Indigenist Mobilization

CEU eTD Collection D INDIGENIST MOBILIZATION: ‘IDENTITY’ VERSUS‘CLASS’AFTERTHE EPARTMENT OF KERALA MODELOFDEVELOPMENT? C ENTRAL E UROPEAN S OCIOLOGY AND P H L D UISA D 2011 ISSERTATION U NIVERSITY S TEUR S OCIAL (B A UDAPEST NTHROPOLOGY ) CEU eTD Collection Cover photo: AGMS activist and Paniya workers at Aralam Farm, Kerala ( Kerala at AralamFarm, workers Paniya and activist AGMS photo: Cover ” Luisa Steur, 2006) Steur, Luisa CEU eTD Collection ‘IDENTITY’ VERSUS ‘CLASS’ AFTER THEKERALA MODEL OF In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of Doctor of degree the for requirements of the fulfillment partial In Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology Social and of Sociology Department INDIGENIST MOBILIZATION: INDIGENIST Professor Prem Kumar Rajaram Kumar Prem Professor Central European University European Central Professor Judit Bodnar Judit Professor DEVELOPMENT? Budapest, Hungary Budapest, Submitted to Supervisors: Luisa Steur Luisa 2011 by CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist reference. bibliographical of form the in made is acknowledgment appropriate where except person, another by published and/or written previously materials no contains thesis The institutions. other any in degrees other any for accepted materials no contains dissertation this that state I hereby Statement Budapest, 2011. Budapest, STATEMENT i CEU eTD Collection this juncture in the capitalist world system. at politics identity indigenous of rise global the of meanings and causes the on debate wider the to contribution a critical makes thesis this processes, of these analysis an Through mobilization. of "class-based" forms older to the than indigenism to amenable more makethem to as way as such in inKerala groups subaltern of lives working everyday the changed that "neoliberalism" with associated processes political-economic the secondly, And power. of relations existing alter structurally government, in once not, could but emancipation for struggles earlier led that platforms class-based - the from distantiation - and with disillusionment of increasing dynamics movement social cyclical the firstly, processes: inter-linked of two analysis an through question this answers thesis The rights. their for struggle now workers adivasi which through framework primary the as ofclass discourse the replace came to belonging of indigenous anotion backs, draw- its despite why question the poses and Kerala in of "indigeneity" notion the to attached risks political the and baggage historical complex the discusses It ofKerala. state Indian This thesis analyses the recent rise of "adivasi" (indigenous/tribal) identity politics in the South Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Abstract ABSTRACT ii CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist inspiration. my never-ending and paths these of all part radical Kalb, Don thank I Finally, suggests. modesty their than journey of this part more much so were who sister, and brother younger my Steur, Farilde and Steur Roeland I thank And PhD. this pursue to me gave they freedom and support the for my parents, Steur, Klaas and Osta van Ine I thank PhD. of this stages last the to contributions and support their for Ropital Sylvain and Carmel Christy Blaylock, Jean Ithank provide. they purpose intellectual joint and energy the for Focaal comrades my Ithank had dengue. I me when for caring for also Ikegame, and Aya Bates Crispin to am grateful I KCBindu. Antony, Josse Paul Keene, Contractor, Qudsiya Waghmore, Suryakant Archer, Rebecca Jeremiah, Anderson Edinburgh: of University the at Studies Asia South for Centre the at my stay through journey of this part became who those thank I Silberling. Louise NRaj, Sexsmith, Kathy particular in engagement, and solidarity for their University at Cornell and House at Telluride the myfriends I thank for this project. support and with engagement their for Gorringe Hugo and Edelman, Marc Herring, Ron Breman, Jan Shah, Alpa Mosse, David Reyna, Steve Lerche, Jens Smith, Gavin Li, Tania McMichael, Philip Friedman, Jonathan thank I Veres. Judit Adorjan, Istvan Echevskaya, Olga Ivancheva, Mariya Pulay, Gergo DoraVetta, Mecset, Bruno Dujisin, Zoltan Pernes, Raluca Kofti, Dimitra Kamble, Swati Guga, Stefan Aungo, Justus Szoke, Alexa Faje, Florin Cucu, Alina Poenaru, Florin Buier, Natalia Simionca, Anca Deneva, Neda Meszmann, Tibor Poblocki, Kacper Halmai, Gabor Schober, Elisabeth Fedyuk, Olena including our world, shaping science social in the intervention ambitious of an point focal cosmopolitan as the CEU the experienced I whom with travelers allfellow- thank I University. European Central the at Anthropology Social and Sociology of Department the shaping faculty all and Rajaram Kumar Prem Bodnar, Judit Ithank Kapikade. Sunny Bindu, KC Moorkoth, Meera I.Ambika, Vasudevan, Jain particular --in mention) can I all ofwhom (not Kerala in politics and lives their into me took who allthose I thank meaningless. have been would work present the journey, of this part been have places, many over who,spread friends those from confrontation intellectual and embeddedness solidarity, the Without striving. political ajoint ultimately, with, collective intellectual productive a for connections the building on depends research anthropological that experienced have intensely I means. dissertation anthropology an writing what lived I have years the Over Acknowledgments ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii CEU eTD Collection Part 2: Part Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist ofcontents Table Part 1: Part Maps...... vii Acknowledgments...... iii ii ...... Abstract Statement...... i Chapter 3: Chapter Chapter 2: Chapter Chapter 1: Chapter 3.3 3.2 3.1 2.3 2.2 1.3 2.1 1.2 1.1 Adivasiness and its discontents...... 33 and its Adivasiness nrdcin...... 1 Introduction...... ocuin...... 102 Conclusion rvligmdl,cmo-es,adcncetzto ...... 91 conscientization and common-sense, models, Travelling eoigaiai ofaeo ob rmd...... 71 framed be to or Toframe adivasi: Becoming ocuin...... 67 Conclusion Vicissitudes of the “tribe” in kerala studies...... 53 kerala in “tribe” the of Vicissitudes ocuin...... 30 Conclusion The tribe in an expanding world system...... 35 world expanding an in The tribe h ieilso ehdlg:O akn crety ...... 18 “correctly” walking On methodology: of The minefields eiglk axs:Tertclapoce oidgns ...... 4 indigenism to approaches Theoretical aMarxist: like Seeing 3.2.3 3.2.2 3.2.1 3.1.4 3.1.3 3.1.2 3.1.1 2.2.2 2.2.1 2.1.2 2.1.1 1.2.2 1.2.1 1.1.3 1.1.2 1.1.1 h motneo en dvs...... 69 The importance of being adivasi...... h tie nwrdtm ...... 34 The ...... “tribe” in world time Research in/on &beyond the capitalist world system...... 2 “I am an adivasi, who dare play with menow!”...... 98 with play dare who adivasi, am an “I ...... 95 us” calls government the “Something tensions...... 91 their and of indigenism models” “Travelling The Muthanga struggle: Within and against the “adivasi” frame...... 86 “adivasi” the against and Within struggle: The Muthanga Struggle...... 81 a Dalit-Adivasi of Visions Kundalla: to Kurichy From organizing...... 77 “autonomous” at Attempts ...... 72 Act Land ST of the shadow the in mobilization Adivasi The indigenist challenge to the ethnographic tribe...... 63 ethnographic the to challenge The indigenist The anthropological tribe in Kerala: A happy people without any without people happy A Kerala: in tribe The anthropological “At the stroke of midnight”, the ethnographic state liveson?...... 45 state ethnographic the ofmidnight”, stroke the “At one!”...... 36 I see when one know “I of thetribe: inventions Imperialist Reflexivity and Academic labor...... 25 Academic and Reflexivity ...... 19 interpretation and discovery of dialectics A rtclsrglsvru h lblssei ...... 14 systemic global the versus struggles Critical indigeneity...... 10 to class From movements: Framing 5 of Indigeneity...... qualities The clay-like history?...... 56 TABLE OF CONTENTS OF TABLE iv CEU eTD Collection Part 4: Part Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 3: Part ofcontents Table Chapter 7: Chapter Chapter 6: Chapter Chapter 5: Chapter Chapter 4: Chapter 7.2 7.1 6.3 6.2 5.3 6.1 5.2 5.1 4.3 4.2 4.1 Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis...... 170 in model” “Kerala the indigenism: Conditioning Contention and conflict at the end of a reformist cycle...... 105 reformist of a end at the conflict and Contention DsPseso mns dvs lnainwres...... 209 workers plantation adivasi amongst (Dis)Possession An adivasi colony meets the threat of absolute expediency...... 192 of absolute threat the meets colony adivasi An ocuin...... 189 Conclusion Privileging education: adivasi identification and the “st list”...... 182 “st the and identification adivasi education: Privileging ocuin...... 167 Conclusion rd n ersnaini oreiiyn oit ...... 175 society in abourgeoisifying representation and Pride Revealing the “real” other: The politics of polarization...... 157 of The politics other: “real” the Revealing (Re)reading Kerala history between communism and caste...... 144 and communism between history Kerala (Re)reading ocuin...... 141 Conclusion Post-communist challenges: Towards culture and caste...... 124 and culture Towards challenges: Post-communist The naxal challenge: Mobilizing the margins...... 108 the Mobilizing challenge: The naxal 7.1.3 7.1.2 7.1.1 6.2.2 6.2.1 6.1.2 6.1.1 5.2.3 5.2.2 5.2.1 5.1.4 5.1.3 5.1.2 5.1.1 4.2.3 4.2.2 4.2.1 4.1.2 4.1.1 Adivasi labor: ...... 191 Of workers without work Salaried subalterns: Onthe vulnerability of social mobility...... 171 Widening circles of political dis-identification...... 143 Electoral Communism and its critics...... 106 iegn ahaso eogn ...... 202 of belonging pathways Divergent expendability...... 196 and “Suffocation” colony...... 193 a Paniya of history Short Kottamurade: I egtecue rmtels… ...... 187 list…” the from excluded get we “If “It is worthy to work for adivasis, so I am taking up the adivasi the up taking Iam so adivasis, for work to worthy is “It Ltterwvsadduheswr h ils”...... 180 fields!” the work daughters and wives their “Let dignity.”...... 176 about more. It’s earning about not “It’s Imagined economies of exploitation and betrayal...... 164 and exploitation of economies Imagined ...... 161 them” with play cannot they develop adivasis “If forward…?...... 159 step adivasi thereal Will Redistributing land or safeguarding landed capital?...... 153 landed or safeguarding land Redistributing caste?...... 150 learning – or emancipation for Education ...... 148 momentum? anti-caste the or impeding Radicalizing The party: egalitarianism?...... 145 or radical Sanskritization movements: Early reform Soman: “If you are good at corruption, you can get along with the with along get youcan corruption, at good are you “If Soman: Janu: “They were just using people to get votes and lengthen their lengthen and votes get to people using just were “They Janu: systems”...... 125 political statist such rejected have totally “I Geethanandan: Vasu: “Even the CPI(ML) became saturated with upper-caste with became saturated CPI(ML) the “Even Vasu: ...... 112 Communism” with beings human became “People Kalan: sus”...... 184 issues…” party”...... 135 processions”...... 130 tendencies!”...... 118 v CEU eTD Collection Part 5: Part Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist ofcontents Table Part 6: Part Bibliography...... 239 ...... 236 Glossary Chapter 8: Chapter 7.3 plge...... 222 Epilogue End matter...... 235 End ocuin...... 217 Conclusion 7.2.2 7.2.1 7.1.2 7.1.1 The (dis)placements of class...... 223 “Then the promise came that adivasis would be given land..”...... 213 be given would adivasis that came promise the “Then it!”...... 209 hear will who one no there’s perhaps….but complain “We can The coherence of critical struggles...... 231 ofcritical The coherence making?...... 228 in the histories Hidden vi CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Maps (Wayanad highlighted) (Kerala highlighted) (Kerala M M AP OF AP OF AP I K NDIA ERALA MAPS MAP OF KARNATAKA MAP OF (Kodagu highlighted) (Kodagu vii CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist INTRODUCTION PART 1 1 CEU eTD Collection attracted attention in Latin America – certainly in areas where there is a strong continuity a strong is there where areas in certainly – America Latin in attention attracted has question This people. indigenous become had workers and peasants how words, other in understand, to wanted I century. twentieth of the decades last in the politics indigenist oriented autonomy- and culturally more to turned socialism even and integration social emancipation, for struggled earlier who people of theworld, regions many in of why question more general the on light shed could they how and debate this in raised issues the in interested I became thing? Was it dangerous? a good it was – forward way the then politics” “identity Was “adivasis”? of of people, group this of supportive been never ofdevelopment model its had Or well-being? general of supportive longer no and corrupted it was “globalization”; to out loosing care, health and education, wage, a decent to chance the had everyone where of India, whole the in reforms land radical most the seen had that “progressive”, being on itself prided that asociety Kerala, Was raised. had it issues the debating still was ofKerala) whole the say to almost is (which Kerala active politically of whole the events: by the impressed deeply still were who occupation the in participants the only wasn’t of 2003,it August in Kerala in arrived I first When for. hoped had people life new of the intact little left that force police amassive areaby the from evicted were occupiers the later, month a half and One theoccupation. organizing in lead the taken had who those by case any –in pride cultural and of autonomy a statement was It of society. “mainstream” the into be“uplifted” so to less – ofKerala citizens full emancipated, become to of wanting statement a not was Theirs land. the occupied they that ancestors oftheir lifestyle and land the reclaim to was it that and rights “adivasi” indigenous, had they that fact the was it about: talked they that workers agricultural to promises broken government’s or the poverty their however not was it event, this At them. for materialized never had this on, stood homes their land of plot the least at own to were workers agricultural that governments Kerala of many promises historical the despite -- for own their call to ofland piece a on Muthanga, at life a new start to planning were They memorabilia. and clothes with bags plastic and some cook in to a fewpots meant just that but them with owned they everything taken had them of Most land. the claim to there settling started and Kerala, of districts northern hilly, the of one in sanctuary”, wildlife “Muthanga the forestland, depleted area of an in gathered people of landless group large a 2003, January In Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Introduction R ESEARCH IN / ON & BEYOND THE CAPITALIST WORLD SYSTEM CHAPTER 1 Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 2 CEU eTD Collection may contribute to a different understanding -- and reality -- of the world system today. system world the --of reality -- and understanding adifferent to may contribute it how ask to movement a social as indigenism to my epilogue in Ireturn indigenism, of rise the to have lead that processes of theworld-historical interpretation realistic amore with come up and grain the against history read to tried having After hunger. and dispossession, violence, wide-scale returning cyclically amongst wealth of islands creates that in locked seem we logic capitalist in the intervention human of possibility the for – praxis for mean can all this what consider to is then, aim, final My question. this precisely answer to trying dissertations this of III and II parts I spend program. political indigenist an sounder doing started have they why but rebel people indigenous why not is explanation needs what hence that and phenomenon a substantive than rather aformal is indigenism of rise the that beclear to is myaim inspiration, for indigeneity their to turn instead or workers peasants as emancipation their for struggling previously were who people indigenous where resurgence” of“indigenous speak than rather Secondly, ornot. as “indigenous” known be to come people how of readings contested and contextual more relational, of way in the stood have historically that categorizations holistic divides. I spend part 2of this dissertation trying to deconstruct such reifying orregionally onto culturally division of this mapping the worse, and, system world capitalist the “outside” supposedly people and “in” supposedly people between – boundaries rehearsed – anddaily reifying the break to aims. Firstly, main three of consists dissertation, of this lay-out the structures time same the at which program, research The project. this during I gained that insights methodological main the and program my research lay out I chapter opening this In system. world capitalist the beyond and in/on my research have undertaken I that intersection this at precisely therefore is it and hope” of a“space I see that action and thinking socialist and of indigenist synthesis in the is it anything, If capital. of accumulated centuries of power the back push to going are miraculously now and proletariat, world’s of the part become to refused somehow have tide, the against swim always to managed have who people representing hope of asislands resistance” indigenous of years of“500 image on the fall back not do also but capitalism of global peripheries the in of socialism” “bastions create than more may do that of praxis sources of recognizing – system world capitalist the transcending of urgency the of light in I doso And relations. of complex global this about indicate turn in in Kerala unfolding Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist at Muthanga, occupation land the organized and 1990s ofthe course the in Kerala in arose that movement indigenist new the Sabha, Maha Gothra Adivasi the on myresearch situate hence I indigenism. of rise global the producing mechanisms of the ourunderstanding sharpen to Iwant world, in the socialism of democratic stories success greatest ofthe one as known once astate Kerala, in happened shift the why and how studying By India. in so less - but organizing indigenous and socialist between Introduction in the capitalist world system but also try to see what social processes social what to see try also but system world capitalist the Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 3 CEU eTD Collection 1.1 capitalist world system may well have to constantly take place along shifting socio-historical shifting along place take constantly to have well may system world capitalist a beyond and in struggle class that means also This refuted. amply been has forms pure into polarize bourgeoisie a and as aproletariat air thin into melt would phenomena structural” “super- such eventually capitalism in that Marxists by some prediction The function. to able be not probably would capitalism which without and reproduced and are produced relations class which through mechanisms allkey are latter The matter. not –do of power relations of accumulation and reproduction the of sites a few key but name to – or thefamily nations, state, the race, gender, culture, history, that as postulating analysis class of understandings popular some as same is notthe premise basic This its determinations. against struggle the as well as thekeyaxisin the worldsystem sum of relations in forcebehind the forms thedriving that eachother to turn in and nature to of humans relationship social as the of class concept keyMarxist the in moreover, interested, particularly Iam theory. Marxist through gained insights of relevance social the demonstrate to merely is my dissertation in do to want I What choice. anontological ultimately is and lenses theoretical one’s on relies “facts” of distinguishing act very the since situation aparticular explains theory one only that “prove” to impossible is it But baggage. unquestioned much too accumulated have they where up them open and weaknesses their overcome to theories expand to try We can theories. different are of potentials and merits the what explicit make can we lead; conclusions logical their see where and theories compare can We theory. byMarxist only explained be can that situation social or historical any is there I think mean not does commitment My tools. intellectual as tradition this within developed concepts sharpening and from borrowing about instead is It 2010). Roy (Arundhati place” wrong the in rub might one that ointment “an were theory Marxist if as it correctly” “applying about nor verities, ultimate finding about not is Marxism with engagement My theory. Marxist “correct” particular, a “prove” to Iwant because not but tradition a Marxist within loosely works project research The present Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist S study. we world of the muchpart are very asresearchers we that science of social attraction) (and dilemma basic the with deal to of how question the and of praxis; sources discover best can that a manner in today world the in on going is what on insights to observation local connect to how of issue the questions: methodological main two half discussing second the spend I chapter, this of part first in the detail in more questions theoretical these discussing After Introduction EEING LIKE A M ARXIST : T HEORETICAL APPROACHES TO INDIGENISM APPROACHES HEORETICAL Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 4 CEU eTD Collection 1.1.1 against the state” (also quoted in Scott 2009: i). On the one hand this is logical since indigenism since islogical this hand one Onthe 2009:i). Scott in quoted (also state” the against struggle their of ahistory is history without peoples of history the that much truthfulness, as least at with besaid might struggle,[i]t of class history is the haveahistory who of peoples history “the if that claim 185-86) (1977: Clastres’ Pierre in lies instance for approach dialectical than rather dialogical This is. context wider in other each to relationship their what on focus a through ofcategories of themeaning an analysis than rather categories different between relationship of the analysis an becomes often this analysis, on relational put scholars many emphasis the Despite product”. historical a“clay-like words, Wallerstein’s in as, indigeneity on to hold to difficult however is It people. of group given of a name the simply than rather project a political is it capacity this in that clear more the all becomes it dispossession, of axes an into indigeneity formed that processes historical same the against ofresistance keysite the also become can it circumstances particular under how acknowledge moreover we If regions. geographical coherent particular or people of categories substantive onto map all, for and once simply, not it does understand can we relationship, historical a particular – of ways contested in various, – expressive as indigeneity see we however, If, so. do to for them basis possible livelihood their to threats against revolt today people many so why all at wonder not need we fixed, and as primordial peoplehood indigenous understand we if For reality. primordial a given, as than rather phenomenon sociological as aparticular context in historical it understand can we how for, stands “indigeneity” what ask to need we indigenism, of rise the explains what ask can we Before Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist T more detail. in here program research my introduce mehence Let itposes. questions the even or produce will project this answers the predetermines far from tradition research aMarxist within Working on. conclusions equal reach will perspective basic this sharing Marxists that exercise actual (“real” as the understand thereby to someas atotality world the -- within understood theoretically Marxists – relations would put class to it) forms social various relate is does perspective role a Marxist What form. “pure” in place they play in class take – ever cannot – perhaps not need struggle Class struggle.logic. a capitalist deepen that institutions This is no simplekey various the with in confrontation and ornation race, gender, of of inequality axes Introduction HE CLAY other” (Wallerstein 1987: 387). 1987: (Wallerstein other” each with struggle forces antagonistic the which through world-economy capitalist of the product historical clay-like a complex, but reality, stable aprimordial sense no – in is it what for peoplehood understand to try to sense make more not it “Would - LIKE QUALITIES OF I NDIGENEITY as indigenouspeople Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research since that would be the only be the would that since 5 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist precisely as the struggle more indigenism define I would world contemporary the in Yet system. world capitalist expanding a violently against society original byan struggle the for stand to be seen can Introduction understanding present realities. What my dissertation aims to do is to pay attention precisely attention pay to is do to aims dissertation my What realities. present understanding in unhelpful is rather but century eighteenth the before of capitalism expansion original the describes accurately –perhaps irony in – i.e., phrase the used Wolf as Eric vein same the in meant obviously thought history, “without” and “with” of people contrasting Clastres’ Pierre world. working of the rest the and people indigenous between rehearses scholarship current much that difference essential the contest to rather – but thus disappear ever distinctions social if – as 457) 2006: (Lee periphery” capitalist the of underclass vast the into disappearing “simply as people indigenous portray mean to not I do this With contested. as well as organized is economy world a capitalist laborby of social appropriation the which through axis evolved historically a particular as vision, Wallerstein’s to according but, system world capitalist ofthe outside being actually on based phenomenon as asocial not seeindigeneity to identifying asindigenous than slash-and-burn agriculture in isolated forests is, it makes sense people for reality is amuchmorewidespread this Since of labor. army areserve into turned themselves indeed (and community” “imagined an it, put would (1983) Anderson Benedict as only, not is society original this that ignore not Weshould system. world capitalist meanwhile suffer from suffer meanwhile terms similar in themselves see who or ‘indigenous’ consider we people Other process). production of the organization of the terms in purely but system world capitalist a within value of surplus circulation of in terms not production capitalist define to tends otherwise (who Wolf Eric for even “capitalist” as count would that –asituation with up come they process production “efficient” more whatever with dealing to subjected capital, of managers from supervision direct under working lives productive their spend life” of way “indigenous an to dear holding ofthose Many etc. workers mine workers, construction laborers, agricultural as power labor their onselling fully dependent and body own their except themselves sustaining of means any owning not capitalism, of global part more obviously even are indigenism of name the in struggling people Many lives. people’s other) (and these over leverage greater ever gains return in that capital global accumulated as off are ciphered production of this surpluses the everywhere almost but ofproduction, mode akin-based towards more lean instance for ofwhich some of life, ways distinct maymaintain people Indigenous system. world capitalist of the part integral an already everywhere almost today also is but state) dis employed – first violently made dependent on being employed, only to then be then to only employed, on being dependent made violently – first employed not on behalf of having their labor power appropriated by global capital and finding and capital by global appropriated power labor their having an original society to confront its subordination to the to subordination its confront to society original an Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research imagined as outside ofthe asoutside 6 CEU eTD Collection relations of power. The notion helped analyze collectivities of protest and transformation and of protest collectivities analyze helped notion The power. of relations on emphasis a necessary retaining while reductionism of economic pitfalls the avoid help to “subaltern” of the notion the posited scholars Studies Subaltern argues, initiative, original the in participant active an (1997), Sarkar Sumit As disjunctions. sterile and categorical to reduced by then had Marxism orthodox – thatso-called subaltern and elite economy, and culture resistance, and –domination life ofsocial dimensions tension dialectical in hold to ability particularly the work of Gramsci work the particularly and tradition Marxist the within came from Inspiration as India. known became what -- by resisting shaping --and resisting and inshaping women and “tribals”, peasants, roleof the to attention more much with hence and nation-state Indian the of teleology the beyond history Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 1 1980s early the in emerged that school Studies TheSubaltern ofhistory. engine main asthe capital with struggle and its states core in working-class formal the posit to tendency and their views state-centric and/or nation-centric, Eurocentric, from away margins, the through history rethink to science social in effort a passionate seen have we soafter, increasingly and 1970s the around from that surprising is not – it of China) exception grand the (with “workers” than rather “indigenous” as indentifying people –from its core within from than rather “margins” its from emanating are system world present the to challenges counter-hegemonic most the that seems it Since debate. general the of history recent the on however, words, a few add here will I Kerala. in developed category distinct asapolitically people of indigenous notion the which how it did so in Kerala. In chapter 3 to of course I follow attention particular with evolved, thisit historically as divide upof the“tribe-class” bynotion tracing the more contemporary ways the bydiscussing for this in ground the 2,Iprepare chapter In “governmentality”. called Foucault of what aproduct primarily is it where particularly dichotomy, common-sense this disrupt to Iwant people. indigenous and working-classes so-called of dichotomy this beyond think to want I subjects, state versus peoples “state-repellent” calls (2009) C. Scott James what distinguish to analysis, academic in also but movements social of rhetoric in the just not popular, increasingly fact in is it Where system. world capitalist of the part intricate an become have who by people lead struggles indigenist of— majority –perhaps many of the the complexities study I Kerala, in Sabha Maha Gothra Adivasi the of case the Through reality. contemporary this to Introduction 2 The first Subaltern Studies volume came out in 1982, edited by Ranajit Guha, who also was editor of Gramsci’s prison notebooks, written between 1926 and 1937, were edited and published in English in S. Pandian, and Ajay Skaria, with an explicit focus also on Dalits and Muslims. onDalits focus also explicit an with Skaria, Ajay and Pandian, S. out,editedbyShail M.S. come Mayaram, had the twelfthSubaltern Studiesvolume By 2005, Stephens. “rebellious revolt” and “peasant mostly concerned with were subsequentvolumes.Contributions the five hillmen”. The first explicit feminist intervention came in Volume 6 (1989) by Julie 1971 by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith. Nowell andGeoffrey Hoare 1971 byQuintin 1 is a major such intervention from India. Its original program was to rewrite to was program original Its India. from intervention such a major is 2 and E P Thompson (1970) whom both were admired for their for admired were both whom (1970) E PThompson and Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 7 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist based is of Zomia analysis his that admits he Though of peoples. types and areas geographical distinct onto “autonomy”) (for state the against struggle and struggle class maps he however (“Zomia”), Asia Southeast upland inhabiting people the 2009) on (Scott work recent most his In compliance. of symbolic surface a under autonomy of a sense retaining of ways myriad have fact – in Revolution Green the so effect polarizing the with struggling peasants Malaysian case his – in subjects state how showed clearly so contrast in 80s by and 1970s the work whose Scott, James of work the in also people of indigenous theautonomy emphasizing towards move this see can We 304). (1997: qualities” and meanings decontextualized fixed absolute, less more or them to assigning of sense the in “autonomy” and of “subaltern” categories the “essentializing toward atendency came there School Subaltern ofthe trail the on noted, has (1997) Sarkar Sumit As theory. Marxist of critique) than (rather criticism of one as exercise their frames but Marxism relational-historical on builds latently that project scholarly contemporary the similar aims interms ofstruggling forsocialism yet against Stalinism – differs significantly from pursuing activists of political a generation with tandem in working – dogmatism creeping its critique and theory Marxist revitalize to working of scholars generation post-1968 This development. combined and of uneven a question as dominance Europe’s explaining theories historical relational more to lead debate this Rethinking innovation. for incapacity absolute an entailed feudalism, unlike and, Asia of history the dominated supposedly had that ofproduction” mode “Asian the and ofproduction mode or “feudal” European the between differences essential through explained as Asia South like places over hegemony subsequent its and Europe Western in of capitalism rise the seen had latter The debates. production of modes Marxist in orthodox distinctions essentialist the rethinking were trend, same this in meanwhile, anthropologists European 385). (1982: cultures” and societies ofself-contained a sum of as instead asystem, atotality, a whole, as “theworld emphasize to was world the understanding in make to tried Wolf difference The system. world capitalist – the formation social common evolving an within conditioning unequal) (though mutual emphasized time same the at Wolf communities, and classes of non-European/non-hegemonic development determined) pre- (not “autonomous” the to did, school Studies Subaltern asthe attention, due Paying analysis. his of center the at production of of modes understanding a theoretical placed and tradition “Marxian”) hepreferred, (or, aMarxist within worked Wolf also Eric history”. “without hence and “static” look them made that projected became myth animperial whom onto regions and by populations formed being also but dominating just core not capitalist expanding of an history without people the and “ seminal of his publication the with anthropology US in turn critical a similar promoted Wolf Eric time, same the Around identities. reified and of fixed terms in them positing without Introduction ” (1982), in which he too sought to tell a relational world history world arelational tell to sought too he which in ” (1982), Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research Europe 8 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist not is culture Sider for though of “others” that and culture “own” between a dichotomy posing in formulation Sider’s in of essentialism aseed still is there Note xiii). (2003: them” on impose to intensely so try others as those well as culture and history own their against and “within live to have people indigenous where level a moremicro at Sider, Gerald following aperspective, such apply also can we but capitalism global against” and “within a struggle as indigenism see We can system. ofthe outside from coming as indeed essentialized easily is it as such), functions still often and system as such impose to struggle the for precisely stood also originally has it (though assuch system world capitalist the against fight for the stand come to has indigenism because Butprecisely content. a global also but form aglobal just not attained fission ofsociety into binary oppositions. And like race and ethnicity, it has increasingly internal the in as atactic but effect as an race, not of suggests (2007) asFoucault sustained, is It 387). 1987: (Wallerstein other” each with struggles forces antagonistic the which through world-economy capitalist of the product historical “aclay-like peoplehood, like but, reality social stable a paragraph, ofthis epigraph the to back come to not, is Indigeneity categories. such other with continuous ways many in hence it and against as well in produced one precisely but system world capitalist ofa outside as acategory not see indigeneity I place. take labor will of division this against struggle the which along axis an as, necessarily, as well labor of division a global in appropriated and organized is labor social which in a way constituting race in or gender ethnicity, to similar inequality, of axis a particular becomes indigeneity Hence power. state through managed capital, ofglobal pool ever-expanding an towards value flowing its and alienated labor social their areseeing people and areas indigenous most seethat we perspective, latter the from people indigenous lookat we If categories. these across appropriated and mobilized is labor social which in ways the study however, not, does He categories. these laborwithin of social organization the studies and categories connects it that in lies relationality the analysis, a “relational” proposes explicitly Scott Though interests. own its for influence of sphere its within indigeneity defining in itself state of the role the ignore Both or “uplift”. protection of either need in culture a tribal of remnants as inhabitants their and zones these positing one hegemonic the from version) assertive amore (simply story a different all that not is this Yet thestate. avoiding of choices as conscious societies highland indigenous, -- see work latest in his does Scott --as to popular likewise is It place. –takes both them –affecting power of an accumulation which across totality of a are part they that sense the in not but other each produce they in that related are hence subjects state and peoples repellent state- Indigenous, studies. indigenous contemporary in popular increasingly is emerges that argument the end, an be approaching may distinction the that and history more distant on Introduction Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 9 CEU eTD Collection 1.1.2 mobilization to wider global processes. David Harvey’s theory of “accumulation by of “accumulation theory Harvey’s David processes. global wider to mobilization and subjectivity of political forms changing connecting of approach world-systems Marxist, a on by building process the studied stead in Ihave in. involved were people indigenous that mobilization of political forms other ignoring altogether simply or of differences substantive be to people” “indigenous and “workers” of considering trap the into fall other or point some at usually hand, other onthe mechanisms, causal discuss do that Studies mechanisms. key causal signaling would, as sociologists however, without indetail, time through process the describing historian, as a so has done he Ecuador, in case, his In movements. of social socialist andindigenist political initiatives in terms of people’s life historiesand the trajectories between continuities the about explicit havebeen to few authors ofthe one is Becker Marc engaged. were people indigenous inwhich ones, socialist notably projects, political alternative of existence the or ignore people indigenous essentialize either century twentieth of the quarter last inthe indigenism of a rise seen wehave why on arguments existing all almost since on rely to sources few are however there answer, an finding In place. took shift this why ask can we Hence initiatives. political of “framing” of adifferent a question – subjectivity political in shift aformal largely in fact is societies” of indigenous recent“rise as the presented usually is what that premise the at arrive to indigeneity of notions of reified deconstruction the takes It F them. to open identifications Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist struggle people indigenous increasingly why paragraph: following in the out I work question the to which from perspective anecessary is also It alliances. wider necessary tothe particularity upthis open to but history aparticular reflects indigeneity that therefore, deny, to not is This struggles. other with ally concretely can that position bea to needs also it – history inworld capitalism and state the of newness relative of the world the remind to which through anobject others, for “inspiration” bean only cannot Indigeneity needs. it ofalliances kind what and about is struggle the what on against both “indigenous” others. Returning tothe global level, itiscrucial to study indigenism as a struggle including potentially as “others” read thus Wemay life. everyday of contradictions the of makesense people which in way the rather but structure coherent and bounded a particular Introduction RAMING MOVEMENTS RAMING and are about” (Harvey 2003: 166) 2003: (Harvey are about” and were struggles such what of nature very the from derived that reasons organizational and pragmatic for simply instances other in but ideological for sometimes different political path, insome instances quite hostile to socialist politics. This was a took generally dispossession by accumulation against movements “The insurgent and within global capitalism precisely because itallows for a realistic perspective : F ROM CLASS TO INDIGENEITY ROM CLASSTO as indigenouspeople Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research while there are potentially many other many potentially are there while 10 CEU eTD Collection development as well as with liberal democratic regimes that for instance abstract the working the abstract instance for that regimes democratic liberal as with as well development of models oppressive with experience historical and life of way different oftheir because had people indigenous grievances of the consequence the tradition, research this in was, of indigenism rise The 216.). 1992: (Escobar signification” and power, production, of system in search of alternatives of search in studied was hegemony, ofsuch outside be to assumed culture, and knowledge local indigenous West, the in frames hegemonic discursive of effects cooptive the of critical particularly were scholars Movements Social New Since practice. and culture political of character the changed significantly America Latin in 1980s of the movements” “grassroots by the action of collective forms novel the that argued instance for (1992) Alvarez and Escobar critiques. Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist an appreciating on focused has it political, than rather cultural primarily as identities, asother indigeneity, take to tends theory Movement Social New Since antagonisms. “class” than other about being as precisely seen were movements these since revolts of indigenous basis in the class interest little There was movements. socialist and movements social indigenous between continuities in possible than modernity European of critiques cultural –the inspire to continue – and inspired have that people indigenous of values cultural alternative in the interested more often is tradition, in this undertaken where movements, ofindigenous The study rejected. usually was society, capitalist in relation antagonistic fundamental as the onclass insistence its particularly and generally, more Marxism theorists, Movement Social New inspired work of Gramsci’s interpretations idealist Though with. become complicit had unions and movements labor “old” that and capital and labor between compromises of steady twodecades came with that conservatism and complacency cultural the 1960s of turbulent in the developing critique European of the part was theory Movements Social New generally More of contention. focus central astheir issues, economic than rather oflife”, “way on people’s focusing identities new generating conflict, central society’s constituted cleavages social butother capital and labor not society “postindustrial” in that argued 1981) (e.g. Touraine line, Stalinist aparticularly to held that party Communist a to reaction over-) a (perhaps in Partly Touraine. of Alain leadership the under France in particularly developed theory, Movements Social asNew known Thefirst, traditions. theoretical broad two into divided been of 1968, shake-up the have, after studies movement Social place. taken has indigenism of rise the on debate of the most in which field the studies, movement in social interpretations existing on abit here elaborate will I Here, reform. neoliberal of side-effects liberating empowering, apparently of the outcome the as of indigenism portrayals overlyrosy interrogating in useful particularly is as Kerala, such areas in developing processes the to according adjustment needs it though dispossession”, Introduction to development as “strategies to contain the Western economy as a as economy Western the contain to “strategies as development Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research emic reading of the content of indigenist content of the reading 11 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist indigenist which under conditions necessary the stresses also Yashar movement, a of rise the explain to enough is not a motive that Wellaware organize. to people indigenous motivated hence and regimes, citizenship corporatist previous under maintain to managed creatively had people which communities, indigenous of viability economic and autonomy the to threat a posed 70s onward late the from countries American Latin in place took that restructuring neoliberal the that argues She perspective. Structures Opportunity Political a similar from this with agrees 5) (2005: agenda” indigenous anexplicitly promote to lines ethnic “along organized theyhave why and before” not and now have emerged movements indigenous “why on America Latin in work Yashar’s 121). (2007: people ofindigenous fate the vis-a-vis history” of “cunning globalization’s calls Turner Terence what is This 2003: 142). (Niezen autonomy to obstacles surmount to used – of multiculturalism tools political and legal the – tools very by the changed being also “is globalization that ensure that technologies communication new and society civil international identity-formation, of international terms in people indigenous it gives opportunities the through hand other the on but landscape”, cultural world’s the changing … rivalry ethnic and domination, state degradation, of environmental forces assimilative and destructive “the poses, it threat the through hand one the on globalization to ofindigenism origins the ties He (2003: 2). canbefound” diversity of human expression clearest “the fact in whom amongst people’) (‘indigenous of people a category in sameness and of commonness feeling a create to of work a lot was it that demonstrates Niezen of indigenism. rise global the producing in People, Indigenous on Group Working UN the through particularly indigenism, (2003) Niezen’s Ronald regimes. colonial and of authoritarian democratization the with created possibilities political and the funding and of organizing strategies transnational of new as aproduct more but well, as century twentieth ofthe quarter last the before issue an been have would presumably which values, indigenous of as adefense so much not interpreted were movements Indigenous of societies. disintegration moral of the symptoms as behavior”, of “collective in terms be viewed should they ideathat the against movements social of rationality the of defending project historical longer the with than left old the critiquing with concerned less was school This state. the vis-à-vis openings political of existence the and processes mobilization ofsuccessful because but and discontents desires of certain because much as notso arising saw movements contrast US,in the in 1998) 1978, (e.g. Tilly Charles of work by the inspired theories, Mobilization or Resource Structures Opportunity Political procedures. formal to democracy reduce and polities, sacral compartmentalize in nature, embeddedness its from economy of the Introduction for instance, emphasizes the organizational efforts of indigenous people, ofindigenous efforts organizational the emphasizes instance, for Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research Origins of 12 CEU eTD Collection which particular political struggles are fought – the former concerns what happens in those in happens what concerns former – the fought are struggles political particular which in setting the shape that processes those concerns latter The power”. “structural and power” “tactical by as determined described (2001) Wolf Eric what as levels two these see to preferring manner, connected explicitly amore so in I do Yet theory. Structures Opportunity Political of focus – the process this enabled that changes structural wider the – and you will if approach, Movement Social New – the process ofthis give themselves activists that interpretations the both to attention pay hence I unfeasible. or ineffective become forms older as resistance of forms and language in the shifts produce to decades past the in have interacted processes economic/structural more and how political/ideological of analysis DavidHarvey’s with I engage that question this to answer an finding in is It 123). 2003: (Nelson people indigenous oppressing non-indigenous about but rich, versus orpoor capitalist, versus worker and peasant right, versus left about been actually having as not are reinterpreted past the of movements social why background; of indigenous being for at them directed of discrimination result asthe this see cometo haveinstead time over but people other vis-à-vis positioned relationally were they of how as aresult oroppression poverty seetheir to used people why – “indigeneity” as concerning enacted and been reinterpreted have instead and struggle class as “framed” being have stopped conflicts social certain is why dissertation this in explain to try I What alternatives. possible and of condition of their understanding participants’ movement shape that practices performative and ideological the as to as well structures political existing vis-avis movements positioning by strategically arise identities collective inwhich ways the to both referring a notion -- “framing” of one as question the put could I approaches, Structures Opportunity Political and Movements Social New between synthesis of anew that particularly and research, movements ofsocial language the In struggle. class people but also why they did they also why but people indigenous as organized people why interesting only not is it that aware remain us help can It “counterfactuals”. through thinking for argument (1999) Tilly’s Charles mayfollow we models, is emerges that resistance the that granted for it take but conditions structural wider the understand help approaches Structures Opportunity Political rise. its for allow conditions structural wider what to attention little butpays resistance of such content indigenous particularly the on focuses research Movements Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist organize people indigenous of why question the answered really have not traditions these of either within working Scholars of indigenism. explanation their in contradictory necessarily arenot theorizing movements social of currents The two space”. associational of “political up opening an is there where and historically exist networks” “transcommunity where namely place, take could organizing Introduction not do so any longer according to other models, notably that of that notably models, other to according longer any so do indigenist. Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research To overcome this hiatus shared between the between shared hiatus this Toovercome as indigenous people. New Social New 13 CEU eTD Collection 1.1.3 the rise of indigenism in structural global and historical context, namely Jonathan Friedman’s Jonathan namely context, historical and global instructural indigenism of rise the with deals explicitly that theories existing few ofthe one with perspective struggles” “critical a of such combination the for argue hereis do to I want What chapter. of this part second inthe to return I will that issue above all amethodological is This structures. global existing of reality the as aswell understanding our may change movements social how to attentive is then but capitalism of global theories of existing lens the through movements social studies it – liberating and realistic both hence is It system. world of the conjuncture current the about us tell they what see to movements social studying of counter-move dialectical the emphasizes it also is that project struggles” “critical McMichael’s about interesting more is allthe what But comparison”). “incorporated calls (2000) McMichael (what system world the within structuring and position their also at but characteristics internal lookat only not should we efficacy and timing their in comparing –that (“concretized”) processes global to relation in contextualized be advocated, just too asI should, movements social that argues firstly McMichael efficacy. and attributes particular of their terms in comparatively movements social studying of theory, Mobilization ofResource incarnations later some in particularly analysis, movements ofsocial practice usual the against set primarily is here describes McMichael Philip The project Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist C basis of perceiving themselves as worker-citizens. material ofthe people many dispossessed that changes 4, political-economic in part discuss I as with, together of earlier part been had people indigenous movements of socialist kind the of disintegration ideological the about dissertation, 3 ofthis inpart discuss I as also, but people indigenous to available resources organizational and communication for possibilities of greater or globalization of criticism “indigenous” an about only not is of indigenism rise the that argue to me leads focus a Such relevant. are particularly mobilization of political forms on impacted mayhave by dispossession” “accumulation and of capital financialization the how on indications Harvey’s David Here restructuring. by neoliberal characterized period in atime happened shift this that fact of the aware Iammoreover indigenism, to socialist – from shift formal i.e. the – framing political in shift of the question the asking In connected. closely are levels two these at unfolding processes the formulation this with explicit made Wolf Eric As themselves. setting Introduction RITICAL STRUGGLES VERSUS THE GLOBAL SYSTEMIC STRUGGLESVERSUSTHEGLOBAL RITICAL (McMichael 2010: 5). 2010: (McMichael conjuncture” neo-liberal this of of claims terms the with precisely is engagement cognitive their and moment, historical this expressing as them view We conjuncture. political-economic ashared to relational in but another, one to relation comparative in not of observation, units as struggles viewing procedure, this Weinvert abstraction. “Viewing social movements asunits ofanalysis … risks cultural andhistorical Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 14 CEU eTD Collection project” to an increase in “rooted” forms of identity” (ibid: 7). Indigenization is amajor is 7).Indigenization (ibid: of identity” forms “rooted” in increase an to project” development a “citizenry-based as nation-state the through identification” modernist of decline “the to relating fragmentation of seeaprocess we hand other the on Horizontally vulnerability. and insecurity economic increasing and classes, working for incomes stagnating unemployment, increasing see we spectrum of the side other the On ofGDP. 25percent astonishing an Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist not just by but class” of a“transnational part areincreasingly who elites of capitalist incomes enormous the in reflected is society of echelons upper the for mobility Upward 11). (ibid.: of capital” composition changing andthe speedup, shift, of global combination of “a is part that differentiation class in rise a notable observes Friedman stratified, quite already or egalitarian more originally whether countries, all In 10). (ibid.: proportions astounding in quite stratification of class in terms happening is polarization Vertically polarization”. “double calls sometimes Friedman what with comes phases, previous like hegemony, ofUS decline ofthe phase current The 2003). and Friedman and Ekholm (Kajsa years 3,000 past the for dynamic a similar by regulated contraction and expansion civilizational of process historical of along part words, other in Itis, England. and Holland and finally Spain and Portugal city-states, Italian the East, Middle the Flanders, and Mediterranean ofthe trade expansive and growth economic following be seen also could that hegemony in shift a longer-term accompanying crisis of economic kind of the symptomatic – is US the ofcourse especially – hegemony of global centers II post-WW the from exported increasingly is capital mid-1970s the from that The fact phase. historical – a cyclical as rather but world-evolutionary thereby and era”, a “new be seen not should Friedman to according system world globalizing contemporary The 648). 2000: (Friedman world” of that structures by the are generated that discourses and derivative identities cultural the and world the “both understanding at aimed is anthropology” systemic “global His of indigenism. rise the for reasons the understand and to try my efforts of heart to the goes theory Friedman’s futures. possible other for space leavesome to perspective struggles” a“critical with dialogue bein to needs it that argue Iwill view, geographical and historical a wide call for Friedman’s with Iagree though Hence question. bedone” to is “what classic the on conclusion Friedman’s is Ages Dark the for prepare for: arein we what exactly is repetition such doubt haveno to seems it theory, Friedman’s at look we when Yet again. over and over of history tragedies the repeating avoid and try to want we if Friedman, to be so,according must It 391f). (1999: understanding” for focus central “our mustbe that analysis of afield constitutes that system global multiplex and dynamic of a part as also but contexts national particular their within just not movements indigenous studying call for consistently to few the of one been has Friedman theory. systems global Introduction for itself. Recent official figures for India show that its 100 richest persons own persons 100 richest its that show India for figures official Recent itself. Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 15 CEU eTD Collection almost all documentation was done by elites only. “Reading between the lines” or “against the or “against lines” the between “Reading only. byelites done was documentation all almost which from centuries from at reform attempts failed counter-hegemonic, discern to impossible is almost it – capitalism liberal embracing all about nowgoes, story dominant the as not, certainly were which of 1989– protests the instance for driving andforces meanings contested the retain to as itis difficult As history. of victors the representing sources historical on rely to need moreover we more the history, in go back we Thefurther world. of the our understanding in makeadifference to studies ethnographic local, roomfor little leaves it that also is approach ofthis aproblem centuries, three than more back goes system world capitalist present the that notion convincing entirely not the to addition in Yet, robust. more all the theories Friedman’s makes This history. in before times many haveoccurred newbut nothing are wake in its he sees violence and fragmentation of financialization, processes the and power hegemonic of decline Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist last the in powers hegemonic of fall and rise the and accumulation of cycles studies Friedman Instead, system. world capitalist current of the beginning the as see many that 2001) Linebaugh and Rediker see of land; privatization by the created problems the solve to (partly expansion overseas and land of common privatizing Britain’s or from ideals, egalitarian universal, for struggle socialist first as the many by seen revolution, French the from onward history studying by merely not theories these at arrives Friedman 650). (ibid.: people” “particular” of rights over the conflict resulting the and state” nation of the mainstays the were that processes of homogenizing “disintegration the represents instead indigenism “core”, ofthe Outside 649). (ibid.: politics minority of forced, often decline, a and modernism anew identities, regional and national of rise opposite an demonstrate.. Asia Southeast and East in system world of the areas rising “the latter, the to regard with observes AsFriedman nation-state. the through organized reproduction expanded of regime a maintaining actively arestill Asia East South of hegemons economic rising new the only which in a situation – hegemonic remain to capital US of struggles the accompanying capital of financialization the from haveresulted that dispossession by accumulation of processes the accompanies indigenism of rise the perspective, Harvey’s into Translated 649). (ibid.: structure” a hegemonic as Empire Soviet of the disintegration “the by accompanied West”) (“the system” world the of center oftheformer state nation of the weakening in the expressed system.. world the in orhegemony centrality in decline of “a process” “dual the follows that arena world the in identification of process “transformation-fragmentation” of a expression an indigenous interms of standard definitions” (2000: 650). This rise of indigenous movements is is one not or whether upon dependent not … of rooting “aprocess hence is Indigenization (ibid.). choice” of identity but biology of as amatter “not mid-1970s the since size in have increased populations indigenous that notes Friedman and of this expression Introduction Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research three thousand years. The years. 16 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Gramsci’s to go to is thechallenge I think yet of, evidence shows work Friedman’s something is Thelatter will”. the of optimism of the intellect, cell: “pessimist prison a fascist in health bad tremendously under broken when he wrote what is probably byGramsci quote famous most the ironically though life his all for struggled he a project – “intellect” and “will” connecting on emphasis Gramscian of the aquestion is primarily this Methodologically history. human through changes inevitable transporting vehicle anecessary just than rather force a historical as struggle ofseeing challenge the is on theory Friedman’s complicate to Iwant issue The main traced. directly be still can struggles indigenist present-day with continuities which from history, twentieth-century recent, more the at look to prefer hence I dissertation this In open. more allthe is somewhere “bastion” adesperate into belocked to refuses that kind of the socialism space-making international, for way the this with but pockets incertain politics ofsocialist sponsoring its Bloc and Soviet the of “alternative” of the collapse the signals indeed It ground. the on accomplish to aretrying people of what terms in studied when integration but perspective systems aglobal from at looked when disintegration signal can Indigenism agriculture. on grip capital’s global confront can that alliance a broader for need the and conditions neoliberal under of farming a living making of difficulty of the awareness an with coupled classes, allsocial for happened never that reform of aland completion as the be read also can but it – trend have it) would (asFriedman Ages Dark the to back – land” a“back-to-the- signal can instance, for ofland, apiece of acquiring Themeaning system. world the in hegemony declining of symptom same old the be just not it need that reveals it preceded intervenes inestablished histories. A closerof study indigenism inlight of the struggles that time same the at thereby and processes inthese intervenes itself indigenism how closely more exploring ofalso move counter to the attention more pay to like would thus I system, global in the process adisintegrative assignaling ofindigenism rise ofthe reading Friedman’s I follow Though 1987: 381). (Wallerstein change” possibly or could changes ever has past particular any that admit ever can one no past, the constant of an assertion by definition is pastness “since.. though even changes” constantly necessarily of pastness content “the changes, contemporary of light in that ignore would aperspective Such or consequence. meaning further no have today product, in which asafinished past the rely on – cannot ones “failed” emphasize, Iwould –including, change struggles social for struggles through thatpartly world the reads which perspective, struggles critical A never managed to put history. in years their thousand three we goback if difficult rather obviously is This interpretations. stamp on historyown people’s about learning of indeed but description” “thick with doing Geertz Cliffort as we knowsees he way the texts it as actions people’s reading of not a proponent is Friedman since certainly limits, buthasits attempted –canto do be school tried Studies the Subaltern –something grain” Introduction Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 17 CEU eTD Collection 1.2 in myths about the superiority of Western modern knowledge production, Kavita Philip (2003: Philip Kavita production, knowledge modern ofWestern superiority the about myths in steeped method, scientific this adopt to anthropologists Indian for reasons The methodologies. inductive “objective” and “modern” in steeped tradition ascientific preserve to as needing seethemselves to continue -- populations “adivasi” on production knowledge the in active most those – often it outside and India in anthropology of currents Many present. the of limits the transcend to future, to the history connect to tools theintellectual offer cannot quo. It status the in anchored is entirely that process of historical analysis an represents it that is methodology, of, the independent otherwise and product, the merely seems that a theory achieve to schemas methodological of inductive imitation such about problem One 1989). (Burawoy refuted have actually would sciences” “hard ofthe practice actual of the examination historical careful that understanding – an sciences physical the to pertain to are understood that methods isolated socially and inductive the using by legitimacy derive to anthropology or sociology in attempts the from differs it in this And exercise. ongoing of an description the hence is following The my research. doing I was as developed only insights my methodological also so walking, correct for anatomy of or knowledge talking correct for noprecondition is knowledge Asgrammatical findings. upmy write to down sat afterwards, and, field the out for I set when developed fully already was and above sketched I program research the of independent was my methodology that a pretence as of methodology discussion explicit toan turning not I am T altogether. theory ofignoring extreme other the against by Friedman undertaken work of theoretical kind the of defense in fact, in partly, detail, in more now to I turn is what entails this method Thedialectical it. of changing part as world the understand to atheory of building efforts -- thecollective struggles” “critical on emphasis more with but concerns theoretical Friedman’s with line in undertaken is dissertation This of it. part are as we and evolves it as of history independent world the explains that theory complete and neutral no is there out, works Friedman kind of the theory need we though Hence change. Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist helps emphasizes, asMcMichael time, same at the of but is aproduct world the of ourunderstanding hence that and processes material and of intellectual interconnectedness a relational is there but that streets the to taking start and pens their drop should scientists social that mean not does This world. the understanding, merely than rather changing, start to philosophers to call famous Marx’s following intellect, and of will dialectics actual Introduction HE MINEFIELDS OFMETHODOLOGY is the precondition for ‘correct’ walking” (Max Weberin Burawoy 1989: 759). 1989: Burawoy Weberin (Max walking” ‘correct’ for precondition the is anatomy than work intellectual fruitful for precondition morethe no is … “Methodology : O N WALKING Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research “ CORRECTLY ” produce social 18 CEU eTD Collection 1.2.1 primarily a question of modes of ethnographic practice, of “doing fieldwork” in such a way as to as away such in fieldwork” of “doing practice, ethnographic of of modes aquestion primarily as methodology by taking is way One analogy. through simply not if global the and local the connecting about go to how remains question the perspective, “place-making” a from For here. end not do issues methodological the Yet space. and in time shaped as relationships places and cultures, peoples, sees stead in and analogy by place and space collapse do, descriptions thick asholistic not, does that perspective” “place-making a from work to prefer today anthropologists Many quo. status the within thinking in anthropologist the also to incarcerate – but 1988: 37) (Appadurai instance for ofIndia case the for hierarchy –caste trope cultural aparticular under and place a particular in natives “incarcerate” to only has not it tendency and the assumed it that 1997: 7) Ferguson and (Gupta culture” and place, of space, of the “isomorphism terms in of criticism a lot against up run has holism Such been. has always actually – and world contemporary the in unsatisfactory grossly is ethnography village self-sufficient of the holism the that formed has consensus A global. the localand the connect to of how is research, my alsofor crucial and sociology, and in anthropology debated questions methodological basic important most ofthe One Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist A describes. she world the in researcher of the involvement –the recognize than rather – isolate to attempt objective the -- andsecondly abstractions asconcrete facts seeing than – rather themselves for speak thefacts of letting attempt inductive the are firstly here with Iengage critique whose principles regulative hegemonic two The versa. vice and change social progressive to speak work intellectual in making important is methods such Overcoming lives. their in force oppressive another yet as works that jargon authoritative an worse, or is, them to meaning no has science that impression the gained have movements social and people ordinary which from those precisely are often method scientific “correct” of the status the claim to tend that principles regulative the that shows fact in discussion methodological following The issues. “adivasi” of study the with associated closely most anthropology of currents the in shift paradigm necessary the producing in success havelittle to continue Sabha Maha Gothra remained intact. Inisinthese conditions that critical indigenist movements like the Adivasi itself gulf the however, Consequently, colonized. and colonizer between ofthegulf side other the to themselves to transport anthropologists Indian it enabled how in lie argues 144) Introduction DIALECTICS OF DISCOVERY AND INTERPRETATION 2009: 150) 2009: (Burawoy futures.” possible also of but of history reconstruction the to turn, in leading, of Marxism, reconstruction the forcing continually is history anomalies up throwing “By Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 19 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 3 I also But itself. truth than rather of truth approximations as explanation for a quest understand can we contingencies; cultural and historical oftheir aware be should we models; and our categories of suspicious beprofessionally to need “we that argued Wolf this, to reaction In narratives” “grand as beknown to came of what deconstruction constant the and description thick Geertzian towards turn postmodern earlier the in intervention methodological Wolf’s Eric recall to useful is it Ithink --theory, or any – of Marxist rejection of Tsing’s context the In endpoint. an but never point a starting is thereby theory Marxist Existing observation. and theory connecting of method adialectical with working in but theory aparticular in defending not lies intervention important most Marxism’s Marxism”, orthodox of a “defense styled awkwardly he somewhat what in claimed them before (1923) Lukacs As theory. than even perhaps crucial –more crucial was methodology that convinced equally were Hopkins, or Terrence Wallerstein Immanuel as such theorists world-systems count surely should we whom amongst but mention, actually to fails Tsing that theorists Marxist the however, Ironically, theory. in Marxist is supposedly it process unauthored and inevitable the beyond of globalization notion the up open Tsing, to according would, This of universalism. ruse the create and travel “universals” how exactly bytracing methodology, upthrough opened and destabilized tobe need system world a capitalist posit that those certainly and universal, the whole, the with grapple to purport that theories understanding, her In 12). (2004: friction” in operates it how out find to need we arrives, it before even is, capitalism global what exactly know we assume than “rather that argues She with. complicit particularly as approaches Marxist sees she which of “globalization”, theories particularly and theory to attributes she universalism the avoiding at aimed explicitly is methodology Tsing’s opposite. the produces fact in methodology on of focusing solution the movements, social to closely more connect and Marxism to attributed determinism the from away tomove desire the despite how exemplifies it because point as astarting connection global of method (2004) Tsing’s Anna take I will ideas. and people, of goods, chains global through only be traced should and totality a as be envisioned not should global the that emphasis empiricist more the it against defend and methodology dialectical realist, a critical for argument an make hereis to do I want What corporations. or organizations, ideas, people, goods, instance offor “travels” the to according empirically global the traces fieldwork, multi-sited to similar that, connection” of global an “ethnography or through 1995) (Marcus fieldwork” “multi-sited through global: the reach for Introduction For a fascinating analysis of how post-modern deconstructivist scholarship is used by Hindutva forces see Nanda (2004). see Nanda Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research in order to dismiss theory 20 3 . CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Marxist whereas description produces hence and theory avoiding at aimed explicitly is methodology Tsing’s that is difference true the but theory above methodology place criticize to claims she tradition Marxist the and Tsing Both defy. to supposed is agency this structure the of concept no is there since extent, anequal to everywhere and everywhere, “agency” discover -- does Tsing – as can we relations, of social totality of the theory a Without possible. is praxis where conjectures the for a quest guide it can that is however One advantage advantages. method’s the appreciate to seem still scholars few that of hand out it dismiss to easy so become has it “totalizing”, be called sense that canin of concretization method the and relations, social of “totality” the is whole this Since of. part are they that whole “concrete” actual the of because sense make only that abstractions as fact ormaterial alocalpractice group, ethnic an like things concrete seemingly of taking effort the “concretization”: called (1978) Hopkins Terence what in engage not does Tsing 2005). McMichael condition; human a primordial as poverty portray to likes similarly a propos, ideology, (neoliberal people these of characteristics original were status minority by characterized a groupness and powerlessness that assume to are left and place first the in beso to came obviously) strawman, (a minorities” “powerless these how know not do still We interaction”. local/global of as “congeries forces global studies also but forces” global to themselves accommodated have minorities “powerless how studies only not she says she both: bedoing to claims actually as she problem see this not does Tsing global. by the and in constituted localis the how of studying counter-move dialectical the refusing and local the by in and constituted is global the how on solely focusing connection”, “global of methodology the comes Hence chains. and assemblages networks, global through travel ideas and things people, how is exactly interesting is instead what that and new, nothing brings it that boring, is capitalism global understanding --that work Tsing’s in echoes – with hear I increasingly global”. “the face of in empiricism ofmethodological guise the in rather but deconstruction with combined description of thick guise in the not comes deforestation of source a new Yet appeal. its lost description, thick Geertzian with together has, drive deforestation Postmodernism’s 397). 