hypotheses....................................... 86 III. METHODOLOGY AND DATA PRESENTATION ............ 100 Operational Measures of Social Mobilization . 100 Operational Measures of Political Develop ment. ........... ................ 102 Operational Measures of Political Hardships . 118 Operational Measures of Civil Violence. 120 Derivation of the Total Measures of Social Mobilization, Political Development and Political Hardships ......................... 132 IV. TEST OF HYPOTHESES -1 .............................. 139 V, TEST OF HYPOTHESES-II AND FACTOR ANALYSIS . 162 VI. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH........................................... 189 APPENDIX I.......................................... 201 APPENDIX I I ............................................. 213 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................. 228 LIST OF TABLES Page Levels of Social Mobilization in the Indian States................................. 103 University Students as Ratio of Population in the Indian States............................. 104 Levels of Political Development in the Indian States................................. 119 Levels of Political Hardships in the Indian States................................. 1 2 1 The Scale of Magnitude of Civil Violence . 128 Levels of Civil violence and Communist Voting in the Indian States.................. 131 Transformed Standard Scores for Social Mobilization Indicators. ..... ......... 134 Transformed Standard Scores for Political Development Indicators ..... ........... 135 Transformed Standard Scores for Political Hardships...................................... 136 Matrix of Intercorrelations Among the 22 Variables ................................. 146 Varimax Rotated Factor Matrix of the 22 Variables , ............................... 185 LIST OF FIGURES Social Mobilization and Political Develop ment: Correlation and Regress ion. 140 Social Mobilization and Ratio of Political Development to Social Mobilization: Correlation and Regression ............. 141 Social Mobilization and Civil violence: Correlation and Regression ............. 164 Social Mobilization and Civil Violence (Low Mobilization States Only): Correlation and Regression ........................... 165 Social Mobilization and Civil Violence (High Mobilization States Only): Correlation and Regression ............. 166 iii j/ T” 4- 4- 4- ----------- INDIA < V -T J A M M U J POLITICAL DIVISIONS C AMD / 1969 j KASHMIR J HjO160 10 4 HjO160 ion HO Mitt) 1-- 1-- 1 ■■ r.' > O E r a . AMO. M ( PO 100 KD 4(0 900 f ' i P i AML At HOTW cfcL'iHCjj ^ l /jv ryvr V"- iruoK AA l - w 4->J * f N V 1, t ; \ KgRMtfil v,, ^ f ~ k ^ ^ t ir'Ty u r r a nv v * 4 f t > v *->rv 1 TRAJASTH a n p R a DESH A V ^ v _>» '" 1 ~ " jtS^* \ r ' ) > *4 5 ‘M /ff f - ' i C3 (b I H * R)( ban&ladiah U H I. f \ A'-f ^ U ^ I , ' # ^ v ____ :v/... - ... _ _ . ‘I r ^ H“ \r\ e j uUiARArTMADHVA PR .A'UJ'S V [Mrnri t ‘ORISSA MAHARAS m I ft a! (“ L ^ \ V / ^ '} A \ / A !S /J''/ \ f ~ J / (A - .J , ANlJHftA X i PhAdtSh J .S ¥ S ti H t r- i tj-- I i-e1. A lj--^j .A \j1' ": I >. Irl I I 1 I ■ I k l-’-i i I IJI h I . f* ( iiahu I N J L k r 11 , i A LiP-l I •■ * ) I i . .. i i j ii > n V iv PREFACE Both during the formulation of the dissertation proposal and the completion of the project itself, I was very fortunate to receive the assistance, advice and comments from many persons in the United States and India. The idea of the dissertation arose in the various seminars on Comparative Politics which I took at the School of Government and Public Administration (SGPA), The American University (AU), Washington, D.C,, during 1967-1970. Or. (Mrs,) Coralie Bryant, the Chairman of my dissertation Committee encouraged me from the very beginning in the pursuit of the project, it is impossible to exaggerate her kindness, help and patience towards me which, however, did not dilute her critical review. Or. Glynn Wood and Professor Charles Ruttenberg were helpful with their incisive comments, suggestions and guidance. My years with the SGPA turned out to be enriching and rewarding beyond my expectations. I am particularly indebted to Dean Earl H. Delongf Dean Robert E. Cleary and Dean A. Dee Fritschler who all encouraged and helped me pursue my doctoral career at the AU. I shall never forget the affection and help I have received from my classmates at the AU, Mr. and Mrs, Steven v L. London, now of TIvorton (R.I.). Another friend in Washington, D.C,, Hr. Sumner McKnight also goaded me In this undertaking. This project could not have been completed without the cooperation of innumerable persons in India. Dr. L. S. Bhat, Associate Professor in the Indian Statistical Institute, New Delhi, gave me invaluable assistance and comments. It is very difficult to thank, him adequately. I am grateful to Hr. A. N. Sharma also of the Indian Statistical Institute, who did the cartographic drawings so w e l l . I am also grateful to the Indian Council of Social Science Research and particularly to Hr. J . P. Naik, Member-Secretary, and Dr, Ramaahray Roy, Director, for granting me financial assistance during 1973-1974. I have insnensely benefitted from my discussions with D r . R o y , vi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Violence— both individual or criminal on the one hand, and civil, collective, social or political, on the other— is not a peculiarly modern phenomenon. Instances of murder, arson, of even regicides, tynannicides and slave uprisings can be found scattered in history. But what is really unique to the modem times is the frequent and increasing outbreaks of a kind of violence--riots, civil wars, political assassina tions, coups d fetat and revolution. The role of violence in the society has engaged many astute and creative minds. Marx and Engels considered violence as the midwife of the revolution ushering in a new order. Sorel, feeling cheated by the revisionist stance of many European Parliamentary Socialists, advocated violence as a means to restore to socialism its revolutionary fervour.1 Simmel saw in violence the efforts of an organism to rid itself of pathological disturbances. To him, conflicts were the methods to 'resolve dualisms* and of 'achieving some 1Georges Sorel, Reflections on violence Trans. T. E. Hulme and J, Roth, {Glencoe, 111,: The Free Press, 1950). Proletarian Strikes, which, to Sorel, were the paws of violence, are now the accepted and legal