20001: (Wolf deforestation” intellectual in project a resemble to comes anthropology predecessors, its to axe the carries approach successive each “[a]s that, worried Wolf Hence wheel. the inventing always were anthropologists of new generations reconstructed: being without deconstructed merely was anthropology in done work explanatory so much turn postmodern the with seethat to frustrating was it and explanations provide to need also anthropologists enough: are not interpretation and description Wolf, to According 386). 2001: (Wolf past” of the accomplishments the incorporate can departures new that and questions, new can generate past the in gained insight and knowledge that be cumulative; can anthropology in explanation for search the that believe Introduction Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 21 CEU eTD Collection research on Kerala that I work out in this dissertation strongly reminded me of the need to need me ofthe reminded strongly dissertation this in out I work that Kerala on research but rather networks and campaigns global with”, in dialogue “is or to”, how“adapts just not mean I and – global the localby the produced localis is howthe ignores method Tsing’s issues main the of one is For there. formed arisen has indigenism of by politics the meaning and effect what to and why how, the of questions global the to answer the provides “travels” such as tracing empirically or that interacting indigeneity much as the of models global and notions local the on muchcontingent so was global 1990s ofthe course the in is by thewhat is really going onlocal. in the world. I do not think the timing of the rise of indigenism understand inus Keralahelp or Theelsewhere Kerala and in of indigenism rise for the explanations actual provide voice indigenous of travels fictitious the think not Ido explanations. for are mistaken thus are acquired that descriptions the that is however, methodology, Tsing’s with problem My are. connections Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist calls ethnography” “global of outline his in Burawoy what to words, other in attention, I pay well”. travel not do demarcations powerful which into real places and spaces – “conceptual 175) (2004: “gaps” calls Tsing what encounter travels these in how interested also Iwas transformed. become often then but purchase, have some (Marcus/Hardtmann) “plot” or (Tsing) “model” of the themes dominant the where places to travel that articulations of political set varied and complex a as but phenomenon place-bound homogeneous as a not Kerala in indigenism describe to tried –Itoo of Hardtmann – work as wellthat byTsing’s analyticallyuseful. Inspired and is global” “the up opens indeed threads various into influences supra-local unpacks and directions various in out branches that fieldwork Such histories. life their and actors and symbols, and themes lines, to plot according also but objects material along just not be traced can that network a relational as understood is interpretation, this in Thefield, field”. the “following as movements on dalit fieldwork doing of her practice describes suggestions, fieldwork multi-sited Marcus’ by George inspired (2003), Hardtmann Eva-Maria how to similar is This indigenism. of models” “travelling different forming eventually settings, different – through tension and grip –both “friction” of aprocess through travelled voice” “indigenous way of the because Tsing notices the shift from class politics to indigenism and describes it ashaving happened (the “critical struggles” perspective I discussed earlier). movements social such of lens the through system world of the anunderstanding aswell system world current the within dynamics to responses of indigenist understanding a theoretical for need the for by arguing and methodology her of limits tothe by pointing oftheory dismissal her dismiss to want however do I altogether. methodology Tsing’s dismiss not do so, I being This deduction. and induction of dialectic a through explanations produce to seeks methodology Introduction dis connections, which are equally important to think with aspositive with think to important equally are which connections, Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 22 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist or stick of indigenism models travelling why explain that at “localconditions” looking simply not Iam history inrecent changed it has how and Kerala of economy the political studying By capital. by private overshadowed or impossible became period post-WWII the in capitalism global of phase production” “expanded the characterizing provisions public and livelihoods of kind the that economies local on pressure such putting gradually capital ofglobal mobility the about of Kerala, case the in as more, but struggles previous in acquired rights social the of them dispossessing deliberately or land their of people dispossessing physically state the and capital finance of alliance an not is it where areas those in is happening of what in terms refinement needs it that show also but view atheoretical such of therelevance for I argue dissertation of this III and II parts In by dispossession”. “accumulation of favor in labor of local regimes destroying 70sis late the since itself for won capital that mobility increased the where groups, population those amongst and regions, those in unfolding process relational disintegrative a signals time same the at system, world the to subjugation its confront to society original an of behalf on quest as the explanation an towards my dissertation, in step next the make to I use that perspective a dialogical hence is it 3, 2 and chapters in contemporary and historically of indigeneity thenotion tracing After all. at discovery for allow to fact, –in meaningful discoveries fieldwork make to also but global the of understanding theoretical abetter achieve to necessary only is not concretization and abstraction move of dialogical This subjectivities. of newpolitical light in global of the understanding our readjust can we how turn, in And, global. by the shaped is subjectivities, political people’s to down way the all local, how the times: butconnected, at different, world the around places different in mobilization political conditions economy world capitalist the exactly how of question tothe answer ever-changing and complex necessary the prevents turn in this And indigenism. of rise global of the herdescription to or“discourse” “background” uninteresting apparently but anunchallenged remains it pretentions, universal its undermine to want to claims she while – unpacked “neoliberalism” or as “globalization” denoted generally process this leaves Tsing theorize, to refusing In produced. globally more and locally more once at was that mobilization political in shift structural a more say--for to so dressing – the symbols and language the providing bemerely to seemed influence transnational this Yet Kerala. enter did contexts other in originating notions indigenist media the through and 1990s late the in abroad travel did dissertation, this of pages the in frequently meet will we whom in Kerala movement indigenist main the of leader the Janu, CK strong. that all fact in not were latter the since influences transnational bytracing just not and level a theoretical at process global-local this understand Introduction of the rise of indigenism. Through such a perspective, indigenism, locally perceived locally indigenism, a perspective, such Through indigenism. of rise ofthe Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 23 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist activism. to counterpart intellectual a critical being to essential is so that freedom academic the retaining of responsibility, our is primarily struggle,that difficult more much the replacing worse, or ignoring our friends), call simply as well might often we (whom field inthe informants and assistants our towards gestures sympathetic on energy of their much too focused perhaps have people oppressed or movements social to closer knowledge anthropological bring to anthropology within efforts that that Iargue which in discussion, methodological ofthis part second the to me brings fact in This analysis. critical above advocacy placing and movement particular a to allying of directly scholars studies indigenous by many taken stance the from different history without participating in this history and influencing the future. Yet this is something in(recent) developments theorizing and history outside standing thesidelines, from observing strategically intervene init. Obviously this work is, as Tsing’sis, not a practice of simply may action human how and in it, happening what’s world, the understand helps that theories, and adjusting using between moves constantly that method adialectical to commitment a is answer my Rather of theory. neglect the to empiricism methodological into retreat to not is answer my methodological but – in time point a particular at possible is what on pressure and put limits exert to power its – of capitalism determinedness the about worry Tsing’s I share back. and (theory) global the to (ethnography) local the from of moving dialectic the through bediscovered only can turn in this, And of capitalism. logic thestructural confronts that of agency kind the praxis, lookfor to but – actors ofsocial part on the action sustained any be to seems which – “agency” calls Tsing what of discovery the just not is thereby for I aim What it. in intervenes actually indigenism how and seewhere to chance the us gives also economy world capitalist of the forces structuring ofthe idea an having politics: by indigenist unaffected however arenot totality this totality of social relations producing a shift in political subjectivity. The systematic qualities of the of understanding theoretical by amore be complemented has to necessarily actors and plots main of its adescription involved, authors somany are there because precisely empirically: can betraced authored it is how exactly that implication the accepting mean not does this but “unauthored” is process the not mean does this that others and Tsing with agree can I qualities. systematic its in understand and try to need we totality by acomplex but capitalists or ofactivists by ahand-full authored not processes, local at globally-produced but not Introduction Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 24 CEU eTD Collection 1.2.2 conventional distinction between subjective and objective styles of writing. Turing a“reflexive” Turing of writing. styles objective and subjective between distinction conventional the challenge would that strategies writing with experiment and produced, is “objectivity” by which strategies rhetorical on the attention focus andwriting, practice fieldwork between book 1986 Marcus’ George and Clifford James from particularly known followed, that of reflexivity form third A interlocutors. her to relation in position ethnographer’s the to attention and claims knowledge of partiality and of thesituatedness acknowledgement explicit the as “positionality” emphasized that critique a feminist incorporated also, however, It expansion. colonial European by wrought of inequality structures with complicity historical anthropology’s of firstly a re-thinking demanded and mid-1980s the around of occurred out comes this anthropology in turn” The“reflexive researched. the and researcher the between relation the more democratic and explicit making about latter, the about usually is “reflexivity” as known is What informant. and researcher between relationship the examining critically and research one’s structuring context the examining critically between a balance keep to fail attempts many production, knowledge of embeddedness social the with to deal how about to thinking comes it When research. independent for space the restrict to are set that mechanisms of ahost against them defend to difficult it makes knowledge academic of production the for necessary conditions social the acknowledging not since also But 1923). (Lukacs facts of character social and historical on the insight core necessary – own anthropology’s certainly – and science’s social contradicts work one’s on influence major of no is context social the pretend to of allbecause First self-defeating. be doubly would this embedding social of its independent is text academic an if as writing by objectivity perform and try to is tempting it though Indeed, 1979:45). (Hopkins study” under system social the of part are “themselves world thesocial to study how above on discussed choices methodological the how information”, of nature the “relational is explicitness some with discuss to I want that Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist process a such imagine canhardly one and reform university of neoliberal context very this in evolved dissertation My science. of social richness the to added necessarily not has means neoliberal through universities wealthy of creation but the did asMarx poverty of relative conditions same the in live not will Most knowledge. of pile historical the to creations own their add freely and books” “devour to allowed even were they last that it was when wonder subsequently may then but claim this with identify immediately will 2011 anno complaint Marx’ reading scholars Many R Introduction EFLEXIVITY AND them, in a changed form, on the dunghill of history” (Karl Marx in Priestland 2009: 38). Priestland in Marx (Karl ofhistory” dunghill on the form, achanged in them, throw then and books devour to condemned amachine into transformed have been “I Writing Culture, not affecting the research pursued. In this light, the second methodological dimension methodological second the light, this In pursued. research the affecting A was the quest to undermine the seeming transparency of the relationship of the transparency theseeming undermine to quest the was CADEMIC LABOR Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 25 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist offamily vigilance the outside colonies people’s poor in out hanging women young educated unmarried on Kerala in enforced taboos gender andparticularly caste strong the despite me of accompanying fact inthe simply however unique also were assistants research My interested in. was I of questions type the exactly understood soon women both and relations, gender on also particularly thoughts, my sharpened they debates many our Through Kerala. in relations ofgender criticism their in radical certainly were they in Kerala), species of this examples thematriarchal considering (understandable “feminist” as themselves describe to hate would they Though invaluable. were University atKozhikode of English Department the at -- error and trial much –after found I assistants research female two the Inthis, fieldwork. independent start to move on I would decided we months, two about after Hence family. my friend’s did as it me affect behavior gender my improper on gossip neighborhood the did nor party, the to linked not was livelihood and biography myfamily friend, my Communist Unlike matter. the in open-mindedness friend’s my Communist notwithstanding latter – the as awoman movement independent of my and Sabha Maha Gothra Adivasi by the movement Communist the to posed challenge the discussing on freely restrictions accompanying the feel to started however also I an outsider, of less process, the in Becoming, Kerala. in movement Communist on the the daily, the Communist for ajournalist to befriended closely became enough soon and Netherlands” for theTrivandrum in headquarters theCommunist visiting and in Kerala Arriving struggle. political firstthrough but consultants of foreign by mediation not certainly achieved been had “development” time where Kerala, in in interested became I Hence practicioner. a development becoming 2003,in than these resisted had themselves people local which in ways the and underdevelopment I was producing structures welcomed political in theglobal interested more Ibecame encounters, critical various through Yet ofmine. interest an obvious was “development” agency, development with rural a Dutch for worked father my where South global the in largely up grown Having “red salutes” India). from my expulsion asto led (which episode fieldwork dramatic a particularly detailed have I where dissertation a this “comradeto appendix the in available is which of more – involved relations fieldwork and positionality, from personal influences, biographical ofthe some sketch shortly Iwill work, own my eye to the Introduction Deshabimani , who more or less adopted me into his family and taught me a great deal me agreat andtaught family his meinto adopted less or , more who Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 26 CEU eTD Collection “adivasi” art, journalists who had been reporting on the AGMS, politicians active for the for active politicians AGMS, the on reporting been had who journalists art, “adivasi” of producers cultural plans, development adivasi implementing of charge in bureaucrats issues, adivasi on working scholars groupings, political of other activists meet to borders) and at several land occupations land several at and colonies other also in but described, just I colony the –in Kerala in Northern workers adivasi and activists AGMS mostly amongst assistants research my with fieldwork from breaks In colony! the at people ofmost size the twice almost giant, a white colony: the in people beside standing was I where pictures at look I would when a shock colony the to semi-public at least and significant something contribute would but gifts” “giving patron were closest to in we woman the for theantenna and of atelevision acquisition the colonysponsoring of step risky slightly – the only set-up the took so I and many for immaterial too bit a perhaps I all was this could course Of be forgotten. not think of that would notdirectly posit in it forme them as perhaps the but nothing was thatthere that in, part I took they was movement the on doinga book writing I was myexplaining best to make sure their struggles would their colony was allin my interest what about me back about interview to confidence enough had moreover people Most and what could be topic). the on say to had inMalayalees educated what it predictable all too often was it for“adivasis”, them – questions to came it when (certainly to talked I I Malayalees usually educated of the most than unpredictable and answered by interesting more views their made this discovered soon we school, attended hardly had colony the of adults most Though stories. their in took we interest the appreciate to seemed enough soon our presence, of weary or suspicious a bit seemed had initially who colony ofthe people Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 4 ( “kindergarten” the running in active woman the befriended we After on). later visits return with (and did I of fieldwork year the during days, several often week, every almost to returned we networks Introduction 5 6 Such behavior Such “shameful” was bound to lead parents to their for hasten search a proper groom (before That was a somewhat risky step was apparent from the issues it gave rise to: some women were very My vagueness here is to protect my informants and myself since it is a so-called “politically sensitive” women who valued their freedom. their valued who women the young woman’s reputation was beyond repair) and hence was in some ways all the more risky for crumbling because so many people television. gathering were always towatch becausesomany crumbling there And not to mention the fact put itonafterthat school hours – something many people soonagreed with heronbut others were angry about.the clay ridges pleased.around Myfriend who hadthetelevision her possession, in moreover,had decided that she mywould only friend and her neighbors’process,nearby the shopkeeper,obviously,to shopand,the furtherindebtedless getting it.The in was houses were thatthetelevision inthe peoplehappy of manytelevisionstopped colony’scolony from watching at topic I study (something I have been made all too aware of). have alltooaware been I made (something I study topic 5 . After many visits to the colony, I started to feel so comfortable there that it was always it was that there to feelsocomfortable started I colony, the to visits many . After 4 . There was one colony, in Wayanad - the district where the AGMS emerged - where emerged AGMS the where district - the Wayanad in colony, one was . There anganwadi ) in the colony and people saw us returning to the colony daily, those daily, colony the to returning us saw people and colony the in ) 6 -- I travelled throughout Kerala (and sometimes over its over sometimes (and Kerala throughout travelled --I Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 27 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist anthropologists such or oppressive racist how aretaught today students many beyond: now are we whom anthropologist colonial old-fashioned the of notion the doubt into puts question latter the Pondering disciplined. being is sheherself how it ignores her subjects, disciplining is potentially anthropologist the ofhow question on the focusing while anthropology: in tendencies colonial contemporary and past both in producing more determinant much arguably one question, ofthe side other over the skip to tend “reflexivity” in exercises existing hertexts, through including subjects research his over researcher the of power potential the and of racism critical deeply anthropologists, modest openand more prejudiced, less by producing past colonial anthropology’s overcoming at attempt the With exercise. market-driven mechanical, another yet into of labor division modern the in experiences work elitist) also (if creative most the of one is potentially what make to threatens process in the that and a career) perhaps, later (or, calleda“PhD” commodity the into combination this turns that context of theinstitutional abstract (concrete) the lookat a reflexive is neglected is often what text, the ethnographic or encounter, fieldwork the biographies, personal of concrete (abstract) the on issue.Concentrated fundamental most the sidestep to seems today reflexivity most that is Isee aproblem indicated, asI Yet, discipline. more endangered) also perhaps (if accessible and open a more anthropology made have that turn reflexive of the achievements are important voice personal amore in narrating and knowledge anthropological produces that interaction human the of glimpses to reader the invite able to Being co-authoring,2001). Not I could freedom outsider preservesomeofthe thatarelative has. Edelmane.g. and study(see networks) kinship socialmovement(s) they (or ofthe not part where they are play roleto critical anthropologistshave adistinct, I think but alsobecause sooner The anashaveexpelledhadformer wastext. partly sinceposingactivistwould probablyeven me my co-authoring or ethnography and activism combining explicitly as such experiments reflexive considered Ineverhoweverseriously following have for each, sympathyI Despitethe close to. become and befriend to I sought assistants) research (and of informants kind of the reflection a is influence Their conflicting. often were views their through my research, on impact critical a tremendous, allhad friends dalit and Communist assistants, research my Together, my arguments. sharpening in me greatly helped friend this with discussions my dominance, upper-caste for acover-up simply was of Marxism variant Keralese the that opinion the Of friend. a close became and family his me in hosted whom of one Kerala, inCentral activists dalit-adivasi with months several spent Imoreover Kerala). call to liked Tourism of Ministry Kerala the (as country” own “God’s to more tourists attract to culture adivasi in potential the using in interested promoters tourism , and welfare of adivasi charge in workers social question”, “the tribal on views distinct with landlords and environmentalists cause, “adivasi” Introduction Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 28 CEU eTD Collection good” geared to producing an educated citizenry and toward a conception of higher education higher of aconception and toward citizenry aneducated to producing geared good” as a“public institutions academic of idea the from away a shift seen have countries many 1980s, the Since everywhere. science on influence an had production” of knowledge marketing “global the through has system, in theAnglo-Saxon started university, of the The neoliberalization production. of knowledge nature contextual necessarily always the acknowledging time same the at while such for conditions the create to best their trying than rather produce they knowledge for the status a universal claiming actually start enlightenment ideal this pursues is inmy view problematic inso far asacademic institutions the to inherent universalism The projects. ofresearch conclusions or contents over the leverage fundamental has network orkinship interest, corporate imperative, state movement, political particular no that such structured ideally are hence career and position one’s academia, Within dogmas. or interests particular beyond goes indeed that of knowledge production the enables personhood, one’s reproduce to has one which in of power relations the to actions and words one’s ofadjusting necessity the from possible as much freed being and that body) (and mind human the about universal something is there that ideal – enlightenment contested a– to back goes ultimately view in my production knowledge academic that emphasize merely written on this question but since mine is not on this topic, I will be necessarily brief. been) have be (and could of dissertations Hundreds today. academia within positioned persons than ideal this under work to position a better arein academia of outside positioned persons sometimes that acknowledge in theprocess and production knowledge non-academic from academic distinguish ideally would exactly what about beexplicit to us Itforces production. knowledge of anthropological field in the imbalances power contemporary the with engaging of terms in important is also production of knowledge context institutional the about Thinking imperialism. of European end formal the since careers over anthropologists’ grip a greater gotten only ways many have in that – mechanisms status professional their with them endowing institutions the with made they compromises the to careers anthropologists’ tied ways complex in that mechanisms powerful of outcome the rather but time atthe anthropologists of ignorance general of the reflection a or inquestion anthropologist of the convictions and fiber moral the about simply not were practices these that is learn not do they What practice. of anthropological forms such in engage Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 7 a firm with continue – and notwithstanding exceptions afew -- were often Introduction For For a concrete and critical ofanalysis the global political context in which the Central European Elkana (2009), CEU’s rector during most of my PhD. of duringmost CEU’srector (2009), Elkana Yehuda by promoted production ofknowledge vision neoliberal) from (andfar liberal classical to a this,however, foundedGuilhot seeforinstance withthecommitment (2007).Compare University was Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research conviction not to 7 I will 29 CEU eTD Collection 1.3 Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist been historically had groups socialist that democracy and land for of thestruggle a continuation as it saw (1998), Harvey Neill as such others, whereas on, itself based apparently it cosmologies “Mayan” by the impressed particularly being (2001), Nash June as such anthropologists, some with of this, heart the at were interpretation its and rebellion The Zapatista class. and to indigeneity it comes when confusion a of explicit lot find century twentieth the of quarter last in the could one instance, for America, Latin In one. likely more is amuch project this future, the into shadow their cast to continue that movements socialist strong have known that regions in culturalism, liberal militant of circuits of the Outside order. world acapitalist to alternatives real of awareness historical of a absence the so in more the all impossible, almost be perhaps would project – this US the in instance –for discourse identity contested hardly and a coherent as become fixed has indigeneity liberal-culturalism, called I haveelsewhere what of hegemony the under where Places others. above than sketched insights methodological and oftheoretical kind the to stick to researcher the for easier make it – movements – and places and times Certain C reflexivity. fieldwork-centered more to complement necessary a hence is anthropology corporate with anthropology critical replace to threaten that processes such against) struggle (and of awareness critical A 2000). (Strathern world academic Anglo-Saxon the in research independent with interference major a become has instance, for efficiency, economic promote to responsiveness ofethical discourse impenetrable their and cultures” of “audit institutionalization The pressures. market to coupled increasingly is research academic that managements, by university on passed government, the from interference bureaucratic increasing through is it state: by the initiated primarily but market the by directly driven so much not is reform because universities public at intense more allthe is process the Ironically, (ibid.). subjects” academic “schizophrenic ultimately and incentives contradictory entirely creating andsurveillance”, performativity measurement, of aregime with trust and collegiality on based relationships of “professional replacement a see we process, the In outcomes. entrepreneurial and interests of commercial terms in are defined activities these that demand managements university since teaching/learning and of research content the on even impact a perverse had has process the economy”, knowledge “global of the forefront the at be to eager country a Zealand, New in how shows instance for 27f) (2010: Shore Cris students. of fee-paying number maximum the attracting towards only geared corporation, business atransnational into transformed is model, this in university, The market. labor the sell on then can one that “skills” particular ingaining investment individual as an Introduction ONCLUSION Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 30 CEU eTD Collection a wider historical trajectory. Kerala is interesting, for my study at least, particularly in terms of terms in particularly least, at formystudy interesting, is Kerala trajectory. historical a wider in conjunction relational as aparticular exception an so much not is Kerala century. nineteenth the in Kerala characterized have seem to that system caste rigid extremely and forms inheritance matrilineal the it does asmuch centuries two least at for of Kerala part become and shaped have that influences overseas many the include Kerala in or “tradition” histories” “Local world. of the rest the with interaction its in peninsula Indian the within processes historical particular of because precisely have developed of India rest the has with it differences and ofIndia” “part doubt without is Kerala experience. Kerala the from maylearn we lessons of what question the and “exceptionalism” Kerala’s about words few a say I must Sabha, Maha Gothra the Adivasi and ofKerala mystudy to resolutely more chapters, next the in turn, I Before American settings. Latin many in than – clearer even or – clearly as perhaps involved complexities the lay bare to tends there movement indigenism the and movement Communist the of confrontation active the because precisely tension the study to ground unique arather is Kerala activists. Communist and indigenist between moving when Kerala in inevitably mealmost to came moreover, poking, This task. anthropologist’s the is precisely poking feel this I adeadlock, into ideas and positions these fix to helps that common-sense the beyond space political create to Yet wound”. the in afinger like “poking regard, this in her experiences expresses 141) (2003: Nelson Diane as I were, if as felt indeed sometimes It comfortable. too is not racists or even opportunists anything but hypocritical, and socialists choosing toconsider indigenist activists as be can thinking Marxist accept to refusing groups indigenist between cross-fire in the Sitting refusing tounderstand words assignifiers of essential meanings rather than relationships. of project intellectual the about also is which of refusal, kind this support to tasks ofmy as one it seen Ihave 2005:179). (Yashar and “whites”” “Indians” between aconfrontation into struggle our transforms which reductionism ethnic accept we do [n]or “peasants”… of mere status the to us transform which ideas reductionist class accept will never and accept to refuse “we 1983: in by stating head-on the tensions confronted CSUTCB union workers agricultural The Bolivian 2006). Postero 2009, Gordon e.g. (cp unionist as aTrotskyite all above identified had he himself of how reminded others while president, indigenous first country’s the was Morales Evo how emphasized some perpetrated byright perpetrated Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist so-called by claimed, now was but components” ethnic with war a “class as 1980s, inthe was it as interpreted, generally longer wasno war the described, (2003) Nelson Diane As war. civil of the on interpretations -- controversy sympathetic less – and explicit an was there Guatemala, in border, the over Just region. the in waging Introduction and left against the indigenous Maya. Or, to move further south, inBolivia south, movefurther to Or, Maya. indigenous the against left Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research culturales , to have been a racist war a racist been have , to 31 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist there. more hidden already histories to become sensitive context in other indigenism of therise studying scholars help mayalso Kerala in visible clearly so are still that – politics autonomous and emancipatory of – or indigenist and of socialist interrelation complex of the traces the think I identity, of indigenous understandings relational orcomplex solidarity socialist at attempts or fragile failed to comes it when particularly histories”, “hidden called Wolf Eric what of creating process in the constantly is history Since itself. Kerala in I encountered what also but openings and explanations certain me towards guided that insights methodological and my theoretical just not were it Hence emancipation. for struggles of past means, byother a re-incarnation, mean also could but forces global of) (derivative to merereaction no is indigenism that possibility the consider to me forced also communities– of exclusive interest the in rather inequalities social confronting alliances of broad interest the in adivasis, landed than rather of working-class interest the – in directions counter-hegemonic into veer constantly to seem and strands political of avariety incorporate movements indigenist Kerala’s which to degree The indigenism. of rise the for explanations more satisfactory at get to chapter this in sketched I program research the of lines the movealong me to it forced – unsatisfactory livelihood” indigenous to “threat abstract an or identities primordial on based indigenism of rise of the explanation an making to adds This in Kerala. process subtle a more is about talks Harvey David kind the of restructuring neoliberal this, to addition In obvious. rather fact but in hidden not are hence identity indigenous and indigenism of interpretations of variety the program, institutionalized or well-oiled a very yet is not it Since Kerala. in emerged recently only has indigenism modern that however, is, of indigenism rise of the study the to ofKerala quality notable The most remains. capital with confrontation a global for The need indefinitely. of neoliberalism theonslaught against out – hold not do case any or in – cannot inKerala revitalized often and instituted as democracy local social for projects show, will dissertation this As 2010). (Oommen “challenges” than “hazards” termed better probably are that problems social and economic created and model Kerala the of architecture historical of the dismantling progressive the to led has It Kerala. in groups poorest and richest the between divide a growing created nevertheless has liberalization Yet al. 2007). et Sandbrook (see India of parts other in developed have that poverty and polarization class of levels the stark creating immediately without of neoliberalism “challenges” the face able to being Kerala to contributed certainly has This framework. democratic an overall within power gain to managed movement Communist the how and Kerala, in world the of understanding sense common- people’s many of part is Communism of ideology howthe implemented, was rights social other and protection wage reform, land of program “Communist” a which to degree the Introduction Research in/on & beyond the capitalist world system world &beyondthecapitalist in/on Research 32 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist ADIVASINESS AND ITS DISCONTENTSADIVASINESS ANDITS PART 2 33 CEU eTD Collection colonial effort to govern the territory’s population. Though the ethnographic exercises of trying exercises ethnographic the Though population. territory’s the govern to effort colonial in the entangled became however, the “tribe”, subcontinent, Indian the ruling rolein proactive a more on took empire British the As organic. and egalitarian was society tribal alienating, and polarizing was society modern if innocent; and primitive was tribe the rational, and progressive was class If not. was society class modern beeverything to assumed was “tribe” the world: modern ofthe understanding over their argued philosophers various which through concept in “world time”This chapter will start with adiscussionas of the tribe’s trajectory in the capitalist worldWalton system – (1984: 181) with. negotiate to has notion calls it. onthe itself bases that Wea politics that references of conceptual kind of the will background historical see the the provides hence It emerged. tribe “tribe” ofthe notion the how trace to aiming sources secondary originally of astudy is provides chapter current this What today. Kerala in movement political adivasi startedof main context the within negotiated is notion the how detail some in as study does dissertation a ofthis chapter next the though Kerala, in life everyday rule in of as acategory operationalized Neither is it an ethnographic study of the contemporary ways in which the notion of tribes. of particular the tribe origins historical is the about theories mistaken correcting about not is political divisions the notion draws. This chapter is not about who or what “tribes” or what who about not is chapter This draws. notion the divisions political and conceptual the legitimizing role in a major has played that adiscipline anthropology, of history the at look a critical alsotakes chapter this tribe, the of notion the examining By carries. notion the baggage historical problematic ofthe because respect this in faces it challenges historical the understand to first is important it today, in Kerala vision hegemonic counter- a transformative, mayhold “adivasiness”, on centering apolitics indigenism, that thepossibility consider to want we If its name. in occurring struggles and interventions political of the context the in tribe ofthe understanding conflicted and critical amore for space up open to order in this do I coherence. its sustaining premises hegemonic the deconstruct thereby and construction historical its demonstrate to common-sense, this disturb to is chapter of this The aim call common-sense. would Gramsci what become thereby arehas “adivasis” what and Who our past. dominating ideas from on carried time, of our thebeliefs shaping assumptions of hidden accumulation adense is the tribe of notion of the making of the The trajectory Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist itsdiscontents and Adivasiness T HE “ TRIBE CHAPTER 2 ” IN WORLD TIME WORLD IN The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” really are –it 34 CEU eTD Collection 2.1 a linear evolution of the notion itself any more than I want to follow the Hegelian belief in the in belief Hegelian the follow to I want than more any itself notion of the evolution a linear to presume want not do I tribe, of the concept the deconstructing historically in that is however, challenge, second The 35). (1997: practices and ideas past of denunciation” abolitionist a “neo- becoming of danger the mayrun warn, Cooper and asStoler indeed, tribe the of history ofthe study –the made are decisions future which through and on material the by forming “structuring” perspective (Abrams 1982) –one that sees the past ascontinuing into the future of kind of this Divorced today. seen is tribe” “the which through lenses the by shaping present the on influence a continuing has history This system. world capitalist the within relations class of (un)making of the context the in tribe of the notion the of history the consider here I will Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist T paradigm. ethnographic ruling the to succumb not does that anthropology from intervention arelevant toproduce trying in on draws dissertation this assources these also acknowledge I AGMS, the around arisen have that debates the to response in produced knowledge significant most ofthe some presenting In agenda. its complement that in ways AGMS of the rise to the have responded that disciplines in films) (and literature of overview a brief with chapter this end hence I anthropology. than other indisciplines mostly still and – ethnography of tribal paradigm dominant ofthe outside realities ofrelevant notice take didacademia AGMS of the rise the with Only emancipation. for a site as science on focused historically have in Kerala movements social radical that fact the despite Kerala, on work anthropological in uncontested largely remained has kind essentializing and isolating ofaparticularly knowledge of ethnographic production the demonstrate, I As Kerala. in ofthe“tribe” understandings to contributed historically has anthropology of practice the how of consideration detailed amore to moves chapter of this part The second all. at the question on debate the in participated having as recognized become to failed often boundaries these deconstruct to attempted who those signified: be could “tribe” the which within boundaries the determined which state, ethnographic the by shaped heavily still were question” tribal on “the debates how we see India, Independence post- in tribe of the a on to discussion Moving place. take could “tribals” these concerning debate political which within limits the determining in role amajor play to came nevertheless label the contradictions, of full were it to belonged who and tribe the of category the finalize to itsdiscontents and Adivasiness HE TRIBE HE TRIBE IN ANEXPANDING WORLD SYSTEM (Stoler and Cooper 1997: 35). 1997: Cooper and (Stoler history” to consigned safely now power of of aform denunciation a neo-abolitionist more than be should regimes ofcolonial study “The continuing The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 35 CEU eTD Collection 2.1.1 interconnected, in the first place economically but also in terms of how theories emerging in one in emerging theories of how terms in also but economically place first the in interconnected, closely were moments two These periphery. of its exploitation intensified the hand other onthe and empire the of “core” the within happening polarization class drastic the hand one the on here: on I focus moments major two includes process place.The took it against struggle which in terms the set largely to ability in its hegemonic was that expansion of capitalist project transnational of a product historical the is “tribe” of the notion the how I discuss section this In I self-generated. and substantive as “non-tribes” and “tribes” between boundaries the reify unduly certainly –would capital by global shaped intensely a period – Kerala of history modern the in of tribes view a dialectical than rather dialogical a take to Yet perspective. a dialogical for argue and system world capitalist the of effects determining the ignore might one century, eighteenth the in India of regions north-eastern of the incorporation of capitalist intensification the before Perhaps emerged. entities these how of process the to forces external of as be conceived cannot capital and state the “tribes”, of study the to approach adialogical than rather adialectical youtake if chapter, previous the in As Idiscussed history. this about think we way the haveshaped that of power relations concepts. What this does is not so much give the “true” history of tribes in India but reveal the Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist past the about me tell people what on and sources historical secondary relyon to needs who me, like anthropologist an for possible is that All concepts. European by formed heavily all are subject on this exist that studies historical the that is problem the Yet history. denied definition per arealmost “tribes” so since more the All dissertation. this in figuring peoples the of some of history actual the of adiscussion with start and 2000) (Chakrabarty Europe “provincialize” to – India in development historical discussing to satisfactory been have of course would It contingency. of moments many also offering but present the on pressure directional exerting and limits assetting past the have seen of history, interpretation a “structuring” from instead, and ofprogress certainty Hegelian the vis-à-vis stance agnostic a critical Ihaveadopted it, producing processes historical ofthe a study with tribe, ofthe notion of the agenealogy pursue to order In 5). 2007: (Foucault matured” and developed it in which contexts theoretical many the of that of use, rules successive of its that validity, and constitution of fields various of its “that as concepts, of other that as tribe, of the notion the of trajectory historical-intellectual the consider to tried I have Instead baggage. intellectual problematic “tribe’s” of the part aconsiderable is such that history of rationality necessary itsdiscontents and Adivasiness MPERIALISTINVENTIONSOFTHETRIBE :“I in the present KNOWONEWHEN not start out with European debates when debates European with out start , is hence to deconstruct these dominant these deconstruct to hence , is I SEEONE !” The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 36 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist another with linked become could both was, modernity Western what not were matriarchy) to solidarity mechanical from as anything (conceived organization social “tribal” and forests Since Europe. in society class modern image: mirror- beits to supposed was it of which that with an obsession as shape took initially “tribe” in on going was what on a commentary as primarily written that thechanges with preoccupations in but subcontinent Indian of the realities empirical the in somuch originate not did categories of overlap The reality. empirical not is together “jungles”) forests(or in living and area a certain in settled people” “first the of being fact the and communities “tribal” distinguish to supposed is that equality and reciprocity of direct basis the on of acommunity organization the links What others. “mainstream” like just forest ofthe outside living not than often more be seen can people such where and community a “tribal” in living and “indigenous” being between relation actual beno to seems there when dwellers” “forest and people” “indigenous with equated often so are groups these why puzzling be rather can it India, in “tribes” as beknown to happened that people on research doing anthropologist contemporary To the lives. their affecting was that expansion of capitalist process the contest jointly to remnants historical as its seen those with alliance an form could society class of modern era the entered to have considered people that unthinkable italmost to making contributed of the “tribe” notion The versa. vice and struggle class formof another as beframed to struggles tribal prevented it how in layprimarily of thetribe function Thehegemonic exploitation. such from “tribals” protect to need the for argue to contexts other in be used could as it just production, capitalist for populations certain mobilize to be used could “tribe” the of Thecategory to. “return” to ideal an as society saw tribal that thinking utopian of socialist part and of society, restructuring their legitimize to it used who bourgeoisie, ofthe language of the part both was tribality from away ofprogress Thenotion time. over itssurvival to key as “tribe”, it the with and society”, of “primitive notion ofthe adaptability and flexibility the stress to right is Kuper Adam populations. local manage and divide to as away colonies in the function important an gained “tribe” the meaning, very this In opposite. conceptual has called (1988) Kuper Adam ofwhat birth the saw we was, point end rational this what conceptualize “the illusion to order In endpoint. arational towards “progressing” was society that hegemonic, became of primitive century mid-nineteenth the in which idea, the to Europe in connected closely was tribe the society”of notion The rolethere. reconstituted but connected a fulfill to other the to travelled context – captured by itsdiscontents and Adivasiness the notion of the “tribe -- as its considered the “classics” on Indian society – notably Dumont’s notably – society Indian on “classics” the considered European societies were undergoing. Similar to how what still today are today still what how to Similar undergoing. were societies Western Homo Hierarchicus society, the notion of the notion the society, The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” (1972) -- were 37 CEU eTD Collection science” proving that the “the natural equality of men” was false (ibid.). false was men” of equality natural “the the that proving science” of name the “in with obsessed 1848, seemed publicationsin ethnographic Indeed, be avoided. to reality a “dark” was society tribal that for all, and once clear, it making and society capitalist about progressive was all that of defining combination potent more the all an for made brew Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist additional An equal. were women) even perhaps (and all men that notion the of popularity rising the combat to church by the espoused orthodoxies religious the ally than potent more and abetter for look to Europe in bourgeoisie the forced tide this 14), Guha(1999: to According revolution. French the since mobilization socialist of tide growing a from “threat” of the background the against be read should society capitalist modern defend and helpdefine to of tribality notion the mobilize to academics century nineteenth many amongst The urge 1999:14). (Guha classes working autochthonous amongst itself Europe in identified however, were, people “degenerate” and “primitive” “backward”, similar colonies, in the identified were progress historical a lackof exhibiting peoples as “tribal” Just history. human in progressed had “reason” which levelto of the signpost the and “advanced” most the as recognized immediately nationswere industrializing European stages. different these of reflections were world the in constructed) increasingly fact (in “found” communities distinct the that also but ofevolution “stages” of certain consisted history human that only not proposed evolutionism Social territories. and/or “peoples” distinct certain onto them mapping by space in periods of time a fixing of history interpretation aHegelian to adds however, evolutionism, contradiction andsynthesis not just inthe human mindbutequally in historical reality. Social of dialectic the --through universal and hence mind human every of a faculty – of “reason” unfolding the as history of interpretation a Hegelian on heavily evolutionismrelies of social logic the latter, the Like society”. “primitive with preoccupation similar a on based been however have anthropology later and philosophy of stands other Many contested. and remembered been have theories these which under term the remained has generally and 1988) 1870s (Kuper and 1860s the of Europe in tribe” on“the philosophizing of upsurge in the current virulent and a dominant was this since evolutionism” “social as here mostly theories such to refer I will 200). 1999: (Guha the sown” and forest the of retreats and advance trade, and tribute and production, -- “predation by affected was society modern everything by unaffected asprimordial, forests and isolated as “tribals” to depict discoursehad colonial into over carried eventually that theories economies, political of regional part integral an form to used “tribal” considered now people many ofthe that evidencesindicating ofarcheological plenty are Whilethere history”. denied while antiquity “permitted paradoxically, were tribes remarks, opposite of a society fully immersed in“historical progress”: antiquity. As Wilmsen (1989: 10) itsdiscontents and Adivasiness racial element to the tribal-primitive-forest-dwelling the to element The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 38 CEU eTD Collection where they again reverberated back to the core (Cooper and Stoler 1997: 12). Being at the at Being 12). 1997: Stoler and (Cooper core the back to reverberated again they where from colonies, in the confirmation and credibility new –received theories racist home-grown with together home” – “at developed as was society tribal primitive of what Ideas 51). 1992: (Devalle sanction” administrative their them gave authorities colonial and them constructed reality of Indian perception European the until India in ‘tribes’ no were “there put, Simply India. in function a concrete gained tribe of the notion the 2008:7), (Gidwani power” governmental of aregime to power ofsovereign regime “a from shifted hence India in rule colonial As taxation. of, purpose the with and through, largely both subcontinent, Indian in the production of of relations organizing minute to amore trade through primarily of wealth extraction the movefrom to necessary it saw class ruling British the powers, imperial emerging other with competition from pressure under century, nineteenth of the quarter second the During “tribe”. of the definition the under caught people amongst century twentieth the in later initiatives Marxist explicitly or even socialist generically of “core” the in by intellectuals neglect gross the for trend the also set it sense that In society. ofclass opposite the light, positive in amore if even signaling, of usualrole its fulfilled then writings Marx’ in also “tribe” the of notion the all this, in Yet Communism”(ibid.). of“primitive form developed technologically a more toward return” “dialectical through achieve would society a Communist envisioned he that societies of primitive characteristic of labor division classless andthe property of private absence the admired toGailey, according moreover, Marx 16). (ibid: institutions of state-associated penetration the to ofresistance evidence but past of the see “vestiges” not did Marx societies, pre-capitalist such of manifestations contemporary In typologies. racial evolutionary their against society, class of pre-capitalist forms of different reading analytical and specific ahistorically with time ofhis evolutionists social confronted Marx that argues Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist of the reading a From 21). (ibid: stasis” evolutionary an or essence of anatural not contingencies, historical of “products foragers contemporary considered Marx thinkers, century nineteenth other most unlike that adds Wilmsen hand, other the own”. On our to opposition polar set in era prehistoric a to respect with contemporaries his of tenets basic the “shared case any in Marx that argues, 20) (1989: Wilmsen as seems, It society. rolein a progressive played having as bourgeoisie the and far so peoples oppressed all of “advanced” most as the proletariat Western the describes explicitly moreover It “inevitable”. is stages these along progress historical that and through pass societies that development” of “stages particular are there that conviction clear the demonstrates nevertheless but communities isolated apparently particular onto historicaleras of mapping essentialism the avoids instance, for (1848), Manifesto Communist the see that can we writings, own Marx’ at look we If ambiguous. however, is, challenge The socialist itsdiscontents and Adivasiness Ethnological Notebooks Ethnological Marx compiled near the end of his life, Gailey (2006) Gailey life, of his end the near compiled Marx The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 39 CEU eTD Collection considered “tribal” (Hardiman 2004), they felt confirmed in their ideas about these groups as groups these about ideas in their confirmed felt they 2004), (Hardiman “tribal” considered officials British whom India Central in groups population the to spread independence”, of “war first country’s the as today nationalists by Indian claimed uprising, 1857 the When descended. tribes and castes lower most which race from Dravidian the darker-skinned to asopposed British, the with descent common a shared supposedly who groups caste “developed” more ofthe distinctiveness of racial a marker as descent “Aryan” read who officials British up by taken was theory the Nevertheless race. than rather and language status social about always were on, theory his based Muller that texts religious old in people “Aryan” an to reference (2006), Tapar Romila historian to According B.C. millennium second the around time some north the from peoples “Aryan” of invasion on the based was civilization Indian claim to theory” invasion “Aryan concomitant the up took Muller Max Orientalist the languages, of family Indo-Aryan the of “discovery” of the as part 50s and 1840s inthe philologists comparative German by initially Formulated Europe. century nineteenth in popularity gained that theory” race “Aryan the development: ofhistorical narrative grand byanother supported also were India in on “tribes” Views tribes. of nature isolated and primordial Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist niches simultaneously mystified this particular into groups population isolating and fixing while evolutionism, Social (ibid.). plains the in neighbors “barbarian” their from rule British by enlightened protection needed forest the in found savages” “noble the because also but ofdevelopment stage reachahigher to them entice rulewould British that claim the through hand one the on Asia, South in communities feudal “barbarian”, predominantly ruleover their legitimize to officers by British used also was framework theoretical same This (ibid.). “advanced” more were they since so do to power the had obviously and themselves for lands plain claiming started who communities agricultural advanced more with contact” into “came they when forest the into driven be to people of groups these led had which systems, economic other than “primitive” more was life of way their assumed Theyalso “savages”). (the humans earliest the characterized organization “tribal” that understood officials colonial since forest the in live and indigenous be to had logically “tribes” These 1999). (Skaria up grow quite to unable peoples”, “childlike as India groupsin social certain see to came officials colonial theory, evolutionary of social lenses the Through colonists. of the or that protection their for either populations, subaltern other from groups these isolate to efforts to central was and India in groups population actual to attached as “tribe” the Europe, in transcendence its orenvision capitalism legitimize either to ofexercises center itsdiscontents and Adivasiness effect of colonial rule as evidence of the essentially ofthe asevidence rule ofcolonial The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 40 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 8 of help the or sought themselves ethnographers into turned either often officers Colonial 11). 1997: Stoler and (Cooper and control” understanding colonial to useful and thereby reified and static sufficiently categories into relationships political and social confusing and fluid “render to officers’exercise of British as part 136) 2004: Hardiman castes; (occupational/endogamous as known commonly were of what group adisparate define came to The “tribe” areas. homogeneous socially in live not did they where organized be to was this how unclear was it practically though even administration of sort a different required tribals that stressed also Britishpolicy (Phillipsof Britishplantation-owners 2003). the needs force serving labor so-called inpractice, “tribes”and where often directly were targeted “recruitment” into the for 116) 2005: (McMillan area same the in lived non-tribals and tribals so-called where even society”, of rest the from differentiated clearly being as tribal the of conceptions … “rigid emerged Hence about. brought society market that character human of cruelties by the uninfected yet as “tribes” onto ideals these projected officers colonial Most culture. and nature of dichotomies emerging the around time atthe in England developing ideals romantic to the hand one on the linked Thedistinction (1959:45). infection” political possible from tribes the quarantine to desire a “from claimed, Verrier Elwin missionary-turned-ethnographer famous asthe resulting, largely subjects, of categories different entirely as two betreated came to non-tribals and “Tribals” 148). 2001: (Dirks character” “ethnographic increasing on an take state colonial the saw years following the event, oreconomic as apolitical than rather failure” “anthropological as an rebellion census the with distinction, “caste/tribe” the into India in – translated colonies, many in rule colonial first of held apreoccupation 2000), (Li divide” “peasant/tribe Thegreat marriage. andchild as sati in 1871 such practices barbaric cruel, uptheir give make them and subjects colonial “civilize” to burden - as its man’s white ofthe target prime be the to was meanwhile, society, Feudal force. labor useful most a into symbolic reform possible beyond and “primitive“ and “wild” themselves proven had they since alone beleft to were former The felt. became also ofdevelopment” battleground. “stage feudal -- taxable and controllable, easily hierarchical, more a “higher”– embodying communities those from “tribes” In “wild people”, unable to grasp the British civilizinginterpreting mission itsdiscontents and Adivasiness the 1857 9 The1857 Great Revolt or Sepoy Mutiny confirmedalso officials’ ideas about its source in the caste Archana Prasad (2003) describes these ideas as “ecological romanticism” and indeed traces their traces andindeed romanticism” “ecological as ideas these describes (2003) Prasad Archana cartridge greased with pig and cow fat was introduced to the soldiers (Dirks 2003:130). tothesoldiers(Dirks introduced was cowfat pigand greased with cartridge system since “ideologies of pollution and exclusion” had formed the spark of the mutiny when a new origin to the English opposition to the industrial revolution. totheindustrial opposition tothe English origin 9 But at the same time the distinction was driven by a realist concern to “divide and rule”. and “divide to concern by arealist driven was distinction the time same the at But 8 .With it, the need todistinguish The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” jatis 41 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 10 factunited other characteristicin life, religion,or economicway of tribes”)eventhough no jungle longerwas no areligious category andinstead becameacategoryonto itsown and (“aboriginal distinguishing “lower” forms of Hinduism from tribal religions. In subsequent censuses, the tribe also“Christianmentionthereas isof asconstant tribes” well complaintsaboutthe impossibility of 1881 census, the tribesin category for religious theseparate clear-cut despite since far from was religion”“Aboriginal temporarilybecame however, aseparate inthecensus.This category too, tribal/aboriginal/jungle complex:“nature“animalistic” thatofbeing worshippers” of religiosity. Hinduhoweverfold had of outside andyetconnotation the takenrootanother added the was to tribewas that the and“caste” waswhatdefined Hinduism idea that the the 1881census, By ‘tribes’, ‘pre-Aryan’untouchables and ‘caste-fettered’ Hindu ‘Aryans’ (1999: 181). casteless a homogeneousor acompositeabout “whetherIndia of caste society, uncertain was observesof late century Bayly nineteenth As Susan Europeanethnologists, they stillvery were order. and peace general the to threat urgent an judged groups population irregular and migrant castes, the only clear distinctionof and loosely tribes earlycensuses talked rather Bindu still 2003).Hencethe 1871census in from in this regard being the (quoted ofdanger” time whichheworships in stone Hindootheology asthe of the asignorantis … “Criminal Tribes” categorybarbarous hillman, who “the semi as he tellinglydescribed reservededucation”whatWesternto of product for is the youth who agnosticfrom “the everythingencompassed it termsince of the definition any “Hinduism” – was perplexing enough that labelof under an ofwhich the since cometoreside have –some atthe time Indianpeninsula in the author of the census had to admit he couldexisting andideologies practicesnot religious myriad eventhoughthe of andMuslim, between Hindu give ofantithesis Islam”,theprimary 1871, in tobemade thefirst, distinction all-India census wasthat fault lineoncolonialreligion exercise drawing primary theconviction thatThe survey by started the was in the subcontinent rule. colonial in role a major gained anthropology that however, survey, population first the of making the in particularly was It 1996:99). (Kuper exercises mapping social their validate and its “scientifically” to cloak its using history. andstarted inanthropology training some least at received officers colonial many inthat onadministration anthropology of effect indirect a clear Since was there it rule, –colonial to irritant amajor were times at also contrary on the –or wasfacilitated initially field believed inthe anthropologists and anthropology of discipline the extent what to is debatable it Though that exercises. categorizing such in engage --to collaborators Indian – and ethnographers European Hinduism was itsdiscontents and Adivasiness “the The 1871 Criminal Tribes Act criminalized many itinerant forcefully settled them to make them available as labor in factories (see Radhakrishna 2001). in (seeRadhakrishna labor factories as themavailable tomake settled them forcefully jatis and – with help of the Salvation Army – The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 42 10 CEU eTD Collection wood) for the global economy (see Ramachandran Guha 2000; Sumit Guha 1999). Yet over time, over Yet Guha 1999). Sumit 2000; Guha Ramachandran (see economy global the for wood) hard tropical (particularly produce of forest extraction the notably political-economy, imperial of concerns major other contradicted “tribes” certain regarding concerns “Humanitarian” non-tribals. to land of transfer the prohibit and areas “tribal” in prevailing rights land “customary” the codify and try to administration colonial the led also This areas. “tribal” into and revolt polarization class consequent and landlords and moneylenders officials, state of exploitative influx an bring usually would latter as the expansion colonial of effects the containing to attention additional pay to administrators colonial encouraged usually rebellions “tribal” Major 1999). (Sivaramakrishnan jungle” hilly “impenetrable an constituting for ofadministration regime distinctive of a need in of anomaly” “zones deemed were forestlands in 1864.These up set officially Department” a “Forest of control the under former the placing areas, agricultural/”revenue” from lands “forest” off mark to was regard this in line fault primary A territories. particular control and distinguish to efforts mapping with interacted thus and expressions spatial different had inevitably communities particular distinguish to efforts colonial that fact by the augmented was “tribal” is someone whether determines what of The complexity society. in place a community’s about truths historical unchanging and absolute denoting as census the in belief general the paradoxically, does, as remains inclusion for criteria of vagueness but the introduction its following century inthe changes of kinds all undergone has India of census the in of tribes list the else), something be considered and list leavethe to (or “tribal” as seen belegally also to seeking communities influential from pressure Under 117). 2005: (MacMillan one” I see when one “Iknow idea the to down boiled often paraphernalia, “scientific” alltheir despite commissioners, census the of categorizations the on Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 11 affiliation religious particular any from groups “tribal” exclude would that shape took ever consensus legal but no or Christian Muslim nor Hindu neither deemed mostly were groups “Tribal” thrown. was elsewhere fit to difficult was that all which into category” “dustbin category. functionlargelya as argues,“tribe” AsCrispinthe Batescameto (1995) succinctly the itsdiscontents and Adivasiness Scheduled Scheduled on Castes, the other hand, cannot legally be Muslim or Christian (i.e., Muslims or Christians converting to Christianity orIslam. to Christianity converting and Christians Muslims however,More excluding so thanthisargument, conversion). continuesafter discrimination Scheduled Castesfromcannot – is argued SCclaim status to exist SC status)only inhas Hindu religionsincebeen (despitethea strategyexperience the many evidences ofof that “untouchability”the caste Hindu right – a keyto definingdiscourage characteristic Dalits of from 11 . Considering the vagueness of the notion of who would constitute a “tribal”, debates a“tribal”, constitute would of who notion the of vagueness the . Considering The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 43 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist groups. social between distinctions “traditional” the upset to continued capitalism even survived people non-tribal and tribal between difference essential the about trope the Independence, after also see, will we As independence. for struggle the of part as peasants and workers “tribal” acknowledged or “tribal” considered areas into alliances built hardly subcontinent in the growing was that movement liberation national the that fact the to contributed policies, colonial and surveys in rehearsed constantly or caste, by class marked people and “tribes” between difference essential the Yet 44). (1983: factories” and mines, plantations, distant in work for recruited coolies increasingly, and, labourers, agricultural cultivation, shifting through subsisting peasantry the of stratum lowest the as society of Indian part mucha are very and were tribals “the life” as Indian of mainstream the from isolation complete of a sense convey not “should tribe of the notion the that emphasizes he – and communities tribal beof to rule tended British against outbreaks militant most the argued, has (1983) Sarkar Sumit historian As on. going actually processes of such recognition public prevented that amechanism into soon turned bay, but at formation of class processes capitalist keep to worked initially of people, category a different clearly were system, of thecapitalist part made and proletarianized how matter no as “tribal”, categorized people the that emphasis The constant 129). 2003: (Phillips people these“depressed” “uplift” to as ways legitimized and economy colonial the for necessary practices labor coercive the organize helped top its at man white industrious the and hierarchy civilization ofthe bottom the at “savage” dark-skinned the placed that progress of rhetoric the place, first in the forest the from in or living not “tribes” those to applicable Equally resources. natural in rich areas from people evict to trope became aconvenient and them, in sometimes and from living people invisiblized the protect to need the trumped of protection need in areas wild pristine, as forests of idea the feasible, more was and pacification increased state of the power military the as itsdiscontents and Adivasiness The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 44 CEU eTD Collection 2.1.2 the continuity of India’s pre- and post-Independence economy and society had been conditional been had society and economy post-Independence and pre- India’s of continuity the demonstrated, has (2003) Chibber Vivek As Independence. before long started had moreover peninsula Indian inthe society shaping role in its and state ethnographic the to Challenges Tribes”. “Scheduled and Castes” “Scheduled for precisely except census the in included category a longer nowas 1931, caste than “cultural” particularity. After social inequality rather questions of aslaunched independence“caste” and“tribal” exclusionschallenges after topoliticize tried democratic popular the of many Indeed, government”. of representative procedures and franchise the of technology political the around “organized phase anew towards census” the as such technologies enumerative and of politics culturalization by the “characterized one from governmentality in shift animportant observes, (2009:2) Rao as Anupama however, There was, the evils of ancient and colonial India that the modern, independent nation was to overcome to was nation independent modern, the that India colonial and of ancient evils the for stood that “caste” of category of the version a morebenign – backwardness and difference of essential a category as “tribe” the treating to returned often state Indian “secular” new initiatives. developmental and affirmative protective, of a host for beScheduled to “tribes” and “castes” particular of identification the requiring yet individual, the on ofcitizenship rights fundamental the ofbasing exercise makeaparadoxical to was nation-state independent newly the Constitution, very its In 274). 2001: (Dirks community” a national of idea of the construction the for terms oppositional the fashioning – in rule colonial direct after long persisting – role colonial be“the to ofcolonialism” inheritance pernicious most “the allowed of what symbolic thereby is It midnight”. of stroke “at the transition the of character orchestrated the captures perfectly also it remarks, (2007) Roy Reka as But inspired. have been writers and of artists generation a by which and knows Indian every probably that a sentence is room.It the filled words famous as these his tears fight to having and me for Nehru Jawaharlal by speech Independence historic this with a tape Keralaplaying from of mine friend a Communist remember I freedom”. and life to awake will India sleeps, world the hour, when ofmidnight stroke the “At Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 12 “A itsdiscontents and Adivasiness 13 According According to the much-debated Article 46, declaring “The shallState promote with special care the RituBirla argues that in reality even Indian “vernacular” capitalism was – despite efforts by the British T THE STROKE OF MIDNIGHT exploitation”. Scheduled Casts and the Scheduled Tribes, and shall protect themeducational from social injustice and all forms of and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people and, in particular, of the of credit, trade, and investment” (2009: 233). (2009: andinvestment” trade, credit, of values the and material community, and lineage, ofkinship, values between thesymbolic negotiability extensive foran allowed that conventions morebroadly, and councils, on“caste-based based regime to implement a barrage of laws intended to allow the “free” circulation of capital – very much 12 Though intending to break with colonialism and its ethnographic interventions, the interventions, ethnographic its and colonialism with break to intending Though ”, THE ETHNOGRAPHIC STATE LIVESON THEETHNOGRAPHIC The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” ? 45 13 . CEU eTD Collection India to further integrate into the global circuits of capital as a matter of conscious conspiracy. conscious of asamatter capital of circuits global the into integrate further to India for coercion and consent necessary the of organizing process inthe arising pressures divisive the simplified however, Theyhence, divided. forever remain would nation the make sure and condition “backward” its in India tolock order in colonizers British by the fixed been had categories colonial that argues nationalists Some nation. Indian the of category cultural new the of creation ofthe favor in usually it was challenged were lines fault ethnographic existing Where 161). 2003: (Kavita production of conditions colonial under generated knowledge” “scientific of of thekind constitution ideological ofthe academia Indian mainstream in of scrutinizing lack the in reflected also is Independence after structure of governance continuity The relative Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 14 society Indian onto capital of global pressures the of translating task the for itself prepared class ruling indigenous the as energies ofsuch taming the saw independence to run-up the rule, colonial under legally and ideologically fixed been had asthey of power relations existing and transforming confronting of aprocess initiating than rather Hence stereotypes. its and divide caste-tribe discursive the beyond going to thought of lack the reflect – clearly raj” of “jungle denouncement the or capitalism of aspects “savage” ofthe critique the as such – rights labor promote to imagery and metaphors the of many and as“tribal” known areas in or peasants workers to connection seek did not exist did that movements labor The 1983: 421f.). (Sarkar “non-violence” in faith Gandhi’s promoting instead and lines these along militancy further any condemning busy was Congress 1942 after Muslims, and Hindus students, peasants, workers, militant of together coming a by up built been had Independence for momentum the Whereas 142). (2007: steam” some “release people the help could rhetorically but society Indian within relations existing upset not would who aleader him in he saw because precisely party Congress the lead Nehru to choose who and workers” industrial and poor the amongst of activism symptoms widespread these from aloof “assiduously stand to preferred who by Gandhi opposed systematically –were countryside the in uprisings anti-feudal as radical as well – movements urban or socialist unionist trade other and “Bolshevik” how of account adetailed provides struggles, subaltern to attention specific with India of history the retelling in Bates, Crispin divisions. local existing reinforced and system world capitalist the in position fixed its in India locked that trade and production of relations the challenge to threatened had and independence for struggle the of phases in earlier figured had that movements moreradical ofthe dismantling the on itsdiscontents and Adivasiness This is of course known from the trajectory of many other national independence movements as well. independence” became the dominant agenda promoted by indigenous elites. indigenous by promoted agenda dominant the became independence” lost out “national Africa, as French movements in theearlyliberation animated that rights Frederik Cooper (2009), for instance, has powerfully recorded how the demand for equal citizenship 14 . The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 46 CEU eTD Collection necessary, change is inevitable” (Das Gupta in K S Singh 1989: 110f). As K S Singh claims, K SSingh As 1989:110f). KSSingh in Gupta (Das inevitable” is change necessary, is “change that opinion the to held healso though even tribals” on the forced tobe change any want not “did and tribals” the for corner soft a“very it, put as achronicler had, Nehru Jawaharlal nature. with harmony in and egalitarian, innocent, this: ofall opposite the were societies tribal pollution, and inequality, conflict, creating admittedly was society capitalist If them. defined had thinkers European as much “tribes” see to swayed were leaders Indian Instead, out. rooted be to evil an not was tribe the of progress, terms in 8) 1989: (Singh level” a“zero ofhistory, stage of aprimordial sign a Though associations. positive with imbued generally moreover was “tribe” the cruelty, feudal and backwardness of beasign seen to was Gandhi’s), in not (though Ambedkar and of Nehru visions modernist the in which caste, Unlike did. “caste” of discovery the as much beruled to were label its under falling people of howthe imagination the determine to continued British the of “discovery” this though tribe, of the notion the mentions hehardly Surprisingly, caste. to regard with particularly today, India in imagined and ispracticed politics way the over state” “ethnographic In society. Indian within differences – legal and technical have rendered than rather – politicize and democratize to efforts radical more outthe 1997),drowning (Khilnani future” the of becameIndia’s“temples mega-dams all above and projects development Large-scale prejudices. religious and workplaces traditional of backwardness the replace to were that values secular and economy planned rationally with little affiliation, except in rhetoric, to romantic or radical socialism or radical romantic to inrhetoric, except affiliation, little with character modernist ofastrongly was variety Nehruvian the socialist, be called could it If 2001). (Davis system world the into incorporation India’s before seen anything than worse poverty of forms “modern” created and that India in inequality economic deepen to continued that relations social the confronting about not was It poverty. “alleviating” as aprocess envisioned Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 15 form updated in models of evolutionary acontinuation was by Nehru understood as “Development” 420). 1983: Sarkar in quoted themselves; reassured officials British (as property” its of security the about be “nervous not needed Congress” behind element capitalist strong “the sure making while change radical to service lip paying about was modernization democratic social Nehruvian society, and economy Indian of structure the addressing of launched had movements popular militant that challenge of the instead Independence, After itsdiscontents and Adivasiness 16 One such updated form was for instance Rostow’s “stages of growth” theory, propagated around the I take this basic distinction between modernist, romantic and radical currents of socialism from Castes of mind world inthe1960s. world Priestland (2009). Priestland , Nicolas Dirks (2001) demonstrates the continuing hold of what he calls the he calls of what hold continuing the demonstrates (2001) Dirks , Nicolas The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 16 . It centered on a on centered . It 15 and 47 CEU eTD Collection the “tribe” as denoting not a particular discursive and historically constituted relationship but relationship constituted historically and discursive a particular not denoting as “tribe” the of idea an intact kept arguments such Yet cultures. of tribal view static a than rather dynamic a for exploitation, colonial of history the from inseparable as poverty of tribal understanding an for isolated, been had tribes “so-called” that view the –against place inits state ethnographic the put to seemed that arguments many forward put 1962) (e.g., N Srinivas M student his and Ghurye drunkenness. oftheir them cure and license”, “sexual their temper cultivation, of methods better to tribes expose would integration believed Ghurye Brahmin, a puritan As part. integrated” “imperfectly a “backward”, been already always had believed, Ghurye tribes, such was to Yet of civilization. need in oflife be form primitive lower, a as had: British provided the way same much the not by Thethe aborigines white man – so calledbut rather – and their by futurewider Hindu society, of which Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 17 from the University of Cambridge (Sinha 2004: 74). anthropology a PhDin held who ofBombay University the at ofsociology professor and scholar aSanskrit S Ghurye, G was approach “integration” the of vocal proponents most ofthe One priority. take to ought effort which about was debate of the heat the anthropologists, to left was efforts ordevelopmental affirmative, protective, state’s the with targeted of being purpose the for of “Scheduling” exercise the since and beunproblematic to assumed was community” “tribal or of a“tribe” part was who knowing Since 1950). of India, (Constitution Tribes” beScheduled to “deemed been had Constitution India’s 342ofindependent in article out laid procedures to the according which communities” tribal or tribes within or groups of parts or communities tribal or “the tribes towards groups, population specific select towards policies designing with suffice could it Instead, independence. for fought had that movements popular by the for called been had that kind of the economy Indian the of arestructuring demand not did conventions by ethnographic defined as question” “tribal the Solving inequality. social ofhistorical expressions interrelated various amongst one as “tribe” of the notion the envisioning for question” “tribal the on debate the roomin little was There (ibid.). ownway” their “in to develop tribes wanted and stage Communist” “original an to belonging “identity” tribal protect to wanted He 3). 1989: Singh 1952 in (Nehru dance” and of song “civilization tribal of the preservation the encourage to wanted Nehru 9), (ibid: minorities” “national called there were what to approach Union’s Soviet by the part in Inspired tribes. the onto “civilization” and development force to aimed which approach “assimilation” the and observation” and study for apart, be kept to specimens museum as tribals the treat to “sought that approach “anthropological” the between acourse steer to tried socialism Nehru’s itsdiscontents and Adivasiness According to According Sinha (2004: 74), Ghurye never however any did for fieldwork his PhD. (1943) suggest otherwise, Ghurye saw “tribes” in “tribes” saw Ghurye otherwise, suggest (1943) 17 Though the title and intentions of his book ofhis intentions and title the Though The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 48 CEU eTD Collection Gandhi. On Gandhi’s advice he went to work in tribal areas, only to eventually turn resolutely turn eventually to only areas, intribal work to hewent advice Gandhi’s On Gandhi. of follower adevote become had he forIndependence, struggle the during but, missionary a Christian as India come to hehad Originally 2004:75). (Sinha a decade for Agency Frontier North-Eastern forthe Affairs Tribal on Advisor chief Nehru’s also was Elwin communities. on these of monographs number a great and wrote communities Baiga and Gond (“tribal”) in 1964 lived in death his until from1928 who anthropologist aself-taught Elwin, Verrier by advocated perhaps explicitly most oftribals, “protection” for the argument the to attentive closely also yet was question tribal the to approach nationalist by the influenced Nehru was policy. development tribal post-Independence of aspects many over in carried that attitude -an independence for struggle in the initiatives own “tribals’” appreciate to failed largely movement nationalist the Gandhi, With laws. forest bydisobeying struggle the joined “tribals” many 1930-31, of movement disobedience civil the during when even way that stayed It luke-warm. remained followers “tribal” self-proclaimed his with engagement Gandhi’s dead, people 1,000 least at leaving and crowd a peaceful fire on opening protesters, the against moved eventually British the When raj”. “Gandhi called they what for offighting initiative the - taken annoyance Gandhi’s to – already had Gujarat) in “tribes” so-called ofthe (one of Bhils thousands of consisting movement aprotest time that by though them, mobilize to volunteers out sending started and presence of their helearned that movement non-cooperation of the launching the during only was It 136). 2004: (Hardiman tribes” “jungle as groups many classified that it was not just in North-Eastern idea no had have initially to seems Gandhi Gujarat, native his from campaigns untouchability hill states but also in his own Gujarat that the British had whose calling happened to be studying the bestudying to happened calling whose Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 18 system caste by the oppressed most those call to he preferred as God”, of (“sons “Harijans” of which of labor division organic harmonious, an otherwise on blot –the untouchability eradicating of issue the to elsewhere, energies political his concentrated generally he though Ghurye’s, closeto was question” tribal “the to approach Ghandi’s India. to introduced had British the -- that degradation moral the mention to –not dispossession and exploitation, poverty, of problems the behind leave automatically would accomplished, truly when that, India modern a united for arguing toward geared systematically were arguments Ghurye’s and civilization. ofbackwardness a continuum on entity holistic essential an itsdiscontents and Adivasiness The term was used by Gandhi to emphasize the fact that (former) untouchables were part of Hindu keep (former) untouchables in the “Hindu fold”, and for other possible humiliating connotations. humiliating forotherpossible and fold”, the“Hindu in keep (former)untouchables Thetermisstronglysociety. rejectedbythe dalit movementpaternalism, itsattemptto todayfor its vedas . Launching anti-colonial as well as anti- well as anti-colonial . Launching 18 ) were as much part as those part much as were ) The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 49 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist such of either need in people by which category legal the is that Tribe” “Scheduled the that objected have (1998), as Beteille such scholars, Some 126). 2005: (McMillan disadvantage educational and economic redress to efforts targeted for necessary or as uniqueness cultural respecting as either justified now difference, essential and distinctiveness cultural of notion a remained It India. Independent into over carry to managed hence tribe of the notion ethnographic the other, on the Ghurye and Gandhi and side on one Elwin and Nehru Between about. is “adivasiness” of what interpretations racist staunchest the to relation in only “radical” and head its on evolutionism social merely is exercise this that is acknowledge to fail they What own. their of “culture” rich have a tribes that fact the defend to position a“radical” it consider and Elwin of footsteps in the following as themselves see still today of anthropologists Anumber tribe. ofthe notion to the attached ideas colonial essentialist the deepening up ended often hence question” “tribal the on line Gandhi’s and toGhurye resistance Elwin’s dealers. liquor and landlords, local community, own of their members of defiance in themselves Gonds by certain chiefly initiated (2004), Hardiman to according was, that community Gond the through sweeping was and singing, dancing meat-eating, liquor-drinking, renouncing of movement aGandhian-style wasnot, Puritanism Gandhi’s all that being for Gonds the praised that writing ofhis time very the at “civilization”: by uncontaminated as cultures of them celebration his with interfere would that changes to blind willfully him make sometimes however, did, communities adivasi to commitment lived own, Verrier’s 183). Guha 1999: (in enthusiasm” sterile too-often and avague with uplifted be to ‘masses’ “as of them thinks longer no and people” as them love to learns poor… the among “lives who poor]”, of the [friend Dinabandhu true of “the asthat role of his rather hespoke often, terms: ethnographic in purely “tribals” his defend however, not, did Elwin poverty. tribal to solution the than rather the problem as society “Hindu” into saw integration – office university his outside foot set ever hardly Ghuryewho unlike – Elwin that islogical it dispossession, and exploitation of networks “Hindu” often capitalist, into incorporation of further process in the out loosing those by experienced hopelessness and violence the with Confronted Guha in 1999:307). ofbeauty”(Elwin and scraps for tracesofinspiration the debris in is search now do can allwe are gone; tribesman Indian of the days “great art the of matters in that helamented with, he lived communities “tribal” of the cosmologies and rituals, forms, arts various the todocument his best Doing it. about doubt leave little ownwords his and romantic a he was noted has work Elwin’s on commenting anyone Almost distinctiveness. cultural their preserve tohelp society Hindu from apart them keeping and “tribals” protecting on focused henceforth Independence after efforts Elwin’s 105). Guha 1999: (in forests” ofthe people wild free the on doctrine Puritan and “bourgeois as Gandhi’s see to came he what from away itsdiscontents and Adivasiness The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 50 CEU eTD Collection It was only when “the entire political climate was becoming communalized” (Teltumbde 2010: (Teltumbde communalized” becoming was climate political entire “the when only was It (ibid.). caste abolish to need the emphasize to reluctant generally was and of Congress out grew infact party Communist the while of caste elimination the for and Congress to opposition direct in party political first the moreover, ILPwas, This basis. this on precisely (ILP) Party Labour Independent forgotten generally now the forming by trajectory political his started and 14) (2010: experiment” a“caste-class to committed was Ambedkar shown, has Teltumbde Anand As together all the victims of the ruling structures (Omvedt 2009). bring would that alliance a “bahujan” envisioned and relations property bourgeois and system caste the protect) thereby (and to“reform” efforts Gandhi’s against strongly was Ambedkar capitalism. under inequality of caste deepening the overturn to “oppressed” the amongst solidarity of creating efforts hampered constantly that caste one’s to belonging not anyone towards “Indifferentism” of mentality caste the 2002: 270): (Ambedkar call“dalits” today would we what oppressing of norms set same by the produced was India” in tribes aboriginal the are called by “what experienced exclusion and poverty the of how talked explicitly Ambedkar question. tribal so-called the for of caste” annihilation “the called Amebdkar of what importance the recognize thereby few Yet hierarchies. caste regional in particular position their classified as “tribes” are organized, as almost everyone in India, into castes ( castes into India, in everyone asalmost areorganized, as “tribes” classified ofpeople majority the that fact the recognize politicians and scholars Most question. tribal the on debate in the part taken as having acknowledged ever hardly is Ambedkar dr. however, reason, this for Precisely question”. “tribal to the answers romantic and the integrationist transcended generally views whose someone also was in India status Tribe” “Scheduled of importance contemporary the for responsible directly most perhaps person the Interestingly, us”. calls government the “what and “are” whothey between distinction a make education any without people heard ever only Ihave that is such claims identity Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 19 realities, new account into take to simply or for “mistakes” correct list to of the “adjustments” the despite and Castes” “Scheduled or Tribes” “Scheduled determined historically were groups certain which with randomness the Despite tenable. hardly is however, argument, This as such. denoted groups the of lifestyle present-day or history substantive on the judgment pass to pretend not does and policy implement to intended merely is identified, are or development protection itsdiscontents and Adivasiness 20 And the that fact many bearingthe communities same name – and considering themselves aunity – A “tribe” whose members manage to become successful farmers for instance can be re-classified as a registered assuch. theyare where region ofthe outside travel “tribes” so-called when evaporates bizarrely status “tribal” that andthefact legalstatuses; todayhavedifferent districts different in administrative but living “Scheduled Caste” or an “Other Backward Caste”. Backward “Other or an Caste” “Scheduled 20 the power of the connection between “Scheduled Tribe” status and substantive and status Tribe” “Scheduled between connection the of power the The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” jatis ) negotiating 51 19 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 21 revolt The 378). 2005: (Frankel union its peasant and CPI(M) by the -supported Muslim, and lower-caste, tribal, - backgrounds various from workers landless and sharecroppers by organizing oflocal outgrowth an was from name their derive they that Naxalbari at revolt original the countryside, the to Maoism spread to trying activists educated urban as known mostly now are Naxals Though “Naxal”. usually, more or, “tribal” either categories: exclusive apparently two into labeled become have later that role but a leading played “tribal” as categorized people which in revolts agrarian various are the – as such recognized not usually again – question” “tribal the on state ethnographic the against challenge of type second A state. ethnographic the to challenges radical more from time the at retreat of Ambedkar’s legacy telling most the perhaps is measure of this outcome the has been that Tribe” “Scheduled of status the for competition The inequality. marked of relations in economically and ethnographically fixed communities of equality formal the for bodies), elected other and parliament in seats and service, civil education, in quotas reserved (i.e. Tribes Scheduled and Castes Scheduled for “reservations” called India are in ofwhat form the in primarily measures, legal the providing to contributed had efforts constitutional his injustice, of structure upthe blowing than rather admitted, himself he As democracy”. our political of structure the up blow will inequality from suffer who those or else moment possible earliest the at contradiction this remove must “We that warned, He inequalities”. have will we life economic and social in and equality have will we politics In ofcontradictions. alife into enter to going are we 1950, ofJanuary 26th “On that: stated explicitly he supervision, primary his under drafted been had which Constitution, of the adoption ofthe time the At above. from reform to turn his about however, silent, or naïve not was Ambedkar cause. theDalit to contribution political main his as see ironically now followers of his most out, (2010)points asTeltumbde that, – aretreat below from forced than rather Constitution the through institutionalized above, from reform at efforts into retreat his to contributed Columbia), PhDfrom the and LSE the from aMsC (with as alawyer trained was Ambedkar that fact the plus This, times. muchat too proved andrule divide of politics the of face in alliance a “bahujan” maintaining of Ambedkar for challenges the Indeed, over” (ibid.). was utility SCF’s] [the as soon “as India of Party Republican the of founding the with strategy initial his to return to only (SCF), Federation Caste Scheduled the platform, caste-based a floated reluctantly, Ambedkar, that administration British the with negotiations in 1920s the in 14) itsdiscontents and Adivasiness Ambedkar’s struggle against the Hindu legitimation of endedcaste in a similar dilemma. Having long religious categorieshe should make his point byconvertingto another religion –that of Buddhism. any in himself fix to other urge category butnear the theend ofresist his life, made to the decision that withinmanaged the hegemonicyears for frame of fixed, Ambedkar Hindu, a die not would he announced 21 The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 52 CEU eTD Collection 2.2 Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist smaller much – a percent a half and one mere a around hovers (STs) Tribes” as “Scheduled classified population Kerala’s of percentage the that fact the is particularity this to Contributing India. in “tribe” the of trajectory historical the in position a particular occupies Kerala 23 May On violence. any without succeeded initially and 1967 March in started was laborers) landless to be distributed could (which lands uncultivated hoarding or (share-croppers) tenants evicting with charged landlords against action” “Direct government. Front United the enter to order in support its withdrew CPI(M) the when continued itsdiscontents and Adivasiness V of interpretation. lenses “ethnographic” hegemonic to prey falling from participants of its part alarge in rescuing succeed not could movement Naxalite the society, Indian in inequalities the of ignoring consequences of the it reminding and state post-colonial the to challenge democratic amajor posing Though Others. primitive role of in their remained “tribals” that so reinterpreted becomes eventually state the by set categories legal ofthe outside of inequality axes various confront to set amovement which in moment a typical forms hence Naxalbari tribals”. “innocent in defending ground high moral the claiming while “extremists” the condemn to eager Congress, to CPI(M) the from ranging opponents, its as well as movement the over leadership the claiming activists urban the both fit The idea struggle. the in participate people make to 419) 1970: (Fic question” tribal “unsettled the and sentiments” tribal.. of dynamism the “exploited – had best at or – tribals “used” had that revolt as aMaoist remembered was Naxalbari – India Central in militancy Naxalite contemporary on debates the in reflected clearly –and of time course the In played. had “tribals” called people rolethat the overshadowing gradually “Naxalites”, as identified became collectively and Bengal West and Pradesh Andhra in number large in party the left struggle, revolutionary agrarian the suppressing with CPI(M) the charging “radicals”, these onwards, 1967 September From power). in CPI(M) the of line the (against Naxalbari at movement the allywith to started organizations andworkers’ students radical and Thunder” a “Spring as events the haddiscovered China that fact the reflects partly peasant of the background “tribal” the ignoring towards The shift 378). 2005: alsoFrankel 99;see (ibid: “extremists” and “tribals” between made is distinction a clear and as “peasants” merely to referred are generally demonstrators the struggle, armed of an characteristics the on took agitation the subsequently when whereas 98) 1988: Ray (e.g., “tribals” as to referred generally are they described, is demonstrators of the death the when how telling is It in aclash. died demonstrators nine and ICISSITUDES OF THE “ TRIBE ” IN KERALA STUDIES rd , however, a policeman , however, The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 53 CEU eTD Collection consider the only possible historical agency “tribes” may have as lying in the defense of their of defense the in as lying may have “tribes” agency historical possible only the consider that ethnographies” “tribal isolationist of paradigm the movebeyond to managed hardly has Kerala in anthropology Consequently, “tribe”. the with obsession historical main anthropology’s shaping power of relations historical the on reflection critical little encourage to away such in critical mass of working-class and/or “tribal” students “tribal” and/or working-class of mass critical no and in general students few very with beadiscipline to continues anthropology where and academia global in suchdevelopments vis-a-vis position a provincialized in themselves find anthropologists affiliated institutionally few the where Kerala, in Yet conceptualization. re- and self-examination critical undergone has there anthropology – universities the into as students groups population excluded previously ofmany entry the as as well – sixties late the of movements social new and the decolonization of influence the Under today. contested hotly Ironically, in the former imperial centers imperial former the in Ironically, – the present section focuses onthe vicissitudes of Kerala’s “tribes” in academic studies. chapters subsequent in further unfold will that – astory happened this how understand to start To dichotomy. tribe-class the beyond workers these of identities particular the acknowledge to managed never movement Communist the 1997), (Baak Kerala in power political Congress later and ofcolonial backbone the formed that plantations tea and rubber the in striking how despite Communist initiatives in the 1930s and40s atorganizing adivasi workers is Yetit slot. “tribal” essentializing separate, a in population or working-class peasant of the part aside set to effort the challenged and ahead have gone might movement Communist the context, Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 22 movement freedom of the heir equal became an but alliance by aGandhian dismantled not was Kerala forming now territories the in independence for struggle led the that alliance working-class—peasant the that considering sense another in scenario all-India the from differed have perhaps, to, ought state The Kerala. in absent entirely almost is elsewhere, problematic though 124), 2005: peoples”(McMillan tribal and areas tribal between “congruence The groups. “non-ST” other to) bonded 1970s,were the until even, often on(or depend and with liveintermingled “STs” these of most ofKerala, districts Eastern hilly the in concentrated Though states. North-Eastern India’s in case the is than percentage itsdiscontents and Adivasiness 23 24 Nehru even initially embraced Nehru even embraced the initially movement Communist as he hoped that in the context of the Cold This – This formulation rather than “the West” – is deliberate in since Germany, hadwhich no overseas There is an numberincreasing of “Scheduled Tribe” students in anthropology yet without critical mass socialism (Fic 1970: 77ff). (Fic socialism War it would allow India to provide a shining example of the “peaceful co-existence” of capitalism and essentialist theories “tribes”. on India’s of authorization sourceforthesocial asamajor continues academia happened.Consequently, German hashardly rethinking such adversary, as their chief developed historically instead and colonies economic realities of ordinary “adivasis”, they still often embrace cultural essentialist theories. essentialist cultural embrace often they still “adivasis”, ordinary of realities economic and with the experience of steep upward mobility making them less eager to acknowledge the 23 , the anthropological notion of the “tribe” has become has “tribe” of the notion anthropological , the 22 24 . We might haveexpected that in such a such in that haveexpected . Wemight , the discipline remains institutionalized remains discipline , the The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 54 CEU eTD Collection Indian Forest Department.Indian Forest ThePaniya other hand Adiya andthe the onthe areonly“wage hunter- by managed be to continue today which reserves, forest protected of establishment colonial and selling The this day. Kattunaikans, bycontrast,aremostly who livepeople used bycollecting,living to of to remembered forestmartyr a became 332) 2007: Menon (Sreedhara Raja Pazhassi the to lieutenant products eventual crushingDuring the revolt, ofthe Talakkal “theKurichiya hero”serving Chandu, asa such as honeyof Wayanad. against Britishmove totakepossession PazhassiofKottayam, the Raja, the ruler and arestatus upper-caste claim amongst Kurichias andjoint-families. matriarchal large in are managed and owned was knownrecently the to havepeople until which land their farming from live participated generally instance, for TheKurichia, society. in position most their or pursue in they livelihoods the in affected than as “tribal” the defined become having more in lies second Pazhassy commonality whose histories substantive by different have to seem moreover Kerala in “Tribes” the Revolt of 1800-1805 of transform. and the evolve communities how particular in studying history world local to relating pursue, otherwise Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 25 separately, each community discusses it since Yet, Kerala. of all“communities” lists that S Singh K by India of Survey Anthropological of the as part survey three-volume ahuge, instance for Thereis of “tribes”. understanding our shaped havehas do we knowledge existing the how of study the to necessary moreover, isnot, anundertaking such and Kerala in groups various of ethnogenesis the documenting sources historical reliable of alack There is Kerala. in as “tribal” classified now groups social the of history substantive the discuss to not hence here is aim The society. in Kerala developments historical the of course the in developed they as trends academic traces merely following the Kerala, in produced “adivasis” on knowledge of the overview exhaustive an giving from Far in Kerala. studies adivasi of trajectory ofthe isasketch The following paradigm. the with a confrontation without though caught., have been adivasis to related studies which within paradigm ethnographic traditional the from away amove see hence we Gradually beredressed. to started has sciences anthropological than other in as“adivasi” defined people the to related of anything neglect Thegeneral differently. adivasis of think to scholars encouraged has AGMS the of rise the that ofanthropology discipline ofthe only outside is It anthropologist. by the described as culture itsdiscontents and Adivasiness K S Singh (2002: xxi) in fact suggests he has overcome the tendency of treating castes and tribes as communities at the end of each of the 220 chapters dealing with a particular “community”. aparticular with dealing ofthe220chapters theendof each at communities communities tendencylies merely in an however introductory paragraph in taboos vis-à-vis other which this of “correction” The diachronically. than rather them synchronically describing and isolates are outlined, plus a few words on the “modern” aspirations and amenities of 25 it is unsuitable for the kind of ethnogenesis that I might The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 55 CEU eTD Collection 2.2.1 Though the overt racist methods used in early tribal ethnographies– such as the cataloguing of cataloguing the as such ethnographies– earlytribal in used methods racist overt the Though work. anthropologist’s the lauding official a government by prefaced and government the by commissioned directly is work the Usually, “tribe”. the with ofinteraction two or a week most at or days a few on based self-admittedly usually tribes, particular of deeds or historical organizing political the sometimes and rituals, death and marriage culture, material practices, and beliefs ethnographies”, systematically detailing systematically ethnographies”, of“tribal form in the comes often still work Written by culturalists. be,dominated to continues and Ithas, orpoliticization. change ofdynamic site the been not has inKerala Anthropology T ofhistorya criticalexamination thatKerala in that Iturnhere. hence to definitions.Itis academicssuch responsible for moreand officers ofpowerful the history samecategoryunder “tribe” the ofthehas less do perhaps to with theirfrom liberated and lazy“civilized” being of habitsneed in desperately were but (Phillipconditions living or wages 2003). How all these various groups – and many others – came to fall Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 26 laborandmobilize all the more so“tribal” labor to eager were they which for Wayanad, in up set British the that industry plantation the with have becomecloselyandmore interconnectedWhat that interesting, is they plausible, is land. otherof people’s produce offliving the forest dwellers parasitically wild were idea thatthey the to 1975) (Thurston coast” Malabar the on wrecked were who ancestors from descended and origin be “ofAfrican might ideathat they the havelaunched, from theorieswildest been particular, the in Paniya the of origins the About “slave”). meaning (literally “Adiya” and “worker) meaning (literally “Paniya” as known are they as long as for perhaps and generations many for such been have to seem who laborers agricultural landless generally are They 2006). (Breman gatherers” itsdiscontents and Adivasiness 27 As Paul Erik Baak describes, the British had varying degrees of success in mobilizing “tribal” labor. There are even formats for “scientific” this kind of documentation and one of the “great achievements” HE ANTHROPOLOGICAL TRIBEIN HE ANTHROPOLOGICAL the confinement and bad living conditions of the plantations surrounded by forest (Baak 1997:94ff.). byforest(Baak surrounded the plantations of conditions living andbad the confinement to face enticed werenot centuryandmoreover thenineteenth ofneed,to landlordsin in times security however proved also areas the coastal from labor Mobilizing laborers. of number required the for enough not often difficult sincelabor many andex-slaves theplantation as toserve reluctant total beenparticularly seemtohave “tribal” labelled communities Some were number still of tied,people through in some obligationsof the hilly areasbut also where a level plantations of were started was point one. point 14- into a survey of India ethnographic forthe Risley’s 27-pointformat H.H. official theBritish simplify of Krishna Iyer (whom we will meet later on in this section) was, according to K S Singh (2002: xxi) to K ERALA 27 , in encyclopedic fashion, the social structure, religious structure, social the fashion, , inencyclopedic : A 26 HAPPY PEOPLE WITHOUT ANY HISTORY PEOPLE HAPPY since “tribals” would have noneedfordecent “tribals” have would since their history and morewith the The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” ? 56 CEU eTD Collection Thurston was a British administrator but also Superintendent of Ethnography and chair ofthe chair and ofEthnography Superintendent also but administrator aBritish was Thurston 1909 Thurston’s is works such One groups. these between difference the on emphasis the increased gradually and tribes and castes of division more rigid a developed but area the of aborigines the were asdalit identify nowadays whom castes the that view the repeating still were society Kerala documenting works century, the of turn the After dalits. considered are today whom Cherumas, to relation in so does interestingly Logan 147), (1997: “aborigines” mentioning When 109). (1887: language” and tribe another in castes of repetitions mere are sub-castes] these [of number a large that and exist not did castes of sub-divisions innumerable almost present the times’ ‘early in that … correct “probably is it saying “tribes”, with associated nowadays characteristics other of the or any isolation relative life, of way adistinct to reference than rather orlanguage in race differences to if referring as “tribe” term the treats Logan instance, another In “caste”. and “tribe” between crucial, so became later difference,which the to attention little displaying 37), (1887: castes” servile other and tribes of “jungle talks instance for asLogan indeterminate rather was term ofthe use yet the used is tribe” “jungle term the Tribes, of Scheduled list the on up ended eventually who groups of the some For 214). (1887: “tribe” a as Kerala, in communities Logan by William 1887 and “tribe” in Kerala. One of the earliest colonial documents on Kerala, the Kerala, on documents colonial earliest ofthe Kerala.One in “tribe” and “caste” terms ofthe usage the clarityon conceptual little was there period earlycolonial the In of Kerala. studies anthropological (Philip 2007). validity its for nothing mattered knowledge their produced those which under conditions In this sectionsubstitute racism by romanticism while relying on their colonial predecessorsof asif the the chapter, to content remain to seem Anthropologists definition. a primordial in “tribes” incarcerated I will has that discipline of their briefly thepast with break a paradigmatic in no interest shown moreover sketch have Kerala in Anthropologists power. of relations social to linked the seldom are “behavior” history or of“culture” observations of that fact the in instance for persist, methodology theof racist forms “tribe” in Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 28 appeal lost indices—have nasal itsdiscontents and Adivasiness 29 A number of anthropologists and Indologists, inside as well as outside India, however continue to William Logan Logan was the 1881 commissioner into William in appointed tenure to enquire special land and tenant profess fascination to an interlocutor like me for the different skull types of the “tribes”. ofthe skulltypes the different interlocutorlikemefor toan profess fascination tenants’ rights that hadprecededtheriots. that tenants’ rights communal as riots the Mapilla depicting arguments culturalist herefused togoalongwith (Muslimuprising Mapilla vs toargue wasinclined Logan Interestingly, area. Hindu) the in farmers tenant riots (“Mapilla”) Muslim predominantly therevolts by following Chennai/Madras), and in rightsstead pointed to the large-scale in dispossessionMalabar of Mapilla (the Northern region of what is now Kerala, then ruled directly from 29 refers to the Nayars, today known as one of the dominant, upper-caste dominant, ofthe as one known today Nayars, the to refers 28 , more subtle (and thereby sometimes all the morepowerful) the all sometimes thereby (and , moresubtle against culturalist arguments – in his report onthe –inhis arguments culturalist Castes and tribes of Southern India The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” Malabar Manual 57 of . CEU eTD Collection political imagination was not generally considered as contradicting Communist ideals. Communist contradicting as considered generally not was imagination political Modernist than other indeed or input popular little for allowed Science this all that fact the orsuperstition; earlier religiousdogma to progressivein relation wasmoreoverconsidered effect, and cause explanation,possibility in the of rational of firm belief “revolutionary”.considered The rather than Sanskrit or English – was already such a – breakMalayalam in with available made was Science the academic past that The fact thatacademia. of it mainstream the was enough to be into entered knowledge scientific of generating methods or dialectic more critical for need the of or science ofsocial importance of the recognition Little 1994). Sooryamoorthy and (Zachariah Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist the with concerned mainly was popularization such Yet movements. science and literacy various through scale a massive on popularized being was knowledge as scientific of Science, field the in turmoil Communist-led of great aperiod also were in Kerala sixties the Interestingly, ofhistory. outside and ofcivilization rung bottom as the “adivasis” place to continued that knowledge colonial of form “indigenous” more supposedly and enlightened amore produce to continued they such, As “tribes”. different the of aspects “cultural” the to physical the with apreoccupation from (1962) D.Luiz as A. such ethnographies, Later Kerala. alsoin dropped, eventually was exteriors of physical measuring other and indexing nasal that holocaust the after Europe in discredited got finally anthropology ofrace type this when only was It 49-51). (1925: castes” higher ofthe people the among characteristics Aryan fine and plains, ofthe people the among features Dravidian and serfs, agrestic the and hillmen the among types the in features “Negroid found he of Kerala region home his in how on publicized widely instance for Brahmin, a himself Iyer, Krishna Anantha hierarchies. confirmold to moreinclined all the but measurements physical with obsessed less became anthropology of Thurston, collaborators erstwhile ofthe one and ethnology” Indian South of “father the considered Iyer, Krishna Anantha as such ethnographers, “indigenous” subsequent Amongst xlvii). (1909: tribes” jungle unadulterated of arecharacteristic which index, nasal high and stature short primitive the exhibit “still who Chenchus” “jungle the example for such as tribes, various of description with accompanied book, Thurston’s of introduction the form index nasal and stature minimum and maximum, of average, tables Elaborate 1808). 2007: (Shah owners of their status the to a guide as of body-parts measures saw such that theories racial tosubstantiate order in exteriors physical other and skulls, noses, people’s measuring --with time the at Europe in anthropology physical in – common obsession certain asa well as ethnography his in emerges Kerala of aborigines the denoting time same the at as tribes” of “hill notion more bounded A Museum. Madras itsdiscontents and Adivasiness dissemination of scientific information, with an emphasis on the physical sciences physical the on emphasis an with information, ofscientific Tribes of Kerala The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” , shifted 58 CEU eTD Collection exploitation of the Paniya in contemporary society and the historical development of this development historical the and society contemporary in Paniya of the exploitation the to attention more pay does He end. not does paradigm ethnography tribal the Aiyyappan, with also Hence time. his in also of“tribals”, depictions such of hegemony continuing the with a compromise may reflect it but unclear is so does Whyhe history”. any without people happy a are “Paniyas formulations: classic rather uses -- he instances other many in – and Paniya of the ethnography his in starting Yet background). own his from well all too knew (and encountered he inequalities the confront to desire his reveal repeatedly writings His background. community their of generality reified aparticular to these reduce to refusing and dilemmas and aspirations hopes, in their interest showing people, ordinary with time considerable spent he predecessors, upper-caste his Unlike voice. such new important an became descent “OBC”) now untouchable, (erstwhile Izhava of a scholar Aiyyappan, anthropology, In academia. was that power of upper-caste bastion utmost the enter to background lower-caste of persons some enable indirectly however movementdid The Communist Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 30 as“ what inKerala producing is known and poverty eradicating world: “developing” post-war of the goals grand the to irrelevance apparent its for public political awider to interest little of discipline a marginal was anthropology countries, World Third most in as Moreover, East. the in anthropology “bourgeois” on attack the and West, the in waging anthropology racial against campaign the of both aloof stay to managed hence Kerala in of anthropology field The 57). 1994: (ibid. public general the itwith sharing to and science physical to commitment his rather but organizers the attracted that socialism his not was it but ex-Communist an also was Haldane 1994). Sooryamoorthy and in1962(Zacharia Society Literary Science Kerala the inaugurate to invited was genetics Mendelian with theory evolutionary Darwinian unite to efforts the support to was contribution scientific whose S Haldane JB like Englishman an Instead, (ibid.). sciences” “capitalist as and eugenics genetics ofMendelian 1950sonward, the from condemnation, or its Union Soviet the in theories scientific new the with incompatible as anthropology racial of “bourgeois” its denouncement followed it that influence Soviet under strictly so not was Kerala hand, other the On 2010). Turda (see of racism problem the addressing of networks academic centered USSR- in urgency little was there hierarchies, racial of ideology -- Nazi over victor historical the been had indeed, in – participated not supposedly had block Soviet the Since unexplored. largely remain could knowledge anthropological in ofracism problem the which in ajuncture moreover Kerala, in was, This East. communist and West capitalist the both dominated that science to attitude modernist staunchly the reflected hence War period Cold the in anthropology Keralese itsdiscontents and Adivasiness “development”. Vikasanam literally means “expansion” but has been adopted in Kerala as the Malayalam referent for vikasanam ” (development). 30 The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 59 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist as understood phenomenon the to referring generally a term – mothers” adivasi unwed of issue the to of commitment “lack Janu’s of CK hecomplained AGMS, the about he knew what India “ 1977 the of author and Kerala of anthropologists celebrated internationally most ofthe one Mathur, P.R.G. interviewed in 2005 I when this Irealized Kerala. in seen are people tribal which through lenses common-sensical have become what to respectability academic lend to continues thereby ethnography tribal the of genre the in reproduced is that remnants historical isolated as separate, of adivasis understanding The epistemological an interesting species ofhumanity. as up them hold and culture, their “preserve” to seek of Kerala, rest of the development the from loose cut them that of ethnographies kind reifying the for suited preeminently communities as betaken to continue -“adivasis” community Izhava (becoming) the of mobility of upward strategies the (2000)on Osella and Osella by work the instance for being paradigm essentialist the with break – a clear terms dynamic and more relational in be understood to have come communities other whereas Hence avoided. however is of the“tribe” notion the in on carried legacies oppressive the with confrontation intellectual An 1982: 38). (Morris unit” a cultural as forming themselves see who of people agroup for tag a descriptive as –“merely “community” a particular about talking as same the as taken be can “tribe a certain about talking that suggests and “castes” and “tribes” so-called between distinction sociological substantive no generally is there India South in that argues also He (ibid:11). culture” Hindu wider the from ‘isolates’ been least, at times historical within not, have communities “forest that and 55) (1982: a tribe” and a caste between … difference essential beno to seems there terms economic “in on focuses he tribe hunter-gathering “primitive” theso-called regarding even that heargues introduction, economic study of 1982 “ the his writes instance for London, in LSE the at Hill based Morris, Brian paradigm. Pandaram established the of confronting short stop these again though ofKerala, in thestudy tribes and of castes essentialization categorical the critique to attempts new find 1980swe the In stereotypes. evolutionary most ofits some reproduce to tempted even sometimes and biases its and ethnography tribal of paradigm the confront to so) understandably (and reluctant Yet heis castes. be considered not would tribes certain why reason” sociological no is “there that conclusion the to comes even Aiyyappan Paniya, the studying In study. elaborate of worthy considered generally not adivasis “black” proletarian, of agroup Paniya, onthe ethnography his focus to first ofthe one is moreover He condition. itsdiscontents and Adivasiness ”, a volume containing classical ethnographies of a large number of “tribes”. Asking him Asking of “tribes”. number large a of ethnographies classical containing volume ”, a ”, largely in the tradition of the tribal ethnography. In his In ethnography. tribal of the tradition the in ”, largely The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” Tribal situation in situation Tribal Socio- 60 CEU eTD Collection organized by the AGMS. bythe organized occupation land major of a eviction forceful the ordered one who the hadbeen Anthony K A year that earlier that fact the despite and activists subaltern most and Congress between antagonism historical strong the despite CPI(M), the towards than Congress towards inclined more positively leadership AGMS the made it time long a for that muchso So activists. on impact emotional a strong have K Janu– C with directly negotiate to prepared himself showed AKAnthony Minister Chief Congress 2003 when during –notably attitude a different show to decide strategically politicians where instances few the that enough intense is interventions political actual activists’ adivasi to deafness consequent The innocence”. “tribal on script main the into “educated” those – certainly Kerala in people of majority grand the and activists adivasi between schism apolitical introduce helps hence ethnography tribal the of The paradigm relevance. contemporary of any sign this under living people the deprives but them “preserve” help thereby to problems their and cultures lost these “documenting” of role the anthropologist the offers past of abetter remnants “innocent” threatened, as people tribal Representing rehearse. to spoke I people ordinary hear or could media and blogs in encountered I daily – that women adivasi – andparticularly adivasis of portrayals dehumanized stereotypical, the feed to continued how anthropology realized I anthropologist, living prominent” “most Kerala’s me was assured and white” brown both races, and tribes civilized more with contact and estates, planter’s for (Thurston jungles of the up opening the from metamorphosis of contact result as the lost becoming are unhappily 1909:tribes xlvii).jungle of various characters and ethnological blood of “the purity that anxiety of Thurston’s Comingan echo hear but help not could I adivasis”. the of end “the spell logically would and withoccur would all the authority of what many people had adivasi mothers” were simply “hapless victims” “unwed assumed apparently He adivasis”. of the end “the signal to likely was hefeared, that, Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 31 pregnant. become they as soon as them abandoning and women adivasi abusing sexually “outsiders” itsdiscontents and Adivasiness 32 Marriama Kalathil’s Kalathil’s Marriama (2004) study of “unwed mothers” amongstthe Irular in Attappady echoes the Mathur had also not taken the effort of following what the AGMS had actually been doing as C K Janu something other than deception might drive the women to relate to wealthier neighbors. relate towealthier drivethewomento other deception might something than never suggeststhat and settler” (58) ofa the lust who“whofellpray to innocent”girl and beautiful exact same concerns. Typically, it mentions only extreme cases such as a nine year old “charming, phenomenon was part of the general oppression of adivasis that the AGMS was addressing. was theAGMS that adivasis oppressionof ofthegeneral part phenomenon was moreover goodand arguedthatthe much mothers” woulddothe“unwed the issue unsure publicizing that she was thefact expected hertogivethe considering issue society” she called“civil what she didnot-- she however, that as explained-- givetheprominence tomeduringan interview it that true, is speeches. It public in explicitly mothers” times several addressedthe of “unwed had issue 31 According to Mathur, C K Janu ought to have “committed suicide” over this issue 32 and worried about the “racial” mixing that mixing “racial” the about worried and The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 61 CEU eTD Collection nomenclature”, mobilized by the government of Kerala in its decentralized planning campaign planning decentralized its in of Kerala government by the mobilized nomenclature”, a traditional using but people, tribal of composition “a new fact in is institution, “tribal” “ the like a notion how shows hence She corrective. be a can argues, she anthropology, applied which to practices, state contemporary in knowledge of forms dominant question to her allows This interrelatedness. necessary their on arguments Foucauldian introduced and power and of knowledge topic the breached question” “tribal to the connection in has University, atKannur of anthropology department of the head (2009), Menon Vineetha anthropology”. “applied in particularly discipline, the of edges the on is place taking be to seems Kerala in “tribes” to related production of knowledge tradition academic colonial enduring the from away move acautious where anthropology within place The only Kerala. Northern in tribes” and “castes different of ethnographer colonial upper-caste by an Nair’s Gopalan beC. to out turned “evidence”, conclusive Delhi as in prime-minister the to way all the sent be to was which book, The forefathers. “tribal” of their pictures and “tribal” as community of the description a detailed care, containing great with around carried abook was of“evidence” piece Thesecond belonging. tribal of “evidence” beconsidered come to would traits genetic random such why explains groups of tribal accounts colonial in genetics race and about obsession the illness, the about “tribal” nothing obviously is there Though anemia. sickle-cell of disease hereditary fromthe suffered them of many that fact the was first The belonging. “adivasi” oftheir of evidence pieces telling two had They status. tribal ordained centrally modifying to way onthe institution first the is that Kerala in body governmental the KIRTADS, to list Tribes Scheduled on the be to right their for argued had how they detail mein to explained list, the to re-admitted become to endeavor this in active been had men who the of One Tribes. Scheduled for reserved benefits educational the access and of mobility venues other seek to need the them to confirmed had crisis agricultural as the list the on back get to trying now Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 33 “ST”. an ofbeing status the he had as long as so do to permitted not their community from the remove to government the ST lobbied -- had backs list: everyone’s behind purportedly – leader local he had been eager to their sellwhen Castes) Backward (Other “OBCs” his become had but list Tribe land Scheduled the on been to set up a cinema butpreviously had group was This as“Kunduvadians”. identifying farmers small of acommunity from people with I spoke mewhen to clear particularly became in this plays knowledge ethnographic colonial a role direct Kerala.How in and benefits status for competition communities’ of politics moremundane the in also pronounced is knowledge ethnographic of The impact itsdiscontents and Adivasiness As a measure, cannot “protective” “tribals” legally sell their land to non-tribals. Wayanad: its peoples and traditions its peoples Wayanad: (1911), another meticulous documentation meticulous another (1911), oorukuttam ”, often taken as a primordial as a taken ”, often 33 The Kunduvadians were The Kunduvadians The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 62 CEU eTD Collection 2.2.2 Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist of “adivasi” experiences the it presented that in abreak-through was Edwin and Narayanan India South in experience adivasi movement. in the cooperation and experience close his from India South in movement adivasi the on papers and of pamphlets a string written has who Nadu), (Tamil Coimbatoire in based activist-intellectual Malayalee a Bijoj, R C is this in active Particularly Kerala. in issues “tribal” of study the to approach a different for tone the set eclectic, sometimes theoretically though Kerala, in movement of theadivasi studies Activist state. ethnographic the from deviance of a degree haveinspired to seems AGMS the anthropology, than other fields in which in ways the of some impression an give to meant merely is but exhaustive not iscertainly studies, development and economy political works, biographical studies, cinematography and literary to moving and publications activist with starting overview, The oftheAGMS. rise the by have beeninspired that ofanthropology outside publications significant most of the overview abrief will give I chapter, of this section last this In “adivasis”. to attention pay to started anthropology than other disciplines that coverage, media massive it gave time first the for Thiruvanathapuram in demonstration large its when onward, 2001 from so more and mobilizing, was AGMS the as 90s, of the course the in only was it that remarkable is It society. Kerala modern addresses that agenda an setting fact are in and past the in or stuck isolated not are “tribal” considered people ofthe many that undeniable has become it AGMS the of rise of the influence the under adjustments, minor only with largelycontinues, ethnographies” “tribal static and isolated writing of tradition the itself, anthropology within Though T contestation. their and projects of hegemonic part always but elementary” and “simple never were “identities” – other any –or tribal that realize and further goastep to need will it knowledge, common-sense through managed and substantiated of inequalities challenging the to contribute actually but develop they as facts (political) the follow just not to anthropology critical For 112). (2009: elementary” and be“simple to used identities these arguing past, that the “identity perception” of “adivasis” isnow inmotion but ignores itscomplexities inthe notes Menon Hence historically. knowledge this producing in anthropology of complicity of the noquestion is there inthat limited sametime is atthe it Yet, granted. for “tribes” on knowledge state-produced taking from away moves resolutely it in that step a revolutionary is almost this Kerala, in ofanthropology discipline the For reasons. strategic for institution the to agree people that argues Menon and innocence, haplessness on tribal arguments behind Leaving (2009:110). itsdiscontents and Adivasiness HE INDIGENIST CHALLENGE TO THE ETHNOGRAPHIC TRIBE TOTHEETHNOGRAPHIC CHALLENGE HE INDIGENIST , published in 1997 and written by Anita Cheria, C R Bijoj, K A search for justice: A citizen’s report on the The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 63 CEU eTD Collection within the tradition of depicting tribal people as remnants of a beautiful but vanishing past. He past. vanishing but ofabeautiful remnants as people tribal ofdepicting thetradition within Mother Forest, biography, C KJanu’s is activist of anadivasi far so appear to biography elaborate The most “tribals”. surrounding imaginary romanticized and stale the break help reality, lived into view a giving by automatically, stories life these also how is New attention. detailed such of worthy weredeemed lives upper-caste only exceptions, few with earlier, that in development novel a is This dalit)lives. (and adivasi describe to biography the of genre the deploy to a move been also has there studies cinematographic and of literary disciplines the within decade, past the In 22). (2003: modernity” tocritique site as “a India) (and Kerala in debates as historical aswell contemporary in constructed is “tribe” the that way the examines critically as it Kerala in path-breaking is work Her of castes”. a conglomeration as of India imagination “the to shadow” as a “appears that caste” outside as thetribe with emerged that division sharp “the addresses directly KCBindu work Inher (ibid.). amembership..too” claim can I which] “primitive”…[to the of notions Western the from breath life its draws which culture academic the am part…[and] I which of culture Hindu upper-caste, Malayalee, the including identity, adivasi the constructed have which cultures “various the studies rather but voice” adivasi “authentic an reflect or lives adivasi document to seek not does fieldwork, on based though that, Kerala from study critical and self-reflexive explicitly first the myknowledge, to Itis, adivasi”. the reading dominant, the Reading identity: adivasi the “Constructing entitled C Bindu, by K of Hyderabad University the for a thesis in studies ofliterary discipline the from comes Kerala in “tribes” on knowledge of ethnographic tradition the with break decisive most The AGMS. by the posed challenge political the to attention paying started now also academicshave some activists, Besides Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 34 Struggle Muthanga the of story the publicized and documented powerfully instance for CSaratchandan filmmakers. documentary from adivasis for attention increasing an also was There 2006). G Jacob of “adivasis”(T concentration highest the with state the Wayanad, in crisis the on later and India South in movements dalit-adivasi on (2002) P. Bandhu and Jacob of TG work the being contribution notable – a collection this to adding started politics, adivasi to attention due with often intellectuals, by dalit publications activist of number increasing an 2000s, the of course the In general. in society as concerning leaders up byadivasi thrown challenges the posed also consequently, and, in moving was society Kerala that directions general of the as part communities itsdiscontents and Adivasiness The Struggle” “Muthanga refers to the of the occupation Muthanga wildlife in 2003, led by the AGMS, about this struggle. this about talk subsequentinmoredetail I will In chapters, bythepolice. eventuallyevicted violentlywhich was written by Bhaskaran. As the title signals, the author does to some extent work extent some to does author the signals, title the As by Bhaskaran. written 34 inhis Evicted fromJustice. The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 64 CEU eTD Collection an instance of age-old “tribal rebellion”. “tribal ofage-old instance an as than rather paradigm movements” social “new the within AGMS the discussed explicitly time first the for which (2006), Kerala’ in Struggles People’s Indigenous and Democracy, Movements, NewSocial Development: ‘Interrogating Parayil Govindan and Sreekumar byK.K. article the which amongst science, political from followed contributions engaged equally but theoretical academic audience with his sympathetic description of the struggle in struggle the of description sympathetic his with audience academic Weekly the in article an in struggle Muthanga the to attention bring helped notice of these groups. ofthese notice took ever hardly anthropology than disciplines other as a novelty is itself in which “tribes”, for attention increasing had have studies development and science political economics, AGMS, the of rise the following that is see,however, do we What entities. dichotomous as absolutely “castes” and “tribes” treat to continue usually and Kerala in adivasiness of constructions colonial with a break of less make cinematography and literature than disciplines other in Publications it. produce helped even and movie the in roles lead the act children Kuttunaikan and Paniya cinema, Malayalee in time first the For inWayanad. girl ofanadivasi age coming-of the centers which Wayanad, in children adivasi for school alternative an of director the Baby, KJ with together 2003 in produce film the is noteworthy more Even aspirations. political and lives their of stories on the activists adivasi with ofinterviews transcriptions literal with sources language of transcribed interviews with adivasi and dalit activists, forming one of the first English- archive internet extensive an made who professor, cinematography aGerman Schulze, Brigitte by work the also is noteworthy genre, biographical the In ignore. person of atribal experiences on the than rather on a“tribe” focusing ethnographies” “tribal that woman an Adiya of life in the Forest a biography being by simply interventions, literary romantic these despite Yet Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 35 speech Janu’s characterizes wit that and sarcasm the mistake readers having of the danger running own words,though CKJanu’s to close remain thereby to meant sentences, complicated and punctuation capitals, avoids that style a literary in biography of the part thefirst bywriting K Janu of C “innocence” the emphasize to best his does even itsdiscontents and Adivasiness 36 Having interviewed C K Janu many times, this is certainly the impression I and my research assistants A notable, exception is the work by professor of economics M. Kunhaman at Kerala University who “innocent”. got from Janu and indeed, most people close to her describe her as witty and ironic rather than wrote about “the tribal economy of Kerala” already in the1980s. in Kerala” already economy of tribal about“the wrote inevitably introduces the reader to the contradictions, interdependencies, and aspirations and interdependencies, contradictions, the to reader the introduces inevitably and Raman was one of the first to bring the adivasi struggle in Kerala to an international an to Kerala in struggle adivasi the bring to first the of one was Raman and 36 Together with C R Bijoj, Ravi Raman - a political economist by training - by training economist - apolitical Raman Bijoj, Ravi CR with Together 35 for a wondering, naive attitude. naive a wondering, for Economic and Political The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” Social Analysis Social Guda she helped to shehelped Mother . More 65 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist up. takes dissertation this challenges ofthe one is This India. of parts other for have done Shah Alpha and Baviskar Amita for instance that way the themselvesin movements “adivasi” for poses “adivasiness” that contradictions concrete the showing by in Kerala prejudices associated its and “tribe” of the notion the deconstruct to helps that work anthropological is done be to remains What ethnography. tribal traditional of confines the transcends content, in also sometimes and in style, that knowledge producing started and movements and livelihoods “adivasi” in interest an have taken disciplines other AGMS ofthe therise with reigns, still presumptions theoretical its concomitant ethnographyand tribal the of genre the confined, be to used “adivasis” where ofanthropology, discipline the within thatthough see we Hence 1991. in economy of India’s liberalization the since years the in livelihood” distinct“tribal apparently an to changes reconstruct to effort his in of “tribals” notion reigning the to closer much –stays Kerala in development tribal Kerala (2008) Aerthayil Matthew by study academic independent the contrast In “adivasis”. on paradigm reigning the challenges significantly – quite by abide silently to choose scholars engaged independent most that stereotypes cultural confronting –often study ofthe tone realist political The 41). (2006: entity” a cultural than formation orasocioeconomic entity as apolitical be identified less more or Theycan domain. political and economic social, [sic] in marginalization of their extent the with do to has much but practices, and customs traditional with do to have much not does Wayanad in a ‘tribe’ “being that stated explicitly instance for It life. “tribal” of notions culturalist romantic deconstructing in studies independent most than wentfurther study government-commissioned this fact, the to Kerala year same That debate. Indian larger in the ignored usually a state – Kerala within developments recent to development” of“tribal study in the engaged who Kerala of outside scholars awoke John M.S. and 2006, J.Chathukulam In ofdevelopment. model Kerala the of achievements the to sympathetic remaining while AGMS the by posed challenge the and livelihoods adivasi on focus to studies development international within from first ofthe one was Norway, in based researcher aMalayalee Kjosavik, Darley livelihoods. adivasi on also focused studieshave development in books and articles of number anincreasing demonstration, 2001 AGMS’ the after development” “tribal to commitment renewed government’s the to reaction In itsdiscontents and Adivasiness The Wayanad Initiative The Wayanad – one of the latest extensive contributions from development studies to the debate on debate the to studies from development contributions extensive latest one of the – Indian Institute of Management appeared, a large-scale study commissioned by the government of government by the commissioned study large-scale a appeared, in Kozhikode on adivasi livelihoods in Wayanad. In Wayanad. in livelihoods adivasi on inKozhikode Impact of globalization on tribals in the context of The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 66 CEU eTD Collection 2.3 politics mobilizing around the notion of the tribe and the effect of such mobilization. In the next the In mobilization. of such effect the and tribe of the notion the around mobilizing politics of asaform ofindigenism rise the for reasons the into enquire to continues but it, capture to fighting those versus state the against fighting those capitalism, global outside peoples and inside “peoples” non-tribes, and tribes between differences essentialist of the deconstruction the at stop not does dissertation my why is That vacuum. the fill to state ethnographic the allow Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 37 of the absence the in that vacuum a leave to seems deconstruction Mere deconstruction. historical to however, limits, are There “tribe”. the deconstructing ofhistorically agenda a similar in engaged have who byscholars done work critical the on relying it, with carries it baggage bourgeois and colonial the exposing and tribe of the notion taken-for-granted the deconstructing by gaze state this status. that come with that entitlements receivethe and India of Survey Ethnographic the in Tribes” as “Scheduled be registered should they not or whether on decisions make accordingly and “tribality” their perform people watch order to in most, at days a few usually trips, “fieldwork” on out venture haveto to continue India in anthropologist Government contested. are interests social different which under terms the by shaping precisely India Independent into over carried and value analytical substantive it lend to willing anthropology of currents by certain up backed imperatives colonial and fantasy Western of born category a is “Tribality” relations. historical study to tool a useful not and construct a(govern)mental is signals notion the that difference essential the that emphasize as to as well tribal are“genuinely” people these whether of debating nonsense the demonstrate to intended precisely is “tribal” as known become people effect what to and how Describing same. the not are they opinion, much academic even and popular to contrary but, - interrelated may be categorization and ethnogenesis – of processes two The as “tribals”. labeled be to came they effect what to and how of history broader the trace but to groups of particular ethnogenesis the of describing project the on embark to not was chapter this of aim the Yet time. over themselves reproduce inequalities social how and extent what to just revealing in one for interesting, certainly is Kerala in groups social particular of of theethnogenesis Thequestion todoso. intend not did It from. come “really” dissertation of this rest the in figuring people the of where secret the revealed not has chapter This C itsdiscontents and Adivasiness Townsend Middleton (2010) has done research on these contemporary ethnographic practices of practices done Middleton Townsend (2010) has on research ethnographic these contemporary ONCLUSION of tribality. invariably frustrated bywhattheythensee who are rather than“genuine”performance as a “staged” governmentanthropologists the commissioning thepoliticians and “tribe” supposed brokers ofthe betweenpower negotiated politically visits are how field demonstrating government anthropologists, 37 What I have tried to do in this chapter is to help create more space for alternatives to alternatives for space more create help to is chapter this in do to tried I have What re construction of an alternative research agenda continues to continues agenda research an alternative of construction The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 67 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist hegemony. its under besilenced to tended past the in have that state ethnographic the against challenges ofcounter-hegemonic kind the to belong may in Kerala indigenism contemporary that suggest also I will so, doing In Kerala. in “adivasiness” contemporary on influences (international) and of interpretations various the and “adivasiness” concerning as beframed came to desires and conflicts social certain how of history recent more the trace to rather but term of the definition authoritative fitsome tribe ofthe notion the employing people of the lives contemporary how into enquire to not is aim,again, My Kerala. in notion the around mobilization political of contemporary a description with here I undertook that practice academic and colonial in of thetribe deconstruction historical the up follow Ifirst however, chapter, itsdiscontents and Adivasiness The “tribe” in worldtime in The “tribe” 68 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist itsdiscontents and Adivasiness social relations and ideals. The dynamist and ambiguity of the AGMS’s interpretations are interpretations AGMS’s ofthe ambiguity and The dynamist ideals. and relations social to but realities local precise to not references as register, a rhetorical in precisely interpreted be should phrases these belonging”, “indigenous or life”, of way a“tribal land”, “ancestral to refers AGMS the When 240). content”(2005: … referential in decrease the to proportion …in “use-value in increasing register, “referential” strictly than rather a “rhetorical” at operates it that politics: indigenous global about observes note cautionary a on Chakrabarty Dipesh what exactly does It particular. the beyond – identity exclusive and categorization with concern the beyond goes that apolitics signals Indigenism of identity. notions taken-for-granted destabilize to effort AGMS’s the is first The ways. major two in boundaries political challenge and state ethnographic the escape tryand to efforts activists’ emphasize to soprecisely have done I in. engaged is AGMS the of intervention kind the capture to resistance”, or “adivasi politics” “tribal than rather of “indigenism”, notion the use I why chapter this in clearer become will It praxis. emancipatory of purpose the for “adivasiness” of notion over-determined an using of contradictions the negotiate activists as emerge that dilemmas the on focuses chapter This 2003). (Kuper native” of the a “return about bring will it that worry They 103). 1995: (Bates them” against directed prejudices the contradict than rather “reinforce merely will a realmthat entered have inevitably activists adivasiness, around program political their shaping in that reaction in worry scholars Some be“adivasi”. to is it what of ideas own of activists’ part intangible an becomes often that imaginary colonial the to back it taking of “aboriginal”, translation aliteral is “adivasi” word the even chapter, previous the in saw as we Yet frames. “tribe” and “caste” established beyond references “autonomous” political, as explicitly intended both “dalit”, to similar as “adivasi” see generally Activists interpretations. hegemonic globally-reinforced and of historically realm of the out kept easily is that something nor on, agree necessary participants movement that something neither is beadivasi to means it what because also –but state the in chance no stand would movement “adivasi” an conclude in India calculations political mainstream make most would that fact -a of Kerala population of the 1,5 percent about only constitute Tribes” “Scheduled because notonly is This labor. to pose dilemmas for the Adivasi Gothra Maha Sabha. Mobilizing as“adivasis” requires activist continues that something is adivasi of the notion the to attached has that baggage The colonial T HE IMPORTANCE OF BEING ADIVASI OFBEING IMPORTANCE HE CHAPTER 3 The importance of being adivasi 69 CEU eTD Collection for political action in Kerala. in action political for a magnet become has nevertheless it of “adivasiness”, notion the in embedded interpretations despite – and perhaps – despite why understand to need the on reflect will I chapter, this Concluding efforts. “conscientization” through content useful politically and coherent a more adivasiness give to tries AGMS the how and Kerala in understood be has to come adivasiness which in ways various the more detail in discuss to on move I then section second the In people. of indigenous oppression historical of the part as became recognizable landlessness and poverty which through events “framing” of a chain as AGMS of the emergence the of trajectory the of adiscussion with chapter this I start intensely to impose upon them” (Sider 2003: xiii). so try others that cultures and histories the against and within simultaneously and cultures own their and histories [indigenous] own their also against, and “within, struggling of challenge Its politics is indigenist asitgoes to the heart of whatGerald Sider (2003: xiii)describes as the legacies. “adivasi” of interpretations vulnerable) (and necessarilycontradiction-ridden therefore and moredialectical with engages but “innocence” tribal of on tropes rely simply not does hence TheAGMS 2003). 2002, Robins 2005,Sylvain (cpBaviskar AGMS ofthe backbone the form who people” “indigenous proletarianized more the for awkward particularly often identityare indigenous of readings dominant since itself disempowering ultimately thereby risks moreover It about. is politics “adivasi” of what meaning hegemonic perilous, the confirming risks AGMS the instrumentally, too used If “tribe”. the of baggage historical the negotiate to having of problem the into runs necessarily past, of the interpretation a specific on future the of visions its inbasing AGMS, the since important particularly is This reworked. but areactively AGMS the in confirmed strategically simply not are sense” “common and stereotypes Cultural past. given the A second way inwhich the AGMS should beconsidered “indigenist” isitscritical attitude toward conducted. is debate political which in language usual the upset to capacity and Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 38 2005: 161) Sutton and (Cederlof identities” reified and of specific membership a proven of deployment the upon “centered 252), 2002: (Sinha non-tribals” … vis-à-vis of tribes a group or of ofatribe solidarity political asserting … movements solidarity “tribal to contrast in stand hence initiatives Indigenist benefits. exclusive claiming with preoccupation short-term the override to vision political for and of reference frames wider of becomepart to specificities local for allows as it Kerala in block political new of a emergence the to has contributed movement the why precisely itsdiscontents and Adivasiness Cederlof and Sutton (2005) observe this kind of in dynamic politics. Tamil Nadu’s adivasi 38 . I call the AGMS indigenist precisely for its transformative political agenda political transformative its for precisely indigenist AGMS the . Icall because of – the ambiguous and very often not merely not often very and ambiguous –the The importance of being adivasi counter- hegemonic 70 CEU eTD Collection 3.1 Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 39 modern of varieties fact in are today movements social Indian Many arrangements. social traditional to claims performed ritualistically as India contemporary in movements of social interpretation afixed to lead not should concerns two these definition, ahistorical movements social give to and lens a“Western” through simply realities Indian interpret to criticalnot is it Though 1998: 2). (Tarrow state” of themodern rise to the accompaniment an and age modern the of invention “an as movements ofsocial definition a strict on studies movement social in insistence the –with private and public between of separation alack individualism, of) myth (the of a lack values, – hierarchical democracies” “Western from different India makes in what interest Dumontian of the confluence the in lost gets often contestation of political forms Indian contemporary of modernity the to orethnicity.Attention caste, of kinship, affiliations traditional to rather, becloser, to and choice or political action deliberate much involve not to assumed often too are still movements social In India, movements. social non-Western to applied often not is but studies movements social in one acommon of readingis kind This 21). 1998: (Tarrow challenge of (indigenist) kind same the requiring as together conflicts social different tying and claims resonant more and broader onto grievances particular of shaping work the work”: of “framing amount of aconsiderable fruition as the here trajectory AGMS’ the describe I will mid-2000s. the into and 1990s of the course the in AGMS of the rise the of trajectory the -throughout perpetuates it practices hegemonic the attacking time same the at while AGMS for the work imagery tribal make to trying - of play this We see communities. adivasi proletarianized less other, to amenable more are much adivasiness of notions whose state, ethnographic ofthe authority the relyon to had often has yet Tribes”, “Scheduled Kerala’s amongst laborers agricultural landless the of interests the by predominantly determined agenda an to committed itself shown has it time over that probably is strengths, and weaknesses core its signals both which AGMS, inthe tension main The “adivasiness”. of notion the of taken-for-grantedness the on relying without coherence impose and try howto contradictions, these to succumb to not how about is AGMS of the act balancing The contradictory. internally are or even each other contradict which of some beadivasi, is to it ofwhat interpretations of a variety on relies The AGMS B itsdiscontents and Adivasiness Apart Apart notesfrom my thissection fieldwork and on also interviews, draws of clippings a collection from ECOMING ADIVASI ECOMING Thiruvanathapuram gave me access to. gaveme access Thiruvanathapuram combing through newspapers theCPI(M)’s archive in that journalistssystematically and and political consciousness in Wayanad and which for the other part I complemented by collection which I partly received from the librarian of clippings from clippings all these include 1990-2005, the period For from1990to2010. newspapers national and local The Hindu 39 : T O FRAME ORO FRAME TOBE FRAMED and The Indian Express that referred to “adivasi” or “tribal” issues – a Solidarity , an NGO working to promote literacy The importance of being adivasi 71 CEU eTD Collection 3.1.1 1975 meant to restore “alienated land” to “tribals”, who themselves were hardly involved in the in involved hardly were themselves who “tribals”, to land” “alienated restore to meant 1975 Act”of Land) of Alienated andRestoration of Transfer (Restriction Tribes Scheduled “Kerala of the implementation and revision the on exclusively almost centered was debate public 1980swhen the in dominated heavily still politics adivasi Legally-determined looklike. to ought politics “adivasi” what on limitations and definitions state reject to trying time same the at while terms sanctioned legally established, using movement “adivasi” an framing of dilemma the encountered it MahaSabha, Gothra Adivasi became the of what years early the From A Kerala. in challenge indigenist the producing in involved work political deliberate see, will as we is, there itself, represents usually AGMS the which through discourses and symbols, of techniques, forms “traditional” the mind.Despite in foremost voters and media, mass opinion, public with but rather orauthorities Minister Chief the eye to an with just not undertaken moreover, is, effect symbolic Its demonstration). alarge before the day undertaken is often it (hence a demonstration joining risk to more willing people ordinary making thereby and more difficult, arrests future making jails, the up filling of effect tactical the also seek but jail in citizens its of numbers large putting about government the embarrass to hope they so doing in arrest: seek deliberately protesters whereby Takethe system. democratic liberal- modern a at aimed considerations strategic and tactical include also techniques These do. allthey is not this Yet state”. the “shaming - towards havebeen traditionally they –as are aimed techniques Indian such many that argue 14) (1997: Martinez-Alier Guha and ( Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist a halt), to comes activity economic all jathras have organized activists repertoire: protest Indian the from extensively drawn has Kerala in movement indigenist The form. than rather context, changing by their meaning “modern” their have gained and repertoires of traditional part equally – were demonstration orthe petition, the riot, the – today Europe in Western of protest forms Many unchanged. remains protest of such meaning and context the mean however, not, does of protest techniques “traditional” to resemblance Formal West. inthecontemporary look differentthan does claims-making India, In of what itis to be “adivasi”. ideas traditional inscribed, challenging on precisely relied Kerala in block political emerging an as Indigenism polity. ademocratic within and framing ofclaims-making contestation, political itsdiscontents and Adivasiness hunger strikes), and even have resorted to the extreme of suicide through public immolation. public through ofsuicide extreme the to have resorted even and strikes), hunger DIVASI MOBILIZATION IN THE SHADOW OF THE (marches,) dharnas , (sit-down strikes), the occasional the strikes), , (sit-down jail bharo andolan jail bharo gheraos (encircling a public official), or “jail fill movement”, ademonstration movement”, fill or“jail ST L AND hartal A CT The importance of being adivasi (a shut down strike whereby strike down shut (a bhook hartals 72 CEU eTD Collection mostly the former lands of the insurgent Pazhassi Raja. In fact the 1957 first Communist 1957first fact the In Raja. Pazhassi insurgent of the lands former the mostly historically given as royal endowments ( endowments as royal given historically land -mostly land” forest “private into British by the divided was Kattunaikans, as the such adivasis of minority of asmall basis livelihood the formed which land, forest uncultivated Adiyas – started to work on the plantations instead (Kunhaman 1985). (Kunhaman instead plantations on the work to started – Adiyas and Paniyas – mostly slaves of former anumber Hence land. ontheir production organize taxation,slave-owning from exempted was land uncultivated settlement revenue British the Sinceunder continued. agreements rights use traditional the of many however, Informally, 43). 1986: (Joseph ignored again were land, held communally on cultivation in paddy engaged been had who Kurichiyar and Kurumar Mullu “high-caste” the notably land, the to claimants ofother rights customary the so doing, 1978). In (Panikkar jenmis, the to given were rights proprietary Full plantations. cardamon and tea of British establishment the facilitate to and British the to loyal class agrarian an create to order in acknowledged was aristocracy landed of the overlordship in 1816,the completed was that settlement revenue British subsequent the During Presidency. Madras British of the part became area the of Wayanad, overlord insurgent the Raja, Pazhassi of defeat 1805 the and British by the part) is Wayanad which (of of Malabar 1972conquest the With 2007). Shanmugaratnam and (Kjosavik land held communally on STs) now (both Kurumas Mullu the and Kurichiyas the as such communities local by certain becultivated to continued land some though authorities, Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 40 Nair of control the under Wayanad in land forest and agricultural regional century, fifteenth and fourteenth late the in already however, Infact, Wayanad. in communities (ST) alltribal to and recently havehappened to assumed is AGMS, ofthe rise the preceding battles juridico-legal the in forward asput alienation”, “Land suggests. alienation” land of “tribal notion simple the than complex more far historically are however relations land emerged, AGMS the where Kerala in Tribes” of “Scheduled concentration highest the with district the Wayanad, In 1). 2001: Vijayabalan and Puthucherril (in livelihood” and security existence, identity, their for land on depend tribals the since alienation, land to be traced can [tribals] on perpetuated violations right human all of cause society political against battle a“juridico-legal it, 232) put (2006: Parayil and Sreekumar as was, It debate. itsdiscontents and Adivasiness 41 By “political society” By“political they do not mean areference to Chatterjee but rather refer simply to political The British TheBritish planters’ lobby, together with Christian missionaries, encouraged this shift by legally parties. abolishing slavery in 1833 (Kooiman 1989). in1833(Kooiman slavery abolishing effectively establishing them as “the sole legal proprietors of all land in Malabar” in land of all legal proprietors sole “the as them establishing effectively 40 ” by (non-adivasi) “civil society” actors, convinced that all over India “the root “the India over all that convinced actors, society” “civil (non-adivasi) ” by devaswon ) to temple authorities – and “revenue land” – land” “revenue – and authorities temple ) to jenmis jenmis The importance of being adivasi rajas had less incentive to incentive less had (landlords) and temple placed most of the 41 Meanwhile, 73 CEU eTD Collection Kerala High Court demanding a speedy implementation of the act. In reaction, the court the reaction, In act. of the implementation aspeedy demanding Court High Kerala the petitioned famously litigator, interest public and activist a social Thera, Thampy Nalla dr. this, At forthcoming. not was implementation but finalized been had Act Land) Alienated of Restoration and of Transfer (Restriction Land Tribal the implement to framework regulatory necessary the 1986 In land”. “alienated over battle juridico-legal the from most benefit to stood groups adivasi ex-landed) some cases in (or landed the AGMS, of the forefront the form to came later group more proletarianized the While arrow. and bow the in wielding experts Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 42 Kurichias the as such groups landed “tribal” recognizably and established more the do than activists society civil to less appeal however, generally, belongs, leader) AGMS’s (the Janu CK which to “tribe” the Adiya, the as such groups proletarian similar and The Paniya place. first the in from be“alienated” to land – neveroccupied exceptions afew –with who Paniya, the Kerala, in “tribe” proletarianized most and largest the to much mean not did ensued that struggles them with the ownership titles ( have provided would Act the as using been had they land the from adivasis of some eviction to the led even that and latter of the in favor settlers and adivasis such between agreements lease informal certain turned that casteism, and indifference bureaucratic with combined ofsettlers, strength organizational the local but as such reforms land of the legal design the not was It ownership”. of “full as one established been never 1970s the of tribunals land the until Keralahad in households adivasi by certain used customarily of land status the however, fact, In al. 1997). et Cheria e.g. (see tribals of the land the to title acquire and landowner tribal the vis-à-vis tenant of status the claim to able were period in this land their over taken had whom settlers the it, through because tribals for out perversely worked land, over ownership farmers tenant gave of 1963,which Act Reform Land Kerala Communist-led thatthe is today refrain oft-repeated An 124). 1986: (Joseph wave migration the joined farmers subsistence poor also when – atime 1970 to 1940 from thrust “colonization” main by the followed was This 1997). (Baak opportunities commercial new of search in farmers Christian Syrian prosperous by relatively led 1920s, the came in migration settler of wave first the when claims usage land of traditional or dispossessed landless already hence were Wayanad in communities local Many 1247). 2005: Shanmugaratnam (Kjosavik Assembly Legislative of redistribution for the provided have would that Act Forest Private Kerala the pass to attempt an made of Kerala Government itsdiscontents and Adivasiness Not surprisingly, the first “tribal” minster in Kerala, P K Jayalakshmi, elected in2011,isaKurichia elected P K Jayalakshmi, inKerala, minster first “tribal” the surprisingly, Not (and an “archery star” as the star” an“archery (and Deccan Herald devaswon pattayam) of May 21 of May land to landless people but the act never passed the passed never act the but people to landless land for the land under their occupancy. The legal The occupancy. their under for theland st 2011reported). The importance of being adivasi 42 , reputed to be to , reputed 74 CEU eTD Collection (Maharashtra). Back in Wayanad, after local consultations, C K Janu and others then took the took then others and C KJanu localconsultations, after Wayanad, in Back (Maharashtra). Pune in conference adivasi a national attended and in Jharkhand organizations adivasi visited had activists other several and K Janu C year, that Early 66). 1997: al. et (Cheria 1992 January in convention astate-level during arisen have to seems Sangamam particular this for The idea role. active an take to started activists Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 43 NGOs and workers social adivasi non- with primarily lay still initiative The moment. transitional akey was Forum” Adivasi Zone “South as the beknown came to by what organized “Sangamam” or Together Coming The 1992 stereotypes. tribal ethnographic to back harking again language scripted aheavily was initially what use political to put to able be would activists extent what to clear not was it Initially question”. “adivasi onthe views offertheir to period this in Kerala cameto all who Delhi, in Judge Court High Malayalee progressive awell-known Iyer, Krishna of course and Jharkhand), in University of Ranchi vice-chancellor (former Munda Dayal Ram Tribes), Scheduled and Castes Scheduled for Commissioner national (former Sharma D. B. as such activists level national by also influenced but Hilda and as Solidartiy such NGOs by local supported They were identity. “adivasi” an claimed themselves who people of 1990s of the course the in militancy increasing the came with communities tribal proletarianized less the favored generally and activists by non-tribal led was that politics “tribal” preceding the with break The indigenist 2001). 20, October ( land" alienated of their restoration is, that tribals, concerning issue main the from attention public “diverting her called Thera what for Janu C K criticized publicly others) (and Thera Nalla Thampy 2001 when in notably clashed, often movement indigenist the and agenda juridico-legal the Inevitably bill. the from gain to and little forest the to connection little have Paniya the like groups proletarian though even Kerala in existence adivasis’ to crucial as seen again passed, was Bill” Rights) Forest of (Recognition Dwellers Forest Traditional Other and Tribes “Scheduled the 2006 when around moreover, morepronounced, allthe became struggles legal such for Enthusiasm 2001). Krishnakumar (e.g. trajectory its in included often are “battles” legal these retold, is struggle” “adivasi the When 1986. to up land adivasi of transactions all legalize would that an ordinance topass tried law of the opponents as act ofthe scuttling a provoked in turn this Yet implementation. such precisely ordered 1993, in eventually, itsdiscontents and Adivasiness Inthe late 80s, big donorsinternational like Oxfam that were in active South India embraced the coming together of many such small community organizations. such smallcommunity togetherofmany coming dependence dissolvethe mightultimately fromthegovernment,which rights “people’s toclaim movement” of foster a would organizations small of community-based that thefunding hoping model, “sangam” these organizations on outside funding. The 1992 Sangamam was envisioned as a 43 , yet in the course of organizing the Sangamam, adivasi Sangamam, the oforganizing course the in , yet The importance of being adivasi The Hindu 75 , CEU eTD Collection “exclusively by adivasis” (ibid.) – a notion that was widely circulated in the media. the in circulated widely was that – anotion (ibid.) adivasis” by “exclusively organized was event the that emphasize to eager were involved workers NGO the voice, their find to starting just only were they when a time as Sangamam the mentioned to spoke I activists Adiya and Paniya the Whereas 79). 1997: al. et (Cheria ofadivasis” identity cultural the assert to expression to be “an thought of Mananthavady, town the through meeting of the K J Baby’s famous adivasi play adivasi famous Baby’s K J of including performances”, “cultural art”, of “adivasi exhibition-cum-sale an photo-exhibitions, life”, “adivasi on region the from scholars by presentations as such events of other a lot included also Sangamam the NGO support, With followed. that occupations of theland preparation in “trainings” receive to place the me, was told they Mananthavady, and cultivate. own to land for but land” “ancestral for – not land for struggle of their beginning the marking as Sangamam of the me to spoke generally however, on, struggle the carried later who activists Adiya and Paniya 69). (1997: and culture” worldview ecological an with people a distinct as survive to land of this adivasis the of articulations and ofaspirations confluence as “the described and 66) 1997: al. et (Cheria decultured” and subsumed be “to refusal and asapeople” “pride culture”, and history land, identity, [adivasi] of their reclamation “the as concerning represented is hence Themeeting 1). al.1997: et. (Cheria people” as adistinct decimation against struggles their strengthen to vigor “renewed finda to aimed atMananthavady gathering adivasis the it, on reported and Sangamam the supported who intellectuals non-adivasi to According there. gathered who with, working been had poor” of the poorest “the for opting NGOs whom adivasis, proletarian most the mostly were it Instead, a majority. formed longer no Kurichiyas however, itself, Sangamam the At community. adivasi Kurichiya “upper-caste” of the imagery on rely to needed still activists so do to though struggle, indigenist international the to made was link A India. South of history the with resonate to made hence was struggle anti-imperialist the role in leading people’s ofindigenous discourse international The 1357). 1993: (Bijoy Mananthavady” kmfrom 16 Fort, Panamaram destroying force imperialist British the back beat ago… 190years day very this “on who warrior) Kurichiya by tying history localadivasi into it integrated was day well.Columbus as “celebration” own their organize to the heroicto decided had India southern in activists 1992, By June protests. in these join to decided strugglealready had India Northern in activists adivasi resistance”, of indigenous years “500 of this part by “the claim To peoples. adivasis indigenous ofits oppression the and Americas the of “discovery” Columbus’ of 500 the mark to protests preparing were Wayanad world the allover people indigenous led by Thalakkal Chandu” (a Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist (or “tribes” and states different from adivasis of meeting large first the organize to day as the 1992, 12, October totake decision itsdiscontents and Adivasiness Nadugadhika jatis ) of southern India. The day was highly symbolic as symbolic highly was The day India. of southern ) , and finally a “cultural procession” from the venue the from procession” a“cultural finally , and The importance of being adivasi th anniversary of anniversary 76 CEU eTD Collection 3.1.2 attended by even more prominent national organizations and activists, such as the Asia the as such activists, and organizations national more prominent byeven attended Though Karnataka. in atKodagu time this held, also was Sangamam Indian South Another Delhi. Year in People’s Indigenous of the Peoples, Tribal and ofIndigenous Council Indian reorganized a under celebration, the for preparations the in partake and links national stronger build – to Jharkhand to Valley Narmada the from – India in places many visited leaders SZAF and Peoples” Indigenous the of “Year the proclaimed internationally been had 1993 The year al.1997). et. (Cheria and Culture” Forest of “Land, issues the on focus to resolved emergence, its in active been had who workers NGO the to according that, (SZAF) Forum Adivasi Zone South of the theleadership under consciousness” “adivasi autonomous a new, of emergence the proclaiming publicly actions of number by a followed was 1992 of The Sangamam A of “adivasiness”. images stereotypical from away further movement the bring and develop to started of indigenism interpretations political and more subaltern the as certainly movement, the for a problem pose increasingly would “adivasis” representing to claim of “authenticity” the on attack The one. or“foreign” “Christian” a rather but voice” Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 44 as precisely movement the re-frame to eager were rivals political IMF. the and Bank World the against struggle people’s growing the subvert and imperialism and feudalism of interests the serve to money” “foreign with but by adivasis organized not was Sangamam the that factions CPI(ML) of the one of allegations -the reference – without repeated largely hand other the on CPI(M), of the daily official the The adivasis. “converting” on intent missionaries” by “Christian organized been had it since organizations adivasi of major the participation the enjoy not did event the alleged moreover TheBJP “anti-nationalism”. promote to were aims its fact in because government the by investigated be to ought meeting ofthe intentions” “real the whom to according BJP, by the marches and meetings protest in aired views the to of attention lot a gave Kerala, in newspapers The opponents. political from ofcriticism a storm for target became “self-assertion” of adivasi expression an was it that event the supporting by NGOs claim the grew, occupations land of program political the later only which from place” “meeting a more as functioned retelling, activists’ Adiya and Paniya most in Sangamam, the Though itsdiscontents and Adivasiness A small extreme Left organization calling itself Yuvajana Vedi even staged something I was to TTEMPTS AT TTEMPTS “Imperialist spy” (Cheria et. al. 1997: 82). 1997: et. al. (Cheria spy” “Imperialist a German tourist who happened to be in the area and hung a placard around his neck with the words experience personally a decade later (see the Appendix to this dissertation): they dissertation): this to Appendix the (see later decade a personally experience “ AUTONOMOUS ” ORGANIZING Mathrubumi 44 From the beginning, it seems, it beginning, the From The importance of being adivasi not representing an “adivasi an representing , one of the largest ofthe , one gheraoed Deshabimani (encircled) 77 , CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist the on focus to continued demands their of representation media the landless, been generations for had who those of needs the on than land” “alienated on more focused it because use little of was stood as it Act Land ST towhomthe activists Adiya and by Paniya now led Though land. acquiring on directly focusing and legal frameworks existing of the confines the leaving were they activists, Adiya and Paniya to moved movement ofthe initiative the as adivasis, to due legally lands” adivasi the “reclaim would imagined they movement adivasi “autonomous” a so-called for pushing been had who – journalists many whom (interview, 23 August 2006).Against the visions of the NGOs andcivil society activists –amongst law” their neglecting are they fact In the law. to much importance giving not were Mahasabha Gothra the and “Janu beginning the from that upset actually were to I spoke journalists though emergence Samithy’s of the context as the publicized again was Act Restoration Land of the of implementation lack The adivasis. landless for land secure to intent Wayanad in organization front a new Samithy, Samara Samyuktha Adivasi of the 1994, 26, January on launching the was turn ofthis Indicative land”. of forest “take-over or “vote”, “fast”, “encroachment”, rights”, for a “stir in engaging or anger” with “seething tribals on reporting those than numerous less remarkably in Keralabecame tribals amongst “fear” and “misery” of headlines however, 1994, Around 1992). 2September Express, (Indian by fear” ..hounded “tribals 1992), 19 March Hindu, (The 21 years” for teacher sans children] by “tribal” [[attended “school 1991), October 19 Express, (Indian unparalleled” is adivasis of Suganthagiri “misery 1991) August 4 Hindu, (The anemic” are tribals Chippankuzhy “most tribals: facing “deprivation” and “misery” ofthe coverage its continued Themedia 4July1993). Hindu, (The State” literate tribal “total a Kerala declared 1993, in July and communities tribal for scheme” “welfare other the after one launching started It ownterms. onits if adivasis, with engaged actively appear to best its do to started meanwhile government Kerala the issues, “tribal” to attention renewed the With 105ff). 1997: al. et (Cheria agenda the set -- would activists non-adivasi – and adivasi landed and educated more that accept to refused increasingly communities “adivasi” landless whereby place taking was interests political of adifferentiation surface the – under media in the proclaiming continue would SZAF the that – adiscourse tribes of “unification” ongoing of an part as primarily framed was Sangamam second Though the distribution. ofland issue the over particularly government, Kerala the confront ready to getting were rather and gatherings symbolic more in any interested not were Kerala in activists adivasi moremilitant the how signaled have fact in well could it organizers, the by as afailure Interpreted Kerala. from adivasis of participation less been have to seems there Andolan, Bachao Narmada of the Patkar Medha and Affairs, on Indigenous Group Working International UN the Pact, People’s Indigenous itsdiscontents and Adivasiness The importance of being adivasi 78 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist work. her honor to ought it her, honor to pretend to wanted governmentreally the if that stating and money the returning by reacted promptly she which to demands, Janu’s over skip to tried organizers the ceremony, award Atthe (ibid.). mothers of adivasi children of out-of-wedlock paternity the determine to DNA tests and Act, of Atrocities Prevention SC/ST of the enforcement the Act, Restoration Land of the implementation as the as well land begiven to adivasis landless for the need foremost and first adivasis, to of concern of issues a number to respond would Tribes Scheduled and Castes Scheduled for Minister the if award the accept only would she announced ( Council” Action Development “Adivasi the representing be to claimed now newspapers K Janu,whom C development”, “adivasi about tobring support her acknowledging for government the thank and label obey the than Rather government. Kerala the by worker” social adivasi for “best Award State a 10.000rupees byrejecting Kerala in headlines the itto made onto went she year, same that November Populations.In Indigenous In August 1994 C K Janu visited Geneva to take part given. were titles land in the until a continued however meeting mobilization of the UN Working the land, Group them ensure to enough not were collector by the onpromises that well her. Knowing persuade to bedside hospital her to came collector assistant the after quit only she which strike a hunger started CKJanu protest, In settlement. attempted the on attack a violent launched and intervened soon and police officials Forest families. 120 migrant by about encroached been already had of which acres 60 other - the land forest of vested acres 60 of about apiece claim to ofMananthavady, vicinity the in Ambukuthy, to a march in families 200 adivasi of ledagroup Samithi, 1994, this April In andAdiya. Paniya the amongst servants civil ranking) of (low- group significant only the were herself, Janu CK whom amongst workers, development tribal -- role a key played BAMCEF) Ram’s Kanchi as (such servants civil SC of organizations where struggle dalit the on modeled seemed workers” development of “tribal aunion form to move The Janu. K by C led again emerged, Workers) Development Tribal for (Organization Samithy Pravarthaka Vikasana Adivasi the SZAF, of the 1994,out of April beginning the At adivasis. landless offer to land no find could yet land, or forest government on families settler by encroachment the to eyes its closed and systematically enterprises commercial for land find easily could apparently the government that fact the about angry workers adivasi landless by fact dominated in were agitations these that read also can we Act”, Land Tribe Scheduled the implement to demand “the on as focusing ofWayanad) capital (the Kalpetta at collectorate the at gathered activists adivasi times various the present who al(1997), et. Cheria In Act. itsdiscontents and Adivasiness The Hindu The importance of being adivasi , 16 November 1994) , 16November 79 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 45 discourse legal ofthe embrace to anexplicit returned 1990stemporarily the half of second the in activists adivasi of “authenticity”, question the on scrutinized and attack under Increasingly (ibid.) expenses” fax afford can tribal true “no since by “outsiders” be funded must she that concluded Janu, to according this, from had and Samithi Ekopanan Adivasi the now was of what demands India Express allegations”, toprove Minister dares (“Janu action legal or face funded foreign were activists fellow her and she that allegations his prove to KEIsmail Minister Revenue dared Janu K C when climax a to --came adivasi” “truly not hence –and “foreign-funded” was it that movement of the opponents by allegations Further action. inlocaldirect anincrease instead was there and less occurred networking international and National Act. Land of Alienated Restoration Tribe Scheduled -the with line in actually always not though around– framed usually still occupations, of land withacombination mostly filled was Kerala in Decade Indigenous the halfof first The subsequent politics. tribal from traditional departed ways in many yet history “adivasi” to claims through support attracted that a program of inplace were beginnings 1995, the in People” ofIndigenous “Decade of the proclamation UN’s ofthe time By the of land. a plot acquire to managed her life in time first occupation that was commenced in March 1995 and through which also land C K Januanother herself struggle”, “Panavalli the for the supported also Samaham, Harijan Kerala the and Front United Dravida the as such groups, dalit Many organized. K Janu C occupations land the supported actively on then from and award alternative an her offer to forward came Wayanad in Panthers Dalit The Thiruvanathapuram. in at colleges organizations dalit various of support the received immediately she and attitude political their wellwith fit gesture proud paternalist, anti- Janu’s groups. of dalit attention the caught inturn this And problem. the was that demands their for of respect lack the and of adivasis discrimination own state’s the was it that claim the with public Kerala the confronted Janu CK attention. media politicizing of – capable or even – to daring not and as“innocent” adivasis of stereotype any against went moreover gesture Janu’s CK it. coopt to failure state’s the and leadership movement’s ofthe confidence and militancy growing the signaled It movement. indigenist ofthe emergence the in moment crucial became a and media by the up taken immediately was award the of returning The act itsdiscontents and Adivasiness Quoted in the activism: “The four people involved were not tribals but cheap criminals”. butcheap not tribals were fourpeople involved “The activism: nothingtodo tribal with dramahad hostage He thenwentontoallege thatthePalakkad outsiders?”. many realtribals? tribals Do you knowcan she affordhas even beento faxingfax letters?representations So tois me italmost not every clear other thatday? How she is supported by well-funded 45 . , 23 October 1996). The minister, apparently, had received a fax summing up the up fax summing a received had apparently, minister, The 1996). , 23October Indian Express of 6 October 1996, Ismail said: “Who is this Janu to claim to speak for The importance of being adivasi 80 CEU eTD Collection 3.1.3 to the struggle that Sreedharan started” ( started” Sreedharan that struggle the to themselves “redidicate to vowing followed that struggle Muthanga the and Thiruvanathapuram in strike AGMS’ the commemorated also activists later, years four struggle Kurichy of the a commemoration At key moment. a as themselves by activists claimed been has but movement indigenist the of trajectory of the retelling of the out left often is Kurichy at struggle 1992. The in there founded was that men) included also (which Society Women’s Dalit the through particularly engagement, activist Dalit a vibrant had colony The 1994:124). Uyl (den landlords their of independent themselves, for aplace with laborers bonded erstwhile provide 1938 to in movements reform of caste context the in up set Colonies”, “Harijan so-called first the of one was colony The of Kurichy. village the near of Sachivothamapuram colony dalit the at a struggle joined K Janu as C moment adecisive was 2000 year The allow. would Act of confines legal the than transformative and broad-based more was that agenda an articulating Act, Land of theST script dominant the from resolutely more to depart be seen could K Janu by C led movement the Peoples, Indigenous World’s ofthe Decade UN the through halfway By 2000, Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 15 August observe to decided Salimkumar, K M chairmen ofits one of words the in Samithi, Ekopana Adivasi 1997, the August Early 1996). 13 October cause’”, tribal help didn’t drama (“’Hostage behavior “violent” their considering adivasi not clearly as takers hostage the and paint incident the condemn publicly to pressured felt CKJanu and “hostage-taking” the followed Uproar amendment. ofthe withdrawal the demand to order in hours nine for hostage Reddy W R district of Palakkad collector the –took leader dalit important most Kerala’s –after pada Ayyankali the itself calling outfit an year, same That strikes. these animated that dalits and adivasis against CPI(M) the within bias perceived of the a point make to desire the but Act the of defense so much not was It Vedi. Samrakshana Adivasi the called a group by secretariat the on amarch and Front Liberation Dalit of the leader the by strike ahunger with aheed cameto Act Land ST the to government CPI(M)-led the by made were that amendments pro-settler against agitations 1996 October In land”. of “ancestral itsdiscontents and Adivasiness F (“Tribals jubilant over President’s decision”, assent necessary its bill amendment givethe to not decided himself), a Malayalee and India of president Dalit first as the (claimed Narayanan R K was time the at who of India, President the institutions, rights human and Tribes Scheduled national asby as well Government Express ( amendment the against protest – in reported it was – primarily again Day”, “Betrayal ROM K , August 4 1997). In 1998, finally, after many doubts had been voiced by the Central bythe voiced been had doubts many after 1998, finally, In 1997). 4 , August URICHY TO URICHY K UNDALLA : V ISIONS OFA ISIONS The Hindu The Hindu D ALIT 19 March 1998). 19March February 9, 2004). Sreedharan was the was Sreedharan 2004). 9, February -A DIVASI th not as Independence Day but as Daybut as Independence not S The importance of being adivasi TRUGGLE Indian Express Indian 81 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist me: told Krishnamma As strike. a hunger start to decided inhabitants point, that At reconnected. was line the however, Again, democracy”. am doing “I proclaiming proudly line, the cut and poles ofthe one into climbed of police, a crowd of front in thecolony, from engineers dalit the of one this, At posts. the erecting in succeed did eventually workers electricity the however, attempts, several After continues: Krishnamma “awareness”, their Emphasizing described: Krishnamma As poles. electricity the erect came to workers electricity were out, men most when day, One necessary. was action direct decided inhabitants the so and colony the over line the draw to efforts his continuing was developer the however, Meanwhile, court. the to by apetition followed intervene, to him on calling minister the to a memorandum send was did colony the at people things first the of One said: Krishnamma As it. stop to “awareness” the lacked dalits assuming were line electricity the erect to scheming those that understood People me: told Sreedharan, of daughter-in-law the Krishnamma, As demolished. bepartly have to would houses some Even becut. have to would and trees supply) power unreliable very a only had itself (which colony over the drawn be would line electricity voltage high- a dangerous however, purpose, this For pockets. own his in up end could money allotted ofthe more sothat material on savemoney to order in short-cut the planned had developer The bebribed. to themselves allowed had who members of panchayat permission with colony, over the erect to planning been had developer a private that line electricity high-voltage a been had struggle ofthe issue main the that learned I Kurichy, at people with interviews From day. martyr” CKJanuunveiledthat “dalit a as altar memorial whose and struggle, Kurichy the during suicide committed who person itsdiscontents and Adivasiness arrest him and take him to the hospital.” the to him take and him arrest to police the wanted we worse: getting was health His days… five for striking been had He strike. hunger the for initiative the took who person first the was husband “My consequences.” the and cons and pros the about convinced were we as united “We stood here.” done things get to theinitiative took who women it is fact In posts. electric the erect to made were that pits the in ourselves put us each of and junction the to “We went details.” technical of allthe us inform to able was and Board Electricity Kerala at the working engineer an was relatives ofour one that of course mind their into it get not could scheme the planning “Those onadalitcolony”. of trickwould be kindonly pulled usthatthis was obviousto “it The importance of being adivasi 82 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Krishnamma continues: Dalits, to itcomes when neglect their and rights ofconstitutional herknowledge Emphasizing tell: to on went Krishnamma As scenario. the escalated experiencing were protesters the humiliation the to dimension gender The added day: next the came however, struggle, the of The climax out: rush and of kerosene acan grab to was her reaction said Krishnamma work. at were colony of the men most again and line the charge to came officials and police of a group Again continue. to was plan line electricity the that ordered had Court Supreme the told however were colony the of inhabitants later, few days A plan. the drop would they them assured had board electricity the until strike hunger the continued and over took person another hospital, the to taken was husband her As said, she dying.Therefore, striker of ahunger risk the with concerned not apparently was police the Dalits, came to it when yet practice usual was explained, she This, itsdiscontents and Adivasiness some policemen tried to catch him. But he threatened to commit suicide if thepolice if suicide commit to he threatened But him. catch to tried policemen some ladder a With terrace. the from down Jayan toforce trying was Everyone voice. father’s about cared nobody But law. the as per -- brigade fire of the help the seek to or had him arrest to had they Either him. rescue to order in arrested him get to had “The police die.’” ‘Iwill screamed, law] in [father he Then hell.’ Go to work. to stopthe notgoing ofPolice]shouted‘Weare the work.The SP [Superintendent stop to them asking was and our release demanding was He it…. onto kerosene poured he Then leaves. dry with it filled and them with acircle made and stones collecting was Dad … there. were people colony the All and shouting. came running and arrested] being were women the [that this heard law] in father [Krishnamma’s father “Our arrested!’”. are being our sisters ‘Brothers, shouted someone Then jeep. police the into dragged were women of us seven and worsened atmosphere me. The toward rushed police of women crowd a Then somebody. beating I remember latti, that With latti. the snatched and up myself I raised and me pushed somebody Then alatti [bamboo beatstick]. himwith triedto Jayanthey theywereclosethe time to By him. snatch to policemen the ordered and there standing husband] [Krishnamma’s Jayan saw Kumar of PoliceVinod TheSuperintendent police. the with quarrelling were we while terrace the on standing he was hand his in alight with and kerosene in himself dipped had He photographs. leader] Pulaya historical [the Ayyankali’s of one holding terrace the up to went myhusband up, turned officials the “When dispersed.” and working stopped they day that for Then charged.’ line the get to able be you will body my dead over stepping ‘Only them, at Ishouted And of them. front in still I stood of kerosene acan carrying and kids ofthe one Isnatched of though, a moment “Without hospital.” the to him moved and my husband arrest to agreed they discussion the After house. a nearby in discussion for us called and spot the cameto police of superintend and collector district the of asudden, All hostage. officials panchayat the took We office. the surround to rushed and there us assembled of all Soon office. [municipal] panchayat the besiege to planned we o’clock five “Around The importance of being adivasi 83 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist was meanwhile, Thegovernment, attend. to able be never would themselves they a college for adivasis dispossess to preferred instead and Tata from ofland a piece claiming from moment last at the off backed government the But 2001). Mukundan also (see in thearea Tea plantation Tata large the from taken land on planned been had college engineering the initially that told was I dispossession. of adivasi case – aclassic land the from beevicted to community Muduvan the forcing was This town. thenearest hour from an about community ST isolated relatively a – community Muduvan of Kundula’s land on College Engineering a Government erect to had decided government the that was it, framed leaders indigenist as Theissue, livelihood. of adivasi cost the at place taking of“development” case a typical as Kundalla at conflict the Theyinterpreted platform. indigenist of astate-wide emergence the and signal support their lend to decided they Kundalla, at government the and community a localadivasi between developing a conflict about heard at Kurichy, active been also had who Geethanandan, and Janu C K when Therefore, movement. indigenist emerging the acknowledge to parties political existing and government of the reluctance the 2000sand early the in adivasis landless for land claiming in ofsuccess scope and pace the of stagnation of the context the in emerged struggle ( drama’” hostage collector the‘Pallakad after action direct first “the struggle, of the part as episode colony Kurichy the ignored that newspapers to according movement– indigenist ofthe struggle major next the was struggle The Kundalla me: told Kappikade Sunny As point. turning a significant became thereby victory This colony. the cross not did line high-powered the ensure to intervened eventually government CPI(M) the chances, electoral their affect it would worried and martyrs more produce might struggle the Afraid on: going struggle of the heard as he soon as colony the to area,came the in activists dalit leading ofthe one Kappikade, Sunny Kerala. in struggle dalit-adivasi the to crucial were Kurichy at events these that emphasized activists Many itsdiscontents and Adivasiness dry leaves and jumped into the fire...” the into jumped and leaves dry of pile the fired then body, his over all kerosene poured dad Meanwhile him. touched engineering college in Kundalla.” in college engineering that destroyed Janu, with Wayanad to went team same This Muthanga. upto – actions adivasi the started we that After movement. the in a breakthrough was “it failed.” action this if Kerala, in else anywhere go Wecannot suicide. commit would persons many leaders….so all but I notonly then, option other no Ihave it, Ifelt Kerala. in live Otherwisewecannot doit. I’d and also–asIfeltit aperson AGMS] [to beleaderofthe me, Geethanandan just suicide…not commit will we option, other haveno decision…we my was that ….and chairman committee working the was suicide…I commit inabig ends ifit a failure, is action [struggle] time:ifthis at onething the Asaperson Ifelt aturningpoint. “It was latti charge [police beating] ….what can I do then…Iwill canIdo ….what charge beating] [police The Hindu The importance of being adivasi , September 3, 2001). The 3, 2001). , September 84 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist had that college of the part the demolished they evening same that and event” “cultural adivasi a big organized they 24th, the March On hands”. own our into matters “take to decided Kurichy, at as activists, the continuing, was college of the construction the that Seeing frame. this confirmed further itself struggle the dispossession, land adivasi of an issue as interpreted Once exclaimed: Martin As all cost. at avoid to wanted leaders community the something was area,which the come to would men young college, engineering the with that was community local the for problem the women: Muduvan of rites traditional the about emphatic so been had others and Martin why me clearto made it was when is This land. the from beevicted to need would community Muduvan the mean would construction ifits wondering Istarted land, areaof large onthe building small relatively at the Looking College. aGovernment into beturned to was that structure this precisely it was so And abandoned. lay itself building farm but the mountain the on graze them having and cows the tending still were People stopped. was funding government when 1996, until run had farm the told Iwas there. farm a cattle up setting in rupees 7 million invested had 1979 from which program, twenty-point Gandhi’s of Indira target the –been successfully more –somewhat moreover had community The project. development successful) entirely not obviously (and funded a Swiss- of theoutcome were houses Theempty cow inside). odd the (with houses concrete empty mostly beside huts with dotted was landscape the andwhere holdings land considerable community’s the working were Nadu) Tamil in community SC an befrom out to turned (who people areawhere the me around showed in. Martin be interested I would of information kind the was this “anthropologist” as an that assuming were they because emphatically so me this be telling must they assuming almost was and struggle political the to relevance of was this how first at understand quite not Idid period. of their duration the for forest the in hut aspecial into retreat would women menstruating that community Muduvan this of practice the about me was told community the from others and Martin last thing and second first, the that surprised I was framed. been have could struggle the which in ways possible many of one only were land” for struggle “adivasi the and dispossession” “adivasi that Irealized itself, community the from activist leading the to Martin, talked and community Muduvan Kundalla the I visited when under-development.Interestingly, relative of areas in colleges government prestigious erecting of policy action affirmative an following for project the defending itsdiscontents and Adivasiness way of living and oflivingare entirely way practices We docertaindifferent. are to things all-alone.” herethe adivasifor them educated easy were some …but be If there ..itwould people them? with mingle to us someoutsiders“If comehere forus live isitWould possible to likethis? itbepossible for It wouldIt not bepossible . If it’s settlers, it is easy for them to adapt. The importance of being adivasi 85 CEU eTD Collection 3.1.4 activists rejected these argument and claimed it would make it all the more obvious that obvious more all the make it it would claimed and argument these rejected activists Yet deaths. various the had caused dysentery) and TB (especially disease or neglect, drinking, fact in that argue to tried authorities The colonies. adivasi in occurring deaths” “starvation of a number on reported Wayanad in activists indigenist 2001, in when started that phase next the for stage the set This by it. played being without card “adivasi” the play successfully to able seemed Themovement confronting. was movement Janu’s C K that pattern social of awider as part beinterpreted to conflicts local for allowing in particularly a success been had Kundalla networks, dalit to ties adivasi confirming and struggle “adivasi” of the interpretation ideological a broader for allowing by internally movement the strengthen helped had Kurichy Whereas Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist T respect. and fordignity struggle their and struggle land adivasi of the terms in both victory key another as it claimed meanwhile struggle the spearheading activists indigenist The life”. of way “isolated adivasis’ respected had commission the Martin, to According colony. Munduvan Kundalla the at College a Government erect to plans the to end an put indeed which issue, the investigate to a commission up set to decided eventually government the pressure, Under (ibid.). also awoman” but Kerala, of leader Dalit aknown only “not was Janu since serious more strike hunger the take to government the urged then speaker Another want”. not do they which of Adivasis, chest the upon development impose to tried has Joseph Minister education “the that claimed withdrawn, hadbeen farm cattle their for funds development how criticized also fact in had but development” “against struggled just not had Muduvans that fact the ignoring Assembly, Legislative the of Member former A attacks”. “anti-tribal the condemned fiercely Kerala of Organizations Rights of Human Confederation of the chairman the strike, hunger the 2001).Inaugurating (Mukundan tribals” landless the all rehabilitate and owners tribal its to lands tribal “restore government the that of which and foremost first of demands, a number made 28. She April on strike hunger a public started Janu CK districts, including actions, further several After well-off). relatively were question in Muduvans the (though of adivasis condition land-starved the highlighting further 2001), (Mukundan starvation” to due death “tribal ofa headlines to lead in turn This, neglect. from died subsequently who walk, to unable man old an leavebehind to having forest, the fled into the Muduvans and itself community Muduvan the attack to back came opponents later, days Three arrests. many again were there and injured badly got activists Many activists. the attack and structure the defend to mobilized been affiliated CPI(M) – including outsiders with clashing erected, been already itsdiscontents and Adivasiness HE M UTHANGASTRUGGLE : W ITHIN ANDAGAINST THE hartals in different parts of Idukki and Kottayam and Idukki of parts indifferent “ ADIVASI The importance of being adivasi ” FRAME goondas -- who had --who 86 CEU eTD Collection cultivable land and that distribution of such land would start on the 1 on the start would land of such distribution that and land cultivable of acres five to one receive would Kerala in adivasis all landless that promised that Janu CK with a settlement on agreed and movement the to out reached finally Minister Chief the Secretariat, State of the front in out of camping days 48 After it. on claims settler any without land nearby any receive simply to preferred and land such to attachment historical sentimental nor act, that under land to claims potential neither had struggle the in active most those hand, other the on but act the around battle legal of thecontinuing light in so to do and adivasis landless for land “ancestral” back claim to pushed were activists hand, one onthe Act: 1975STLand the under as envisioned land “alienated” thatof was again frame indigenist inthe handle to issue state-wide level, the tensions inthe indigenist discourse itself also increased. The most difficult a at materialize to started block political anew form to organizers the of aspirations the As Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist a“climb land” “ancestral on emphasis the dropped C KJanu that fact saw the commentators ( one” as a‘political’ of tribals “agitation the consider not hedid because Minister Chief by the tolerated was them, to according one anovel strategy, camp” “relief the that commented moreover Newspapers background. the to demands “employment” and “poverty” pushing issue”, land adivasi “the to went however attention media Most use. proper its to beput Fund Welfare Adivasi andthe provided, jobs bealleviated, poverty that demanding Committee”, Solidarity Tribes “Scheduled read that abanner under residence official Minister’s Chief of the front in huts” “refugee erecting 18 on September when later, weeks two but 2001) September (e.g. Council Action Adivasi-Dalit the mentioned still newspapers September Early “tribal” struggle – and notjust byactivists themselves. a classical as beframed to started however also increasingly it more attention, gained struggle the As March). Assertion (Rights Yatra” Sthapana “Avakasa the became what for adivasis mobilize help to Wayanad to travelled Kundalla and Kurichy in participated whohad activists Dalit march”. of rights a “restoration announced they Council) Action (Adivasi-Dalit Samithi” Samara “Adivasi-Dalit the of name In landlessness. adivasi was problem root the activists, camps ( medical and tribals” for rice “free of announcements Some necessary. were solutions structural itsdiscontents and Adivasiness activists organized what came to be known as the known be came to what organized activists march”( “rights of the point end the Thiruvanathapuram, to activists adivasi with travelling while attack heart a from he died since as a“martyr” remembered is Vaikomwho from adalit Biju, death ofKallara the on reporting when so even did They Council”. Action “The Adivasi on instead reporting andwere name organizations’ of the part “Dalit” out the leaving were many announced, The Hindu Indian Express July 12, 2001) were not going to make the desired impact. According to According impact. desired make the to going not were July 12,2001) , 19 September 2001). In the capital, from 29 October onwards, 29October from Inthecapital, 2001). , 19September Indian Express Indian kudil ketti samaram, , 3 September 2001). , 3September th the “Adivasi Solidarity Day” was Solidarity “Adivasi the The importance of being adivasi st of January 2002. Many ofJanuary a “relief camp” strike, camp” a “relief The Hindu The 87 , 9 CEU eTD Collection help to increase the pressure on the Kerala government. They decided to claim land at the at land claim to Theydecided government. Kerala the on pressure the increase to help thereby and attention nation-wide “higher-level”, attract would that action through confronted be only could problem the that however, decided, leadership TheAGMS redistribution. land for plans its through push to government the vis-a-vis power bargaining mission’s the strengthen to order in agitations organize would AGMS the hoping were agreement, 2001 the honor to up set institution the (TRDM), Mission Development and Resettlement Tribal the within bureaucrats Sympathetic families. adivasi landless of number the know not or did land enough find not could either it claiming by redistribution delay to trying was The government frustrating. was action government of pace the 2001 agreement, of the promises the implement to government Kerala the up on building pressure the with even Yet, delay. continuous produced plan of this implementation actual the over battles legal but where adivasis to beredistributed to order in government central the from government state by the bought been had half of which farm cooperative 7000-acre – ahuge, district Kannur in farm Aralam of parts redistribution. On the 27 Onthe redistribution. for earmarked tentatively had government the lands other and plantations government invading adivasis up oflandless building was of 2002amomentum end bythe Instead, out. died soon struggle Plachimada in the adivasis resident locally than of other engagement confronting, was AGMS the problem main the was that adivasis landless to land distribute to reluctant government anegligent rather but companies multinational by dispossession much so not was it of Kerala rest the in since But belt. mining India’s in organizations adivasi and struggle anti-Coca-Cola the between alliances in instance for emphasized theme, a secondary remain It did rights. land adivasi-dalit of behalf on exclusively more asone struggle ofthe framing over the out won however, Cola”, “Coca as imperialism corporate and of American symbol clear a such targeting a struggle of Kerala in popularity overwhelming The participated. strike” hut “refugee of the part been earlier had who activists ofthe many 4, August on area affected the through march a demonstrative In struggle. land adivasi the in episode another it becoming of a potential saw initially activist anddalit, adivasi was population affected ofthe part asignificant Since 2007). Aiyer (see e.g. District Palakkad in Plachimada Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist become had now by who K Janu, by C – again inaugurated was struggle major 2002another April in meanwhile, the In beempty. to out turned promises the if action direct undertake to pledged and of theagreement implementation the asto doubtful remain however, did, AGMS inthe Activists victory. aclear agreement the considered activists AGMS though 2001), Singh KS 244; 2006: Parayil and (Sreekumar down” itsdiscontents and Adivasiness the adivasi leader of Kerala - against the pollution by a Coca-Cola plant at plant by aCoca-Cola pollution the -against Kerala of leader adivasi th of October 2002, the AGMS organized a “surprise” action to claim to action a “surprise” organized AGMS 2002,the ofOctober The importance of being adivasi 88 CEU eTD Collection had voicedwere twisted into proof that: proof into twisted voicedwere had occupation land ofthe site the near living communities adivasi that repression of police Fears that: complained again moreover report The adivasi. “authentically” being from them disqualifying apparently latter the that: “revealed” and Truths” Disturbing Some Sanctuary: Wildlife Wayanad of “Invasion entitled was It Report”. Investigation “Spot a with –cameout activists by “outside” adivasis” “innocent of a manipulation considered they by what enraged were and there cattle their graze to used of whom some area– the in landowners local by lead group environmental an Organization”, Protection Environmental The“Wayanad occupation. the of nature “real” the about circulated were as “facts” backfire to started however struggle of the representation public The AGMS’ occupation. the against mobilizing started parties all political at Muthanga, settled AGMS the after soon as needed desperately was which support, gain the AGMS helped and organizations society civil many inspired nature with harmony in live to homeland to their returning adivasis of image the area.Yet, the roamed that animals wild about the worried and sanctuary awildlife was land targeted the out find to surprised fact in were occupation Muthanga in the participants the of Some plots. own their cultivate and houses build to land the claiming were they that and before there lived actually Muthanga at gathering “adivasis” ofthe none almost that obviously, was, discourse of this out left leaders the What said, They lands”. ancestral to their going refugees of ofthousands line as“a Muthanga to journey their described leaders AGMS media, Tothe ancestors. adivasi to havebelonged to believed were that in thearea found were shrines homeland”: “adivasi an as it claim could they because area the chose also leadership The AGMS attention. national attract to likely hence and legislature Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 46 area “nature” adepleted Sanctuary, Wildlife Muthanga itsdiscontents and Adivasiness The area had formerly been occupied by a eucalyptus plantation supplying a paper factory owned by the Birlas, one of India’s houses(Raman business 2004:one wealthiest 129). of India’s the Birlas, accept land ‘somewhere’!” land accept to agrees victim the land, of therobbed stead In land…. alienated for land alternative for ademand is there world the in nowhere because … world the around struggles adivasi to compared when cause adivasi the of selling a real was 2001] [of Agreement “[t]he areas” those in houses and cards ration arehaving of them most and … places away far are from Sanctuary the inside tents makeshift the occupy who of those “[m]ost unison”. in gods their up woke of Wayanad, tribes the all to belonging etc, Kurichia the Kaattunayaka, the Bettakuruma, the Adiya, the Paniya, the They, ago. centuries lost they that freedom their back got they as though ease, with mountains of the spirits the with conversed Muthanga to returned who “those 46 falling under Central Government Central under falling The importance of being adivasi 89 CEU eTD Collection representation in the state parliament and sustain the pressure on existing political parties to parties political existing on pressure the sustain and parliament state in the representation direct some least at get and try to order in Council”) Grand (“Political Sabha Maha Rashtriya the wing, a political-party –developed worse or better –for moreover The AGMS defeat. of its than rather AGMS of the victory of the a sign as see others and C KJanu something – 2003 after Wayanad in active particularly became instance for CPI(M) the of wing “adivasi” created The newly its program. much of onboard taking in fact itby against mobilized parties political themovement, repress simply to able Not seriously. challenge indigenist the take to parties political established pushed it significantly, most Perhaps movement. indigenist the for as afailure regarded be simply cannot Muthanga Yet workers. adivasi to applied 2007) when (Shah frame indigenist the of side” “dark the fore the to brought clearly struggle The Muthanga intimidating and paralyzing effects -- for years after years for -- effects paralyzing and intimidating their continued – and on dragged that participants movement’s the against cases court filing from government the prevent not did however, adivasis, “real” the for sympathy This tribals”. “innocent the with hadmingled Lanka) Sri in Tigers Tamil then (the LTTE or the Pradesh) in Andhra active Naxalcontingent (a War Group People’s the either “outsiders”: non-adivasi by instigated been had eviction Muthanga of the violence the that circulate to started stories police, the from away escalation the blamefor the shift to and adivasi” “innocent ofthe image the with eviction the during activists by AGMS shown resistance organized the To reconcile Supreme Court Judge V R Krishna Iyer lamenting the plight of plight the lamenting Iyer Krishna R V Judge Court Supreme Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 47 “atrocities on adivasis”. the condemning to turned opinion-makers other and parties political most violence, the to reaction in point, that At struggle. Muthanga inthe complicity supposed for their station police the to them hauling and “adivasis” random identifying oflocals too days those incidents many were There followed. arrests massive and eviction the during died policeman one and activist adivasi One violence. brutal into escalating occupation, evictthe to sent were officials police of number alarge 19 2003, February On intervene. to reason a with government the provided and of theAGMS opponent by political more widely up taken soon were arguments These itsdiscontents and Adivasiness 48 The article went on to – entirely out of context - lament how adivasis’ “unlettered their ways, naiveté Early Early 2011, court cases against adivasi activists were still continuing. legislation restoring the traditional forest resources to the tribals”. tothe forestresources the traditional restoring legislation forest compassionate “a thereforerequiring hostile,” sentinelratherthanits isits diversity and themeasy thatand preytoexploitation bycunning settlers”partof “thetribalis make argue bio- forest dwellings” of their out by law terrorized … habitat, this to native adivasis, powerless artless, “the men threatened the local tribal people living in the periphery of the Sanctuary”. of the periphery the in living people tribal local the threatened men her gang and she because now cause realAdivasi the representing not is K Janu C “Ms 47 . The Hindu (16-17 June 2003) published a long, two-piece article by article two-piece a long, published 2003) June (16-17 48 . The importance of being adivasi 90 CEU eTD Collection 3.2.1 3.2 August 11 2006) August Hindu, Day(The Indigene World celebrate to read were speech famous Seattle’s Chief from exerpts how include references international of direct Examples available. is discourse local established no which for ideas new introduce or to audience, society civil a global to appeal to Kerala, beyond of actors attention the to draw a need is there when mostly origins international identifiable clearly with discourses call upon activists AGMS in general. politics adivasi inhabiting contradiction and tensions the reproduce and indirect largely however, are, Kerala in politics adivasi on influences Theinternational 2003). Niezen e.g. (see movement people’s indigenous international the of strength growing ofthe influence bethe to tautologically, somewhat assumed, often is world the around indigenism of rise ofthe cause The main “T concept. the in embedded dilemmas and tensions many the encountering meanwhile beadivasi, to it is of what understanding more useful a politically towards sympathizers “conscientize” to try activists AGMS understandings, sense” “common- local and of indigenism models circulating internationally between how describe I chapter, of this part second the In notion. a complicated is itself “adivasiness” oppression, and discrimination ofadivasi questions as laborers” ofagricultural plight “the or development” of “lack of issues to reduced been mayhave otherwise that conflicts of a series reframed it way the to thanks Kerala in force political asnew recognizable became AGMS the Though Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 49 T moredetail. some in Kerala in interpreted became adivasiness of how instances some look into now I framing, indigenist its ad AGMS the of emergence the of trajectory historical the sketched Having of“class”. language old the in issues their framing to revert not would and politics” “identity of indigenist form some in believe to continued dalits and adivasis many oppressive, obviously became interpretations indigenist hegemonic which in at Muthanga, experiences the Despite Sabha. Maha Rashtriya the toward shift banks” “vote or seethese needs adivasi to cater either itsdiscontents and Adivasiness The newspaper article reporting on the reading also noted that Chief Seattle’s speech had been taken speech ChiefSeattle’s notedthat onthereading also reporting article newspaper The RAVELLING MODELS RAVELLING RAVELLING MODELS RAVELLING from a Hollywood movie, which script was rather far removed from the original words of the chief. of words removedthe original from far rather was script which movie, Hollywood a from 49 or the proclaimed pride of indigenist activists in Kerala when Cathy Freeman Cathy when Kerala in activists ofindigenist pride proclaimed orthe , ” COMMON OFINDIGENISM AND THEIR TENSIONS - SENSE , AND AND CONSCIENTIZATION The importance of being adivasi 91 CEU eTD Collection confronted her after her foreign trips in the 1990s. the in trips foreign her her after confronted had that criticism of such storm the re-open would woman awhite with seen being that worried hostile suspicions. For me it was initially even quite difficult to meet C K Janu since she was Kerala to receive international support, let alone money alone let support, international receive to Kerala Cold War suspicion of foreign intervention foreign of War suspicion Cold and of post-colonial of a combination out Growing cooperation. “foreign” any towards Kerala in harbored suspicion intense by the obstructed more the all are exchanges buy international cooperation international hindering thereby “indigeneity”, to claims exclusive any acknowledge to refuse to continues government Indian The limited. remains Kerala beyond networking direct Yet Peoples. Tribal and of Indigenous Confederation Indian the and Self-rule Tribal for Front National the as such networks international and national with contact in activists AGMS put actively Bijoy CR like activists Regional-level network. alter-globalization centered direct-action a Action, People’s Global of invitation on 2001) Madsen (see Europe toured that Resistance and Solidarity for Caravan Inter-continental the part took moreover and Rights Indigenous for Group UNWorking of the on invitation Thailand and Geneva to travelled Janu K 1990s C mid- the In limited. been has fora international in leaders of AGMS participation The actual movement. indigenous international the with resonance strong their discovered I until leadership, K Janu’s of C qualities typical for took Ifirst instance, for women, adivasi of role leading the on insistence and metaphors of environmental usage frequent The localexpressions. unique, for them mistake easily could one scene, international of the awareness an without that much so so indigenism of local part become do however exchange international and national in originate that ideas Sometimes realities. of local top on Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 50 Chicago” of red strikes heroic “the or are equal” all where of Soviets land “the to references Communist to similar remain references these Often 2000. in Olympics the at medal a gold won Australian) aboriginal (an itsdiscontents and Adivasiness 51 52 Referring to the 1886 general strike in Chicago for the eight hour workday and its brutal police Such suspicion should not be considered paranoia. Note for instance that the American ambassador in In order to receive money from foreign donors, an organization moreover needs official “FCRA” official moreover needs organization an donors, foreign money from In order to receive suppression – a day commemorated on International Workers’ Day (the 1st of May). (the1stof Day Workers’ onInternational commemorated day –a suppression Communist government in Kerala in 1959 (Moynihan 1975:41). in 1959(Moynihan government Kerala in Communist American money indeed involvedwas insupportingthebreak-up of thefirstdemocratically elected India at the time of the first Communist government in Kerala in his memoirs explicitly tells of how which used to be closely associated with the movement in its earliest phase, does. phase, earliest with themovementinits associated usedtobeclosely which Solidarity, suchas NGO though an status FCRA have not doesobviously movement,theAGMS social Being a withFCRAstatus. has toNGOs become attached “marketvalue” distinct a sothat so much process – costlybureaucratic and isadifficult which Act) status, Registration Contributions (Foreign 50 : they invoke an imaginary connection but remain abstract, afloat abstract, remain but connection imaginary an invoke : they 51 it is very difficult for any political grouping in 52 , and not be buried locally under be buried not , and The importance of being adivasi 92 CEU eTD Collection sovereignty also, however, invokes many tensions. One is the fact that the interpretation given interpretation the that fact the is One tensions. many invokes however, also, sovereignty of indigenous reading dominant Theinternationally activists. AGMS amongst popular quite adivasis’ sophisticated civilizational achievements before their subjugation by the Aryans is adivasi various of roots historical ofthe re-valuation the vein, this In block. apolitical into adivasis unite to efforts their and “culture” adivasi in pride for search their modeling in activists AGMS serves likewise, “sovereignty”, of theme The indigenist backfired terribly also but audience alarge them gained this imaginary, eco-indigenist dominant to language Baviskar 1997). Baviskar 2010; Shah also (see elephants wild especially and animals forest of have usually workers adivasi the that fear mortal the with uncomfortably rather sits however adiscourse such fact In “father”. their forest the and “mother” their being earth the of terms in environment their to of adivasis relationship the described she Affairs, Indigenous on Group Working International Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 53 in in apiece when instance for discourse this into played CKJanu adivasi”. “being for simply but agriculture commercial resist to want they because itor to related closely are livelihoods their because not nature of respectful more as somehow are cast adivasis when however, appear, Tensions allies. acquire movement the helps indigenism on take this environment, natural of its pollution the and sovereignty food of Kerala’s erosion of the context the In life. of way sustainable more a healthier, regain to citizens “modern” for way the can lead and nature from alienated are less adivasis that claim they when activists AGMS by reproduced issometimes onindigenism take environmental The tension”. of “nodes calls Tsing Anna what evoke and Kerala in echoes their – find struggles Amazonian the of out modelcoming stewardship” “environmental the and US, the and America Latin through travelling model autonomy” “pluri-ethnic the axis, Zealand Canada-New a along originating model “sovereignty” the – distinguishes (2007) Tsing Anna that indigenism of models” “travelling international three The dilemmas. certain evoke also then inevitably they though locally, meaning some doacquire ofindigenism landscape political international the in circulating themes some influences, of international weakness relative the Despite itsdiscontents and Adivasiness 54 Many Many adivasis I spoke to who had participated in the Muthanga struggle even considered elephants A more logical ally might have been the international Via Campesina movement (see e.g. Borras, e.g. (see movement Campesina Via international been the have might ally logical more A upon a vat of illegal liquor brewed in the area and had drank it whole. it drank had and inthearea brewed liquor illegal of vat upon a stumbled had it since -- diarrhea –and beenpossessed byalcohol fact hadin thattheelephant clarified todestroyrepeated ifsentbythe it times.was as forest guards CKJanueventually tomemany almost as direct messengers of the state: the story of how one elephants had stormed their settlement rather the more upper-caste farmers who are often their most direct oppressors. direct most their often are who farmers upper-caste more the rather movement’s allies in India have Edelmannot been peasants or agricultural workersand – as in Latin KayAmerica – but 2008) yet for reasons that would deserve in-depth research, this international 53 As we saw in the first part of this chapter, when AGMS leaders adjusted their adjusted leaders AGMS when chapter, of this part first the in saw we As 54 . Indigenous Affairs gothras , the influential publication of the publication influential , the The importance of being adivasi (“clans”) to demonstrate 93 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist ofindigenism of therise explanation aconvincing give hence of indigenism, models” “travelling ofinternational or ease fit natural the nor contacts, international direct few the Neither 279). 2002: Rodriguez in (Ambedkar them” reform to aid, medical them give to them, civilize to effort no made had Hindus] [the they because savages ..remain[ing] aborigines “the to led supposedly that system caste ofthe “indifferentism” the against in arguing words own Ambedkar’s in cansee we as it, in reflected realities the about ideas essentialist less to necessarilylead not does ofcaste critique and the granted for taken remains often likewise “adivasi” of the category The unquestionable. more all the constructs legal these make to tends constitution the draft to person the fact that the ideological the Ironically Tribes”. “Scheduled and guruCastes” of “Scheduled separation strict ofthe in reflected this form of indigenism ininstance for India – in Indiaidentity of indigenous reading democratic amore to --commitments dr. Ambedkar – was himself overshadow to come sometimes categorizations legal India alsoin so “indigenous”, considered be to is of who definition legal the over debates in America Latin in happens As unproblematic. entirely not is model this even But in practice. implemented being from legacy, Ambedkar’s dr. in the world – but rather to fight against the casteism that prevents the constitution,progressive most ofthe one already is – which and with constitution it the reform much to so is not adivasis for issue the India in America, Latin in unlike there: form different has asomewhat it though Kerala, in activists adivasi for problematic least the perhaps is America of Latin parts many in as dominating identifies Tsing that democracy of deepening model autonomy” The “pluri-ethnic communities tostart policing each other for such signs. adivasi on pressure places this and 2005) Sonntag (see “authenticity” cultural of degree a demonstrate can communities if betolerated to tend only moreover, such, of statements open purity, cultural imply not does sovereignty principle in Though 2002:269). Rodriguez in (Ambedkar system caste of the spirit” “anti-social general the to contributed him to according which other castes”, to origin an ignoble and caste own] [‘s one to origin anoble give to made Annihilation of Caste in his warned Ambedkar dr. As status. for competition aSanskritizing to leads process the that danger the moreover There is to deepen. tend also divides of community fault-lines the community, one’s valorize to is aim the though basis, a “clan” on explicitly by organizing that moreover is problem more internal A suppression. state brutal particularly invoke to tends turn in which secessionism, of specter the raises sovereignty territorial stresses that autonomy of a notion Importing communities. other with integrated and intermingled much more live historically adivasis where Kerala in situation the fits hardly Self-Rule) Tribal for Front National the (e.g. of India North-East in the even or US inthe organizations by sovereignty to itsdiscontents and Adivasiness : “The literature of Hindus is full of caste genealogies in which an attempt is The importance of being adivasi 94 CEU eTD Collection 3.2.2 like “it’s true me things telling “ignorance”, hersupposed underline emphatically later and silent keep usually would question in worker Theadivasi educated. least at were as they by-standers these consult anything, or, if anthropologist other some or G Mathur PR to talk Ishould –instead, “adivasi” be to meant it what know not did obviously adivasis uneducated these that issue, this on people wrong to the talking Iwas me that and warn intervene to need the feel usually would standers by- educated more the scheme, communities” distinct innocent “35forest-dwelling the fit not did that me something telling started they Whenever be“adivasi”. to it is as what understood they what on latter the quiz me to for impossible almost usually itwas workers, adivasi to I talked when around were assistants my research than other Malayalees educated When follow. usually would adivasi” a “real not was question in person the that qualification The alcohol. alternatively, or, “outsider”, more foreign even some then Tigers, Tamil or Naxals, not if – herself to external forces of influence the under produced been have but character adivasi of her be part not would this differently act would “adivasi” considered normally person “destitute”, “poor” [ “poor” “destitute”, “naïve”, “artless”, including of synonyms chain another (and “hapless” and “innocent” Likewise, forest”. the to – “yes, negation outright an then and stare a blank was however, return, in Igot All lived. also farmers Christian many where village ofthe edge the to simply all, at forest the to going not I was saying him confronted I forest”. the “in of time a lot spending thus and was adivasis on research I wasdoing how friends his of one telling acquaintance Malayalee educated an Ioverheard Once test. empirical any withstand to enough also stubborn is forest” the in “live they that idea The groups. these of tribality the determines that government the than rather traditions” and customs “distinct their is it that idea the upsets never somehow list the to added or from are removed groups certain and are made “corrections” as time over changed has and census government the in Tribes” of “Scheduled number the to refers “35” number the that fact The refutation. empirical to immune be to seems it sense, common of usual is As hapless”. and “innocent are and forest”, the in “live they that traditions”, and customs distinct with all Kerala, in tribes 35 are “there that is – themselves adivasis educated many ironically, including, – Malayalees educated most amongst discourse sense” The “common Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist “S ambiguity. fullof –are Kerala in beadivasi to it means of what sense” – “common the indigeneity of interpretations engrained locally everyday, also however, next, see we will As Kerala. in itsdiscontents and Adivasiness OMETHING THE GOVERNMENT CALLSUS THEGOVERNMENT OMETHING chechi pavam [elder sister], we don’t know anything about these things..” or “we were or “we things..” these about anything know don’t we sister], [elder ], and “child-like”) seem definite markers of adivasiness since if ever a ifever since of adivasiness markers definite seem “child-like”) ], and ” The importance of being adivasi 95 CEU eTD Collection adivasi workers themselves: workers adivasi ordinary amongst adivasiness on sense” “common different a quite of revealing was Velli from got I that be “adivasi” to was it what of interpretation the background, this Against situation. difficult a particularly in stuck was Velli poor, was colony the in everyone Though creditors. by harassment of burden the lightening to went usually money the her financially, assist to tried I When medicines. or her diet her on either compromising necessarily usually was she so and her baby and her for treatment right the get to forher impossible almost it made properly, work able to being not with combination in necessities, Every-day get”. to difficult is very treatment usprivate “for doctor: a private as money of sums high charged he when after-hours his him during see to managed she if her offer he might as what potent as not probably was hours public regular his her during prescribed doctor the ointment the me, that shetold well, knew baby who was strugglingher withaffecting even infection, a major had become but a ginger bad harvesting while accident as alittle skin rash. I often spoke started had with Thewound her hand. on wound infected Vellia badly had she since work not did her she about her ordeals – she Iknew time of the most for but chance the got she whenever fields paddy the in labor day for to go used she said area.She inthe campaigns literacy of because alittle write and read could she though school, attended not had She role. a leadership in butnot struggle Muthanga the in participated Velli fieldwork. of my most did I where colony Paniya in the met often I whom awoman Velli, with had was I exchange interesting Aparticularly “adivasi”. be to meant it what of interpretation her meabout to talk and ignorance of disguise public the below transcript” “hidden of the abit reveal to worker adivasi uneducated an I got however, Sometimes, Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist goes: songs Paniya of many ending apologetic ( and deeds words, mind, our all thatin of unaware itsdiscontents and Adivasiness Velli: That’s That’s because she [CK Janu] has a job [ Velli: I: She is an Adiya. She is Velli:also an adivasi. I: we of onlywhenwe say Paniya—then not That’s about the the meaning word. It’s Velli: I: not know the authority. Let not my words go wrong…” (Aiyyappan 1992: (Aiyyappan mywordsgowrong…” 98). authority. Letnot know the not Velli: “Nothing. “Nothing. The government [ Velli: I: “I have no learning; I have no intelligence ( nointelligence Ihave learning; no “I have have different languages. have different allthese us, and Adiya, Urali, The Naykkans, isdifferent. Ours different. is speech Their songs. different have all we You see, adivasis… us calls soshe professional, But I never hear you talk about yourself as adivasi…. yourself about talk you hear I never But Why isthat so? … of adivasis talks always she though, word this uses also leader] AGMS [the Janu Paniyas. just Weare adivasis. us calls who government the is It Paniya. mean mean? word the does what But So what does it mean when you say “adivasi”? you say when mean it does So what sarkar ]…When we say adivasi, we mean the Paniya. the mean we adivasi, say we ]…When budhi) joli manasa vacha karman manasa vacha . I do not know the regulations. I do regulations. the know not do . I ], that’s why she calls usadivasis. She isa The importance of being adivasi )!”. As theseemingly As )!”. 96 CEU eTD Collection many of them themselves saw as definitive “adivasi” characteristics. Despite the fact that fact the Despite characteristics. “adivasi” definitive as saw themselves them of many what were education of a lack and poverty anything, If anymore”. adivasi be not then would we “though rich, become would ofthe if one be great it would that concluded that discussion a into got instance for once interviewing, was I workers of Adiya group A AGMS. the in positions leadership in been not had who workers adivasi ordinary amongst encountered often I a notion is – poverty namely – adivasiness really defines of what interpretation final Velli’s Kurichias. the herexcludes to according which poor, is that a caste beof to “adivasi”: be to means really it what of reading own her give to shedecides point, this at Yet British. the against Kurichias the by resistance” “tribal legendary and deeds heroic the of knows doubt no also Velli and “adivasi” are Kurichias and Kurumas that is obvious it Kerala, newspaper-reading To are “adivasi”. Tribes as Scheduled listed has state the that all groups then whether on more hersome push her to Iinterrupt until characteristics, cultural other and “songs” particular their have all they how and are there communities adivasi many ofhow riddle me the giving starts also Velli herself, of adivasiness understanding “proper” mainstream, the remembering if as then, Yet state. of the that with coincides that of adivasiness understanding an have people all such job: has asalaried and educated is Janu CK because case the is this that explains she of “adivasis”, speaks who land occupy to joined had she movement very the of leader the also but government the just is not it that fact the her with confront I When “ does who someone “worker”, means literally time same her of name the “Paniya”, ofbeing that is her defines naturally feels she that category only the that throughout emphasizes Velli us”. calls government the “something – category alegal simply is which Tribe”, “Scheduled of as asynonym used is “adivasi” that Malayalees: educated most elude to seems nevertheless but all to obvious be perhaps should what saying by starts She adivasiness. of meanings different exposes answer Velli’s Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist itsdiscontents and Adivasiness Velli: Why… because they have a lot of money of course! Anyway, it is not we notwe who it is give Anyway, course! alotofmoney have they Why…because Velli: I: el: No, their caste ( Velli: I: They are different. Velli: I: are and Adiya. all These not Urali, rich. four…they They Naykkans, are also Paniyas, Velli: I: are just Paniyas.” are just We names. such gives who government the It’s ‘adivasis’. as names such ourselves Why so? Are they not adivasis? not they Are Kurumas? and Kurichias the two, other these And like us. adivasis? AGMS].I see—but Are what about thethey Kurichias and Kurumasalso [officially STadivasis? and included in the Which all groups are included in this group of jati ) isdifferent. pani ” (labor – not – ” (labor The importance of being adivasi jati joli (caste) that at the , salaried work). , salaried 97 CEU eTD Collection 3.2.3 be adivasi and she told me: told she and be adivasi to meant it what of idea the changed had AGMS the how about K Janu C to talking was I day One Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 55 “I adivasiness. of notions common-sense in existing is present than interpretation assertive politically and “proud” amore promote to tried conscientization has through AGMS the interpretations, more practical on its and of adivasiness definition cultural the on both playing though following, in discuss as I Yet Communities. Backward Other or Castes as Scheduled re-classified become practice thestate theway from different altogether not moreover, is, interpretation Velli’s status, Caste Scheduled on decide to state the for point akey is distinctiveness” “cultural rhetorically itsdiscontents and Adivasiness upturning common-sense and awakening a more politicized understanding of social reality social of understanding a morepoliticized awakening and common-sense upturning of methods Freirian with experience first-hand had moreover Janu herself, 80s the in workers social inspired liberation-theology by efforts of “conscientization” end receiving the at been Having 2004). Smith (cp. sense common - underlying “consensus” the than rather – violence the and contradictions the expose to a tool into identity” “adivasi turn and ideas taken-for-granted to meaning emancipatory new, a give to lies CKJanu like intellectuals” by “organic intervention political for potential the where is This challenges. external and contradictions internal its against itself sustain to order in reworked beconstantly to needs and achievement total a is never sense” in “common is crystallized that hegemony the emphasizes, (1994) Roseberry as for Yet power. of relations by existing shaped is consciousness which to extent of the effect an precisely but manipulation ideological and of social lack of the a question not is It quo. status the of hegemony political the indicates robustness its since also problematic is it but block political a build to which on basis apowerful is sense common argued, Gramsci As sense”. “common as become taken has what - changing world social their idea of existing people’s changing involves aware”, politically people “making as in Kerala described often “Conscientization”, AMANADIVASI the beginnings of an emphasis on “adivasi identity” also started toappear. also identity” emphasison“adivasi an of the beginnings Freire’s PedagogyGramscian of the more explicitly a gained oppressedit the KSSP, Kerala, in movement literacy popular “non-political” but meaning (Zachariah and butin “overcoming false consciousness” the late70shey-daysofinterpretationthe of CPI(M)-affiliated and inSooryamoorthy Wayanad, itthe movementgave The earlyCommunist 2001: 1126). tradition (seeHalliburton philosophical 1994:it became80ff.) . In partthe latter of phase,the spread of liberation theology and Paulo Bodhavalkaranam applies its criteria for Scheduled Caste status since often “forward” ST communities can communities ST “forward” often since status Caste Scheduled for criteria its applies , , the raising of one’s consciousness or awareness ( WHO DARE PLAY WITHMENOW DARE PLAY WHO !” bhodam The importance of being adivasi ), is in fact part of a long 55 . 98 in CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist around). way other the than (rather of closeness” kind “some feel cameto people that identity “adivasi” a shared of notion of the intervention the through it was that – Sabha Maha Gothra Adivasi the of activism the to tied inextricably is identity this “admit” to came people whereby process the how alsotells she but identity “true inone’s of pride re-gaining as the brought has AGMS the changes the sees Janu definitions. state-centric on plays also earlier) “adivasi” as identified were nor identified neither (who officials (ST) “adivasi” on emphasis and dalits for category Caste” “Scheduled of the use her reform, internal and self-awakening of one as process the describes Janu Whereas identity”. “own their about learn can they where children adivasi for “classes” requires it – rather, workers of adivasi sense common the to entirely left be can that notsomething also is It Tribes. Scheduled government-employed and ofeducated alliance the needs but adivasis impoverished by proletarian, solely be done cannot that something is argues, implicitly Janu identity, adivasi an Recovering choosing. own ofher conditions under so not doing is she yet identity, adivasi useful apolitically articulate to trying is K Janu C culture. and politics subaltern of expressions autonomous alsonot are organizations political their state, the of captives passive and thedeluded simply never are populations subordinate though even that Gramsci, with emphasis, his and struggle but consent not understand to concept a as hegemony on emphasis 360) (1994: Roseberry’s remember to however, is relevant, it in, pride take than of rather ashamed tobe identity an and destitute, ignorant as “adivasis” depicts that sense a common in intervene to efforts AGMS’s of the description of Janu’s context the In itsdiscontents and Adivasiness before…”. there not was it still.. mind…but unconscious his from talking was maybe he and ok, theguywasdrunk, me now!”… like “Iam whodareplaywith an adivasi, say things seenourpeople forthebus,Ihave stand thecitywaiting in go forworkand when I now But things. do and others face of the into boldly look to used never people Our Sabha. of Gothra formation the after people in came feeling This Kerala]. in Castes Scheduled largest ofthe [one arePulaya they that say to unwilling not are They SC’. am an ‘I that say they Caste], [Scheduled SC to belong they If as adivasis. themselves introduce me they meet cometo they When it. do they days These areadivasi. they that say to used never came, they adivasi are who officials when here, seeme to came people when Before, Sabha. Gothra by the taken approach an is This our identity. and tradition our understand makethem to groups small form and children to classes give We times. earlier in lost adivasis the which identity the preserve to attempts Sabha Gothra the that is happens what Now before. that say to used never They us. between of closeness kind some is there it do we when because it say They adivasi. as themselves introduce they me come to officers when days These adivasi’. am an ‘I saying in interested became people identity, distinct a have world the allover adivasis that realize them made and active this become has Sabha Gothra the that Now … adivasis. as them view talkedme,otherswouldalso to ifthey talk tome,maybe feltthat comeand they didn’t Sothey adivasi. an I am that everywhere tell always me.I to speak not would adivasis places, goto to I used when Earlier reluctance. any without adivasi’ an am ‘I say them made that them among mentality a came there Sabha, the of work active the with But this. like colonies cometo to not preferred they adivasi, being to admit not did educated are who Those mainstream. the with line came in and identity their lost adivasis which in incidents many were there formed, was Sabha [Maha] Gothra [Adivasi] the “Before The importance of being adivasi 99 CEU eTD Collection songs: Adiya of refrain the in instance for this reading claims, he (1993:10), slaves” as mere themselves identify them made havenow ofslavedom “centuries eyes: Masters’ their through themselves seeing of consciousness” “false the sees only Baby slavery, their describing songs In (ibid.). past” their forgotten completely had who ina“people “thinking” provoke and growth” cultural stunted long their “re-commence to genus this recover to was challenge it, the saw K JBaby As lost”. “completely been had lives” drab in their element positive only “the genus”, “ancient This was a strange and difficult process” for his students (1993:31). According tohim “thinking that claims He is dramatized. emancipation and slavery Paniya of history the in which Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist describes the process hestarted withhis pupils inthe making of his famous play he seehow to interesting it is and identity adivasi a proud for need the in believe to first of the one was J Baby K children. adivasi for school participatory alternative, an (Dreaming), “Kanavu” of founder the and play-writer Baby, afamous KJ with as such of themovement, sympathizers middle-class and/or upper-caste amongst expression adifferent gets “conscienticizing” of project The movement. the in position leadership K Janu’s C for a reason doubt no qua in status the confront effectively to encounters she contradictions the negotiate to background, working-class adivasi own her from capacity, Her sheuses. of contention symbols and language It is hence quite literally in order to be heard – rather than stared at – that Janu adjusts the me: told and laughed She dress. Adiya a traditional than rather a sari wearing meetings press to go usually would she identity”, her “adivasi presented proudly she claiming muchand so adivasis of identity the about talking while that that fact the about Janu asked once I of life. leash anew receive adivasiness of interpretations sense” “common quo, status the to challenge a radical launch to of “adivasiness” notion the using while Moreover, humiliation. invites also inevitably process the that fact the instance, for in– pride take to identity adivasi an of creating process in the involved contradictions are many There itsdiscontents and Adivasiness “We are the slaves of the lords of the hill, we are the slaves of the lords of the fields”. the of lords the of slaves the are we hill, the of lords the of slaves the “We are 29). (1993: exploitation” ruthless and ignorance “poverty, to due restlessness” of total “depths into sunken had tribe” the with identity ofone’s solace the nature, with harmony the forests, ofthe refuge “the wear this as a part of solving the problems of our community.” of problems the of solving a part as this wear I notbeadangerif will Butit common adanger. to beapartofthe itis society, dress this IfIwear beacceptedby thepublicandsociety. bea of andto part thisto we do when a danger becomes ok. It is it Then problems. toour solutions of finding a part as but else, of anything a part as not this Weaccept it. like don’t we though situation, the to according things certain accept to have We free. feel can we So dress. a common is it since stare will nobody sari, wearing go we if But be aproblem. would It time. that at will feel person that what of think even We can’t dress. our traditional wearing meeting apress to goes us from a person if animal, a wild at looking as if stare will people “Then The importance of being adivasi Nadughadika 100 , CEU eTD Collection songs, “My Homeland”, that he had he that Homeland”, “My songs, mashe clad theThankachen, by as sitting was I day One kind of whitedalit. dhotias a lost had he lifestyle” “harmonious befittinghelping him himself regain the also was claimed, he project, His superior”. a are far that havebeliefs they but clothes shabby wearing be may “They me, he told As elders. theadivasi from gaining he was of knowledge kind of the admiration his expressed often Thankachen me, to Talking “temple”. a as up doubled that shelter a wooden in classes, evening inthe students tohis transfer hewould knowledge, This herbs. medicinal of particularly knowledge, traditional as other elders – “ adivasi to he talked by as sat I often routines, daily his following Thankachen with mornings several spent I As dalits). (including area of the people original ofthe unity cultural the tribal consciousness” amongst children of thevarious adivasi “clans” ( Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Aralam to run a “ Thankachen of I observed encounters the accompanied clearly instance for It efforts. conscientizing to efforts to responses workers’ adivasi ordinary of characteristic fact in was contradiction and ambiguity This community”. our “uplifting in work K JBaby’s praised however often had she encounters, earlier during times, other At them. “exploiting” was he – that others for and dances song perform to children adivasi training merely was Baby K J thought she me told instance for point some at my fieldwork, during alot with I interacted woman Paniya a Thankamma, themselves. workers by adivasi adaption strategic and resistance provoking likewise ofadivasiness, notions in hegemonic element as another function to comes hence growth” cultural a“stunted having and past”, their forgotten “having “ignorant”, being from and slaves” “mere as ofthemselves thinking from adivasis liberate to seeks that The discourse her approach. described K Janu C way the power of relations – existing confronting and – with copying to adjustments as tactical than rather oppression to adaptations internalized fully as adivasis amongst heobserves timidity and “ignorance” the interpreting toward strongly leans hence Baby K J itsdiscontents and Adivasiness (teacher), was teaching one ofthe one teaching was (teacher), moopans” – mashe gothra padasala gothra , a Pulaya man Central Kerala who had come to the AGMS land occupation at occupation land AGMS the come to had who Kerala Central , aPulayaman from whom he collected and recorded traditional songs and stories aswell stories and songs traditional recorded and hecollected whom from ”, an alternative evening school “to generate and mobilize a mobilize and generate “to school evening alternative ”, an Into the cages of starvation of Into thecages me chained which My homeland, medown trampled That homeland my My homeland, my prayers thepowerof with Flows River Bhageeradhi The landinwhich mysweat with flourished The landthat fields salubrious Into shores river turned sacred I culture of essence the gained I wilderness, One with nomore mine is built Ihave The world inmyland anoutcaste became I leftwith nothing The serfwas thepowerofmylabor With land theonewhobroughtprosperitytothis I am ofancient thefoundation laid theonewho am I me down stamping Is glory into that flourished My homeland glory eternal of My homeland Homeland My civilizations The importance of being adivasi gothras) and help revive help and 101 CEU eTD Collection 3.3 C block. political “indigenist” alternative an forge to efforts AGMS’ the to crucial remains nevertheless consciousness “adivasi” contradictions, its all With about. is adivasiness what of common-sense Malayalee the negotiate to leaders AGMS of efforts as the ambiguous as are hence conscientization so-called at their efforts to reactions workers’ adivasi ordinary them, confront to needing time same the at while possible asmuch advantage their to of power relations existing putting of possibility the use need the between it. Caught on commenting start implicitly elders the as certainly present, those on lost isnot watch to around sit elders adivasi while culture” non-adivasi a white-clad of irony the hand, other the On regard. this in of them expected is what of aware explicitly become moreover they culture” “adivasi collect to efforts Thankachen’s in Participating in. involved are they land for struggle mashe themselves – the parents of the children at the at children the of parents the – themselves workers adivasi hand one the On palpable. arehence scene in the involved The contradictions retreats…”. royalty young men standing around eventually pick the pick eventually around standing men young two which at moopan, at the distressed looks and lesson the stops He of. disapproval his show but cannot too, as atemple night at used is place the that aware well Thankachen, that act an to restore order to the class, the drunken moopan spits his tobacco on the floor of the of floor the on tobacco his spits moopan drunken the class, the to order restore to tries Thankachen as And complete. “class” the of disturbance the making gestures, his parodying Paniya drum) to accompany Thankachen’s singing starts making fun of the drunken of the fun making starts singing Thankachen’s accompany to drum) Paniya as he does so. In reaction, one of the younger men standing around with a with around standing men younger the of one reaction, In so. does as he bench his off falling half story, a drunken telling start to opportunity the uses space ofthe side know best?”. At this the class becomes a bit restless and the Paniya the and restless a bit becomes class the this At best?”. know should who one you the “Aren’t says and ironically smiles She it correctly. singing heis whether ask herto to turns Thankachen song, the through halfway somewhere come Having proceeding. Thankachan and after a while the awhile after and Thankachan after lines the repeat children the occupation: land atthe knowledge of adivasi sources Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist aPaniya from morning the in collected itsdiscontents and Adivasiness ONCLUSION they anxiously conjure up the spirits of the past to their service and borrow from them from borrow and service their to past of the spirits the up conjure anxiously they crisis revolutionary of such periods in precisely existed, yet never has that something in creating things, and themselves revolutionizing in engaged seem they when just “And their tributes for educating their children into an “adivasi consciousness” that framed the framed that consciousness” “adivasi into an children their educating for tributes their moopan moopan herself comes and sits on the side to watch theclass watch to side onthe sits and comes herself whom he considered one of the most “authentic” most ofthe one heconsidered whom padasala moopan mashe –built the shelter and pay Thankachen pay and shelter the –built up and escort him away, joking “his teaching the children about “adivasi about children the teaching The importance of being adivasi moopan thudi sitting on the other on the sitting (the traditional (the padasala moopan 102 – , CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist can deconstruction that fact the to sensitive particularly are approach this to according working Scholars 2003). Routledge Xaxa1999; e.g. (see adivasis as themselves asserting people those in embodied life, of way a anddifferent resistance and of marginalization history uniform) not (though a shared to reference accepted a generally and fact asasocial identity adivasi see to prefers it as for warns approach essentialist strategic the that a danger is This adivasis”. by “real led not it was that by showing precisely AGMS the of legitimacy the undermine to worked it where media, mainstream the reached of deconstructionism version a vulgar merely instead, Yet start. the from as nonsensical exposed been have could adivasis” “real were there activists the not or whether about arguments perhaps ofMuthanga, time the at Kerala in media the on stronger been scholarship ofthis influence the Had interpretations. political more radical for space andcreates identity of adivasi reification the counters spontaneous fit) of social conflicts as indingenist ones. Ideally, such deconstructivist scholarship than (rather framing political the to attention have paid and “tribe” the of notion the to attached have historically that meanings essentializing and essentialized the have criticized I as approach deconstructionist the from strongly havedrawn one preceding the and chapter This 2007). Whitehead 2005; Sissons 2007; Shah 2007; Baviskar (see further even become marginalized ofadivasiness images fitromantic to fail who adivasis proletarian which through authenticity” “oppressive and “communalism”, nativism, indigeneity: of shadows xenophobic the of danger the against warns It myth. romantic essentialist, an into Tribe”) “Scheduled (the category legal official an and life, of way a“tribal” indigeneity, supposed of notions mixes that 2009) Bindu 1995, Bates e.g. (see construction bourgeois-nationalist and/or acolonial identity” “adivasi considers indigeneity to approach deconstructionist The approach. essentialist a strategic and deconstructionist a between caught scholarship, studies indigenous in intellectually reflected is moreover ofindigenism dilemma The political ethnographers. state of speech borrowed the and disguise tribal time-honored into challenge political their fit to Muthanga, instanceat for activists, of indigenist part on the efforts did as intensified, adivasiness “real” of schema animaged to according movement the measuring of quo,counter-efforts status the to challenge a realpolitical posed that developing was movement as apolitical just Hence opponents. by bemobilized to started also frame indigenist the within of dissension nodes various the – “tribality” of definitions state ethnographic by set scenario the to according simply operate not did that movement –a shape taking was movement “indigenist” an that time same the At itsdiscontents and Adivasiness this time-honored disguise and this borrowed language” (Marx [1952] 2008: 15). 2008: [1952] (Marx language” borrowed this and disguise time-honored this in history ofworld scene new the present to order in costumes, and cries battle names, The importance of being adivasi 103 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist inKerala. indigenism of rise the of causes underlying of the question to the precisely turn hence I chapters, following the In essentialism. further of mechanism self-reinforcing a create unwittingly can it discourses, of indigenist reproduction its in essentialist” “strategically if movements, on impact have astrong can indeed scholarship because precisely that problem the avoids moreover of amoment rise the for causes structural the to Attention problems. these toovercome identity aunique to make they claims the on than rather from emerge they grievances economic and political the on more attention focusing moreby all the question in movements the strengthen can scholarship such even Yet society. civil global to accommodate to the need and movements indigenist ongoing on impact potential its of aware particularly itself shown has turn in scholarship essentialist Strategic representation. ofsubaltern demands society civil global that imaginary romanticized the of critique a formulate as well as age, a “neoliberal” in mobilization on political limitations the understand to Itry leaders, adivasi contemporary discrediting than rather them, at directed images stereotypical the reject than rather reinforce to tend activists conditions what under generally, more asking, By explanation. structural and political complex a of need in is but experiences historical communities’ particular to of indigenism fit “natural” simply or availability ready the liein to be assumed cannot of indigeneity attraction the practice, also in but theoretically and historically only not that showing movement, Communist the to contradistinction in movement indigenist an building of effort the undertook activists of why question the of pertinence the underlines chapter present The today? discourse apopular such isit tension, of nodes ofindigenism’s inevitability seeming the despite Why, energy. political so much attract to started nevertheless has adivasiness carries, it baggage problematic the all despite why, ask then to step next logic a taken hasseldom but identity” of “adivasi problems and complexities allthe has exposed scholarship deconstructionist one, For other. each against approaches two the of dead-lock the beyond go least at to which in away propose Ido though it, to “solution” no have I real and is essentialism strategic and deconstruction between The dilemma themovement. within thecontradictions critiquing as also role see their than rather audience awider to concerns their represent and activists of adivasi position the in themselves place to inclined more are scholars Such 2003). (Karlsson it on based initiatives democratic many the disempower andthereby discourse asapolitical identity adivasi of legitimacy the undermine itsdiscontents and Adivasiness The importance of being adivasi 104 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist AT THE ENDOFAREFORMIST CYCLE CONTENTION AND CONFLICT PART 3 105 CEU eTD Collection here is that of “tactical” relations of power (Wolf [1990] 2001): those operating those 2001): [1990] (Wolf power of relations of “tactical” that here is analysis Thelevelof terms. in indigenist contested became 1990s ofthe course the in Kerala Part 3of thisdissertation studies the political dynamics through which social inequalities in given a critical interpretation of the kind of “democratization” that may have produced the rise the produced may have that of “democratization” kind ofthe interpretation a critical given have who scholars been certainly there have Hence andliabilities. contradictions difficult invite to tend also thereby yet indigeneity of images dominant deploy strategically to try activists indigenous how of analyses explicit most ofthe some provided has (2002) Conklin Beth scene. transnational of a part become movements indigenous which through technologies new the are than of indigenism trajectories political in defining important more still is nation-state of the history the particular that argues who (2007), Tsing by Anna stressed islikewise discussed, also I which of indigeneity, interpretations oflocal Theimportance of oppression. forms pervasive more all- even sometimes new, inviting in lies of recognition” “cunning the that argues she – terms latter’s on the happens state Australian by the communities aboriginal of “recognition” of how description critical (2002) Povinelli’s Elisabeth in echoes find I noted that adivasis many of lives everyday the to distance their and of indigeneity determinations Thelegal dissertation. 2 ofthis part in have asI state the and difference indigenous between relationship problematic even and complicated on the observations similar have made They of indigenism. rise the underlying “democratization” supposed the of ofaspects critical have been scholars Many democratization. of process a signals necessarily democracy liberal in “recognition” greater movetowards the indeed whether question and argument this rethink Icritically next, the and chapter this In 2005). (Yashar homogeneity” “ethno-national to attachment their up give and of “difference” tolerant more become to 2008) (Jung people of indigenous recognition the on norms” “international emerging newly by forced were states as decades in thepast emerged indigenism that idea as the up summed be can latter The argument. “democratization” the indigenism, of rise the for offered explanation political common most the beyond go to trying Kerala, in inequality and poverty confront to eager most movements social and parties political the amongst interaction the from arose indigenism how at specifically, more Ilook, 4). part in consider I (which itself setting the shaping of power relations “structural” the to opposed as setting political-economic Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and E LECTORAL C OMMUNISM AND ITS CRITICS ITS AND OMMUNISM CHAPTER 4 Electoral Communism and its critics within agiven 106 CEU eTD Collection trajectory of the rise of indigenism against the background of the declining appeal of the original ofthe appeal declining of the background the against of indigenism rise the of trajectory historical The “caste”. and of “culture” terms more in articulated acritique towards and “class” from away turned disillusion, ideological and practical of combined out Communismgradually, electoral against contention of how process lived the demonstrate These biographies. activist different through indigenism of rise the analyze to out set I chapter this in took, indigenism indigenist and Communist activists that further contributed tothe distinct political form that between dynamics political the at detail more specific in looks chapter next the Whereas 194). 2003: (Niezen decolonization” of process of the a “completion toward indigenism as caused more likely by the by more likely caused as indigenism of rise the sees that one – emerges perspective a different rivals, political main their to relationship in but particularly own their just on not state, the vis-à-vis movements indigenous than Communism indigenism to attracted became Kerala in people why is be asking should we question the 2009),then (Thachil reason very this for votes Caste Scheduled and Tribe Scheduled of majority masses” as their priorities and ifthe Communist party historically – and still –receives the “toiling of the emancipation the and land reform claimed that groups Communist in biography political their started in Kerala activists indigenist if mostcontemporary Yet democratization. of beasign have to would emergence its marginalization, and poverty challenge to and rights land rallyfor to which around program possible only the were indigenism limits, and all pitfalls ifdespite For platforms. political existing along mobilize not did people indigenous of why question the explicitly more addressing by so do to Iseek “democratization”. in than elsewhere indigenism of rise the for emphasis causal the placing consider maywell we – invite discourses ofindigeneity use strategic the that perils the influences, movement social of transnational weakness the indigeneity, about common-sense ofastate-determined existence – thepre- ofdemocratization a process as framework liberal to the according indigenism of rise the interpreting on questions critical raise to combine reasons all where Kerala, In Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist fact in becoming ofstates a symptom be may indigenism that words, other in Thepossibility, using. been had people indigenous that protest of popular avenues earlier obstructing started thereby and state the in locked became democratization of cycle global previous a how by contrary, the on but, movement indigenous by theinternational states on put pressure democratizing the by much so not caused have been may of indigenism rise the that possibility the ignored They have paradigm. liberal the within remain to tend side-notes, critical raised have who those as well as democracy by liberal offered possibilities the about optimistic more those both movements, indigenous new producing trajectory historical the analyzing when Yet of indigenism. cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and less sensitive to democratic pressure. democratic to sensitive . By asking this question and focusing on the political interactions of interactions political the on and focusing question this . Byasking crisis of liberal democracy than by its forwards march forwards by its than democracy ofliberal Electoral Communism and its critics rather 107 CEU eTD Collection 4.1 social welfare (as the Communist party claims) or, as many indigenists now claim, as leading as claim, now indigenists or, asmany claims) party Communist the (as welfare social and reform of land implementation successful to the leading as alternatively characterized is chapter, of this part second in the see will we as which 1999), (Heller struggle” class Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 56 cretinism” “parliamentary into degeneration the called Left radical the what communism”, “electoral to by themove Menon to according characterized was contrast in mid-70s, the about to 1957 from phase, The second films. and literature, songs, popular utopian in also but entities militant into peasantry the and proletariat the organizing movement a political in only not expression found This hierarchies”. of past rejection a rampant and order ofanew visions “euphoric as describes 308ff.) (2005: Menon Dilip by what characterized be to period this led movement Communist the in struggles these all of together coming The movements. regional these bridging framework overarching an created that leadership, Congress under initially nationhood, Malayalee and independence Indian for movement the and 2008); Herring 1994; Menon 1992; rule(Panikkar British direct under region Malabar northern the dominated that landlords Hindu) (upper-caste and state colonial the by livelihoods their on squeeze the against movements peasant (Muslim-majority) the 1989); (Mathew administration public in participation greater demand and status social “modern” for compete to mobilizing were they where Cochin and of Travancore States Princely southern the in active particularly were that movements reform community the party: Communist of the leadership the under movements social of types ofthree convergence by the is characterized period This inKerala. party Communist the of power to coming the 1957 with in ends and 1930s the vicissitudes of the Communist movement. The first period, inthis scheme, starts in the to according ofKerala history recent the regarding on agree scholars most that periodization three-fold general the consider to useful is it story, biographical each situate to To beable T turned indigenist). Communist dalit (committed Soman and indigenist), turned Communist adivasi (practical Janu CK indigenist), turned ex-Nalite (dalit Geethanandan supporter), indigenist turned Naxalite (lower-caste Vasuettan member), party Communist adivasi (life-long Kalan PK activists: Malayalee exemplary five of the biographies through traced is hence movement Communist cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Parliamentary cretinism, a term Marx used in his HE NAXAL CHALLENGEHE NAXAL society can be achieved by peaceful, parliamentary means. parliamentary peaceful, by beachieved can society : M OBILIZING THEMARGINS 56 , and the disciplining of cadres. It was a period of “organized aperiod was It ofcadres. disciplining the , and 18 th Brumaire , describes the belief that a socialist Electoral Communism and its critics 108 CEU eTD Collection allies to form governments than in class struggle. class in than governments form to allies collecting in and majorities parliamentary acquiring in interested more become to started party the that then already was it toDamodaran, According ‘government’.” word by the replaced was ‘state’ the word and ‘party’ word by the replaced was ‘class’ word “The 1985: 355): (Damodaran cretinism” as parliamentary be categorized only can which “a course it on put fact in Unity” Democratic of Democracy a “People’s by government” Nehru anti-popular and “anti-democratic the replace to in order Election General in the participate 1951to in itsdecision turn: opposite an making was party the practice out,in points Damodaran Ironically, 1984). (Banerjee inadopting difficulty had later decades two leaders Naxal ultra-left ofthe many even that time the at opinion unpopular -ahighly independence” “fake represented it since be overthrown to was of India government Nehru independent, newly the that stated which theses, Ranadive “ultra-left” notorious the adopted even leadership party In1948the following. significant a kept party the leadership, Communist of the mistakes tactical many the despite since organizing union-based grassroots, its in lay clearly movement Communist ofthe strength the that argues He next. the to blunder one from stumbled phase early its in party the Moscow, from Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 57 Union Soviet the with completely themselves identified they how about 40s and and in the1930 defended Communists Malayalee that line Stalinist the about critically talks He it. in experiences his about open unusually however leaders of the Communist party and early the of staying one was K Damodaran (1974). Ali Tariq to withas told Damodaran’s K probably is the party (the CPI) till his death inaccount 1977. insider’s critical yet sympathetic He well-informed, most the -- is process in the emerged that challenge Naxal the –and Communism electoral to “euphoric” from transition the Regarding third. the to second the from shift the describe better chapter of this part second the in those phase, second the to first the from transition the on particularly light throw chapter this of part first the in biographies the Whereas 2008). (Williams economy” “lagging Kerala’s with concern agrowing with onward, mid-80s the from especially characterized, became moreover It compromise”. class “institutionalized calls (1999) Heller Patrick that type organized of the even militancy, class declining camewith state, development a model as Kerala praising report 1975 its published had Nations United as the just mid-70s, the from phase, third the that agreed generally is It 2005:310). (Menon terms” own its in culture regional defined and power assumed leadership upper-caste a largely “as aside bebrushed to inequality caste of issues cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and This This wasrecognizable to me party members since most Communist I interviewed – in Kerala including convinced that criticism of Stalin’s policies was mere CIA propaganda. the critical and well-read ones - still defended Stalin as the hero of the Soviet Union and were 57 . He also describes how by following the dictates the by following how describes also . He Electoral Communism and its critics 109 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist that timeargues the at party the within debates in involved intimately was who Damodaran, reason. by any justified was it believe not did and pain with split the on back looked however, interviewedstill, I members party Communist Many 179ff.). 1982: 60s (Nossiter early in the split Soviet Sino- the with moreover, intensified, became disagreement The Front”. Democratic “People’s a of favor in and Congress against campaign uninhibited an wage instead orto line, Maoist the countering and Front” Democratic “National in a bourgeoisie national the within elements progressive with ofallying strategy the adopting Nehru, with agreement Union’s Soviet ofthe line the follow to over whether a disagreement as following understood generally was It party. Communist of the followers ordinary many of morale the to blow another CPI(M),was influential more the became Kerala in what and CPI the into party, of the split The 1964 359). (1985: inside” sick felt really homeI I returned when night “that Ali, Tariq with conversation in he recalls As effect. that to a speech make to spot the to travel Damodaran made even and it justify to decided government Communist the action, the condemning of instead momentum, gaining was that Struggle”) “Liberation so-called (the campaign anti-Communist the strengthen and police the alienate to Afraid Party. Socialist Revolutionary by the led “Kollam”), (now Quilon in a factory of owner the against struggle union a trade in participating workers three shot police the when victory, election the after soon came Communism ofelectoral reality the with disgust own Damodaran’s says, Damodaran As speeches. to restricted were Communists of the promises ofthe many that discover to started turn in Workers Minister. Chief Kerala’s from than rather Centre the from orders their receive servants civil where set-up federal India’s within changes of effecting limits the was however, discovered, soon inpower Communists the What workers. ofthe struggle the for support their emphasizing constantly election, the after weeks the in speeches maderadical Communists as the and capitalists and landlords for was victory the uncomfortable how saw as they increased says, Damodaran joy, Their describes, Damodaran As party. the boosted still politics parliamentary to turn the election, Kerala first the after immediately Yet cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and others to open and bitter disillusionment.” bitter and open to others in and passivity to turned jubilation cases some In off. wear to began government a communist having of novelty the awhile after and happened new radically “Nothing 357). (1985: ruling.” are We leader. is our Namboodiripad in power. is ourgovernment because us attack you daren’t “Now streets: the on policemen telling workers illiterate poor, hearing remember I class. working the in strength and of pride feeling atremendous There was demands. their satisfy would government new the that deeply very felt They jubilant. were main, the in peasants, poor and workers the victory the after “Immediately Electoral Communism and its critics 110 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist of age. years over 70 reached having away, passed he 2007, 17 November on Kalan, Iinterviewed after a year About 2005. May in Kalan Vinodkrishnanwith and Namboothiri by anthropologists interview an of excerpts transcribed with is supplemented interview My Academy. Folklore State Kerala of the president as achievements artistic Kalan’s of in honor rally organized a CPI(M) at spent I of aday evening and afternoon late the in Thrisillery, in home 2006 athis of Spring the in him with had I interview an on based is Communism with engagement his of portrayal biographical following The force. a progressive as party the appreciated genuinely who him like workers adivasi were life,there allhis party the Communist of a follower and uncle CKJanu’s K Kalan, of P life ofthe sketch following the in see will we As perspective. this with agree however, workers, all adivasi Not workers. the over dominance his maintain him may help that patron influential more as the appears party as the soon as slogans Communist empty and flags red Independence, of time at the flags Congress time: the at outfit political convenient most bethe to happens whatever in dressed everytime on stage, appearances several makes question in workers Paniya of the landlord The members. orex-party non- amongst common increasingly become Nadugadhika - Baby J by K liberation and slavery Paniya on play famous the In areas. rural remote, more the in concentrated be to as they tended period this in workers adivasi many of lives the in appeared first party the that hence was It party. the off from splitting factions Naxalite of rise the to led later which areas, rural the into further out reached members party Communist which in aperiod also were 1960s early the Communism, of Chinese influence the Under 369). (1985: elections” win to “trying in simply engaged equally was leadership CPI(M) the observesthat Damodaran however, reality, In victories. electoral but revolution for not struggling was that CPI “Rightist” a“revisionist”, off from split had it claimed it that fact the to due was CPI(M) ofthe popularity the consequent CPI, the with stayed who Damodaran, to According CPI). the remained by what advocated option (the wing itsRight against of Congress sections progressive with byaligning so do to or whether CPI(M)) became the bywhat adopted strategy (the League Muslim the and Sangh the Jan as such parties other with by allying Congress break to whether more seats: win to tactic best over the developed Thedifferences cretinism”. “parliamentary on a consensus had basically argues, he camps, two of the The leadership cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and electoral alliances”. electoral of question the to related differences internal was split the for reason major “the (1993) - the advent of Communism in the region is parodied in a manner that has that amanner in is parodied region in the of Communism advent - the (1993) Electoral Communism and its critics 111 CEU eTD Collection 4.1.1 Kalan had already achieved a position of leadership in his community. It was hence under his henceunder was It community. his in of leadership a position achieved already had Kalan 1960s, of the course the areain the into inroads making started party Communist the When eventually, after a lot of “training”, becamethe “training”, a lotof after eventually, accepting his ideas and seeing him as a reformer. He was made assistant to the to assistant made was He a reformer. as him seeing and ideas his accepting started elders the over time and beings” human “separating practices such against was Kalan upon. frowned be to used – inter-marriage area the in others and Kurumas Paniyas, Adiyas, between practices” “untouchability of kinds all exist to used there me, to explained Kalan As elders. the with confrontation in him brought community of his practices traditional the becoming to extended soon ambitions His find. he could orposter of paper on anyscrap skills his practicing read, to himself teach gradually to able moreover was he him, gave landlords ofthe one textbook ofaMalayalam Because Kannada. and Coorgi, Malayalam, of Adiya, command existing already his of top on Tamil learn to him allowed This children. family’s the after look to him assigned time the at for working were parents his landlords Tamil the teens, his reached Kalan When omen. as amiraculous elders by the interpreted was he recovered that The fact young. very still he was when once ill gravely fell Kalan Also childhood. survived sister, elder his one, only siblings, eleven of Kalan’s that fact the from be glimpsed can was life enslaved this hard how Just cattle. landlords’ the graze to forest the into be sent would meanwhile The children animals. wild against the crops guard to night at again fields the to return often to father his for only evening, late to morning early from working parents his remembers Kalan times: several Karnataka property, at the annual festival ofValliyoorkavu festival annual the at property, their were if they as landlords, amongst exchanged being of workers then practice the still was there year: that to attached were they local landlord of whatever fields the worked parents His Kalan was born around 1930 around born was Kalan Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 58 K cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and 59 60 There was no custom of registering births in his community at the time, or of counting age exactly – The festival survives till today, held in March every year, but has now become a mainly “religious” Itwasthen the called Coorg, as British called it, and people often still though officiallyit thatway call ALAN hence the vagueness around his exact age. hence thevaguenessaround his exact festival- cum-fun fair (I visited the festival with people from Kottamurade -- see chapter 5). --seechapter Kottamurade withpeople from thefestival fair (Ivisited cum-fun festival- this district is now renamed Kodagu. now is district this We were sold and bought!”. and sold We were then. were things how was That my parents. bought Coorg in landlord some “Probably : “P EOPLE BECAME HUMAN BEINGS WITH BECAMEHUMANBEINGS EOPLE moopan 58 in Thrisillery in Wayanad as the eleventh son of an Adiya family. Adiya an of son eleventh as the Wayanad in Thrisillery in (headman), though initially his critical attitude towards some of some towards attitude critical his initially though (headman), moopan 59 . During his youth, Kalan moved to Coorg to moved Kalan youth, his . During C OMMUNISM of his community. Electoral Communism and its critics ” moopan and 60 112 in CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Congress with compromised having to admits even He violence. avoiding of strategy practical a and people “his” andto party Communist the to of loyalty combination a flexible is actions his through line red The AGMS. the and Communists between even and Naxals, the and Communists parliamentary between parties, Communist the between – Left the on movements between differences the emphasize to disinclined also remarkably is Kalan activists, other to Compared point: this emphasizes Kalan with interview Vinodkrishnan’s and Namboothiri from excerpt An accomplishment: astunning achieve to party the allowed that this precisely it was as appreciates heactually landlords, their and himself like workers both included party Communist the that The fact intentions. good their of sign a rather but hypocrisy of asign not party Communist the in involvement landlords’ considers he him, after generations Unlike landlords. former his about affectionate oreven forgiving who in his 1960s,Kalan, the until Wayanad in existed that slavery of system the experienced youngerconsciously never who Janu CK like workers adivasi younger to years contrast in surprise, To myinitial did experience the systemme, told asKalan Indeed, himself, is much more inclined to be Vinodkrishnan, and Namboothiri told Kalan Communism, to attraction his About party. the in involved becoming started community the that leadership cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and I experienced in my life. Former landlords and we have changed a lot!”. havewe changed and landlords Former my life. in I experienced moments touching most the oneof was It me tight! hugging me by congratulated sixties the in of struggles a series led we whom against landlord same the member, Party asaCommunist Council District ofthe representative as the elected I was when later years Many land. the occupied settlers new when our help sought landlords the Often disposition. afriendly having were landlords the and workers agricultural the struggles, long the after even this, to due Probably struggles. the to turn violent possible any from refraining – were workers agricultural asthe well as landlords the – sides Both violent. turned never landlords the local against by us led Thestruggle forefront. the in was I Wayanad. in workers agricultural adivasi the for wages better to led that our struggle Itwas my own. including landlords, local the against struggles victorious led we Union”] Workers Agricultural State “Kerala CPI(M)’s [the KSKTU the of banner the “Under retaliation]!”. [in us on committed atrocities any labor without ofbonded system the end “to being.” ahuman into man turned Communism of communism. advent the with beings human here became “People acommunist”. becoming was my community member of Every too. members my community reaching was society classless ofapossible idea the me Through party. communist by the led movement peasant the of worker active an becoming I was soon and regularly classes party attended I a Communist. turning was I Russia about heard I stories by the Impressed too. Wayanad in system be asimilar to going it is soon that us told The Communists school. attended child every where and fed well is everybody where rich, and poor no were there where Russia called country a about told Wewere poor. and rich be no would there which in a society for working were they that knew only We us. for meant communism what before knew “We never Electoral Communism and its critics 113 CEU eTD Collection Kalan became apprehensive. As he told Namboothiri and Vinodkrishnan: and Namboothiri hetold As apprehensive. became Kalan that state the against struggle a violent of favor in were they that he realized when only was It me, told he Naxals, the About repression. police haveinvited ofwhich both AGMS, the of approach confrontational the and attacks Naxal over the preferable was violence avoiding of approach party’s Communist the – circumstances personal his of because – and view his in that stressed yet movements, indigenist Naxal and towards sympathy heshowed Kalan, with my interviews Throughout Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 61 Vinodkrishnan, and Namboothiri to narrated Kalan As sections”. weaker “economically the for housing providing and laws, reform land labor, implementing bonded abolishing effectively 20-point a grand civil rights and harassing (and often disappearing) Leftist activists, including Communists, with suspending of a policy combined government the when (1975-77) period Emergency the during cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Congress was not Congress was only in power at IndiraGandhi level the national as prime (with but minister) also in only came to power again in January 1980. January in again topower only came Congress). Kalan’s CPI(M), adamantly opposed to an alliance with Congress,Minister ofwas Kerala in the betweenopposition Nov 1969and and March 1977 was AchutaChief parties. numberofand other League, theMuslim Menon the CPI, with coalition though in Kerala itself, of the CPI (in coalition with ‘Naxalites’. For me they were just comrades of the KSKTU.” the of comrades just were methey For ‘Naxalites’. the of sympathizers were radicals young these that time the at aware not was I radicals. the joined members my community of Some them. joining us on They insisted struggle. militant a more lead to wanted who comrades party just were us with working cadres party young the us For union. the within group revolutionary a more of rise the of little knew we but KSKTU of the leadership local in the emerging was Dissent sixties. late in the direction a new in moving was landlords the with had we “The conflict Party (Marxist)”. Communist of the supporters strong remained all We orme. people of my priorities political the altered way no had however The benefits too. this add I should village. my in people my for 32 houses allot to government state then bythe made was decision urgent An community. my for support some provided it But experience. painful a was mine to inimical views preaching people with platforms Sharing was. I Perhaps The party might have thought that I was practicing a clandestine political me. against activity. action disciplinary any took never party the of this, because Perhaps clear. was conscience My party. ruling the with myassociation to reacted Party Communist the how bothered never I decision. government the glorifying party Congress of the leaders state with stage the shared Ieven slavery. abolish to government of the decision of the consequence the about people my telling household to household from moved I memories. similar had Itoo experienced. actually had they things of the memories tormenting had members community of my all Almost centuries. for landlords local to slaves were community me.My to overtones personal deep had The decision in India. communities Adivasi to regard with Party Congress the by labor, made bonded abolish to decision the decision, ahistoric with do much to had It them. with cooperate government localpro- with platforms shared I Party, of the consent the “Without 61 sympathizers. It was not very comfortable for me … but I had reasons to reasons I had but … me for comfortable very not was It sympathizers. Garibi Hatao (“Eradicate Poverty”) campaign including the promise of thepromise including campaign Poverty”) (“Eradicate Electoral Communism and its critics 114 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist me, told Kalan As jail. in were they when activists AGMS the of rescue the to came former how the emphasizing instead AGMS, the and party the Communist between time the at existing differences the downplays He Muthanga. at violence the caused that by Congress a“betrayal” with combination in infiltrations “foreign” it were stresses Kalan struggle, Muthanga the and AGMS the About me: told proudly instead and him with my interview her in condemned never Kalan Janu, to comes it When imperialist powers to destroy Communism in India”. the by “fostered been have well may general, in parties Communist repress to excuse an as state bythe used was which by Naxals, promoted violence the that articulate, members CPI(M) many heard I had a suspicion repeated Kalan state. inthe party of the annihilation political eventual and army Indian by the suppression brutal provoke to only 1951 1948 and between uprising Telengana led the militants Communist where Andhra, in party Communist the of experience Kalan says his reasoning in this also drew on the lessons provided (in CPI(M) networks) by the me, told Kalan As innocence. of his convinced became they gowhen him but let questioning for in Kalan took police the this, to connection In point. some at landlord local the targeted even and the Naxals join did however, community, Kalan’s in Others cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and had to keep my commitments.” keep to had I always. her near onmy presence insisting was she and ill seriously was She mother. my for but them, joined have definitely Iwould leading. he was cadres of young group the for and leader the for sympathy genuine Ihad Wayanad. in movement ‘Naxalite’ the rolein active an take me to requesting of times, number a my house to came encounter, a fake in police by the killed was later who Varghese, leader, Their them. to sympathetic was I still but for, opted Naxals] [the they means the about reservations had “I was not wrong. But it ended up hurting human beings and finally it was we [the finallywas we and it endedup hurting humanbeings Butit wrong. was not it Though mistakes. some were there But needed. is Struggle wrong. was it saying not I’m happened. Thestruggle organization. an formed and listen didn’t They dangerous’. is countries foreign help –involving oftheparty gradually, up with locally, to buildit Weneed between. in come will others organization, the control to be able not will ‘we her: told I Janu. with on early movement] of aseparate formation [the this discussed “I party”. the with grew She things. of aware grew she struggles, in participated she when still, but education formal no Had talented. was She it. in working started and party the usto small grewupshecamewith then.Whenshe Shewasstill forwages. struggles our in participated father Her us. with Shegrew her up. brought who party communist was the rose uplikethat.It timeawomanfromourcommunity thefirst was for “It awareness”. political memy gave that party all, this After itwas party. the I becamefullyinvolved in Ididtoo. [the CPI(M)]. organization parent the with remained Naxals] [the them for sympathy had who “Many Electoral Communism and its critics 115 CEU eTD Collection that the revolutionaries broke with the CPI(M) to form the CPI(ML), which eventually came under came eventually which CPI(ML), the form to CPI(M) the with broke revolutionaries the that revolutionaries who had untilinspiration then been members of the CPI(M).Communist 70s)parties Thisearly(late60s, altogether. Naxalite early movement its took It was only during parliamentary-oriented the with part to and system” the thiswithin “working reject to rising struggle from Naxalbari by the inspired became who those also were there Yet name. party’s the in made had the people sacrifices and the be to as itused it of uprisingimage the to dearly too held they orbecause it, on depend come to had status and livelihood their because direction, a different in it push to able of be to hoped they because party the with continued Many 60s instead. 50s and late the marked May 1967 disillusion increasing 1940s, the since already active been had movement Communist the where in of Kerala, areas semi-urban coastal, in the communities Naxalbari such For 1960s. of the course in the there scene the on arrived it when movement Communist the in involved actively became who regions more peripheral Kerala’s in workers dalit and (in adivasi ofthose typical is story Kalan’s West-Bengal), led by armedit: rejected Kalan effect, that to award rupees a50.000 him award to decided panchayat other When ideal. a “Communist” as this appreciate come to having and nothing absolutely upowning grown having minimal, were moreover ambitions material His be spent. would the other activists I will discuss shortly, never got involved infights over how recognition from the party and beyond in his role as role his in beyond and party the from recognition of alot gaining while Yet Mananthavady. in elections local the in candidate a as him fielded Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist block of anentire president Adiya first the of becoming in terms networks, CPI(M) through successful, highly Hewas party. Communist the with conflict personal any into got also never form. Kalan art Adiya a particularly celebrating time same the moopan as a that recitals expressive performances, Gadhika his used he Academy: Folklore State Kerala the of president and call it) newspapers as artist”, folk (“tribal performer as aGadhika role his and his leadership position in it.The most explicit wayinwhich he managed this wasperhaps in community Adiya of his aspirations and needs the with Communism his connect to managed he which with flexibility tactical and practical the to related partly least at seems which life, his all member a loyalparty remained next, present I story whose activists the unlike Kalan, cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and the burden of any luxuries over me.” over luxuries of any burden the without hut in this a Communist as dying prefer I luxuries. afford cannot Communists orroof. wall proper no had that dwelling myhumble with comfortable was “I conducted a strike at the secretariat”. the at a strike conducted Trivandrum, to went we arrested were they When it. protested who party] Communist Kalan had become expert in, to introduce his community to Communist ideas while at while ideas Communist to community his introduce to in, expert become had Kalan members reasoned Kalan was to have a proper house as house a proper have to was Kalan reasoned members ********* panchayat panchayat Electoral Communism and its critics president, Kalan, unlike some of some unlike Kalan, president, when in 1990 the party panchayat panchayat president and president money 116 CEU eTD Collection in February 1970 in what only recently only what in 1970 February in shot was He revolutionary. revered most the become to was waves, migration post-WWII the in Wayanad to Idukki from had migrated that family Christian apoor from man ayoung Varghese, Areekkal group Of this groups. reading organizing and Malayalam into works Mao’s translating started Kerala, in back later, and West-Bengal in radicals Communist with contact into got who CPI(M) the of leader asecondary formerly Narayanan, Kunnikal 60s around late the in emerge did group small a Yet 361). (ibid: paradise” a “policemen’s virtually it make that Kerala of controls social traditional and pattern settlement “rurban” also the but Kerala, in campuses of college even character “provincial” the poor, rural the for securities minimal some least at creating in reforms of Communist success the state, the in of tribals number small relatively the to related was Kerala in of Naxalites number small the (1982:359-60), J Nossiter toT According 1990). Ajitha (see movement the of ideologue main the of daughter the Ajitha, famously most odd woman, the men--and or so a hundred about ofonly one small arelatively though even a following, gained Naxalism where ofWest-Bengal outside place first bethe to was Kerala Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 62 intervene to Center the provoke otherwise would Naxalbari that CPI(M) the of part the on of fear out --partly in West-Bengal government CPI(M) by the revolt Naxalbari ofthe repression violent the parties, Communist of theparliamentary out grew CPI(ML) the Though movements. Left New later the with continue would that tendency a 1984: 98)– (Banerjee enemy primary their as capitalism, than rather state, the confront and zones” “liberated create out to set Tsetung” of Mao “Thought by the guided Revolutionaries”, “Indian The machine”. state the “smashing than rather power state ofcapturing practice “illusory” its for party the condemn to members party Communist erstwhile many encouraged had revolt Naxalbari the 1967, By autumn peasantry, the of potentialities revolutionary the of rediscovery its in and, revolts peasant of Indian outgrowthan ofatradition sympathizer,Banerjee, theCPI(ML) Sumanta was critical leadershipof CharuMazumdar.the According most totheCPI(ML)’s importantchronicler and cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and 63 A repetition of sorts of the post WW I scenario of the Left in Germany where the split between social The policeman who shot Varghese, Ramachandran Nair, was himself in fact a Communist sympathizer the rise of fascism (e.g., Priestland 2010; Harman 2003). 2010;Harman Priestland (e.g., offascism the rise unityagainst necessary revolutionaries becamesohardened itunderminedtheir that and democrats the superior officer who ordered the shooting, Lakshmana, to life pullimprisonment. the A triggerfictitious rendering on Varghese in anda fake finally “encounter”. in 1998 publicly On October revealed 28, 2010, the a storyspecial of how CBI he wascourt forced sentenced by his superiors to be the one to provincial governments” (1984: iii). a few in participating quo by status of the management efficient the to down settled had which India, in Left parliamentary of the sclerosis ideological the to a challenge “posed 62 -- hardened the split into one of outright hostility. ofoutright one into split the --hardened 63 was confirmed to be a staged “encounter”. Before “encounter”. beastaged to confirmed was Electoral Communism and its critics 117 CEU eTD Collection 4.1.2 certain nostalgia Vasu remembers the early days of the Communist movement: Communist the of days early the remembers Vasu nostalgia certain a area. With of his workers weaving the organizing in active party, Communist undivided) still (then of the member aformal became 1947, Vasu In party. Communist the joined had now Congress in once activists radical all when a time up in grew Vasu Congress, with his party since he died in 1948 of a snake bite; Krishnan 1971). Thoughof turn Vasu’s electoral the father experience to lived never used (who leader to Communist beearly an Pillai, Krishna by the up set in Kerala, factories textile first the of one Factory, Weaving Trust Commonwealth 5 his completed had 15 he of age the At family. working-class Izhava, of an home ancestral the 1930 to in born British), the under (“Calicut” ofKozhikode city coastal northern the in up Vasugrew Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist V 2009. inAugust home inKozhikode his afternoon in rainy a long on him Iinterviewed Bindu, K C anthropologist fellow with Together of Kalan. that than party the with experience different a rather exemplifies ofKozhikode, town native his in strong already was it when 1940s the in party Communist the joined having life, his see, will we As attacks. ofthese in one participated here, to Iturn life whose activist the Vasu, Ayinoor landlords. notorious and stations police on attacks of successful a number organized had group –the demise its to months within – leading movement Naxalite upthe round to order the gave time, the at Congress) with coalition (in Minister Chief and CPI leader senior Menon, Achuta cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and On the wall: Lenin, Stalin, Phule, Ambedkar and Bhagat Singh ASU Harvest of the Varghese drama, interesting though sharply criticized by former Naxals, is provided in : “E VEN THE by C P Surendran (2006). P Surendran by C Vasu at his home his at Vasu th standard and started working at a factory near to his home town: the home town: his to near a factory at working and started standard CPI(ML) BECAME SATURATED WITHUPPER BECAME SATURATED introduced to the “scientific socialism”of he was of twelve, age the at Already library..”. that to much so owes area whole “this university was this local library”, he recalls: “My movement. Communist of theearly part were that plays theatre political and lectures, public libraries, village ofpublic system of the education isvast since he made intensive use informal his school, primary of upper year first the attained ever only Vasu Though famous Basel Evangelical Mission in1874. Electoral Communism and its critics - CASTE TENDENCIES An Iron !” 118 CEU eTD Collection oppressed in society were: in society oppressed most the whom of unaware entirely seemed CPI(M) the since sense made CPI(ML) the To Vasu, alsoatleastwas oneKurichiya (more “forward” STcommunity) among them. Janu’s though there “tribe”) ofmost (CK and them were Adiya Naxalmovement ofthe then part were who Thirunelli in base Varghese’s around living laborers bonded the mostly was it recalls, alreadyandunderground youngerat AsVasu than wasten him was years workingtime. who the Varghese, comrade meet to got finally Vasu 1969 by and formed was CPI(ML) the 1967, of end the them.By to bepaid rice to of measure stood outsideagreater demanding asworkers house Varghese’s work (thenstill under the CPI(M)’s banner): the landlord’s family was trapped intheir In 1967, there ever first In the was in cash. As Vasu recalls of what he experienced in Wayanad at the time: the at Wayanad in experienced he what of recalls Vasu As cash. in bepaid to wages for pushed and further went they system, labor bonded of the end the fearing landlords from resistance lot of a under later, -- workers the to paid (rice) of paddy amount the increase to fought they first, At area. of the workers tribal the mobilize labor and bonded against fight help to 60s late the in Wayanad to went Vasu countryside, the organize move to call to Mao’s Heeding Narayanan. Kunnikal by available clandestinely made thought, by Mao’s inspired more became soon but CPI(M) the with identified 1964, Vasu in split party the When Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and a mistake”. was It areas. rural the – never organized being were all and workers coir where Kannur, Calicut, Allepey, like cities was it Kerala, in Even beorganized. to ones the were Bombay places like that thefactoryworkersin mind Theyalways had in any suchinsights. lacked really party Communist Indian the But countryside. the from them surrounding by cities the capture and areas rural the on concentrate to you had that wrote He 1920s. the in areas rural in working been had himself Mao because idea, some had party Communist Chinese The Asia. in conditions the to it adapting without interpretation Marx’ with directly working workers, urban on concentrating always were “They police would do nothing.” do would police suicide…the it was pretending body, upthe tied then and workers ofhis one murdered had who Brahmin this was there Thrisilleri in me how told Varghese Comrade incidents. such many There were murdered. were all, they at resisted they If time. the “adivasis were really living under the torture of the landlord’s the of torture the under living really were “adivasis credit for this party but it’s a totally different party”. claim the [the atthebase.TheseCPI(M)] daysthey workers -- butwith caste elements upper- some with -- sure itself proletariat the by party aCommunist was It Alleppey. in worker acoir was himself Pillai Krishna and movement Communist the of bases the were unions Thefactory movement. library by the formed been had who people the white-collar workers used to consider them consider to used workers white-collar and intellectuals Petty-bourgeois then. movement Communist the formed actually who unions, in organized proletariat, the was It Calicut. in our factory in unions forming he was Kerala, in movement Communist the of father the Pillai, Krishna “Comrade gherao -ing (encircling) of a landlord in Wayanad as part of part as Wayanad in landlord a of (encircling) -ing chetta [lower-caste ruffians]. They were They ruffians]. [lower-caste Electoral Communism and its critics goondas [henchmen] at 119 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist landlord’s the with seen were members CPI(M) where inNilambur incident an recalls Vasu onNaxalites. in attacks involved became members as CPI(M) turn a vicious on took however mistake ideological an was What cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and loosing his mind entirely: avoided just only Vasu died. eventually mad and went Francis long. for so confinement solitary in put were who compliance, CPI(M) with murdered been had who Naxalite of the son the Francis, heand only Itwas confinement. solitary in mostly in jail, years a half and seven spent and police by the tortured badly was Vasu killed. were ofwhom two area, the in landlords cruel most the of several on by Varghese, led attack, -- the action in theThirunelli participation his for time 1970, this in again police by the captured but attack Kuttiyadi the from acquitted was Vasu station. police Kuttiyadi the attacking from them dissuade to faction Narayanan’s to travelled he had when was 1969, in police, by the captured Vasuwas time first the Ironically, directly. police the attack to in wanting all wrong it had belief, Vasu’s in Narayanan, attack. that counter to prepared be they should in, comes police the when then, only – landlords ofthe defiance in land claim to people organize to be to ought strategy main the that argued Vasu understanding, this From Kerala: in been has always –and issue primary the is land Vasu, to According water: and of ice metaphor the recalls Vasu caste, and class between relationship the To explain stations: police attacking of tactic the with agree however, not, did Vasu Narayanan, by Kunnikkal led faction CPI(ML) the Unlike times. several Wayanad from Calicut to fleeback to had and life his on attempts of CPI(M) target the was even himself Vasu flag. a red held members party this feudalism that is the main enemy we need to fight”. to need we enemy main the is that feudalism this is It everything. hewas land, the owned Brahmin the since and land through was earlier existed you way only road…the the on Brahmins for way making I remember “Even it”. on act not would so they and upper-caste were leaders many it, understood they if even Or it. have understood few unfortunately but Communist, by any understood be clearly should This water. like is class ice, like is – caste move can it fluid, is water whereas frozen and solid is ice substance, same arethe “both ideology”. Brahminical the ideology, its and ofcaste issue this discussed really never Communists TheIndian enduring. and so oppressive it makes what and feudalism Indian of basis ideological the here.It’s caste through expressed is difference class – India in issue main the is caste that And system. afeudal is directly here experience we what that mind his in it about clear not was He then. wrong was Narayanan believe still I attack? to whom on strategically concentrate to need we when but enemies are both course Of there. amistake made Narayanan Ibelieve feudalism. was it believed leaders Naxalbari the whereas imperialism was enemy main the believed “Narayanan goondas killing a CPI(ML) comrade, Chandy, while one ofthe one while Chandy, comrade, a CPI(ML) killing Electoral Communism and its critics 120 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist adds, Vasu And, as well. paid got households upper-caste in working women adivasi that and money in paid were workers adivasi sure making and ofupper-castes, cattle the herding than rather school attending started ofAmbedkarites: those from differed usually interpretations his though Ambedkar reading started also He Ambedkarites. of anumber to became closer in 1981and leftit Vasu as itwas, CPI(ML) in the lost faith Having jail: in while Ambedkar read having not heregrets back, Looking the CPI(ML): from entirely faded had party Communist of areal attributes essential two Vasu, to According it. to destroy Naxalleadership the amongst his children planted personally he had that claimed: had time the at officers police ofthe one ofwhat Vasu reminded leadership new the Seeing by upper-castes. become led again had astonishment, his to which he encountered, CPI(ML) new the with disillusioned became however also Vasu hours. evening inthe CPI(ML) the rebuild to helping by day, shop wood and umbrella an running aliving made and again in Calicut down settled Vasu 1977, in released finally When cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and the implementation of the until then merely then until of the implementation the enforcing respects: several in important was CPI(ML) original the think does Vasu back, Looking be talking aloud to the moon…many comrades in jail went mad”. went jail in comrades moon…many the to aloud be talking Iwould of jail out I came when how remember relatives my Still, insane. becoming from me prevented that alive, still was he me, when brought my brother books the was “It Caste’ ‘ ofAmbedkar, volume first the about often talked “we similar.” very are they analysis of their terms in -- but end the in government democratic bourgeois a imagines Ambedkar – solutions on totally diverge Ambedkar and Mao India. in done already had Ambedkar in China, did Mao What have done. should CPI(M) the work the analysis, class the did Ambedkar fact In agent. a British as Ambedkar portraying CPI(M), by the brainwashed completely I was point one at is because It CPI(ML). the with again happened that Savarnas by the leadership of the stealing the have resisted could and a clearperspective gotten have would I have, would I If amistake. was “That used!”. be should it be correct, just not should Ideology weapon. be astrong should it used, being not is that ornament an be just not should Ideology usage. practical for good and enemy of the as that as sharp be sharp, should ideology good A ideology. the was there secondly, But theproletariat. longer no was it of leadership: question the “Firstly, tendencies!”. upper-caste these with saturated became CPI(ML) the even CPI(M), the with as happened, is what this …and ideology feudal especially and ideology [upper-caste] Savarna oppose I do but castes upper- against nothing have upper-castes….I graduates, university with filled been had it jail, in were we while but party beaproletarian to supposed was “The CPI(ML) ….only a Marxist will understand that this is actually a class analysis of India”. analysis a class actually is this that understand will aMarxist ….only proclaimed end of slavery, ensuring adivasi children adivasi ensuring of slavery, end On the Annihilation of Electoral Communism and its critics 121 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist landlords: the against actions the during also timid were comrades His timid: more much as comrades his were who adivasis the heremembered since women the of militancy at the surprise his explains Vasu inspiration: of source new needed a much- found hence Vasu adivasis, organizing started Janu 1990s, ofthe course the in When success. areal come to not could struggle the Kerala, leave to excuse an find to happy only was where capital environment an Yetin workers. the for payment retrenchment secure least at to hoping demonstrations, by workers’ accompanied strikes, hunger many held leaders GROW other the and Vasu protest, In action. take to “helpless” legally was party the that arguing then and all at promises such denying first backtracked, however it did, it 1987, when In elections. the have won would as it as soon re-opened factory havethe to had sworn CPI(M) the government, aCongress-led under struggles, earlier GROW’s during since CPI(M) the with collision direct in himself found more once Vasu demands, workers’ to reaction in factory the down shut had management the after 1987, In (GROW). of Workers Organization Rayons Gwalior the union, workers’ independent of annew, initiators chief the of one became 1983 Vasu in 1988), Raman and Mohan (see management with colluding were INTUC) Congress’ and AITUC CPI’s the CITU, CPI(M)’s (the unions trade major all the that fact the to reaction In Kozhikode). (near Mavoor at Birlas, the families, capitalist wealthiest ofIndia’s one by owned factory fiber and pulp rayon polluting environmentally and exploitative notoriously a at employment secure more and wages better for of workers struggles ongoing the with involved becameparticularly Vasu CPI(ML) the leaving after struggle, class to committed Still cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and clear the Naxalite movement would fail … yet some things it achieved”. it things some yet … fail would movement Naxalite clear the always was it a mountain, against astone like was It our demands. 10% of least at to in gave they other the with but certainly, hand, one with us beat They land. or your head your choice: the given were they when mouths, their open to afraid too were landlords the when implemented, reform land was came Naxals the when Only places. many in reforms land the ofimplementing way no was there 1970s, the Till fell. government the itthat to saw landlords and reforms ofland issue the precisely raising were they When tigers. paper yet not were Communists the when 50s late the in a time, was “there nervous about sitting next to me.” to next sitting about nervous so were they because Varghese towards then and other each towards moved they slowly slowly, mebut to next sitting were by me….they threatened felt me.They to next sit to want not did they first me-at to next sit them made had Varghese of me. sides both on sitting were men adivasi young Two eat. to around sitting were people twelve or ten some houses, Adiya’s ofthese one in was die…..it would who and live would know who didn’t supper….we of last go…wetookakind readyto were justgetting we action, Thirunelli-Thrisilleri the in behave: to used men adivasi how “I remember it!”. believe not could a demonstration…I hold to women adivasi seventy with Calicut cameto she when time first the for Janu noticed “I Electoral Communism and its critics 122 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 64 us!” for really cared who person [CPI(M)] “CPM asthe mistaken, ironically him, remember mostly and attack Muthanga the after home his at stayed had who interviewed, I whom workers Paniya the of stories of the many in up turned Vasu level. ideological a better to lift it hopes to and Janu’sstruggle support upon himselfto it Vasuhastaken insight, From this movements: reform caste early of the mistakes the repeating of risk the runs Janu Vasu, to According movement: library the with did he like self-educated become to chance the had never Janu regret, To Vasu’s movement: a bigger of part becoming movement Janu’s envisions Vasu Yet According toVasu, movement: Naxal earlier of the fruition the was movement Janu’s he realized that then was her.It to talk to went hence Vasu struggle, land a in her participation of because Calicut in jail district to the brought was 1993 Janu in When cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Perhapsthey thought Vasu was a CPI(M) member because of the portraits of Lenin and Stalin that decorate Vasu’s home – as he himself explained to me, these were simply those that were “available”. were that those simply were these me, to explained himself he –as home Vasu’s decorate emerges and comes to Calicut to lead seventy women!”. seventy lead to Calicut to comes and emerges leader awoman which from community same very the is this imagine off…Now ran away straight ofthem two firing, was there moment very the and men, four were shooting…there some was there point some at and men of Adiya agroup with “We were in the mode ofproduction”. mode the in changes as reform seesocial to need you .. set-up social same the in progress material have cannot you but only– progress material for going were movements “these this clearly in her mind…”. Janu has Iamnotsure theideologyculprit is ofBrahminism. mostimportant but the state by the institutionalized been has oppression This sector. agricultural the in caught all are they of. And worst are the adivasis ..and British the under than poverty deeper arein people of the most but now millionaires poverty….there’s in lives India 70% of but muchstruggle too without lives middle-class lead and land get actually will people some that sure maybe Janu land. get adivasis some if be solved not will landlessness of Theproblems possible. is not it but means peaceful through of land question the solve you can thinks –she struggle the for base ideological of an more lacks “She guns”. by be broken only can caste see that and of feudalism also–shewillseetheironshield movement Januwillbepartofthat that time Mao and from comes emancipation their that understand people that atime come will “There movement.”. Naxal the to credit give not to as way in some brainwashed is – she know doesn’t she now Even movement. Naxalite the of daughter ideological the is she know not does herself “Janu Iknewhim!”. Kalan], jail.’ myuncle was in P K called [not Kalan ‘Aperson said, me jail, with in do youknowthem?’She adivasis eight were ‘There said, I said! she ‘Thrisilleri’, from. came she where her first “I asked Electoral Communism and its critics 64 . Through his . Through 123 CEU eTD Collection 4.2 and eventually become the principal leader, besides C K Janu, of the AGMS. His life exemplifies life His AGMS. of the K Janu, C besides leader, principal the become eventually and later a decade altogether behind Communism leave to only a Naxalite became Geethanandan joined. now, to I turn story whose activist the Geethanandan, that Naxalism of wave is this It start. the from it to opposition in moreover was itself, party Communist ofthe outgrowth an being than rather movement, Naxal new This troubled. deeply ideologically moreover and factionalized, more the all peaceable, more was that one yet began, organizing Naxal of cycle anew prison, from released been had as Naxalites imprisoned ofthose many finally by 1979 when and passed, had Emergency the After 2007: 116). Menon and (Nigam 1970s late the in motto its as revolution” social for “science slogan the adopted even that KSSP) (or Movement Science People’s the to particularly and Kerala, in movements Left New towards moved Left radical ofthe more Emergency, the During 1975. June in rule Emergency of declaration the with draconian became which repression, increasing faced it though continued, also activity Naxal degree, Toalesser 2009). ”(Patil is caste] [that monster this you kill “unless be possible would reform socialist no true that warning Ambedkar’s propagated Patil,explicitly Sharad leader, Theparty’s 1993: 67). Ambedkar(Omvedt Phule and as such leaders dalit early of theories and ideology Marxist of mix salient most the perhaps advocated which Party Communist Satyashodhak the arose also there home region), (Ambedkar’s Maharashtra in Again 114). Nigam 2007: and (Menon Ambedkarism and movement Panthers Black American the by also but hand one onthe by Marxism/Maoism inspired Mumbai, in Panthers Dalit influential the were There currents. ideological other from ideas of avariety with manner in aheterodox it combined and ofit critical also were yet Marxism by influenced often still were that groupings appear: to started India in Left” “New the be called may what of beginnings the reaction, In 312). 2005: (Menon again” yet deferred transformation of social prospect the with despair of a mood in “began 1970s, in the suppressed brutally been had Naxalism of wave militant most and first the after period, post-Naxal the Leftists, many For Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist P especially adivasis. As he observes of his “adivasi comrades”: and lower-castes amongst of egalitarianism vestiges the in rather but dogmas imported in not inspiration its finds and caste on squarely focuses that of Marxism interpretation an for need of the convinced more ever is meanwhile Vasu movement, Janu’s with interactions cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and OST feasting person as neighbors. Amongst these adivasis, that will be impossible”. will that adivasis, these Amongst neighbors. as person feasting a and person astarving have you can non-adivasis themselves…among enjoy and week that work for go not will group whole the of money, a lot make a few If communities. other see amongst you don’t that them among ofsharing idea this is there now “Even - COMMUNIST CHALLENGES COMMUNIST : T OWARDS CULTURE AND CASTE AND CULTURE OWARDS Electoral Communism and its critics 124 CEU eTD Collection 4.2.1 Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 65 againstbut struggle the class the struggle becameconvinced Geethanandan that gradually not CPI(M), of the praxis Stalinist continuing of the CPI(ML) the within critique rising a with combination in Engels, by described societies tribal traditional the of understanding his Through organization: of social forms moreegalitarian pre-modern, on Morgan like by ethnographers work ofthe discussion his and of Engels work in the interested particularly became Geethanandan of caste. those particularly oppression, of forms non-Western ignored that Marxism of versions “Western” with dissatisfaction adeepening was there by Maoism, inspired still and, question caste the on time the at on going were debates fierce CPI(ML) the Within job. dull but stable in a Thiruvanathapuram in Office General’s Accountant the at years for worked Geethanandan CPI(ML), in the involved while and college, After Kozhikode. in a policestation on attack an in involvement his for Emergency G activist and learn ofhis political dilemmas. an as action in him see to chance more the all had however I biography, personal his discuss to afternoons long for down sit able to being not home and at Geethanandan meet to opportunity an Missing farm. Aralam at CPI(M) the with conflicts elections, municipal Muthanga, following cases thecourt between: in came always of care to take he had politics urgent since his home visit to chance the got Inever Unfortunately entourage. ofhis as part days many I spent 2006 and 2005and in occasions onnumerous Geethanandan interviewed I politics. “cultural” towards and class from away took, “ex-Naxalites” such many that trajectory the cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and joined a Naxal faction led by K Venu by K led faction a Naxal joined the CPI(ML) thatto attracted wasbecame he Biology, Marine studying of was he 70s, while early growingthe in days college his influence During Kerala). on (Northern Malabar in party campuses Communist of the astronghold of Kannur, district around India at northern the in Thayyil 1954 in the in family dalit well-to-do arelatively to time.born was Geethanandan In 1979, he During the early, exploratory During of phase my research in Kerala in 2003, I K interviewed Venu, notorious EETHANANDAN abandoning Marxist analysis altogether. analysis Marxist abandoning to them, according and, “globalization” of aspects fordefending friends CPI(M) my amongst There are places where this still remains”. still this where are places There commune. original an like was it possible, not was exploitation where set-up primitive this analyses time…he the at there were who anthropologists many read “Engels : “I HAVE TOTALLY REJECTED SUCH STATIST POLITICAL SYSTEMS STATIST POLITICAL SUCH HAVETOTALLYREJECTED 65 , theCPI(ML) ideologue who had been imprisoned during imprisoned been had who ideologue , theCPI(ML) Electoral Communism and its critics ” 125 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 66 adivasi culture -- even though some activists in the dalit networks still eyed him with suspicion and dalit on based ideology an to turned increasingly instead and anymore grouping Marxist any follow to not decided had Geethanandan disbanded, was faction CPI(ML) Venu’s After activist”: “dalit a he became when time the was this 2007 in in interview an In place. taking from unionization at efforts united any prevented that hierarchy the in lower considered those as status formal same the begetting avoid to hierarchy caste the up higher of those part the on the desire and taboos caste itwere Often work. this more in all the Geethandan bother to started however ideologies ofCommunist dominance the to due caste of problem the to attention of The lack of workers. emancipation the tofurther strategy as akey revived being CPI(ML), the pressure under was, and Communists early the of program a core been had that a strategy – sector informal the in workers on organizing concentrated he where Thrissur to moved He activist. afull-time become to General Accountant the job at his left and woman (upper-caste) a Nair married had time by this Geethanandan inter-marriage, through patriarchy and caste break to the need on conviction political his with seems, it line, In altogether. faction CPI(ML) his disband to decided Venu K that prevalent so become with a generalMarxisttheory had malaise and “castequestion” on proceedhow the to on opinionof 1991,differences eventually, by and in 1987 CPI(ML)of the another factional split yet counterpoint.led Thesedebates imperialist to anythan itsAmerican better hardly imperialist”, “social indeed become countryhad thatIndianrevolutionariesconfirmed the the to Union Developmentswithinon the Soviet including theCPI(ML). reverberations inIndia, had strong the calls for reform that emerged with Gorbachev as General Secretary of the Soviet Union,by reinforcedrevolutionaryThese were thoughts aim. which betheprimary oughtto centralized state cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and “Class struggle “Class isn’t enough”, interview with Geethanandan by Ka Shaji in caste-based. The Left never had any satisfactory answer to caste-based problems.’’ caste-based to answer satisfactory any had never Left The caste-based. mainly was them against discrimination the because one a class-based than rather approach a caste-based required problems Their dalits. poor extremely were with I worked Thepeople activist. meadalit made Thrissur in activities union “The trade Tehelka 66 , the major caste-conscious news journal in India today, Geethanandan claims Geethanandan today, India in journal news caste-conscious major , the Electoral Communism and its critics Tehelka 12 March 2007. 12March 126 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist states: other in than problematic more as Kerala in dalits and adivasis facing situation seethe came to even Geethanandan movements, Communist impotent increasingly but conscious ideologically of Kerala’s as part up growing radicals many As people: indigenous world’s the in on living society primitive original, of the “culture” egalitarian the namely ofideology, opposite the he considered what more in ever faith his placed gradually Geethanandan of theAGMS, “brains” strategic the considered widely and while grouping political intellectual avery from emerging though Hence says, AsGeethanandan communities. adivasi and dalit in on live that forms social egalitarian more the from organically rising ideas their culture, this of representatives but him for ideologues so much not were Ayyankali and Ambedkar as such Thinkers outside”. from by anything not ideology, by any not culture, “our calls he by what inspired became He culture”. dalit-adivasi traditional the culture, our “in particularly and forms, social earlier in structure state any within ofhierarchy problem recurrent of the negation the saw society, primitive of study Engels’ on relying indeed Geethanandan, systems political statist methat to explained Geethanandan enemy, main asthe state of the view CPI(ML)’s -- the left having –though with line In have to claims however, himself, Geethanandan Engels”). with always is head “Geethanandan’s me: told activist dalit one (as Marx over Ambedkar appreciated really he extent what as to cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and other states”. other in than scattered -more of life ways and our culture in ofit here because scattered arevery we education… modern this Communism, this factors, many ofso because “it’s No…”. culture? this created who intellectual particular a there is this, created Who things. allthese assimilate to like would we and countries different and areas different in scattered is heritage our cultural and traits “our cultural our culture.” from emerges it ideas, the created who intellectual, the is who spokesperson, the is who exactly say cannot you But people. many also…so leaders tribal Ayyankali, there, is Ambedkar there, are leaders Renaissance course Of systems. higher the reject and deconstruct land….to our culture, our our life, use We can that. more than nothing – ideology the is that life, of way our own Wehad background. cultural ideasand cultural butaboutourown is not work aboutintellectual “it way.” another go to wanted I thatstructure, negate to wanted I structure. power and hierarchy graded this allhave they orders, statist all they’re state, a Marxist or state, Brahminical a state, a capitalist it’s whether state, capitalist the like Just Party. Communist “like the Brahminical state, or thecaste structure…this same thing is there within the systems”. political centralized all are they because movements Communist such rejected “totally Electoral Communism and its critics 127 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist upon it took who clergy Leftist-inclined more radical, by the up taken Kerala, in networks Christian through spread to started Theology Liberation which in time the also were The 80s 2009). Steur 2007:107; and Nigam (Menon services public cutting on conditional loans of financial acceptance the and Zones Economic Special of creation the in rule neoliberal with compromises “necessary” its justify to used Left, parliamentary the amongst reigned “realism” Kerala and Bengal West in yet struggles popular in participate to continued units local presence, marginal a but had Left parliamentary the where states In dilemmas. ideological own their to succumbing gradually were that Naxal groups fragmented few the than enemies class greater were there remember to manage leadership CPI(M) the did moreover, barely, Only communalism. such as representing seen inevitably at all–were or not Hindutva –whether mobilizations based Identity- 177). 1998: (Surjeet forces separatist” and communal “divisive, for Left parliamentary the amongst by a“vigilance” characterized were BJP, of the rise the with 1980s, the Instead, Left. New the to beopen to willing was however, faction, Neither guard. old orthodox an versus leadership reformist ofa factionalism escalating the and crisis existential growing class struggle through made been had gains social whatever over defending investment business byof attracting workers and agenda apolicy prioritize to “poor” the of side peasants.on the stand to claiming those allowing discourse The flexible CPI(M) and obscure an for it mistake easily 1980scould inthe time first the for Communism in the 80s encountering those was born, was Naxalism of wave second the where Kerala in a campuses college party in the urban of the midst milieu radical the in force living a still was ideology 1970s,Communist in the If of a strategy: and ideology any without basics, on the acting simply as he sees toamovement him attracted praxis, political from distant increasingly seemed they where a context in especially debates, ideological endless with frustration Geethanandan’s politics: “strategic” than rather more spontaneous towards leading there, stronger usually by is inspired heis culture original the claims Geethanandan states, other to Travelling cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and That’s the only idea behind our politics and our actions.” and our politics behind idea only the That’s idea. the That’s live. to right the for front political a have To live. To our concern. That’s live. to right the for arefighting who people just it’s ourmovement, movement, “This different.” totally is ….it may come[laughs] question ideological some only immediately…then react they instance, for Nadu Tamil in outside, But nothing. do and debate we question.. ideology The ideology. the about immediately think we Kerala, in ourpeople to happen things When [happens]. nothing and…nothing, debates such having question, ideological that or this about thinking be will we Kerala] [in here But spontaneously. immediately, be reacting will eh…way…they rational particular, in this be thinking won’t “They ************* Electoral Communism and its critics 128 CEU eTD Collection interviews) for naïveté. for interviews) my own during it I experienced (as speech Janu’s C K characterizes that irony and wit the mistake reader make the not should book, the from Iuse quotes few the in style, translation this that warn should I xii). 2004: Bhaskaran in (Shankar world” “inner Janu’s is he believes what to close staying of hope the in possible”, language simplest “the he calls what using including oddities, of stylistic a number introduced Shankar Ravi translator, the as also frustrating is text the Yet source. invaluable an is conversation, taped from transcribed entirely is of which text Janu, K ofC a biography I lendfrom that her youth about stories with combined Thrissileri home in her at her with Ihad interviews long two from composed next, herstory here to turn I 1990s. the in in Kerala emerging movement adivasi new the of leader becomethe to on went who Janu, CK “captured” Solidarity when the time was 80s, late the PKKalan, uncle ofher words In the projects. Solidarity’s and Hilda of both target the became increasingly population” “tribal the classes”, “backward on focus an initial From methods. pedagogical of Freirian help the with power” own their “mobilize and poor the motivate” and conscientise, “educate, founders) its of one of K Narayanan, words the (in to aimed 1982on from that (Wayanad), Mananthavady in based NGO an of Solidarity, founders of the that is also It (Wayanad). Battery Sultan in Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 67 Lukose Jacob of trajectory opening up in the 1980sopportunities new the embraced instead and altogether church the left to networks, church the continue their activitiesquo within status of the defenders the with conflict into coming after them, of Many clergy. the by founding NGOs. on influence a definite had Theology Liberation Wayanad, in This Also areas. coastal the to confined is for instance not was but the1988 1984to from the state) in community oppressed historically (another fisherfolk of Kerala’s agitation of the support in performance its of peak the reached theology Liberation poor. the “conscienticize” and empower to projects welfare organize to themselves cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and 69 68 There are interesting parallels between the trajectory of Kerala’s fisherfolk/fishworkers activism activism and of fisherfolk/fishworkers parallels between the Kerala’s trajectory There are interesting Certainly in the context of the general stereotypes on adivasi women as “innocent” and “childlike” and “innocent” women as adivasi on stereotypes of thegeneral the in context Certainly Iinterviewed Mr. Lukose of Hilda and K Narayanan and Joseof Solidarity in 2005. Sebastian the movement frames justice and ecological issues”. ecological and justice frames the movement economic nationalism now dominate over liberation theology, class, and gender discourses in fishworkersthe Baviskar, too–as Sinha, Philipway and (2005:232) observe, community, “[c]aste, and them to focus on adivasi rights.prompted AGMS the justas rights onfishworkers’ focus unions parties’trade to political promptedA shift from “class” to “identity”the was moreover apparentAGMS. amongst the The fishworker’s independent organization, the KSMTF (formed in 1980), for instance leaving out upper cases) was a good idea. a was outuppercases) leaving ( pawam Mother Forest, ), I do not think using this odd style of translation (strange spellings, overly simple words, published in 2004 by the Malayalee social activist Bhaskaran. The latter, the latter, The Bhaskaran. activist social Malayalee by the 2004 in published 69 68 who in 1987 founded Hilda, the “High Land Development Agency”, Development Land “High Hilda, the 1987 founded in who Electoral Communism and its critics 129 67 CEU eTD Collection 4.2.2 associated the party with the landlords in the area since party members would often visit them visit often would members party since area the in landlords the with party the associated always had me, she told Janu As to middlemen. work the of supervision the leaving a year, times jenmis Janu’s mother and father, a father, and mother Janu’s Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 70 J cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and were organizing there in 1967-68. As written in Bhaskaran (2004): in Bhaskaran written As 1967-68. in there organizing were Communists radical when period the exactly in Wayanad, in Thrissileri, in born was Janu C K PROCESSIONS ANU Before the Naxal movement became active movementbecame the active Before Naxal in Wayanad, it was to common for landlords pay adivasi and stones were removed from the rice. from removed were stones and the amount measuring beforethechaff theirsharewasby Another way they triedtoincrease favor. the landlord’s middlemenagricultural to laborersuse bamboo in kind vessels –in a quantity that of rice were - rather imprecise than in cash. and It wasof common, course moreover, adjusted for in their But I have never seen him” (Bhaskaran 2004: him”(Bhaskaran 36-67). But Ihavenever seen him. with closely worked had who our community in people were There Verghese. for forced him to use a litre usea to him forced heard that he objected to the to he objected that heard have I this, from Apart better. us understand to huts our in live to trouble the took Verghese that heard I directly. people of our problems the understand to keen was and our community in people the to close very was Verghese that heard Ihave anything. forest, the land, the tree, of anything—the afraid not are also us amongst appeared who migrants new The fear. without man a was Verghese chaff. without grain the a to a visit paid Verghese that heard have I […] Verghese about openly speaking not into frightened were people [Communist] the and police bythe of interference because Still, this. against worked Verghese like people that heard have I [..] time] the labor at ofbonded system against agitations led had Verghese that heard I of fear. amount some with mixed also was it him for respect great had our people Though area. Thirunelli the in beactive to used Verghese that heard have I tones. hushed in talk to used They leader]. Naxal the [Varghese, Verghese about talk adults heard Ihad young, very I was “When : of Thrisillery, a formidable institution whom only showed himself in person one or two “T HEY WERE JUST USING PEOPLE TO GET VOTES AND LENGTHEN THEIR LENGTHEN TO GETVOTES AND PEOPLE USING HEY WEREJUST C K Janu at her home her at K Janu C ” 70 moopan measure. For all these reasons our people had great respect great had people our reasons these all For measure. jenmi jenmi [landlord] in Thrisilleri and forced him to measure out measure to him forced and Thrisilleri in [landlord] (chieftain) of the community, both worked for one of the one for worked both of thecommunity, (chieftain) measuring out wages in bamboo measures and measures bamboo in wages out measuring rice soup with more water ( morewater rice soupwith there was enough work, all they got was got they all work, enough was there when seasons in even period: this during experience everyday an was Hunger family. the supporting longer no was and re-married had her father since time the at her wages collected who her mother, with fields the in work to returned Janu town, nearby a in teacher a female of baby the after looking a maid nineas to eight at age worked having After were”. them – “I assumed they too were with the party - and most of Electoral Communism and its critics vellam ) than rice, which had which rice, than ) vallipani Party kanji-vellam , our [the 130 , CEU eTD Collection partake of the castetaboos:bothered “hewould by one not he wasof them, used behave asif her, to taughtwho activists genuinelyJanu remembers teaching.Solidarity whowere committedtheman how to Sibi, of learn helpedherwasthearrival readingandwriting, however, reading. Whatreally to them at the time and trying to use the pamphlets brought back from party processions to practice recalls liking better. She - were processions area forparty from the people usually totake - them Janu’s experiences with activists of the KSKTU (the CPI(M)’s agricultural union) coming to visit learned anything through the project and in a way this was logical since logical was this a way in and project the through anything learned fact in Nobody teaching. actually in than organization the from allowance her claim to able being in interested bemore to seemed girl - the and write read to learn to wanted she as - frustration the same caste as the samecaste the from a girl and area the in campaigns literacy organize to started Development, and Education Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 72 71 KANFED sixteen, around was she When school. to went never however, herself, Janu hostel. a tribal in live and town a nearby in school attend to taken was sister Janu’s 80s, early the in emerging literacy tribal for projects many of the part As wages. higher get to atool party the considered – she promises economistic purely its for Communism know came to Janu’s Instead, Communism. with associated Janu something not were countryside the in ofpower relations transforming of ideals Varghese’s experienced. personally never she past a distant is itself party Communist of the spirit radical and early the Janu for dalits, and adivasis elderly for Unlike about. really were songs and slogans the ofwhat time the at idea no had she though them liked she says Janu experiences, those Of wages. and hammers, and sickles about fields, in the toiling workers about played songs itself, meeting the At voice”. a loud in all“echoed they that slogans shouting worker aparty with flag, a red flying a lorry in to Kalpetta taken were They out. day of a prospect by the exited day, that to work went nobody how describes she (2004), by Bhaskaran recorded text the In capital. Wayanad’s Kalpetta, in rallies party’s Communist ofthe one join to chance the had time first the for Janu fields, the working days her spending was she when of fifteen, age the At minds. of people’s back the in constantly was of starvation fear The forest. the in tubers for by digging besupplemented to cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Translator’s Translator’s odd style of not using upper cases. For some reason transcribed as “Canfed” in Bhaskaran (2004: 22). (Bhaskaran 2004: 23). 2004: (Bhaskaran Literacy. one Literacy. lamp lightthe of to was verydifficult slushyit whole fields the dayinthe “after toiling kanji 72 would just feel like gulping down something and curling up to sleep”up to and curling something down feel wouldjust like gulping and jenmi chakka , a Warrier, sometimes came to give classes after work. To Janu’s To work. after classes give to came sometimes , aWarrier, curry made in our hut” (in Bhaskaran 2004: 24). He would 71 , the Kerala Association for Non-formal for Association Kerala , the Electoral Communism and its critics 131 CEU eTD Collection As Janu emphasized to me in this respect, this mein to emphasized Janu As Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 73 Also, “tricks”. full of language incomprehensible dense, a in them to talk to and speak workers adivasi let to not best their doing were members party seemed It meetings. party of agenda the onto way their found ever – hardly living of conditions or better land agricultural like – hercommunity to importance of issues herthat to seemed It classes. party about uneasy increasingly felt however Janu withthem(Bhaskaran2004: 30). partystood feeling the the leastleft with at were people that so increase”, paise afifty with settled be would wages in increase rupee one for “Agitations compromise: a was there make sure – and members party themselves often – in question landlords the with anagreement come to and up step then party the would time, election around just usually slogans, enough chanted and songs enough sung had they after Only work. the do to elsewhere from laborers in brought or not, member party Communist a he was whether landlord, the while work goto to people forbid and strike a organize would party the and wages higher demand to want would they be when would variation Another for. asked they wages of the part least at got workers the make sure would that settlement a behind-the-scenes orchestrate then would leaders party some Eventually, party. the to publicity more give to order in and employer the of favor in settlement the postpone but agitations support would party the up, pay to failed employer an manner. When predetermined in arather yet wages, honor to employers forcing in instrumental indeed was party the says Janu back, Looking party. the through tackled be to were believed still time the at she – problems faced they problems general the more about more and learned process in the and communities adivasi other to travelled regularly she so, Doing others. to learned she what propagating and classes and meetings party attend regularly to started also she KSKTU, the in active increasingly became Janu As confident wasshe aliteracy enoughtostart othersandbecome workerherself. teaching a while the night.After deep till in a slate wouldshe practicewritingon enthusiasm, Janusays his ourand meagernessof (ibid.) wages” ownstarvation about the our “tell us moreover, cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Something I Something expectcertainly Janu told with Bhaskaran a hint of irony – note the words “our (Bhaskaran 2004: 35). 2004: (Bhaskaran us…”. about cared really never it elections, win to voters just were people our party, “To the Party, the the our area, In class. aParty camefor He [Namboodiripad]. EMS seen Ihave issue. the evade just would The Party committee. upper their consult to had they that say would men Party the Party the in us to relating issues raised we whenever “Somehow, jenmi and the estate owners had grown to merge into a single giant tree” giant asingle into merge to grown had owners estate the and Electoral Communism and its critics 73 Enticed by own ”. 132 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist According to Janu, me: told Janu ideology party’s the in figure would adivasis how on Reflecting power”: and “money of side the on standing always party the find came to she incidents, other such and ground burial the on Reflecting strategies. malevolent and hypocritical just as see to started increasingly she her youth, in party the of of goodwill gestures benevolent considered had Janu what 1991, in party the leaving After good. for party the leave to decided she Instead, compromise. to not decided and party the to opposition in directly herself found Janu farmer. the of favor in issue the settle to tried party so the and be crucial would vote farmer’s the which in forthcoming bank cooperative local of the election an was there out turned it farmer: ofthe side the on up stood party Communist the claim, their supporting than rather point, Atthat confirmed. was land the to right their until leave not would they insisting station, police of the front in squatted women Sixty ground. burial their to right the demanding station police the to marched they however, free, still were involved women the Since action. the in involved men adivasi the arrested who police, the in called crossed path the land whose farmer the this, At ground. burial reach the to able be to a path cut to and it taking from others prevent to ground burial the around fence a build to them enticed by others, encroached also become lay buried ancestors their where land the of seeing prospect the with combined this, over Anger land. the appropriating legally of andways municipality to the connections better with by settlers over taken increasingly was huts their around crops subsistence cultivate to using been had people that land the even while wood or fire food collect to forest the enter to people restricting been increasingly had Department Forest the that fact came the of this Ontop dead. their bury to left land have no would they soon that feared others and it, Janu around land onthe settling started elsewhere from farmers When theirs. it traditionally considered but land the to papers ownership official have the not did They ground. burial as a used Adiyas that Thrissileri near ofland piece a over struggle the me, was told she as party, Communist the with break Janu’s for The trigger cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and occupying land, made some agreement, started getting land, then they formed the AKS the formed they then land, getting started agreement, some made land, occupying by struggles conducted Mahasabha, Gothra Adivasi the formed we When itself? time getlandthat try to setupin2001] adivasiand wing [the CPI(M)’ AKS they formthis didn’t it.Why from I resigned But party. the of amember Iwas Yes, … manner. honest for mypeopleinan partyIcouldneverdosomething the within that from “I knew processions.” their fill us to use could they so poor, and starving us keep to party of the interest the in was It of extinction”... threat all“under medicines, the beat we are,how we poor how on papers research writing academies, arts folk creating at great is “The party all”. that’s ofrice, kilo free another announce would leaders some starving, were we When slogans. their for ornaments the songs, rallying of their ingredient the just uswere like people and landless workers party, Communist “To the thudi [drum], on how we dress, what plants we take as take we plants what dress, we how on [drum], Electoral Communism and its critics 133 CEU eTD Collection consider alternatives. consider to committee by agovernment advised been having despite Lavalin, SNC company Canadian by the replaced generators hydro-electric of a number hehad price excessive an against deal: a shady brokered CPI(M), the of Secretary State became even later who Vijayan, Pinaraji government, led CPI(M) the in Electricity of asMinister which in scandal” “Lavalin the became notorious Most 108ff). 2007: Nigam and (Menon party Communist of the leaders ranking high- – including all levels at ofcorruption degrees by unprecedented marked also 1990s were the Indeed locallevel. at the funding public appropriate to schemes – shady by appalled – or in entangled becoming cadres party ordinary even of likelihood the increased moreover funding Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist of importance The increased (ibid.). “decentralization” through orchestrated welfare social from state of the retreat ona conditional was that loan Bank Development Asian an negotiated Minister as Finance had Isaac, Thomas campaign, the of ideologue main the that emerged it when moreover light optimistic less a in be seen to came campaign decentralization whole The 108). 2007: Nigam and Menon (see party the within leadership reformist and new guard old orthodox the between fights factional increased also it Yet projects. local concrete towards narratives grand from away move to keen and ofcentralization critical were that movements Left New many by optimism with greeted was plan The 2002). Franke and Isaac (see planning village-level decentralized, in experiment as anovel launched Campaign, Planning People’s the to due itself reinvigorate to be able would CPI(M) the that a while for seemed had it 1990s, early the in changes.Initially, the embrace to unwilling those against turn to started moreover, and, grotesque become to operatedstarted party the how of reality the and party the joined they which with ideals the between gap as the off broke finally party the to loyalty whose longer, for party the with hadbeen who be others, would there party theCommunist with parted had Janu after 2000s, 1990sand the In me: told she As alternative. Communist the of demise the namely AGMS, of the rise the for reason the about explicit is Janu cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and many times over the years…. Otherwise they would not have done this.” have done not would they Otherwise years…. the over times many so power lost and power in was that party A party. the leave would people that fear for Mahasabha.” theGothra have formed not Iwould Otherwise processions. their lengthen and votes get to people using just were time, that at they, that experience bitter of the out Sabha Gothra form to Ihad Sabha. Gothra the have formed not Iwould struggle. that of leader a as come have Iwould forland, struggles conducted and AKS an formed movement Left the had party, the in I was when time the At Mahasabha. Gothra the formed have party, Iwould not Iwasinthe[Communist] while AKS “If theyhad formedthis panchayat ************ -level decision making on the distribution of distribution on the making decision -level Electoral Communism and its critics 134 CEU eTD Collection 4.2.3 still only a child, that he first came into contact with the Communist party: Communist the with contact came into he first that achild, only still S 3). chapter (see movement indigenist ofKerala’s emergence the in a landmark formed that there place took that struggle Kurichi the for famous colony, Sachivothamapuram home in party longer. the to I loyal remain to Soman interviewed led moreover, also, parents his for made movement Communist him the on difference revolutionary bay. The at it two kept party Communist mainstream ofthe occasions, strength the in where 2005of Kottayam. region the in influence Naxal less was there since party and Communist the from 2006, whileaway aturn into disillusion his visiting translate to Vasu for than Soman for longer took it Yet Vasu. him at hisof that to similar more ishence party Communist the with experience His consolidated. heavily been already had party the where a region in and age a younger at so did Soman but party the joined Wayanad in Kalan P K when time same the less or more was It old. years fourteen only he was when mid-sixties the in party the joined had -- Soman movement early Communist Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 74 here I consider trajectory whose activist last the for Soman, straw final the were that practices of corrupt kinds these was It cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and OMAN George Kunnath’s (2006) biographical analysis of a Communist Dalit in Bihar forms an interesting comparison to Soman’s story. toSoman’s comparison aware of things yet then. They took him to jail that day, and released him two days later. days two him released and day, that jail to him Theytook then. yet things of aware theoretically not was I party. Communist the Ijoined revenge In policemen. many of mymom. Therewere infront policeupmyfather, beat the akid,Isaw “When Iwas Soman at his home Poster: Ayyankali : “I F YOU ARE GOOD AT CORRUPTION around their dwellings (the “ (the dwellings their around land the to right the workers landless granting laws enact to tried had government Communist first the after 1950s, late in the region the swept mobilizations of as awave and life ahard was area. It the in landlords large ofthe one of fields the by working meet ends making hardly landless, were parents His Kottayam. of vicinity the in family workers’ agricultural aPulaya, in 1951to born was Soman struggle by his parents to receive a piece of land, when Soman was Soman when ofland, apiece receive to parents byhis struggle of the time the at was It reformer. anti-caste Pulaya early the of Ayyankali, poster byalarge nowadorned is which of porch front the house, two-room a small in colony very in this lives still Soman 1962 and in there moved family The Colony. Sachivothamapuram in ofland a piece them yielded it Eventually struggle. the joined too 74 . From Kottayam -- with Alleppey one of the heartlands of the of heartlands the of one Alleppey with -- Kottayam . From , YOU CAN GET ALONG WITH THEPARTY YOUCANGETALONG kudikidappu Electoral Communism and its critics ” land), Soman’s parents Soman’s ” land), ” 135 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist words: their from different very something practicing leaders Communist other saw he when however, wane, to started enthusiasm This perspective. aclass from questions social different analyzing enjoyed had and thought Marxist of pupil enthusiastic an was Soman party, Communist the in days early his In and insight: commitment on but education formal on depend not did party, Communist the of days earlier in the that something moreover, is, It values. its and organization a political of survival the key to is believes, Soman clarity, Theoretical commitment: his strengthened a theory as Marxism that believes also he hand, other the On long. so for party the loyal to him made that distress their in family his supported had members party Communist that way the was it believes Soman back, Looking impression: strong a made and personally Soman “taught” also K Gopalan A leader Communist The early jailed: was father his when members party Communist from got family his support the remembers vividly still he context this In eat. to anything or in, cook to pot a even not with them leaving belongings, few family’s the also destroyed had police the up, beaten badly been father his had only Not hesays. kid, a young Soman as for traumatizing been had brutality The police cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and did nothing wrong, just participated in the struggle for land.” for struggle in the participated just wrong, nothing did He him. catch to came police the when day the myfather, to close sleeping been I had communist Ezhava can participate in the SNDP [the Ezhava reform organization] reform Ezhava [the SNDP inthe participate can Ezhava communist us.A do partywould punish that, the wouldtryto we Butin termsofcaste. if their own on organized getting started time same the at party the inside Nairs the and Ezhavas the But blindly. beliefs those followed we And Pulaya. the and Paraya the mobilize not could we communalism, spread to supposed not were we Because ST. the and SC the against working was party the apreposition such with fact in But ideology. the in believing party the to on We held our voice. welost then And party. the into infiltrate to class middle 1990 Butaround inclass the started terms. seethings “I usedto standard!”. fourth to up school to went he only and secretary… state wasthe KVPathroswho party, itwas the EMS in therewasapersonlike “Even when party.” the leave never will follower Awell-taught leaders. brilliant such has party Noother knowledge. his in Pillai Govinda P V cansurpass none And teacher. amazing an was He Pillai. Ramachandra S party, the in leader brilliant one was There me. taught leaders big of the all Almost … over India. all developments, political the all analyze They would [CPI(M]. CPM the especially does, party Marxist the as closely as issues analyzes ofthem none but India in parties political are many “There worker”. inferior an you as treated henever understand, youwould him with worked you “If inequality exists.” called nothing where Russia, like a nation visualized They a change. for longed party Thecommunist then. existed that situation political the was That that. do to ready was nobody times Those them. for food the carry to here came Pillai Ramachandra them. to food take to were Sowe jail. in the provided was food no times “Those Electoral Communism and its critics 136 CEU eTD Collection become so bitter with the party that he decided to leaveit: to he decided that party the with bitter so become however had he experience, whole the After him. against allegations corruption of the acquitted was Soman up, higher came from areport and enquiry of a commission appointed insistence, his on theparty, After retaliation. in corruption of accused was he himself and loose broke hell all set-up, the exposed and this about out found Soman When contract. the get to up set had they person of the servant the to belonging other the all and at exist to not out turned who person a from ofwhich one applications, three with came up foul and played however, colleagues, His beorganized. to was applications for call open an which for – project –alarge stadium of themunicipality’s therenovation for plans been Therehad members. party other some Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist member in thea CPI(M) as experience his was party the to loyalty of his in terms Soman for straw The last party: the over took -- upper-castes and – rich” “the is that identifies Soman problem The main CPI(M): the and Congress between anymore difference real no see to came Soman party, the with disillusionment his With more: moreand class working the to commitment its from deviating was party Communist the noticed already had he Americans, by the effect this to campaign sustained the on blames Soman which Union, of theSoviet demise the With unnoticed...” level in federal at the 1996: Congress with alliance forman to trying party Communist the see to stunned was “They he of Kerala, government Communist first of the dissolution the for becameresponsible enemy, political the main the and landlords and of capitalists party the was protectorsCongress that taught been always Having Soman. bother to started also practice and ideology Communist in of inconsistencies Other Congress! This is not something that cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and can go And I, who pointed all this out, am still living in poverty. … So my point is if andonlyif isif So mypoint poverty. … in out, amstillliving all this I,who pointed And now. are rich corruption the behind are who Those party. the I quit then And me. kill to they tried likethis.And the party cooperatewith I saidcouldn’t And change insociety. fora longing partynot I came to the “I said public meetings.” public other any in involved get to allowed werenot STs, or SCs Communist we, But programs. acknowledges them anymore. Their histories are excluded from the party’s history”. party’s the from excluded are histories Their anymore. them acknowledges nobody but community, our from martyrs are many There started. ruin its “then is avotebank”. atus all seewhenlooking they class–but poor, the the working itsold values with ofuplifting party is still Communist the feel poor makethe to issues some against apose take Theyjust parties. other with ofopinion difference no have they politically But redder. is flag party “The [Communist] Manifesto?!” the to changes some next…make be will what Iwonder relevance? its is what slogan, that itabandons Once class. working of the rule of the slogan its abandoned has party TheCommunist now. exists really Party a Communist called nothing that say “We can panchayat where he got caught in the way of the self-enriching ambitions of ambitions self-enriching the of way the in caught got he where panchayat membership, but longing fora membership, but longing Electoral Communism and its critics 137 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist never broughtup: CPI(M) –the AGMS Muthanga in theyears after the crippling morally and financially was that cases court of number of thelarge retraction –the AGMS the for adifference have made could that issue crucial the Yet adivasis. landless to land grant to need on the decided congress a party and violence the condemned Achutanandan leader opposition CPI(M) then the instance, for Muthanga, After support. of the genuineness the about convinced longer nowno he is Yet have been defeated. struggles these when especially struggles, for dalit-adivasi support proclaiming party Communist the encounters Soman turn, every At “themselves”: organize to - castes than rather “nations” he calls – whom adivasis and dalits for essential is it believes henow perspective, aMarxist from Even own: their on organize to adivasis and dalits for need the with concerned more becoming started hehas instead, activism dalit-adivasi in involved becoming and party the leaving in Yet ideology. party the against has nothing he that emphasizes still Soman back. years a few died father his when condolences their offer cameto party the from nobody father, his with stood had it as party the he joined whereas that notes Soman Bitterly, him: followed others him, preceded had colony his from people the of Many party. leavethe to decided 1998 Soman in 14 onward, age from party, Communist of the as member years 33 after Hence cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and like that. The party is totally degrading.” totally is party The that. like survive to want I don’t But theparty. with along you get can corruption, at good you are only one agenda, that is to demolish this group.” this demolish to is that agenda, one only has class ruling the understand to need We theoretically. ourselves organize to need we that For conscious. politically are we say we can gimmicks, hidden these of aware become Pulayan the and Parayan the when Only community. this shatter to are clearly deeds their behind Theintention that? doing he was Why faction]. Naxal [a War Group People’s by the organized it was saying astatement made Achutanandan happened, Muthanga when And thecases? withdraw to resolution the pass not they “Why did power.” havedecision we can means, those own we when Only nation. any for keyissue are the production of means The emerge. will theory a situation, the examine closely to youstart Once happened? this Whyhas forward. more much are They become. has gap the big see how now But our community. and [Ezhavas] SNDP the between a gap of less much was there earlier history, at look we “If AGMS].” of the organization sister political [the Sabha Maha Rashtriya the formed we discussions, many Soafter ourselves. for voting start should we thought, we Now, so long. for parties other for voting been “We have it]”. with stand they [that ideology its and party of the because not It’s way. ajob…that needs daughter land, of a piece get will they Maybe benefits. for only party the with are standing Most left. are families seven only Now member. a party be to used 3] chapter – see government CPI(M)-led then the against protest in struggle Kurichi the during suicide committed who man of the son [the brother Jayan’s Even are there. real supporters few Now party. the with all were almost colony, this in “Here Electoral Communism and its critics 138 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist worked view Thankamma’s in likewise, Samithi, Kshema Adivasi The CPI(M)’s me –told Porrotam of –abranch Sangam Samara Adivasi in the activist a leading Thankamma, call Iwill whom woman (dalit) Cheruma A government. the with agreements for searching it was as in this complicit as AGMS the saw and problem main the as constitution the and democracy parliamentary to commitment CPI(M) the see come to had they that fact the for except Soman, and Geethanandan ofJanu, those to similarities great showed Naxals adivasi and dalit contemporary ofthese Thestories instead. statements ideological wooden rather me with presenting up–often open or information personal share to reluctant usually were they reasons obvious for and around stay to them for safe nolonger was it felt they hour before an half about for them with speak only could I Usually difficult. much more was them with contact establishing by thepolice, wanted even sometimes and followed are they since that however is groupings these in activists of accounts biographical detailed give cannot I reason The scene. political the in place asmall occupy and today in Kerala function which Flag, CPI(ML)-Red the and Front), Liberation Adivasi (the Samithi Vimochana Adivasi the (Struggle), as Porrotam such people) 20 about than more no ofprobably (each groups splinter Naxalite and dalits Communism to indigenism that Ihave notyetwho discussed inthissection, which isthat of adivasis joined from shift the understand to relevant is that trajectory ofbiographical atype There is Naxal groupings in the 90s and 2000s. There are a number other. the not and of new land, one the giving by them isolate to attempts government despite together stand to them for need and the adivasis and dalits of commonality the emphasizes Soman vision, of this part As cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and proletarians.” of hegemony the Wewant society. in change asea brings that arevolution to forward look We exist. still problems these all of independence, years 50 after Even proletariat. the liberate be ableto not will It system. parliamentary the with hand in “hand Maoism”. and Leninism of Marxism, that is ideology Our constitution. the with shoulder to shoulder work to decision Sabha’s the Gothra with disagree Westrongly set-up. social existing sure that by following the constitution nothing ispossible interms of changing the made have power in governments The changes. radical be no can there constitution, the following that are convinced We system. parliamentary the in believe not “We do forward”. way only the is it but people these organize to easy not is It them. marginalized also have powers, imperial ofthese path the following India, in governments Subsequent land. of this owners the once were who adivasis] and dalits for [synonymous STs and SCs the out wipe to wanted powers imperial the “See *********** Electoral Communism and its critics 139 CEU eTD Collection develop their theoretical visions further. visions theoretical their develop nor propagate not could they why explain also ofcourse state by the illegalization consequent and approach action-centered militant Naxalites’ the although AGMS, the of popularity greater the explains probably – ideologically mistakes” “past processes and party Communist the from it distinguishes ideologically, also but practically just not clearly, that vision indigenist an have developed activists AGMS that –thefact vision in Thedifference support. and alliance greater mobilize help and large at Kerala in debated become ideas Their vision. new of a interms party Communist the with disagreement their articulate to need who intellectuals organic also but activists ideologically-driven just are not however Soman and Janu, Geethanandan, Vasu, like Activists action. (illegal) through primarily party Communist the with and disillusionment frustration their “articulate” they Instead Naxalgroups. these amongst on going innovation ideological belittle to seems there “teachings”, ideological abstract highly to holding moreover and state, a veryfragmented in being underground, operate to forced Being adivasi: asan struggle class of the bepart to him to meant it what him Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 75 Krishnan Arruvikal re-interpretaiton. political no with lines, hegemonic along entirely so did usually they identity, adivasi of notion the to close something on touch did interviewed I Naxalites the When saying away question the wave to quick was Sangam, Samara Adivasi the founded Porrotam why about her I asked when Thankamma, lines. these along questions with uncomfortable rather get generally indeed and orculture identity, caste, of issues mention hardly would interviewed I Naxalites contemporary the sympathizers, and activists AGMS to contrast stark In loans. farmers’ reclaim to used it documents the destroyed and office bank a local besieged Porrotam after time other the people; starving amongst food the distribute to Corporation) Supplies Civil State Kerala of the Store” Maveli “Mobile (a unit distribution food a mobile attacked had Porrotam after time one police: her tothe they reported – twice became violent then colleagues CPI(M) former with clashes enough, Soon reasons”. “ideological were claims she what for party the left 2000 she In leadership. CPI(M) under there adivasis organize to Wayanad her to sent 90s had late the in which CPI(M), the with breaking after only of Porrotam part become had She herself cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Whodays after my interview himwith was by contacted a journalist and convinced to stage an attack on me(see appendix). cannot remember all of them but there is a list…”. is there but of them all remember cannot I and traditions, customs different with groups, tribal different are 35 There “Adivasis? women, we are all the same, our party does not discriminate amongst human beings”. human amongst discriminate not does ourparty same, the areall we women, farmers, dalits, –adivasis, struggle proletarian of the apart are adivasis “Because 75 , the Paniya leader of the Adivasi Vimoshana Samithi, merely told me when I asked me when told merely Samithi, Vimoshana Adivasi the of leader Paniya , the Electoral Communism and its critics 140 CEU eTD Collection 4.3 party hence was easier for Janu than for those who had experienced the party in the days when days in the party the hadexperienced who for those than Janu for easier was hence party of the Rejection as akid. it joined whenSoman was it as youth, his in joined had Vasu one the from one different avery already was encountered Janu C K party Communist the Communism: with involvement their of nature the and timing on the depended - altogether Communism rejected they which to extent the –and groupings Communist of part as hopes erstwhile of their acrisis to responded activists different way The alternatives. lookfor to activists for trigger first the became usually that dogmatism ideological their than rather corruption leaders’ Communist it was that here show given narratives biographical the perception, Guha’s Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist ideologically both is that movement aCommunist with encounters here show present I biographies the 212), (2003: practice Gandhian “meaningful” their of because popularity their retained CPI(M), later of the Secretary General long-time and Minister Chief first Kerala’s Namboodiripad, EMS like leaders Communist ideology, Stalinist a“bankrupt” despite that argues who Guha, Ramachandran Unlike indigenism. towards and Communism from away turn to reasons ideological and of practical a combination show Kalan) all (except biographies their practice, stress others while ideology on emphasis more place activists the of some Though groupings. Communist orother party the within had themselves they experiences negative the were – debates political of general and party the of politics everyday of the aloof somewhat stand to choose could age his old in who Kalan all except – party the leave tonevertheless activists pushed What on. politics counter-hegemonic emergent an build to notion difficult and complex a highly fact indigenism, which is logical since, aswe saw inpart 2of thisdissertation, adivasi identity is in of positives by the triggered one Communism from away turn the was moreover, activists, these of none For Communism. to all had commitment strong the reveals of indigenism, convinced became they before engagements, political previous their into – anenquiry experiences current bytheir extent some to transformed memories their –with present the in them interviewing by even Yet possible. was engagement such which under conditions favorable as the internationally and nationally movements indigenous of emergent environment political wider the with activists, of these engagement indigenist of process of the set that trigger the itself AGMS the with encounter Soman’s or thought, Ambedkar’s with encounter Geethanandan’s Solidarity, with encounter Janu’s in read then could One forward. it take to determination right the with persons for waiting merely evident, already always was indigenism of basis onthe organize to need the ideathat the confirming merely stories at arrive easily could here, one presented activists of the trajectories biographical the into enquiring Without C cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and ONCLUSION and practically increasingly in crisis. In fact, contrary to contrary fact, In crisis. in increasingly practically Electoral Communism and its critics 141 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist terms. opposite diametrically almost in itself frame but party, Communist the critique just to not AGMS the propelled that dynamics polarizing this at look closer a take will I chapter, next the In “identity”. and beings” “human “caste”, and “class” “culture”, indigenous and “ideology” Marxist indigenism, and Communism between polarization inideological expression its finding also eventually movements, new the and party Communist the between hostility mutual into radicalized for, stood originally had party Communist the that struggles class of kind the reinvigorate to efforts as out started what that, than more party: Communist ofthe appeal of adeclining aquestion however, just, not was It power. on hold its manage to order in this on compromise to need practical its and class working of the onbehalf struggle class the leading of d’etre raison ideological its between torn becameincreasingly government, ofthe charge in being periodically through changes effect and elections for stand to decided having once that, party Communist ofthe appeal the declining in hence located is in Kerala of indigenism rise the for A majorreason activists. of other I collected histories life allthe in it did as biographies, these of single every in large figures party Communist The earlier. oppression their resisting and articulating already were people indigenous many which through organization, indigenist than other venues, alternative the to happened what ask not do and state the and people indigenous of interaction the on only focus that studies from emerging usually picture the from different rather hence here is discussed I trajectories biographical the from emerges that The story governance. neoliberal quo of status the with compromising of practically part directly less was yet through, going was CPI(M) mainstream the dilemmas of ideological kind same by the affected was that grouping Communist radical and a more dynamic of part been hehad since Janu it did than Communism reject to longer Geethanandan took it Likewise, class. working of the lives inthe changes unprecedented leading was that aforce represented still it cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Electoral Communism and its critics 142 CEU eTD Collection upper-castes “uplifting” their lower-caste brothers and exhibiting the typical the exhibiting and brothers lower-caste their “uplifting” upper-castes be to areassumed instance for leaders Communist connotation. – caste – naturalized implicit an acquired have notions particular how in place taking is ethnicization asubtler party, Communist ofthe side the From race. “black” original as the seen be to – come Izhavas) including (often defined broadly – adivasis and dalits while Hindus”) “caste (or or “Savarnas” castes” “upper- in for stand to comes increasingly party Communist the AGMS, ofthe side the From terms. opposed diametrically in other each see to tend moreover groups Both origin”. of “myths on different bordering ofhistory, interpretations different radically developed have blocks political both see, will we As culture. mainstream versus culture adivasi-dalit of one: “cultural” a but struggle ina“political” engaged isnot she that claim C KJanu’s in instance for be seen can this of aspects though one, political than rather ethnic as an interpreted generally is split the where point the reached not has Ethnicization characteristics. ethnicized certain on took even split political the see, will we As two. the between polarization ideological the magnified and own of its a dynamics on took party Communist the with interaction its emerged, indigenism of form the in challenge new a once how at here detail more in Ilook eachother. to contrast stark in two the position to hardened increasingly blocks political two the between competition and conflict how show however, chapter, this in discussed Thedynamics indigenism. and Communism between ambiguity of spaces lot of a left also histories life the politics, focused to “identity”- “class”-centered from ashift inclinationfor a strong show chapter previous the Whereas the activist biographies, incombination with widerpolitical trends,that Idiscussed in de Swaan emphasizes, “identification and disindentification are not each other’s opposites” each other’s are not and disindentification “identification emphasizes, Swaan de As Kerala. in groups two the between developing processes key some captures disidentification” of circles of “widening description (1997) Swaan’s de Abram Indeed, Kerala. in indigenists and Communists between of polarization dynamics political the analyzing to relevant also appear conflict ethnic study to developed notions that surprising not perhaps then is It 2010). (Devika “self-sacrificing” and sober men: caste Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 76 cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Projit Mukherji (2009: 93) even argues that “Marxism ..in [West] Bengal is no longer a matter of demonstrate this Marxism by acting in a certain way. ina by acting Marxism demonstrate this these contexts apparently simply“ these contextsapparently in Mukherjiargues, One can, identity”. amatter ofethnic instead become it has .. revolutionary praxis W IDENING CIRCLES OF POLITICAL DIS be CHAPTER 5 a Bengali Marxist” as a matter of pride – one need not 76 Widening circles of political dis-identification - IDENTIFICATION habitus ofupper- 143 CEU eTD Collection 5.1 the Communist party and the CPI(M)’s official website, emphasize a “scientific” reading of reading “scientific” a emphasize website, official CPI(M)’s the and party Communist the of by members and documents party Communist in cited source main bethe to continue which Namboodiripad, of EMS writings The in general. history approach to of how question the with already starts however polarization the main topics, and questions historical specific from Apart indigenist activists. activists as well as official publications bythe Communist party and published writings by indigenist and members party Communist with interviews my sources: partisan different from compiled here is I present that past recent Kerala’s on monologues) reactionary more perhaps (or “dialogue” polarizing The party. Communist the to opposition explicit about but more needs political to indigeneity of of notions fit the about much so not indeed is in Kerala mobilizations political ofcontemporary form indigenist the how show to but past the on claims their of truth-value overthe arbitrate to not readings, these at closely lookmore to interesting is It reform. radical avoiding project, dominated upper-caste an with them replaced and movements “anti-caste” ofthe momentum the took over movement Communist the of rise the that contrary the to argue activists Indigenist transformation. social structural of aprogram towards customs traditional negative reform to struggle their broadened movements”and reform “social earlier the haveradicalized to claims party Communist The history. of this version different radically developed now haveby groups Both widening. been have disidentification of circles which around node a key become hence has party earlyCommunist the - and identifies AGMS the which – with century twentieth early the of movements reform caste the between relationship of the question the particular in and Kerala of history political of the interpretation The future. of the visions its and politics in present battlefield a prime always is The past Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist (R disidentification”. of circles “widening of such terms in AGMS the and party Communist the between to the self.are denied that inclinations self-serving the project to which on target the becomes who “other” As we will the to opposite self, anegative constructing on more all the but in-group a positive seeconstructing in this on only not depends (ibid.).Identification indifference” and ignorance base its chapter, at with triangle, an emotional of sides “two are sense this in itand disidentification Identification Kerala. is well in activists indigenist possibleand Communist as between – other each into blur sometimes and related tointimately are groups two where virulent captureis muchmore disidentification Rather, 105). (1997: the rift developing cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and E ) READING K ERALA HISTORY BETWEEN COMMUNISM AND CASTE AND COMMUNISM BETWEEN HISTORY ERALA Widening circles of political dis-identification 144 CEU eTD Collection 5.1.1 kinship arrangements of his caste – particularly in the traditional practice that only the eldest the only that practice traditional the in –particularly caste his of arrangements kinship the in reform promote to wanted EMS Malabar. in caste highest very the caste, Namboodiri own his to reforms introduce try and to he founded organization an Sabha, Yogakshema the himself: ofthese one in involved was EMS that well-known it is and movements” reform “social Malabar) and Cochin, Travancore, of “unification” the and independence Indian (before century twentieth early the of movements caste-based callthe to tend documents party Communist Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist E history towards Communism. of advancement linear in the moment historical some as except caste about talk to of avoiding ways find to best their trying now were groups same how these and it, from benefitted groups which imposed, was hierarchy how caste lens: acaste itthrough reading was activists indigenist to according history tointerpret way The right India. South ruined what was Brahminism that standpoint EVR’s avoid to to beable precisely of history interpretation Communist a used and EVR, leader Dravidian the with competition fierce in was EMS Kerala: reach to time atthe Nadu Tamil in spreading was that anti-Brahminism radical the prevent to everything do to trying was EMS that me, was told often activists dalit problem, The movement. proletarian of a leadership higher-caste the justifying turn in development, progressive and inevitable as an history in turn a cruel was what presented it hierarchy: caste to subjugation violent its excused and society Dravidian egalitarian of themore achievements the ignored reading “scientific” Such in thehistory. movers as primary the Brahmins the a rolefor recover to attempt an infact was what exercise “analytical” a neutral, as disguise to it allowed This analysis. Communist party’s view ofhistory lay precisely withits supposed “scientific” class-based Indigenistsinterests. vested bolster to serve only would argued, EMS activistshistory, of reading ananalytical give to Failing 1998). inPanikkar (EMS superiority” of Aryan theory I spokethe as unscientific as is superiority “Dravidian that, argued yet thinker, Dravidian radical Nadu’s to by Tamil EVR, admire to claimed EMS contrast ofhistory. course the describe “scientifically” to simply but – North the from of Brahmins advent supposed the before i.e., society – society pre-Aryan argued called of so- not or “superiority” the about argument an that make to claimed, he not, society feudal to the Dravidian ancient, from institutions family and ofsocial progression crux the described EMS history. of of progression rational the the in overcome be will and beovercome to need that relationships problem feudal of the sign a of “backwardness”, a question is caste light, this In organization. with thehistory: seeing things of the past not asmoral issues but as signs of a particular social cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and ARLY REFORMMOVEMENTS : S ANSKRITIZATION ORRADICAL EGALITARIANISM Widening circles of political dis-identification ? 145 CEU eTD Collection respective castes. As a Communist party member told me, told member party aCommunist As castes. respective their within locked became existence of their course the in consciousness, ofpublic form a promote helped initially had which movements, reform the as Communism towards drifted movements reform social the in actors revolutionary more the that claims hence history this Communism and published a version of the Communist Manifesto Communist of the a version published and Communism by inspired me,was told member party a Communist ideologue, anti-caste Tami great distinctions vis-à-vis upper castes but inending untouchability towards dalits caste defying in laynot of acommunity strength moral real the that argued and God!”, jati of “one slogan Narayanan’s Sri whosuggested Ayyappan, Sahodharan atheist the is Communists many by noted Especially Revolution”). Soviet and socialism of “ideas to movements” renaissance “social the introduced (who P. Kesavadev and in Malayalam) Marx of biography newspaper the of (editor Pillai soRamakrishna more the all but praise for Malabar) in Guru Narayana of Sree follower (a Vagbhatananda and Ayyankali, SNDP), the (of Guru Narayana Sree out singles 2009) website (M) (CPI party of the history Theofficial government. by the provided people, the from pressure under and thereafter, missionaries by Christian introduced initially education”, modern acquiring in interest an in “awakening important were They “untouchability”. and “casteism”, customs”, bad and “superstition against fighting it, puts website CPI(M) the as in, role important similarly a played movements” reform “social Other 1998). Panikkar (in beings” human into Namboodiris “change to wanted EMS words, own his In 1976: 2ff). (Namboodiripad reluctance any without castes other of people with inter-dining and thread the“sacred” wearing longer no instance for convictions, his to according lived haveconsistently to by Communists acclaimed widely is and movement, reform Izhava the SNDP, the from inspiration claimed EMS this, In castes. other vis-à-vis ofuntouchability practice the all above practices, traditional negative of some abolish and education modern towards attitude a positive awaken to wanted moreover Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 77 purdah and in unmarried remained women Namboodiri of majority a women and Nair marriages informal with had sons whileyounger marry family would son ofa cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and 78 79 Purdah, the of Purdah, concealing women from men exists and indeed invarious life, all public forms both from Saradamoni (1980: 146 ff.) and Mohan (2008) describe and analyze Ayyappan’s struggles in more Mathew Mathew Baxter (2009) has done a fascinating study of how EVR vernacularized concepts from the themselves….still all they can doisgossip!”. they all themselves….still can amongst gossip onlythrough news receiving usedto for centuriesthey’vebeen women, Namboodiri (Saradamonihome ofthefamily the walls within remained generally theirface and toshield umbrella leaf 1980:use a not did women Namboodiri inIndia. Hinducommunities and Muslim in 129). As an Izhava friend married to a Namboodiri woman would joke “These detail. Manifesto in his translation. his in Manifesto , one religion, one God for man” ought to be replaced by the motto “no caste, no religion, no religion, no “nocaste, motto by the bereplaced to ought man” for God one religion, , one Swadeshabimani in Travancore and the first to, in 1912, write the Widening circles of political dis-identification 79 . The Communist version of version Communist . The 77 (total seclusion). He seclusion). (total burkha 78 . Even EVR, the EVR, . Even but a large palm large a but 146 CEU eTD Collection bead necklace that symbolized their slave past - the successful “Kallumala”/bead necklace “Kallumala”/bead successful - the past slave their symbolized that necklace bead the without go and garments upper wear to allowed be to women lower-caste for he fought and successfully pushed for the enforcement of a six day working week for agricultural laborers agricultural for week working day of asix enforcement the for pushed successfully Ayyankali Poor), ofthe Welfare for the (Association Sangham Paripalana Jana Sadhu 1905 ofthe Ayyankali’s was there however, spectrum, caste ofthe side other the On land. demanding – started outcastes and castes lower –nowthe people Dravidian original the of descendants the camethat time the when of wealth sources salaried new, the to access thereby and education in investments into land in wealth excessive their convert to them allowed that apreparation was it change: social a of radical time during castes respective these of dominance right to walk on the public roads in most areas of Travancore areas most in roads public the on to walk right the had by 1900 Pulayas that so spaces public particular enter to lower-castes of prohibition combine livelihood issues with issues of “human dignity”. Ayyankali fought against the to ability his in precisely lie Ayyankali like leader anti-caste of an strength the him, to According me: told AGMS, in the involved activist adalit Sunny, As against. befought to an issue not otherwise but uniting from workers it prevented as far so in a problem only was caste party the For did. movement Communist the than structure caste the confronting in muchfurther and went century nineteenth of the years last inthe active already was which (founded in 1914) in (founded Society Service Nair powerful the instance for also but 1920s, the in Sabha Yogakshema EMS’s like organizations upper-caste the that and caste was issue main the that emphasize they movements”, reform “social as together movements these lump than Rather movements. reform early the of nature the on view different a very have however, activists, Indigenist Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 80 cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and 81 82 83 The Vaikom Satyagraha took place in 1924-25 and was in fact not a temple-entry movement, but a By the 1920s, the NSS owned over 100 acres of land and school buildings and equipment worth over Earlier they had to use special roads or jump off the road and make themselves invisible if someone These struggles are documented in in detail (1980:Saradamoni 146ff.) confronting Hindu orthodoxy. Hindu confronting to approach non-“impatient” promote non-violent, to usedhis primarily Gandhi theoccasion shows, in the struggle. involvement forGandhi’s particularly attention gained temple.Thestruggle the Vaikom roads around touse the lower castes of public theright untouchable Asestablish movement –led byCongress–to a fascinating collection of documents of the time (Government of Kerala 2006) 200.000 rupees (Jeffrey 1992: 104). 1992: rupees(Jeffrey 200.000 many such practices are powerfully dramatized. from a higher caste would come on the horizon. In the movie issues.” ‘real’ the from as adistraction discrimination caste on focused that action any condemn to leaders Communist allowed superstructure and base between distinction rigid “this address the structural issues”. followers, fighting for temple entry like at Vaikom at like entry temple for fighting followers, their amongst behavior Sanskritizing encourage to aiming were organization “these 81 , emerged not so much from the desire for reform but in order to ensure the ensure to order in but reform for desire the from so much not , emerged 80 Widening circles of political dis-identification . They were not interested to interested not . Theywere Elippathayam 82 ; but also, with the founding in founding the with also, ; but byAdoorGopalakrishnan, anti-caste movement, 147 83 ; CEU eTD Collection 5.1.2 casteist”, claims to have a much higher number of lower-caste leaders and Member of the of Member and leaders of lower-caste number higher a much have to claims casteist”, “anti- ofits evidence as moreover, Theparty simplicity”. and of “sincerity ideals Gandhi’s lived truly who Communists the was them it to according me. Indeed told Communist Pulaya a feelings!”, caste old the overcome people make to things many so did leaders Communist -- “The workers foodwith sharing and “comrades”, themselves calling houses, people’s into came They taboos. caste of kinds all break helped leaders Communist how for gratefulness their express moreover sympathizers Communist ordinary Many masses”. oppressed Association Labor Travancore first the being example –acommon laborunions into developed gradually set up have to claimed are 1920s ofthe inthecourse SNDP the like movements reform inEarly social 1922 caste”. under human the caste, one to belongs world whole “the that vision as the seen simply quoted, the guidance often is Pillai Krishna comrade as was, Communism theory. socialist much about anything ofknowing aims without socialist adopted they beginning, in the that a admitting qualms no new socialisthave usually leaders Communist 2009). website (CPI(M) people” of ordinary heart the touched vision which style anew experience: and life out of formed man… anew to shape giving of idea populara new “propagated leaders whose early Communism, and movements these between sequence with “thea radicalizing claims it cases, both In Malabar. in mostly movements, peasant early the from crucially, and, Cochin and inTravancore movements” reform “social the from – both movements people’s earlier the from organically grown having as itself sees party The Communist T argues, Sunny As intervene. to them prompted and leaders upper-caste worried that momentum this precisely It was visions. egalitarian radical for them mobilized and time at the of dalits lives the Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 84 of 1915-16 agitation cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Caste-determined dress codes and other everyday rules used to be extreme in Kerala in in the nineteenth in Kerala tobe extreme used rules everyday other and dress codes Caste-determined HE PARTY 33f.). front of a higher caste person, had to refer to his own dwelling as a “dung-heap” (Saradamoni 1980: different castes for instance differed (e.g. differed instance for castes different people from of todwellings given Names words. self-debasing use to forced were lower-castes ornaments particular castes could or could not wear. Even language was caste differentiatedcentury. and There used to, for instance, be a “polluting distance” for every caste and strict rules on what politicized this section [dalits and adivasis].” de- society Kerala of ‘politicization’ the means It of it? meaning the is What leadership. party Communist the in back find we movement Ayyankali’s from man a single “Not : R ADICALIZING OR IMPEDING THE ANTI 84 . Ayyankali’s actions and words, Sunny claims, emerged organically from organically emerged claims, Sunny words, and actions . Ayyankali’s chala for dalits, for Widening circles of political dis-identification - CASTE MOMENTUM CASTE illam for Namboodiris) – a Pulaya, when in ? 148 CEU eTD Collection dalit speaks he is accused of copying the higher castes, of not being ‘authentic’ to his caste, his to ‘authentic’ being not of castes, higher the of copying accused he is speaks dalit the “when said: University, Kottayam at Manoj, activist a RMS as me. Or told activist AGMS an upper-caste; be to assumed automatically almost was leadership Communist the how of indication another is lacking, as Mayawati like leaders Dalit contemporary laments establishmentso Indian the which leaders, early Communist was simply a reflection of anotherworldly Brahminical of anotherworldly areflection simply was lives. personal their in practice of caste fundamentals the retaining time same the at while “untouchability” and “casteism” against as being themselves present publicly would they caste: oftheir outside marry to prepared not were leaders Communist Upper-caste marriage. endogamous institution: caste key the upset to not careful always were Communists that argue indigenists Indeed, Things her novel in (1997) Roy Arundhati by powerfully articulated is The argument codes. dress and inter-dining of level symbolic the to safely it limiting momentum, anti-caste the impede to precisely arose latter the argue They party. Communist the and movements caste anti- early the between relationship the on view different a radically hold activists Indigenist 1984:3f). (Namboodiripad separatism” communal and caste from completely itself “disassociated that oppression” caste against struggle “uncompromising an including stand” secular a “genuinely maintaining to committed ideologically party Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 85 parties other than Assembly Legislative cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and 86 87 According to independent researcher Kumar (2009: 402) there’s 40 percent more STs and SCs party Roy – who showed herself in strong solidarity with the AGMS after the Muthanga struggle (see her paper Chakravarti Chakravarti (2003) works out a similar criticism from a feminist perspective. members in the Communist party in Kerala than inCongress. than inKerala party theCommunist members in since the Malayalam translation only came out as I am writing these words – February 3, 2011. 3, February – words these writing am I as out came only translation Malayalam the since condemned her for to EMSsaying orthe Communist effort, Communists Ispoke to Keralain universallysuch and passionately awful governpeople a and wordsfoment revolution simultaneously”. Though onecan see notRoy is altogetheron hostile EMS. Mostpriest had not, it ofmust Marxism alsoin the be noted, in redKerala” her book faced with “the extraordinary– critics said absurd– position of having to leadership as being high caste”, high as being leadership its sees definition per party Communist the says It it say? does sacrifice’…what ‘self- about all people, the ‘uplifting’ about always it’s language, their at look “just of democracy.” ashot with spiked Hinduism, orthodox and Marxism Eastern of mix heady A revolution. a cocktail Theyoffered to. not appearing never them, challenging never divides, communal the within from worked Marxists The community. traditional extremely a caste-ridden, of values traditional the questioned overtly never that movement areformist As Keralainsidiously. into crept communism that was secret “The real in a passage speculating about the origins of Communism in Kerala in of Communism origins the about speculating a passage in Fronline 87 From a caste perspective, the “sincerity and simplicity” of the Communist party Communist the of simplicity” and “sincerity the perspective, caste a From of March 15-28, 2003) – in her book goes on to call EMS “the flamboyant Brahmin high 86 85 . And, as Communists like to point out, it was the only the was it out, point to like asCommunists . And, Widening circles of political dis-identification habitus . Read thus, the thus, . Read : The God of Small sanyasi style of style 149 CEU eTD Collection 5.1.3 Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist that movement Communist the was it But 2009). website (CPI(M) masses” oppressed the among enthusiasm a new “imparted which employment government to access with conjunction in schooling, for sections” weaker and as untouchables so far suppressed “people by demands the particularly and efforts schooling missionary Christian the contributions: earlier acknowledge does party The 2009). website CPI(M) Nayanar; of EK leadership under government CPI(M) by the1987 (attained ofKerala rate literacy 100percent formal the and ofeducation level high the achievements key ofits one – as granted is often – and claims party The Communist E voice their strongest criticism. on their 50 party by the celebrated (grandly Kerala in party Communist of the achievements proudest the probably are 1970s the in implemented of struggle, lot a through eventually, and respectively) 1958 (in 1957and government Communist by the introduced bothfirst and, Act Education Kerala the and Act Reform Land Kerala The reform. land and education Kerala: in of power of relations reproduction the in keyissues two the of history the to comes it when controversial particularly is party Communist the roleof the on perspective of difference The general emancipation. their for work to claiming movement very the by produced being was slaves former as position oppressed their clearlyhow seeing from people prevented ideology Marxist ideology”. this of slaves into changing were “they dalits: and adivasis re-enslaved had ideology Communist argued, K Janu C As hierarchies. caste existing the preserving about was Kerala in Communism how disguise to an effort as see hence activists –many 2010) (Joe it called activist asone Vedanta” Marxian -“this intellectualism authoritative of air its and Marxism of theories The abstract me: to out pointed activist AGMS another As work. intellectual and manual between of labor division caste typical the reproducing hence was Theparty this”. for in academia invented theword is ‘Sankritization’ cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and DUCATION FOREMANCIPATION DUCATION Pillais…”. all Namboodiripads, it’s party: of the leadership the at look Just intellectuals. great as posing high-castes these for way make to party of the out thrown he was Malayalam, Marx’s who translated Christian aPulaya Pathros, sidelined.. were caste alower born to of Marxists efforts scholastic the but party of the theoretician visionary becomea to encouraged was EMS like aBrahmin mediocrity, theoretical his “Despite th anniversary in 2007). Yet they are also the two areas where indigenist activists indigenist where areas two the also are they Yet 2007). in anniversary – ORLEARNINGCASTE Widening circles of political dis-identification ? Capital into 150 CEU eTD Collection “ critics indeed see the educational question in quite a different light. They argue that early that Theyargue light. adifferent quite in question educational see the indeed critics Indigenist party. by the addressed been really has not and progress”) of level “’that’ people”, (“backward of education question the to attaches that hierarchy internalized) case Babu’s (in a certain sense however can one members, party Communist of formulations such in Already me: told Kannur in leader AKS aPaniya Babu, them. to available education inmaking party Communist the of importance the emphasize persistently would I interviewed members AKS adivasis, ( Prabhatham like magazines weekly out brought material, andpolitical scientific accessible publish helped moreover Theparty 2009). website (CPI(M) libraries and rooms reading village maintained and organized party Communist the ranks”, the among consciousness political To “develop claimed: Communist Izhava Asan emancipation. their in help would that knowledge people to have taught claims movement Communist the ofthis, top On Model. Kerala the of stones corner over as world the recognized become have that Development” Education and Literacy Mass in … achievements “stellar of the boasts (2009) website CPI(M) the vein, this In evening schools. Malayalee classics such Kesava Dev’s “ Dev’s Kesava such classics Malayalee schools. evening in others educated turn in villages, their in back later, then who participate would of people Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 88 education enjoyequal to able be would Malayalee every that apriority into it turned and people the of desire this up took cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Two measures ofrice” Two measures Deshabimani For an insightful and detailed academic account of the history of literacy and politics inKerala, with literacy andpolitics the of academic history accountof detailed an insightful and For first-hand observations the1960s,(1968). from seeGough first-hand have been doing is raising them up to that level” that to up them raising is doing have been AKS and the CPI(M) the What of progress. level ‘that’ to up yet are not who are people Theadivasis unions. workers’ and party Communist – movements progressive by the efforts and works of the result and achievement an is situation This of Kerala. situation social the in athing such for hindrance no is There school. to admitted children his get can tribal any .. Here upper-hand. the have Communists where states the in case the is not this away…but people backward keep to practices many still are there states other In places. only ofthe are some regularly] power in hasbeen party Communist the where India in states three [the Tripura and Bengal West Kerala, communities. other with people, other with education get and eat, walk, sit, can people backward other and adivasis the where places many not are there India called country this “In governments did not dare modify education policies.” education modify dare not did governments new power, lost Communists the when even that electorate the with popular so goals setting in education, invested methodically and deliberately party Communist “the providing a political awareness, political classes…that is the crucial thing.” crucial the is classes…that political awareness, a political providing were they that, more than actually, consciousness….or people’s raising were “they – later the name of a progressive arts and cultural forum – and a daily newspaper a daily – and forum cultural and arts a progressive of name the –later ). It also organized weeks-long “learning and training camps” in which hundreds which in camps” training and “learning weeks-long organized also It ). (1948) were all products of this movement. With regard to dalits and dalits to regard With movement. this of allproducts were (1948) 88 . According to a Communist MLA I interviewed, MLA aCommunist to . According Widening circles of political dis-identification From thegutter ” (1942) or Thakazhi‘s ” (1942) 151 CEU eTD Collection has a caste connotation) or to even commit suicide, as for instance in the famous case in 2004 of in case famous the in instance asfor suicide, commit even or to connotation) has acaste claim activists that term (a out” “drop to children adivasi and dalit leads easily discrimination Such discrimination. caste of form (institutionalized) as another loan a student getting in students adivasi and dalit of the difficulty interpret to come have also activists Indigenist Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 90 89 meal” “mid-day free celebrated much the during (e.g., exclusions and remarks caste everyday subtle from forms, pervasive its most in casteism experience and adivasis dalits where site main the are universities and schools that claim activists Many schools. public Kerala’s in peers and teachers caste upper- of violence and prejudices caste the suffering were adivasis and dalits education, prime receive to off children their sending were themselves leaders Communist while that is instead activists by many told Thestory materialized. ofthat little see very activists indigenist all but to available make knowledge would movement Communist the that were promises and Hopes explains, activist, adalit Sunny, As aswell. caste of mechanism the is argued, activists ignorance, and knowledge of line Thedividing itself. of caste question a central as but raising” “consciousness for muchasatool so not seeeducation activists indigenist Indeed, me: from Idukki told a dalitactivist children. As their for education demanding again landlords, their up to – stood victory their won they before starvation facing almost – dalits which in strike a large organized moreover Ayyankali activist, AGMS an to according were, dalits for education to right the for 1910s in the he led agitations The school. to going start to children their for way the cleared that movement allAyyankali’s above was it that but education, acquire to possibility and confidence the muster andadivasis dalits some helped efforts missionary cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and This criticism is beautifully elaborated in See Saradamoni 1980: 148. Soumya Vincent, about casteism in a nursery school inKerala. nursery school ina casteism Vincent, about Soumya worker…and given education only to the extent necessary for such labor”. such for necessary extent the to only education given worker…and a field be considered always hewill contradiction, be a always will dalit educated an sure make will ideology Brahminical The occupation. one in locked being about is “caste into fields’”. your schools turn will we school, to go our children let don’t you ‘if them, told Ayyankali was astruggle. party], it request oftheCommunist apolite [likethat “Theirswas not it..” enter to dared had girl untouchable an because --just school the fire to set (upper-castes) Nairs of angry group A violence. of a lot faced and stance took abrave He schooling. to our right assert to demonstration a organized and issue the up took Ayyankali girl, a Pulaya accept to refused school village this When Kerala. of history the in episode revolutionary most “the central historical dividing line of higher and lower castes. It is moreover the key the moreover is It castes. lower and ofhigher line dividing historical 90 ) to violent “raggings” (bullying and torture by peers). by torture and (bullying “raggings” violent to ) 89 Twinkkle twinkle little caste little twinkle Twinkkle . Widening circles of political dis-identification , a (2009) documentary by 152 CEU eTD Collection 5.1.4 R words: Janu’s C K In ingeneral. raising” of“consciousness skeptical are thoroughly generation younger the of particularly activists, indigenist many classes, political as pointless see cameto they what experienced Having dominance. upper-caste perpetuating hence themselves, for think not do people ensuring institution a principal become have – to activists indigenist – to seems society civil of Malayalee character “educated” the of this, top On me: told activist AGMS adalit As upper-castes. to as adivasis and dalits to given was education quality same the ensure to effort an made never has activists, indigenist to according party, The available. universally makeeducation to pretending quowhile status the maintain can so it it encourages even or colleges and schools in casteism condones silently Kerala, in campuses on presence strong a has that India of Federation Youth Democratic the wing, youth its through including party, Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 91 ( plots homestead over their ownership families landless award to secondly, illegal; land their from farmers of tenant eviction makethe to firstly, laws: reforms ofland package the was introduced undivided) still (then party the reform important most the that networks party Communist in story a common is It 2006). 22, February resolution (CPI(M) reforms” land ofradical issue crucial the address did not movements… reform social “these that note also they reformers”, social “great in praising generous have become documents party Communist While in Kerala. reforms land “successful” the are for, responsible solely it is claims party Communist the which achievement, major The other Trivandrum. at Commissioner Entrance the of Office of the floor seventh the from jumped who Anand Rejani student dalit old 21-year the cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and the Indian state where by far the most radical land reform happened. The third component – the component Thethird happened. reform land radical most the far by where state Indian the into claim, Communists Kerala, made have and success atremendous were aims two The first landless. the amongst land surplus the redistribute to and landholdings to acres) 15 about (of Her case Her is analyzed case from a perspective dalit in by and caste higher K. P.Girija “On suicides, education” EDISTRIBUTING LAND OR SAFEGUARDING LANDEDCAPITAL OR SAFEGUARDING EDISTRIBUTING LAND in go about lecturing on it.” on lecturing about go don’t we but things, all havedone Adivasis own. as their it establish it, propagate it, on abook write up, it picked howthey news the in explain will they tomorrow today, stone a up picked others if But doing. are they what on others to classes give never “adivasis education!”. an for America to children their sending ‘Communists’ those all look at just And laborers. agricultural remain to how was learning were children allour English, learning were children other ...While ignorant. and poor remain would schools government from education got who our children that sure made always “They Insight: A dalit youth magazine youth dalit A Insight: . 91 Indigenist activists claim that the Communist kudikidappu Widening circles of political dis-identification land); and thirdly, to set ceilings set to thirdly, and land); ? 153 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist me: told activist, aPulaya Boban, As activists. indigenist most by themselves leaders party Communist to attributed moreover is ceiling a certain above land toredistribute measure of the failure whole The society. of rest the like from living a steady make and cultivate to use could they that land any possess to come not would they sure made always was it but doubt, no measure aprogressive stood, huts their which on land of piece small the own to got of them many – little very meant reform land hand other on the adivasis and dalits landless For land-grabbing. legalizing thus “landlords”, adivasis the dubbed and be“tenants” to claimed now them from land taken informally had who settlers as adivasis many to detrimental even was claim, they reform, The “tenant” me, told activist an As party. Communist of the that from strongly diverges Kerala in question land historical the of reading Indigenists’ order. social traditional the confront and practices casteist oppose effectively to beable to groups these for basis necessary the laid it claim also Communists some workers, dependent and farmers tenant erstwhile to eviction against security providing By As the CPI(M) website puts it, declared: member AKS an As successes. significant to led reforms the implement to party Communist the of struggles persistent the still But governments. Congress by subsequent muddled moreover and considerably down slowed was act reform land of the implementation The 1959. in government federal bythe its dismissal to leading ministry, Communist first Kerala’s against emerged movement” “liberation so-called and American-backed landlord-led ahuge because successful less – was ceiling certain above a land surplus of distribution cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and their slogan. But the party leaders diverted the strikes as they belonged to feudal to belonged asthey strikes the diverted leaders party the But slogan. their was be yours’, shall you work land ‘The strikes. agricultural Theyinitiated lord. feudal the was leader party the but values, feudal against fought adivasis] and “They [dalits issue!” land the even solved haven’t they but power bein to are going Communists the that now time ninth the It’s adivasis. and dalits downtrodden the for anything do to manage did not [Communists] “They consciousness”. ofdemocratic pedestal the to of landlordism grip iron the under suffocating were who ofKerala people raised which Party Communist the was “it government”. Communist of the part the on achievement agreat was it system, capitalist and by aparliamentary arebound we where India like a country In livelihood. their for land some with left also were landlords the so and work and love to land had so they landless the and peasants the it to distributed and landlords feudal from the land confiscated party TheCommunist time. first the for in India peasants the to land the distributed that government Communist the was It it’. work who those to ‘land raised was slogan the that government EMS’ during was 1957. …it in government, EMS ofthe time the at areality, into peasants by the land of ownership turned first that party Communist the was It peasants. and workers landless to be given should land that stand the took that party Communist the was “It Widening circles of political dis-identification 154 CEU eTD Collection a number of dalit and adivasi activists in Kerala in 2007 read, in Kerala in activists adivasi and of dalit a number by statement ajoint As started. has reforms land much-vaunted Kerala’s from excluded all those by land for struggle real the that Muthanga at break-through the and AGMS the of rise the with is only it argue, they Infact, land. of waste a fewcents most at received they struggle, the for sacrifices of the most bearing after others: with front in one fight to andadivasis dalits for sense no made it that agreed to I spoke activists indigenist most history, this from lessons Drawing he added, Independence for struggle the to reference In me, told RMS in the activist An struggle. the in life their lost who dalits the acknowledged never but government” “responsible and Independence for struggle the into it fitted and up it took say, they leaders, party Communist caste higher The 1990). Ayrookuzhiel (see area the in landlords Christian) Syrian and Nair (mostly upper-caste the by imposed hardship economic the contest and eviction their prevent to dalits by astruggle actually it was activists, indigenist to According Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist the in it called P.Venugopal history”, over war (“A regard this in of contention point important an is reforms, constitutional authoritarian introduce to attempt of Travancore’s dewan the against insurgency a democratic and struggle Independence the of as part circles Communist in remembered is which 1946, in Punnapra-Vayalar at The struggle party. by the ignored arelargely which struggle, in the andadivasis bydalits made sacrifices the in lies moreover question land the on party the by betrayal activists, indigenist many For continues: Bobin As ceiling. land above the owned family no seemed it end the in that so names individual separate in property family the register to relatives their warned moreover leaders party many claim activists indigenist capital, business and educational into painlessly wealth landed their converting from Apart cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and “It is hard to be proud of this Kerala that has excluded dalits and adivasi for so long….”. for adivasi and dalits excluded has that Kerala of this beproud to hard is “It Vayalar!”. and Punnapra at died had STs and SCs thousand five than More class. working the chain to move was first very their But strikes. Vayalar and Punnapra the through power to came Left 1957 the “in the major temples. And they lost nothing”. lost they And temples. major the governing are they now and businesses started and town the to escaped The Brahmins community. his has saved and earlier much things has foreseen he 1957, and in power cameinto He presence. anation-wide with a bank it’s now Trust, Dhanlakshmi was it Earlier Bank. Dhanlakshmi the called a bank established himself he purpose that for And people. landless become would Brahmins and the land their snatch would unions labor and workers them, told EMS – otherwise, banks in money the deposit and off land selltheir to Brahmins the he advised meeting Sabha Yogyashema that In Oomaloor. at Pallakad in of Brahmins a meeting organized EMS 1945 In themselves. families And twice. Kerala of Minister Chief he was died he till party, of the Secretary General was And safe. community own his keep to intelligently, very it playing always was “EMS that person posed as the savior of the working class?!”. working the of savior as the posed person Widening circles of political dis-identification Indian Express, Nov281997). he 155 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist contribute. they which to – and have arisen past Kerala’s on views dichotomous these of which out present in the dynamics political polarizing these at look closer a take I will section following the In interpretations. their of commonalities theprogressive defending with than history Kerala of reading on the differences their with concerned more become to tend they Other, intimate most other’s are each activists indigenist and Communist interaction, political everyday their in since Yet 2010). (Shah rest” to model Kerala the “put and market the in intervention government against dogma neoliberal classic the argue to activists byindigenist model Kerala ofthe critique of the themes twisted recently has Institute Enterprise American the how being example notable most the forces: academic reactionary by mobilized of being danger in also constantly is discourse indigenist the academics, critical from support academic of a lot has gotten it though But 231). (2006: further” them deprived and only marginalised benefit their for exclusively intended “programs while them dispossessed and displaced often instead and Adivasis” cover not did society of ‘larger’ benefit the for projects “state to whom according Parayil and Sreekumar or 182); (2006: development” of model Kerala vaunted the of gains the of out left largely been have “tribals that argue who John and Chatukalam of India”; “part simply is Kerala of caste terms in that claims who (2006) Omvedt Gail (1998:33); adivasis and dalits to comes it when ofDevelopment” model Congress the behind far lags model Kerala “EMS’s that argues who Prasad, Bahn Chandra well: as scholars by various reading their in encouraged been have indigenists 2004), Kjosavik 2000; Chasin and Franke 2005; 1997; Heller Sen and Dreze 1975; UN (e.g. model Kerala the of defense a behind networks academic from draw and mobilize to continue members party Communist as just And adivasis. and of dalits expense the at privilege upper-caste sustain to serving obviously rather oreven subtly aseither model Kerala seethe cometo have activists indigenist while development, of model” the“Kerala with itself equates party Communist the all this, In Kerala. in struggle land the and reforms land of nature the on finally and in this, meant party Communist the of program educational the what and come from rates literacy high famously Kerala’s where on movements, these vis-à-vis role was Communist the what on was, movements early reform of nature the what –on questions all major on story Communist ofthe opposite the almost is sum, in inKerala, activism of earlytwentieth-century reading The indigenist cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and government. Since then dalit and adivasi land struggles in Kerala attained a new order.” a new attained Kerala in struggles land and adivasi dalit then Since government. State the and Kerala of Adivasis and protestingDalits the between signed was October 2001 in agreement land historic the till struggles land of unknown aland was “Kerala Widening circles of political dis-identification 156 CEU eTD Collection 5.2 in 2005-2007 to spoke I activists still indigenist many communities, and adivasi dalit most and Congress preferredbetween to deal antagonism historical the despite and attack police Muthanga the withordered that government UDF Congress same this was it thanthat fact the despite that profound – so profound was withKerala, of Minister Chief the Left. InCongress then the K Anthony, 2006A by gesture symbolic this of impact The agreement. an reach AGMS activistsand government the to talk to invited officially were time first the for activists indigenist and 2001 in May over taken UDF had Congress-led the after developments to contrast in stands This “Left”. ofthe opinion activists’ indigenist confirmed --only by “outsiders” manipulated were question in tribals the how of rumors spread – and coalition) LDF the in politically even not were (who attackers their than rather activists the condemn to government LDF of the reaction consequent activists.The actively supported the that AITUC, wing, union trade its of activists and cadres CPI were it since one Communist versus indigenist an primarily became again conflict The Front. Democratic Left CPI(M)-led the joined and Congress Kerala from off hadsplit that party aregional (J), Congress of Kerala head the was college engineering the of charge in Minister Education the Kundalla, At companies. in interested only were Communists that activists many to proof – another inhabitants colony’s LDF the Kurichi, At Kundalla. at and Kurichi at both occasions: major more on two activist indigenist with clashed had CPI(M) 2001, the in May term Front Democratic Left of the end the Towards accusations. defamatory of mutual full turn, vicious amore took again government the and movement the between confrontation the soon very power, came to CPI(M), by the led Front, Democratic Left the 1996 in when defaming, much mutual without place took government the and movement emerging the between contention 1996, to from1991 in power was by Congress, led Front, Democratic United the 3).While chapter (see aims “unpatriotic” had and funded” “foreign was initiative the that argue to first the amongst was CPI(ML), the following CPI(M), the 1992Sangamam, the major turning point in the AGMS’ rise it found itself confronted with the CPI(M). Alreadyevery almost at during2000s where and of the1990s course the in interaction of their context in the seen be should uphold activists and Communist indigenist that past of the reading The different Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 92 R cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Two major coalitions emerged in Kerala following the lifting of the Emergency (in 1977), which EVEALING THE all regional parties. regional all The other, the United Democratic Front (UDF) is led by the Indian Nationalfew Congrss and is otherinclusive of small continueparties till today. One is the Left Democraticincluding Front (LDF) led by the CPI(M) and inclusiveCongress of the CPI, a (S), a breakaway group iof the Indian National Congress. “ REAL ” goondas OTHER 92 government was seen supporting the contractor against the against contractor the supporting seen was government connected to the Tata estates who came to attack the attack cameto who estates theTata to connected : T HE POLITICS OFPOLARIZATION Widening circles of political dis-identification 157 CEU eTD Collection Even the death of one of the policemen at Muthanga is blamed on the CPI(M): the on blamed is Muthanga at policemen of the ofone death the Even circles: AGMS in common is that astory articulates however Ammini intense. particularly was conflict CPI(M)-AGMS the where Thrisilleri from comes Janu like AGMS, the of leader a secondary Hamsakkali, Ammini cadres. CPI(M) actually were police, the in send to excuse an government the giving from them stop to trying were who activists by “captured” themselves gotten and unrest initial the fomented had who officials forest claimingthe Muthanga, behind party Communist the see even generally activists Indigenist Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 93 argued who AGMS, the of secretary vice- the a while for Mammen, for instance including by many, echoed was The sentiment point: asimilar made had 2005, Janu in an interview In me, told Janu elections municipal the2006 during LDF the than rather UDF the with side subsequently to her decision On arena. theelectoral most: interests vested hurt it where strike could moreover and Assembly Legislative the in avoice activists give possibly would that movement of the branch asapolitical Sabha Maha Rashtriya the form to decided cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and This perception nurtured This postedwas by Congress,which advertisements in page-wide all major help the tribals. help the to been first the Congresshad that baby and claiming with woman tribal curly-haired silhouette of a newspapers in 2001 when the agreement was signed between Antony and Janu, showing the was the people of the party who did it. They did it to destroy the struggle”. the to destroy it Theydid it. did who party of the people the was It CPM. ofthe people the but killed, who or anybody orGeethanandan Janu not was “It us”. on it blame to collector to the went then and trees cut and fire Theyset struggle… our destroy to ofjust capable are all they theyare. CPM? youknowwho What was the Sonow Didyouknow it that? Do you know it. did who people CPM was trouble…it create to our huts on it throw and dung elephant to fire set cameto people CPM[CPI(M)] happened, firing [Muthanga] the before day “A agreement. an for ready were – they protested people tribal the when things discuss to ready were who they was It government. UDF the is from it anything expect can one “If extend.” some to agreement.. that maintained and agreement an made table, one around them with sitting a discussion held adivasis, accepted They hitherto. that has done adivasis.None the accepted government Congress the time first the for that is Kerala of history in the happened that thing important One it. for work and agenda separate make a not Theywill started. has government right the of what rest the do will they power into comes left the when time next the and in power is right the Now agenda. political same the under things with deal they or right, left beit “The government, to do that”. willing never was Left The agreement. an made and discussions, for cameforward they a government as But of strikes. lots conduct did we Indeed strike. Muthanga the toward willing tohold discussions with uson the adivasi land issue, despite that attitude were But they against theMuthangastrike. tooka they [Congress] stand true that is “It 93 ” Widening circles of political dis-identification 158 CEU eTD Collection 5.2.1 W discourse. political leftist traditional of that to terms different radically such quo in status the to challenge their pose to need the felt activists indigenist why understand to start can we that of dis-identification, circles such in is precisely It other. the onto projected vehemently become face activists and indigenist Communists both that processes and characteristics structural animosity, ofsuch dynamics interactive Inthe doing. “actually” are they what to are, intentions “real” their what and are really others the of who question the from everything on suspicion of spirals interactive in entangled become have and other “real” the discovering with preoccupied are groups Both way. hidden a perverse, in enemies chief its for is working it believing intensely, other the suspect to come hence have camps political Both Front” ( Democratic Left CPI(M)-led of the defeat the ensure to “work it would declared publicly and block Congress-led the with allied of this on top – and inelections beinterested to not claimed had it though – branch a political formed AGMS the 2006 in When interests”. “vested larger of service in AGMS, of the hand seethe to havecome they suffers, party Communist the backs set- of all kinds Behind masses”. struggling the of unity the by“dividing movement, Communist the destroy to is goal main AGMS’ the convinced usually membersare party so, Communist Even Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist quarterly theoretical CPI(M)’s in the it put Karat Brinda (as exploitation” of nature class the obliterating identities adivasi separate and fragment to seek that NGOs funded foreign by promoted politics “variantsofidentity against as adivasis “real” of the side the areon they convinced are members party Communist abound. accusations mutual adivasis”, by –“real led being and – representing are they not or whether about criticism public faceof the “adivasiness”.In of defining problematic the is place takes dis-identification which around issue important One Janu: to according too, a reason had they And cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and member of the AKS was at pains to prove his genuine adivasiness in reference to the heroic the to reference in adivasiness genuine his toprove atpains was AKS of the member ILL THE REAL ADIVASI STEPFORWARD ILL THEREALADIVASI NGOs...”. and movements political these the for beavailable longer no will they educated get and school to children their send living, their for things cultivating start land, get struggle, a for go people these if So projects… the made ofNGOs, case in the and organizations the …founded movements their nourished they herethat people the with was it years these because…all this like bepictured to it want They struggle. a terrorist as pictured and everyone, and organizations social the NGOs, the Kerala, of movements political of the need the was “It The Hindu The Marxist, , 13 March 2006), mostCommunists saw all their worst suspicions confirmed. but above all the Communist party, but aboveall the Communist in September 2010). In this vein, a Kurichiya (ST) state committee state (ST) a Kurichiya vein, this In 2010). September in …? that the Muthanga struggle should Muthangastruggle that be the Widening circles of political dis-identification 159 CEU eTD Collection should remain numb. As she says with regard to the Muthanga struggle: Muthanga the to regard with says she As numb. remain should adivasis that anotion incorporates use Communists, including politicians, most that definition very the Janu, to According operates. politics and dalit deeplyanti-adivasi and divisive a rhetoric party Communist underneath that effect the to counter-claims and counter-suspicions many as however, are, there activists ofindigenist genuineness ofthe suspicion Communist every For cause: adivasi “real” ofthe representative not was Janu why reason another ofargument line this to added Palakkad in to spoke I whom Communist Paniya elderly An that proves Communists, consoles however Backer conventions, Communist-organized in of adivasis The participation And he continues, commentator on adivasi issues in frequent Backer, Aboo As Communists. ofthe competitors and enemies major of allthe embodiment the rather but cause adivasi the for fighter true a not be– to pretends she who not is C KJanu that allegations of arefull sympathizers and members by Communist works Written leadership: Geethanandan’s of suspicious rather was Kalan movement. their leading was he though problems”, adivasi understand “truly to able be never would a dalit, as Geethanandan, that point: this stressed Kalan P K Also In contrast, he immediately continued in accusatory tone accusatory in continued heimmediately contrast, In Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist AGMS: the to reference with concluded and British, the against a guerilla of leader Kurichiya the Chandu, Thalayakkal of struggles cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and she were a real adivasi she would know to let the elders lead...” elders the let to know would she adivasi areal were she If know? she does What comefrom? suddenly she did where Janu, C K so-called “This 109). (ibid: Adivasis” genuine the represent actually not do interests by thevested sponsored [the AGMS] organizations paper “the 108). 2005: (Backer demands” their and agitation Adivasi the thwart to attempt an was it However tribals. of the realsaviour the as Janu C K project to trying process the in agitation, this to support full their lent media anti-Marxist traditional “the regime”. LDF last by the introduced questions Adivasi the to solutions enduring long the with tamper to order in state the of groups naxalite the of assistance cunning the with politics bourgeois of the creation the been has K Janu “C own.” her move on can’t She Janu. controlling are They .. adivasis. the exploited they a shied, her as using and of everything front the at Janu Keeping happened. Muthanga] [at problems these all why reason the is “That Castes.” Scheduled the to belongs He adivasi. an even not is himself Geethanandan staff. outside “Geethanandan set up this up set “Geethanandan “this is what is different about the AKS.All about is the different is what “this gothra padasala The Marxist , writes: our (clan school) here and just appointed some appointed just and here school) (clan leaders are adivasis.” leaders Widening circles of political dis-identification 160 CEU eTD Collection 5.2.2 Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist “I AKS: toldmeabout the another AGMSactivist As argued: Geethanandan As farce. real is the itself it dalits, and adivasis According to indigenist activists, though the AKS denies any positive political contribution by argues, AGMS, the to related activists adalit Sunny, As adivasis. and of dalits part the on agency any negates systematically party Communist the agree, activists indigenist most As cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and the same Communist member said, adding said, member Communist same the oppressed. the need who leaders is it leaders, needing oppressed the than rather that is allegation the of Thelogic it. expressed AKS of the member Adiya an as group”, a backward as adivasis keep always to “wants other the that notion the is opponent political closest the onto difficulties structural projecting suspicion mutual Another F ADIVASIS DEVELOP THEY CANNOT PLAYWITH THEM THEYCANNOT DEVELOP F ADIVASIS they are giving the accurate answer of what they consider adivasis should be.” should adivasis consider they what of answer accurate the aregiving they actually adivasis, are not react who those that say they When itself. question particular one that analyze haveto Sowe adivasis. not are react who Those consent. mute with violence and trauma, torture, that all endure to has Theadivasi it. question to supposed arenot we murdered, brutally got an adivasi if violence.Even and torture all possible bear areto who as persons adivasis imagine they adivasis, not are they and are violent her friends and Janu someone says When incident. that study to are we back... fighting started youngsters the and of us some on violence inflicting started police the “When one of them is adivasi!”. is ofthem one a single not society, this registered who members seven members…all all the and trust.. aregistered a trust, just it’s community, tribal organized a democratically not “It’s village.” every each and in apparatus a political have they money, have they because anyway people rally can they But facing. they’re a problem It’s leaders.. by party represented all are they Samithi Kshema the in But them. representing is she – Kurichiya Adiya, – Paniya, nationalities different the All adivasis. the of leader anational leader, anationalist is she Janu, See adivasis. of communities the different representing not he’s Janu, like not is Kani leaders. party political by the controlled is Everything there. community adivasi an from one the is He community…. Kani the to he belongs … [laughs] Kani leader…Vijayajan their to talked also AKS…I organization, adivasi this has also CPI(M) the “Now the dalit, itisthe adivasi!’”. there is nocaste in thissociety, now suddenly there iscaste…who is behind it?Ah, it is years forty last the for ‘Aha, react? Marxists these did How movement. adivasi dalit true came,a we then And Ha!’ caste. no is There caste? is where me caste, show you must ‘No,no, seeit: to wants He condition. a social is caste that amaterialist to say cannot caste?’.We is ‘where us. ask materialists these caste?’ is ‘Where us. negates ideology very their But dalit. the adivasi, the of favor bein to claiming are Marxists “Now adivasis without any social refinement”, social any without adivasis keep to want They culture. and of living standards good achieve adivasis let “They don’t Widening circles of political dis-identification ” 161 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist me: told even AGMS, the with activist Kurichiya a Kavitha, issues. other all will neglect it priority top for this and banks” “vote gather to is activists, indigenist to according party, Communist the for issue The key middle-class. become the has CPI(M) ofthe constituency actual the though even constituency natural their remain they so that position desperate impoverished, in an adivasis keep to prefer parties Communist the convinced are inturn activists AGMS picture: bigger the understanding from them preventing and thoughts their poojas The beliefs”. superstitious old “reviving by of society” forefront the to “rising from adivasis preventing were Geethanandan and Janu AKS, of the member aPaniya Suresh, to According andtheAKS, the AGMS between antagonism the fueling from refrains usually who PKrishnaprasad, MLA Communist to according Even party. Communist the was welfare adivasi for pushing force genuine the neglected, allbut media, ofthe spotlights ofthe outside that believe Communists Most Janu: and Anthony for exercise” “image-building an merely was strike whole the that of theAKS convention of a front in in 2001,argued signed was K Anthony A Minister Chief (Congress) and AGMS the between agreement the after who Vijajan Pinarayi as such leaders Communist from statements with directly resonates The idea more forcefully: even it put member AKS Kurichiya A cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and activist ofthe AGMS: Paniya another for bitterness caused also elections with party Communist of the The obsession under them. They want adivasis to dance according to the tunes they play.” they tunes the to according dance to adivasis want They them. under be always will adivasis tomakesure is do to are trying others and Geethanandan “What “I joined with Janu with “I joined are blind”. that rituals and beliefs allows nor Kshema Adivasi Samithisupports the beliefs. theAGMS] But [unlike intheir continue to believers the want We rituals. and ways leavetheir to adivasis want “We don’t struggles”. of AKS news the suppress to tried and tribals, by the up put resistance of case only as the agitation Mahasabha Gothra the projected media bourgeois “the ( coverage” [media] good a earned who Janu was It Janu. of agitation the from nothing earned have “The Adivasis adivasis”. the with play cannot they develop adivasis If adivasis. to happen to good any want don’t who are people Geethanandan and “Janu influenced the Collector and the Revenue Department and somehow got it stopped. AKS stopped. it got somehow and Department Revenue the and Collector the influenced CPM[CPI(M)]men occupied atAralam farm].Butthe [for theland deeds title the get to about We were happens? Sowhat again. up coming elections there’s “Now Janu..’.” to her vote giving be will she ‘soon saying people’, ‘Janu’s us calling us, against discriminating started people party Then issue. land the withJanubecause of towork But Iwanted givethemmyvote. atall.used to the party I and other rituals he had seen AGMS followers do, he believed were aimed at “mystifying” at aimed were hebelieved do, followers AGMS seen had he rituals other and chechi The Hindu [elder sister], to work with her. But I had no illfeeling toward Ihadno her. toworkwith But [elder sister], , 18 October 2001). , 18October Widening circles of political dis-identification 162 CEU eTD Collection Communist party: the from received Janu treatment the considering when Geethanandan to according noticeable more is allthe networks Communist into movement the co-opt to out is AKS the that The fact idea: same the echoes AGMS, in the activist adalit Sajitkumar, said Iinterviewed, activists Adiya the of one Maren, moral corruption.As party’s Communist ofthe her exposure and popularity increasing Janu’s CK to reaction in bank” vote adivasi the “secure to attempt as an precisely interpreted generally is AKS of the The formation argues, Geethanandan As movement. indigenist the co-opting at attempts Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 94 prize” Kalan for adivasi rights”, and various symbolic gestures such as their role ininstitutionalizing the “P K struggle “intensified an call for their rights, of “dalit” notion the using to turn their Ambedkar, of appreciation their – politics identity adivasi towards makes CPI(M) the move Every cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and 95 In an interesting twist of historically loaded last names, on December 21 Described to Described me by dalit activists as “the award for dalits working dalits”. against and Culture. and Namboodiri, received the P K Kalan prize, awarded to him by the ruling LDF Minister for Education acceptable, as an ‘agricultural laborer’ and an activist. But after 1989 she came out of out shecame 1989 after But an activist. and laborer’ ‘agricultural asan acceptable, wasvery 1990,of 80s, end she acceptable –why?Upuntil not party.ButJanuis Marxist the to acceptable very is He party. Marxist of the member representative ablock …. party Communist the in heis active, politically still he is Kalan, her uncle And party. the very was she period that During youknow? party, Communist this in formerly was “Janu plans.” and our agenda Theystole AKS. called organization parallel a byforming ourstrikes claim toworkforthepoorsubverted who “The Communists vote”. adivasi the get it to in are interested all they But promises. sotheyshould arekeeptheir favornow[they ingovernment] [the Communists’] in their is Thesituation Janu! with not AKS, the with are now adivasis most though even – 5kilos only aregetting we government LDF with Now season. rainy during ration offree 10 kilo getting were we government UDF previous ofthe time the At statement. ofthat skeptical you.’ I’m for that do can we Only you land. get won’t ‘Janu that rumor the spread to AKS the and formed organization Janu’s with dissatisfied very became it So bank. vote adivasi its loose would it Naturally party. Communist the neglected they her.So behind stood adivasis all the [Muthanga] strike ofJanu’s time the At action. came into organization Janu’s after only formed was that organization an is “The AKS that!”. more than nothing to] thought his reduce will of Communism…[they part is India democratize to tried and ‘casteism’ against fought who Ambedkar …so democratization. for stand also Communists and of democratization part he? It’s didn’t caste, against fought Ambedkar person. good a very is Ambedkar that argue Communists course “Of all have had title deeds long time ago – but then how to pressurize us to give ourvote..”. give to us pressurize to how then but ago– time long deeds title had have all could we wanted, they If vote. their secure to enough just gestures, a few make will they elections, near Only happen. will nothing years five for win, they If CPM? the trust we all Buthowcan willgetland. CPM wins, thenextelections,if thatwith now canpromise acceptable to them [laughs]. Till the end of the 1980s she was an active worker for worker active an was 1980s she of the end the Till [laughs]. them to acceptable 94 or the “Ambedkar award” “Ambedkar orthe 95 -- hence become interpreted as electoral moves and moves as electoral interpreted become -- hence Widening circles of political dis-identification st 2009, dr. Vishnu 2009, 163 CEU eTD Collection 5.2.3 Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 96 tribals: poor of expense atthe money making and CKJanu, Naxalites including people, unscrupulous of kinds all were there convinced are, Communists many as was, to spoke I often journalist Communist A corruption. and greed after not were Communists went, argument the movements, other in those Unlike children. for aschool-building build to instead money the had used and himself for a house tobuild money accept to president, panchayat as even refused, had uncle) Janu’s and Communist Adiya (the K Kalan of P story to the contrasted often then were stories Such me: told AKS of the member aKurichiya As life-style”. a “lavish herself buying and tribals poorest the from money collected promises, false under having, Janu C K about networks party Communist in circulating were stories wildest The of theother. part the on intent malicious exhibiting as parties by both become interpreted income permanent without movement a beginning and salaries staff its pay to able party well-resourced institutionalized, an between differences structural The followers. its oppressing or exploiting actively is leadership ‘other’ the that claiming oppressed, adivasis keep to hoping is other allegethe to than further goeven camps both of views polarizing intensely The most I Muthanga: before long behalf on their acted have would it argue, activist well-being, in their interested really was party Communist the If cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and MAGINED ECONOMIES OF EXPLOITATION AND EXPLOITATIONBETRAYAL ECONOMIES OF MAGINED I’ve seen C K Janu’s new house and must say it takes some imagination to, in the context of Kerala, call it a “huge house”. “huge it a Samithi?”. Kshema this organizing are they why line...then a class on working are they Generally adivasis in the Kshema Samithi. On community basis! This same Communist Party. organizing started they years three two after basis…but a community on organized be not should adivasis said initially her. ..They opposing started they basis…and a community on way, inadifferent adivasis organizing started and party Marxist the how they get that much money.” that get they how is That money. foreign getting are they Weknow is. our question what is That time? years two in that do she could How time. years two in house that built She of luxuries. house a huge has she Nowsuddenly adivasi. other any like poor She was family. agriculturalist’s an to born Shewas of asudden. all Janu to happened “Things protect”. to interests their have just they us, for speak to want really they that not it’s it…now knew They land? no had we that unaware Were they dead? their burry to land of a piece have even not do adivasis most that before realize not they Did us. with stand to came party the Marxist that Muthanga after only it’s adivasis.But for done all pointto theyhave they to aretrying thatnow strategy oftheir survival just part “It’s Widening circles of political dis-identification 96 and all and kinds 164 CEU eTD Collection Communist networks that have penetrated deepest into rural areas with a high concentration of concentration a high with areas rural into deepest have penetrated that networks Communist is often it since And workers. adivasi oppress that of power local relations into blending Indigenist activists in turnsee the Communist party’s large institutional structure as seamlessly said, member AKS a Paniya Babu, Suresh As claim. Communists on, rely could people that party Communist the was it instead, violence, Muthanga the After leadership: AGMS the onto at Muthanga experienced theAGMS repression the projected even Communists Many Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 97 farm: Aralam at office AGMS the over take to organized they onthat going “exploitation” by the upset so were They light. same this in cooperatively, them trade and products agricultural pool to occupations), land ofits (one farm Aralam at organizing was AGMS the that groups” “self-help the interpreted members AKS adivasis: poor from takes than helpsrather claim, ( adivasis the amongst apolitical” and “gullible few the words, Pinaraji’s leader CPI(M) in or, dupes as movement other of the followers the defame to leadership the beyond stretches sometimes even argument of The line cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and An activist close to Geethanandan within the RMS in fact told me worriedly: “he is giving his whole life and poor?”. and to these causes. What will happen in his old age? Will people remember his sacrifices when he is old organizations”. Left other the and party Communist the was them help to one only the confusion, the all Amongst them.. for money spent that India of party Communist the was It safely... themhomebringing and jail them fromthe who didalltheworkoftaking the AKS and party Communist the was It homes. their to them or return bail on out them take to anything do didn’t of Janu organization that organization… of Janu’s people Mahasabha, Gothra Adivasi of the workers including jail, in were adivasis all those “when Janu”. with stood who are those days these most the suffer who people the Wayanad, In [adivasis]. community ofthat people using benefit, her for games some played “Janu their name. Is this not exploitation? It’s nothing but exploitation.” but nothing It’s exploitation? not this Is name. their in money are taking others that know even don’t adivasis The adivasis. ofthe name in abroad from of money a lot They get that. for return in money receive they adivasis.And of the plight the describing countries foreign to reports Theysend on. so and starving are they and poor are so Kerala in here adivasis the that foreigners tell “They will their pockets. Leaders like Geethanandan did that!” did Geethanandan like Leaders pockets. their into straight went of this out made they money sale. The for stuff other and coconuts store and Tocollect for? building office their areusing they what know “Do you adivasis!”. poor from money take not Wedo functions. AKS the way the is not It that. like not is AKS return. in get they did nothing And adivasis. poor of these each from collected they 500rupees occupation? Muthanga the for collected they much money how you see “Did The Hindu , 18 October 2001). The AKS in contrast, its members its contrast, in The AKS 2001)., 18 October Widening circles of political dis-identification 97 . 165 CEU eTD Collection supporters often presented themselves as the only ones with moral fiber. As Kavitha told me: told Kavitha As fiber. moral with ones only as the themselves presented often supporters AGMS patronage, political and electioneering of landscape a as purely perceived is what In of Maren: words the in Or said: Wayanad in occupation land independent smaller, a of leader Kattunaikan the As followers. unquestioning their as adivasis off pay can they believe who are Communists duped being really are who ones thatthe argue hence activists Indigenist AKS, the to reference with says Janu As followers. make committed not does however, This, benefits. short-term some get to simply pretence, as is argued, activists AGMS many the party, with stand still adivasis some why The reason Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Thirunelli from activist aPaniya Akkati, As party. Communist the beabout to tend exploitation direct of complaints frequent most the adivasis, cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and since”. ever us neglecting been has party The offended. were they and Janu against speak not I would said I So someone. by betraying gained money the with live to want I don’t But Janu. Janu meinmyneeds. againstmaynothelp ifIspoke education ofmychildrentoo the for provide would they said They conference. press the in Janu C K against speak to me money offered and my house cameto party [Communist] the from men “Two party.” political any support to not land, get to is aim Our anything. mean doesn’t It our votes. cast to used we election of time the at “Yes, exploiting?” are they in saying point the even is What them. with stand will they definitively then good, adivasis, the for working are they If party. the from away move will they definitely land, thepromised adivasis the give to fails AKS If them. behind adivasis gather to want they wing, adivasi party’s Marxist this “The AKS, back.” go will they benefits get don’t they when days, some After benefits. some gain to interests, selfish some come with within…Some from comes that adetermination with [financial] Peoplecome getting their support. must back Iwould whenIstop go words, else’s somebody on joined had I If you dare’. if me ‘kill say I’ll me, kill to comes someone If say. others what matter no back go Ican’t of determination, out Ijoined Since me. with problem the is you. That prevent can nothing then come, to yourself for decide you If inside… deep a leader not is person that But, leader. as the known is person this society, of the eyes the In salary. the get to come will person That a leader. become necessarily not will or she he leader, asa someone appoint and Sabha, Gothra of works the in actively partake to them ask and salary as rupees 1000 people some give I “If all up.” it cover to need they know They involved. are directly they men, CPM The seduced. are girls the and alcohol given are parents the films, the seeing After tempted. are They our kids. for apassion are Films again. and again films, see to taken are girls panchayat!The the in are there mothers unmarried many How seduced. are girls and nights the in arrack and toddy aregiven community of our “Men panchayat Widening circles of political dis-identification told me, told 166 CEU eTD Collection 5.3 Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist a of end the by marked conjuncture global larger of amuch part is but Kerala in indigenism of rise the in factor salient aparticularly was change for force a as of socialism The demise dis-identification between Communists and indigenists. of political circles widening into escalated rivals political of anothering and of history rereading a party, the of leaving process in the how showed moreover, chapter, Thepresent by it. disillusioned were they because but could they because not party the left and emancipation and equality for of fighting ideals Communist to attached personally and closely felt Kerala in people “indigenous” many however, showed, chapter previous the As people. indigenous for liberation of one is moment present the hence that and activists bynon-indigenous people indigenous on imposed merely were initiatives socialist such regimes, ofauthoritarian also outside that – initiatives of socialist part really never were people indigenous that shows critiques emerging such believe 2005) Yashar (e.g. scholars race. Some and ethnicity of issues ignored having cultural identity –just associalist parties inLatin America and Australia are now criticized for and caste of issue the with engagement a serious for allowed had not that Communism Indian in bias “Western” of the critiques and compromises of earlier are-evaluation to lead turn, in This, emancipation. and equality social for greater stood still the party believing stopped Kerala in groups subaltern gone, but all seemed economy a liberalizing in reform socialist state-led for scope the onward 1990s the from when so more allthe in power, participation continuing of its course the In 1998). (Tarrow policy as reform such implement to designed institutions in participating time same the at while reform social for movement apopular sustain to ofhow dilemma movements’ social classical the opposite: the quite something signal to seems it Instead of democratization. a sign considered be hardly can sense in this party Communist the of demise The aims. socialist for strives genuinely party the believe longer no they but alternative electoral realistic no is there because and networks patron-client its through concessions practical some get to party the for vote maystill Many course. its run has clearly Communism electoral that feel who intelligentia and constituency class working disillusioned increasingly an with together goes however, This, website). (CPI(M) votes” cent 33 per and 65 seats a “whopping it received 2006,when in victory election its with history” “created it claims in fact CPI(M) the contrary, the –to elections parliamentary of arena the in defeat into directly translate not does appeal diminishing This movement. Communist the is, that Kerala, in mobilization indigenist to alternative major ofthe appeal diminishing ofthe role the emphasizes that answer an has suggested dissertation of the part second this involved, dynamics political of the terms in inKerala indigenism of rise the caused may have of what question To the C cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and ONCLUSION Widening circles of political dis-identification 167 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist looking started anymore) that call itself not did often (that left the which in context the formed in turn, this, And diminished. center the liberal of dominance Theautomatic (ibid.). unchanging” be might world-system the that “fears into transformed become had be better would future the that certainties long-term The power. in once movements of anti-systemic promises failed the with disillusion a other, the on and order world American the in Union Soviet of the collusion ofthe criticism and power hegemonic of US a rejection hand one the on sixties: late in the erupting protests the in context every virtually in repeated were themes Two (ibid.). world” the transform to movements antisystemic ofthe capacity the with “disappointment a bitter with combined oftheworld-system” workings the about anger “long-existing the 60s, late Bythe (ibid.). dissent” to began eventually and thoughts, second have to “began hence militants ardent previously many present” the became future “the As 84ff). 2007: (Wallerstein them” represented that to be agovernment asserted was what on demands make militant to “not asked being of even position the in themselves found now people Kerala, in Including transformation. social towards step thenext taking of power, in once inability, apparent their with arose disillusion acreeping power, came to movements left-wing popular many as Yet excluded. entirely almost erstwhile those for space economic and political up opening “progressive”, indeed were results the because but made being compromises the to blind were they because be, not that powers the with behalf on their negotiating a period in which many adivasis was this chapter, previous in the we saw As ideal. their as envisioned liberals and and socialists both dalits – like P K Kalan - embracedof democracy kind the to a route was there economy, world a capitalist of frame the within even the role of the party in that all, after incompatible not were democracy liberal and socialism that proving socialism, to path” “Kerala anew, to key the hold might state the believed even was it awhile, For world. the across democrats social to example an was government, Communist elected democratically havea to state first the Kerala, and step” “first of the interms progress extraordinary made movements anti-systemic period, II post-WW the In 69). (ibid.: society” state/the world/the the transform then state, the in power obtain first action: of agenda a “two-step on agreement ageneral was there and strategy anti-systemic dominant the become had option” “political the movements, anti-systemic within debate internal of decades after century, twentieth the of decades early By the life. a better be facing would generations future present, the in sacrifices certain with that and side their on was history that idea – the (2007:85) oppressed” ofthe an “optimism of one argues, Wallerstein was, period reformist This citizenship. of mechanism the through inclusion demanding movements “anti-systemic” with combination statein liberal the of supremacy the by characterized was that and century mid-nineteenth in the began that period a long was (2007), Wallerstein to according latter, cycle. The reformist cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Widening circles of political dis-identification 168 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist part ofthis dissertation. of thenext focus is the ways structural inmore Kerala in ofindigenism rise the conditioned they how and latter the of effects The of neoliberalism. counter-revolution establishment’s capitalist the right: the from reaction successful remarkably and a fierce also triggered it -- movements social new only trigger not did sixties late the in appeared that reformism of crisis the For seventies. late the from globally unfolding was that capital of concentration and accumulation unrestrained more ever the resist to seeking currents those for space political diminishing the of however, indicative, more the all is close so fact in are ideologically even and biographically who those amongst andpolarization infighting This 2003: 168). (Harvey developmentalism socialist of rhetoric impotent now aby through movements new the co-opt to tried left traditional the where so allthemore dynamics, political ensuing the of characteristic a general is in detail discussed chapter present the that left traditional of the remainders with movements new these between clash of kind The movements. rights indigenous others of amongst rise the triggering ideology, and political of organizing forms different entirely for cycle reformist theendof a at conflict Contention and Widening circles of political dis-identification 169 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist THE “KERALA MODEL” IN CRISIS CONDITIONING INDIGENISM: PART 4 170 CEU eTD Collection relational and grounded insights into the process through which people became attracted to the to attracted became people which through process the into insights grounded and relational more provides thereby It place. take experiences such in which appropriation and production of regimes changing the with this from deriving meaning and orientation for need human the and a living securing of necessity daily the relate to helps of class concept the way, this in Used 2). 1997: (Kalb themselves” maintain and survive to efforts from their asarising people … between interdependences and ties frictionless never and basic the in as“rooted concept analytical an class takes that perspective class “expanded” an on this in rely I experiences. lived of everyday, terms in it understanding means way in this restructuring economic to indigenism of rise the Connecting form. indigenist an take to Kerala in protest subaltern of articulations contemporary encouraged have also may changes morestructural dissertation, of this part previous in the discussed dynamics political the with interaction in how, to clues us give can that restructuring, neoliberal to, areaction just not by, and isconditioned indigenism that fact the only is it For model. Kerala the of crisis the – by itself restructuring economic of process the by shaped was of indigenism rise the how studies that a perspective I propose of this, Instead of life. ways indigenous to poses neoliberalism that threat the against choices individual rational and attachments of cultural combination a from deriving action people’s indigenous sees explanation prevalent This 2005). Yashar 2003, Niezen (e.g. disintegration and dispossession ofneoliberal face the in available, frameworks legal and organizational whatever with integrity, cultural communities’ their to defend people indigenous awayfor was indigenism that indigenism: of rise global the for explanation structural a dominant beyond goes that explanation an I propose so, doing In thereof. visions Communist than rather indigenist to -- of contention forms new to attraction their conditioned have may lives everyday of people’s context inthe howchanges Ihencestudy ofdevelopment. model Kerala the of economy political setting in which the political dynamics I discussed in part 3 unfolded and consider the shape that of forces the kind on the changingfocus I inKerala. of indigenism rise the “conditioned” that relations power structural in shifts of study the to Iturn dissertation, of the part fourth this In Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis O N THE VULNERABILITY S ALARIED SUBALTERNS CHAPTER 6 OF SOCIAL : MOBILITY Salaried subalterns Salaried 171 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist key by several initiated was campaign” planning “people’s massive A 2009). Pritchard and Neilson 1999; (Kannan population (strike-prone) “troublesome” its for famous state,already this abandoned further 1991, capital in liberalization with isthat happen did What policies. adjustment structural dramatic it introduce did nor land peasant of evictions orviolent scale large- for allow not did government Kerala’s elsewhere. than subtler is process the Kerala in Yet there. living of people land the clear to army the even and forces of police deployment massive the on relying projects these of each – 2011) Levien 2008; (Banerjee-Guha space more ever occupied Zones Economic Special and 2004), in pace(Khagram increased building dam big 2010), (Roy market stock on the and traded companies off to mining sold were land of areas large early1990s: the in “liberalization” economic embraced government federal theIndian after intensified - profit financial into beconverted to field” “green literal most - the land over struggles India, in Also arekey. of legality definitions and violence of monopoly state’s the which in processes coercive stresses, Harvey David as usually, are decades.These previous in won rights socio-economic the of people disposes that programs austerity of types various of imposition the and land, their from of people expulsion forceful the rights, ofproperty forms of common privatization the and commodification formsof intensified on relies dispossession by Accumulation 2003). (Harvey accumulation primitive called Marx what of repetition endless the dispossession”, by to“accumulation of production, intensification the from profits of deriving logic a capitalist reproduction”, “expanded from century twentieth late the in capitalism global in a shift entailed “counter-revolution” This of 1968. revolution world the to counter-revolution establishment’s capitalist the called (2007) Wallerstein what of terms in transformed become have lives working people’s which by process recent the envision to maybegin we scale, a global At outcome. limiting what ispossible and pushing towards what islikely though never predefining the role, haveadeterminant to be seen can power of relationship a historical as class that identity, of political question static the than rather identification political of process the at looking i.e., by indigenism, of rise the of question the posing by is precisely It system. world capitalist evolving an in living of context conflictive everyday the from practices and interests, beliefs, people’s dis-embed to refuses that perspective class historical and a relational of in terms interpreted when power explanatory have more but of indigenism rise to the contributing in insignificant arenot determinants orlegal self-interested Cultural, 1965). (Thompson power synthetic of its analysis class depriving means fact in amanner such in added class of law: determinants orthe “self-interest”, of drive the “culture”, of compulsions the instance for besides indigenism of attraction the explaining “factor” another yet as class take not do I indigenism. of politics Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis Salaried subalterns Salaried 172 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist against labor manual doing days their spend who workers landless for difficult being latter the – livelihood own their secure to need the with activism public unpaid their combine to position a arein they Minimally mobility. upward some experienced have who those are generally cause indigenist the for networks social and resources, financial achievements, educational their used have who and Sabha Maha Gothra Adivasi of the leadership the whoform The activists politics. indigenist to turn to for them ground the prepared have seem to lives their affecting changes political-economic how out pointing activists, indigenist mobile upwardly such several of experiences the follows chapter This model. Kerala ofthe aftermath in the competition symbolic and economic of intensifying effects the experience who and dalits adivasis salaried well-educated, often of group vulnerable yet mobile avertically leadership: AGMS the on focuses chapter this land occupations, and demonstrations AGMS’s file ofthe and rank the form who workers agricultural of the experiences the on 7focuses chapter Whereas AGMS. in the involved classes main two the of positions different the to according differently expressed were Kerala in indigenism of rise the conditioning and relations class affecting shifts The structural achievements. these undermined structurally that of aprocess part 1990s was the in economy Indian the of “liberalization” the agriculture, and manufacturing both in sector public large a relatively and measures, welfare ofredistributive range broad a health-care, and education of provision public reform, land and laws labor of stringent enforcement the through market the taming about was model Kerala the se.If per Kerala to than history world in conjuncture temporal and spatial aparticular more to pertained model Kerala the argue would I fact, In neoliberal. turned democracies social other many so which under pressures the from isolated South, global the in democracies” “social remaining few ofthe one simply not is Kerala unaffected. Kerala leave 2007), Heller (e.g. hope to continue scholars assome not, did by neoliberalism driven restructuring economic global the shows, dissertation of the part this As reproduction. by expanded characterized period historical a world of part intricately also was – it programs protective and redistributive to commitment exceptional Kerala’s signal merely not did clear, became it model, Kerala old The 2007). Nigam and (Menon cooptation of neoliberal subject the became itself and in thestate invested capital manufacturing lack of the for compensate to enough however not was campaign decentralization The 2001). (Isaac well-being general ofensuring Kerala model old the circumstances, changed in continuing, was model” Kerala a “new wereconfident campaign of the Initiators economy. Kerala’s revive to order in initiatives productive small-scale support levelto municipal the to directly funds of government a third more than channeling reaction, in members party Communist Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis Salaried subalterns Salaried 173 CEU eTD Collection 99 onto their children’s generation. children’s their onto middle-class where education, of arena the secondly and today, Kerala in status social representing in crucial consumption, and occupation, professional ownership, of land arena the firstly shape: take insecurities present which in arenas important particularly two to regard with change of process the of vignettes I present paragraphs following the In indigenism. to turn to them enticed what of view grounded amore give can This (re)production. ofsocial regime changing particular a within lives everyday in their leaders of indigenist experiences the on instead focus to sense makes hence It advantages. material such or other subsidies receiving about nor on lease), least (at have already leaders all almost which land, of piece a receiving about not are they direct: very usually not moreover Keralaare in initiatives political indigenist leading for those Gains leaders. female for more damaging be allthe can which campaigns, smear of vicious target the become usually they time same the at yet adivasis” “poor as defending known be Theymay return. in reputation social ambiguous an most at get and activities political oftheir because debts large up run leadersinstead indigenist many Yet followers. their themand incorporate to eager all too parties political major ofthe networks well-oiled established, the have joined could they self-enrichment: for avenues more comfortable and risky less to turn not did orwhythey so do to chose they strategies the explain not do arguments Such gain. cultural/symbolic and financial for simply it arein who women) (sometimes men middle-class “exploitative” even or are entrepreneurial leaders these that arguments: utilitarian confirm automatically however, not, need experiences own leaders’ of account Taking movement. the to bring they what precisely is which Kerala, “mainstream” of part are rather but exclusion and poverty dire experienced personally not have leaders most Janu, CK from apart instance, for AGMS Inthe position. inconvenient an occupy to tend leaders as studies indigenous in explicitly discussed often not leadersis motivated of what The question movement. indigenist an organizing to time and energy their dedicate to them affecting changes by structural be encouraged would adivasis and dalits amongst mobile upwardly more the why hence is chapter in this at I look Thequestion followers. its positionas same in the not hence is AGMS of the leadership the 2000:325), (Deshpande groups other Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 98 wages minimal Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis I use “middle-class” here in the classic, Weberian sense of the educated, salaried middle stratum middle salaried sense educated, ofthe Weberian intheclassic, here “middle-class” Iuse A frequent complaint C K Janu aired to me was that rank and file would often be unable to come to (between those performing physical labor and those owning capital) – meetings because theyhadto meetings because 98 . Though class differences amongst adivasis and dalits are less than amongst than are less and dalits adivasis amongst differences class . Though kanjikudikkuk 99 hopes concentrate on carrying over their own social mobility social own over their carrying on concentrate hopes (eat kanji , rice soup – i.e. make a living). a make rice soup–i.e. , not in terms of the Indian Salaried subalterns Salaried 174 CEU eTD Collection 6.1 overall had less access to Gulf money (ibid.). Even those who did manage to progress to manage did who those Even (ibid.). money Gulf to access less had overall and 1990s the in Kerala in unemployment rising by the hit hard were moreover adivasis and dalits Both 2006: 192.). (Omvedt communities of other that double than more remains however still decreased, also has it though inKerala, andSTs for SCs oflandlessness The percentage land. in investing privately was could who everybody that fact of the Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist reform land style Kerala-model belated some not 192): 2006: 1992 (Omvedt and 1982 between 7.7% 12%to from decreased landlessness in Kerala, non-SC/STs Amongst all. at if later, even bought is land Agricultural onit. ahouse constructing start later then only and available is money as enough as soon habitation for land buy people many observed, (ibid.) Osella and Osella As 146). 2000: Osella and 1980 (Osella since percent thousand two to up -- land prices in rise sharp the in reflected moreover was capital symbolic of form as akey land in Interest plots. real estate ordinary into them turn to soil with up filled being fields paddy see Everywhere in key more land. buying in rice-producing invested became – usually onward 1970s the from trend increasing an regions – states Gulf I ofthe one in visitedwork job or a salaried get to managed who members family educated during my fieldwork by made money The mobility. upward of projects finance to loans todraw which from basis in 2005-2006, I could and standing social of as asign important more became allthe land – competition international to up opened was economy agricultural as Kerala’s -- decreased resource productive a as land of potential as the 1997). Ironically, (Morrisson income-earning off-farm up setting of costs the underwrite to loans, or sale through money, raise to capital as rather but farming for landowners small new successful 90s that 1980s and ofthe course the in is it 70s. Yet and 1960s the in already started process The 1999). Kannan 1997; (Morrison reform revolutionary to than rather system existing the within mobility social to committed landowners (petit-bourgeois) small into them turned also it land, to access workers agricultural some even and farmers tenant gave reform land as itself: development of model Kerala of the aproduct arguably was Kerala of “embourgeoisement” The initial P Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis 100 RIDE AND REPRESENTATION IN A BOURGEOISIFYING SOCIETY BOURGEOISIFYING A IN REPRESENTATION AND RIDE Legislatively, land reform inKerala land in 1957, started Legislatively, Communist the when governmentfirst ofthestate favor of tenants and workers) by the Land Tribunals 1981). (seeRadhakrishnan of tenants andworkers) bytheLand favor land and over 400,000 cases for Emergencyworkers’ ownershipperiod. By of1981, homestead the characterized that “threat” more Naxal the proceduresandneedtocounter bureaucratic of streamlining than land 99% had of beenover 3,5resolved million (largelycases the simultaneous 1975with a realmomentum reached in and tookoff finally implementation for intenant-farmer ownershipimplementation of of terms In (KARB). Bill Relations Agrarian Kerala comprehensive its introduced immediately it was only with the Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act of 1969, however, that and rents of large private enterprises. private large of rents and thehyper-rich,less than1% draweuphemism for of thepopulation, who theirincome fromtheprofits en masse started using land not so much 100 Salaried subalterns Salaried but a reflection but 175 CEU eTD Collection 6.1.1 incorporated as the new society’s slaves. society’s new as the incorporated became latter the whereas margins to its escaped they as dalits than still so era more Dravidian the of ideals the embody adivasis Sunny, to According it. replace came to that society caste Brahminical, the than egalitarian more much was which descend, dalits and adivasis both which from society, Dravidian of experience historical onthe relying about passionate isalso Sunny Ambedkar. of dr. work the from primarily draws he his inspiration and caste of issue the precisely hence is thinking and activism his of focus The caste. of reality the deny to class use Communists how Kerala is in particular he hates What it. to opposed radically is Sunny theory Marxist with familiar being despite Yet Naxalite. a was brother elder his and supporters CPI(M) were parents 4,his chapter in discussed biographies activist ofthe more once Reminding movement. the behind force intellectual a major and actions AGMS’ the of scenes actor-behind-the- important an been years for forties,has his in now man (SC) aPulaya Sunny, Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist “I Soman. and Geethanandan, C KJanu, of Idiscussed stories life the to background the forming those to similar are very however, here, introduced protagonists the of lives the through read we dilemmas subsequent and circumstances political-economic changing The 4. chapter in already Idiscussed biography whose as those same the not – are Krishnakumar and Mamman, Ashogen, Ammini, Sunny, – chapter this in meet we leaders secondary the Kerala, in scene indigenist the of protagonists known of less anumber introducing of sake the For leaders. becameindigenist who those of lives on the impacted have may processes structural such how concretely studying here to turn I (ibid.). Chattisgarth to only 41%, second at estimated is now it – tremendously increased has coefficient Gini Kerala’s and growing is figures consumption of these terms in groups richest the and the poorest between Thedivide then. since exponentially grown has even that figure a – states Indian all of expenditure consumer capita per highest the had has Kerala 1993-4, since that found has 73) (2010: Oommen thrives. consumption decades, two past the in Kerala in stagnated has production as Asmuch consumption. through name family and self one’s express to competition increasing the by produced tensions the felt also They land. and education private it in investing turn in were who communities, other towards mostly flowing was that – 2010:80) (Oommen decades three last the over total in billion $150 than less no at estimated – money Gulf of stream the to comparison in pale achievements seetheir to job, started professional or a land acquiring by parents of their generation the to comparison in significantly Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis T ’ S NOT ABOUT EARNING MORE ABOUTEARNING S NOT . I T ’ S ABOUT DIGNITY S ABOUT .” Salaried subalterns Salaried 176 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist ( labor day also in engaging without a living make to land enough receive not did they farmers, tenant unlike but, a homestead granted of being extent the to reforms land from benefitted family His ofthese. edge the on just lived and youth his in fields in paddy worked Sunny Even landlords. upper-caste of fields the paddy working lives their spent grandparents Sunny’s Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis materializes in Sunny’s home: the rickety wooden stools and bed surrounding the television the surrounding bed and stools wooden rickety the home: Sunny’s in materializes more substantial something day Another instead…”. homework some doing try always could her, “you heteases and meanwhile, shop a repair in at looked haveit will they that comments Sunny DVD player, failing the about upset or surprised too Not it. feeds she DVDs the of any play to it refuses as useless rather is DVD player the out itturns of Sunny, amusement skeptical the to Unfortunately, her homework. on works sister studious hermore while of tunes the singing and cherishing been has she films Tamil and of Malayalam collection the play finally can she hopes, she Now, player. aDVD acquisition: latest family’s the me shows day one daughter His machine. sewing a Singer and books, many acomputer, set, a television as such items expensive more a few have does it Yet it. of out and in flock happily chicken and pretentions upper-caste has few moment the for in lives family home his The rented project. his pursue to networks other to to turn needs however often Sunny enough, not is alone loan formal a Since family. his for a house build to trying heis where own of his land of a piece bought hehas which with aloan take to Sunny allows it but sector private in the jobs to comparison in much earn not does It prospects. career exiting many too without but job salaried steady, and prestigious a fairly is It ofIndia. Company Insurance Life government-run the at clerk of a that is job his professor, a philosophy of eloquence the with views his articulates Sunny Though him”. for a liking taken “has daughters of his one because Sunny by tolerated grudgingly – thelatter god) dalit nota (certainly Krishna of a picture as well as son young oftheir apicture includes are worshipped ancestors family’s the where shrine small A hamlet. native Sunny’s visiting were they when age a young at drowned son - their daughters two their and samecommunity, the from comes and friend childhood his whowas Jessy, wife his includes household Sunny’s “blackness”. of his disdain their to down boil Sunny to according neighbors the with quarrels numerous and Pulaya background of is family Sunny’s that well know neighbors His there. live familiesalso upper-caste many and room -- dining and bathroom, akitchen, bedrooms, two –including large fairly are houses its Yet house. his to I walk when my knees above comes almost water the monsoon every badly so floods it neighborhoods: of best very the not is It of Kottayam. town the in neighborhood middle-class a mixed in house a rented in lives now He job. office an to get managed and college to way all the education coolie panni ). Sunny was determined not to make a living in agriculture. He hence pursued his pursued hence He agriculture. in a living make to not determined was Sunny ). Salaried subalterns Salaried 177 CEU eTD Collection Sunny then tells me about the history of the paddy fields themselves: fields paddy the of history the about me tells then Sunny passionately critiques. With a smirk on his face, Sunny adds to the story, the to adds Sunny face, his on asmirk With critiques. passionately hemost is something or capacities position present his than rather occupation caste traditional his to according someone perceiving always of Malayalees in sees Sunny The tendency oftheParavan castetraditionallyof India, assignedcoconuts: ofplucking the task firstDalitpresidentNarayanan, the aboutKR jokeinKerala me of andreminds the coconut trees the hepointsat cannotcar pass, village, the native where ofin his fields besides thepaddy paths a his village, occasion.classic “ambassador”for hiringalong Walking native small car me to the the he invitedone day instancewhen for me.Also emphasizedaboutoften dignityto point Sunny this me. told Sunny black”, I’m because comment that made only “He that?”. like makeacomment to areyou who areyou, who but Iam who Iknow you? “Who are retorted and had implied was what exactly he knew said Sunny a phone?!”. aregetting “Oooh, you said eventually had ofthem One him. given had workers co- ofhis some looks strange the noticed he hadimmediately and thatday desk his on a phone placed had superior His work. his at he had a confrontation at angry day one home comes Sunny of caste, in terms experienced events and relations everyday of instance telling another In Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 101 sofa: the about anecdote alittle me tells and it about mood a good in clearly is Sunny room. living small the of space entire the less or more up taking set sofa a by replaced been have Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis There is a beautiful scene in the classic Malayalee movie dares do so and likewise almost fallsoff. almost likewise dosoand dares tothe coming of a Pulaya, otherwise it won’t be solid enough? All these dikes are built of our dead of built are dikes these All enough? be solid won’t it otherwise of aPulaya, sacrifice the field]needs paddy the [around that like a dike say to used they “You know protruding belly]…these days no longer, now I am a so-called I ama now longer, no days belly]…these protruding tohis …[then, pointing tooyouknow my youth treesin climb allthese “I usedto mentality!”. Kerala the is That juice]. coconut alcoholic [an toddy tapping trees, coconut climbing caste, of his occupation traditional ofthe because It’s post. flag the climb he will or down him hold to need they on, going is ceremony hoisting flag the when say, “They dignity.” about more. It’s earning about not It’s dignity. have to order in jobs, other on take to need Wedalits phone?!’ a getting heis a desk, at sitting he is Oh, now? laborer agricultural our is ‘where ask one no labor. Let and caste between tie that break to I want case. any in laborer agricultural as an Not fields. paddy the in work than rather die to willing Iam caste. is “That very edge of it, almost fell off…!” fell almost ofit, edge very the on sat She dare. didn’t on it.She sit to embarrassed too was She my mother? And this. like asofa was there and day homesome upper-caste one visiting were I, we and mother My caste. about you me tell Let caste? no is there Kerala in say Marxist “These mudalali (capitalist – upper-caste) home is told to sit on the available chair buthardly chair available onthe toldtosit –upper-caste)homeis (capitalist 101 . Chemmeen activist where fisherman where the (dalit) ”. Salaried subalterns Salaried 178 CEU eTD Collection colleagues from a more confident critical position. critical confident amore from colleagues and neighbors his with competition consumptive the confront to anything if own, of his ahome and land ofowning status and security the aspires Sunny them, Like status. lower-caste with associated work agricultural manual and of kind the do to are willing few out that points Sunny sovereignty, food of their decline the about Malayalees of many worries the Despite Communists. many animating issue an is which import, rice on dependence increased Kerala’s understandably more about theexisting inequalities thismagnifies than about issues like is anger his processes, market related and Kerala in boom consumer the about skeptical is Sunny though Moreover, identity. class than identity as dalit interpreted likely more is today politics stresses the issue of “identity” –which according tothe political dynamics inKerala his that logical is perhaps it at work, exploited particularly being about than humiliations social moreabout are frustrations his that fact the and terms economic in progress” “absolute Sunny’s Considering next. to the generation one from carried inferiority and of dependence relations of free tobe desire the but affluence, ofmaterial pursuit the nor ideal, cultural particular a to adherence strict beneither to seems Sunny for The crux so. doing of way “rational” be themost not wouldperhaps a day, for car anice hiring on e.g. money, his hespends way -the possible means all by wealth accumulating with obsessed particularly not also is Sunny hand, other the On culture. mainstream to of belonging as symbols venerated not are certainly they – skepticism some with treated likewise are house the into trickling durables consumption The Krishna. god the with “flirtations” daughters his tolerates but worship ancestor of custom Dravidian as a sees he what about vocal be to has come He manner. more politicized a in dilemmas these with deals Sunny competition, status middle-class up with keeping and in” “fitting at efforts tireless to leads this some for Whereas mobility. upward his of vulnerability the accentuate that interactions of everyday kind the in reinforced identity, of caste terms in particularly perceive and experience to come hehas something is “dignity” Sunny, For Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 102 Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis The collective memory of slavery among Dalits in Kerala contains many stories of the harsh labor, 40s – for a description of such stories seeMohan (2011:541). stories ofsuch adescription 40s –for mostly by Pulaya and Paraya workers, involved in the reclamation of the backwaters in the 1930s and cultivation if they so want to. No Paniya or Pulaya should be doing this.” be doing should orPulaya NoPaniya to. want so they if cultivation do paddy and go [upper-castes] Pillais and Namboodiris the let am happy, I Kerala? in bodies. 102 And all these Leftists complaining that there is no paddy cultivation going on going cultivation paddy no is there that complaining Leftists all these And Salaried subalterns Salaried 179 CEU eTD Collection 6.1.2 during our first interview with the fact that AGMS activists had promised her a mobile phone: a mobile her promised had activists AGMS that fact the with interview our first during assets toreach this position. This was noticeable forinstance in Ammini’s slight obsession or income cash enough quite not with yet status, middle-class to aspire them make to enough just seems position social Their garden. with house middle-class a lower in children eight their and him with lives She quarry. stone a owns who contractor a Muslim married having family, ofher rest the than off better is moreover, Ammini, Adiya. the and Paniya the like past have aslave not do they though Kerala, in “tribes” poorest ofthe one are generally Kattunaikans history to me, Ammini tells me: tells me,Ammini to history her community’s over.Explaining it took settlers or because department forest by the it to access denied were they because either work, to used they land the to access lost but agriculture swidden practice to used “tribe”who small – arelatively background Kattunaiykan of is Ammini officer police chief the told she mehow to me,repeating to story the telling likes her. She shoot to police the taunting apparently pose, a defiant her in showed that at Muthanga confrontation police the during taken a picture fame for acquired and in jail was Janu when occupation Muthanga ofthe aftermath the role in a leading gained had She did. Sunny as society Kerala of critique a similar had AGMS ofthe leader secondary talkative and fierce arather Ammini, Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 103 “L Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis The transfer of land from tribal to non-tribal ownership is in principle illegal and if a bureaucrat a if and illegal principle in is ownership non-tribal to tribal from land of transfer The ET THEIR WIVES AND DAUGHTERS WORK THE FIELDS WORKTHE WIVESANDDAUGHTERS ET THEIR conspired in proclaiming it transferred toothers. transferred it inproclaiming conspired had remained themthoughthemunicipality legally with sometimes ofScheduled Castes, case inthe also registration, onlandownership transparency todemand groups by Dalit recently beenused whose name land is really registered. truthas toon impossible thelegal toascertain itis littlepowertodemandtransparency, those with For this reason, in Tamilon Nadu,its officials the Right andto Informationthe title influence informal greatest municipality accordingtowhomever has bythelocal deedsdeeds proclaimed as Act hasas recorded in official recordsbegin need not,with moreover, and be themany sometimestheland were using wasnotregistered under to punishment. Yet, adivasis theirname same. Forloopholes to beliable transferringthe he/she would title deeds, inactually indeed wouldhaveconspired moreover exist in the prevention of transfer of tribal land. The title officials to forge the document..”. the forge to officials government the influence to enough powerful be will outsider the land, is our it know we our heart in deep Though land. our it’s that prove to documents legal have any won’t he will make all the documents about the ownership of the land in his name his in land of the ownership the about documents the all make he will us likethis Byinfluencing some paddy. money or some some timehewillturnupwith after Then of land. apiece him allow will we Then a house’. up put to of land me apiece of you to give would besokind to makea it haveland shelter, a place,and such Idon’t ‘ say he would and be amiable he would and come will a person then and of land acre have an I suppose But land. possessed “our grandfathers me first!”. shoot then people these attack to you want if thing, one do front…you the in “You there moopa !” [chief], Iamfromsuch [chief], Salaried subalterns Salaried 103 –we 180 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist – man upper-caste by an pregnant made been had who girl aKattunaikan marry to forced was son her sister’s of how tells Ammini Angrily communities. powerful more from produce its policing and sexuality women’s with obsession the that excesses the of brunt the bear to by having and norms gender “immoral” ashaving large at society in stigmatization their by mainly status for competition gendered by this are affected communities dalit and Adivasi prestige. for competition in the all-important become has “reputation” as awoman’s policed and guarded increasingly is sexuality women’s and 2010: 81) (Oommen rise the also on now is Kerala, in berare to used that aphenomenon deaths”, of “dowry number the this, With gold. advertising billboards are roadside as rise, the on visibly is dowries women’s for chains gold selling of shops amount The independence. and employment to a means than rather market marriage on the asset an often now is enjoy women that education The objects. as status women to attach which have brought, period model post-Kerala of the insecurities and inequalities increased the that prestige for competition the through is way one and avengeance with challenged presently are model Kerala the of gains these Yet education. secondary and primary in enrollment high and health good relatively astheir aswell women, of expectancy life high exceptionally the for known least at were heydays its model, Kerala of the period the during apace continued in Kerala other communities and Nayar (higher-caste) the amongst traditions ofmatrilineal decline the Though ofdevelopment. model Kerala of the trajectory gendered the reflect in turn that involved dynamics gender the demonstrates more clearly but mobility Ammini’s story is similar to that of Sunny’sCertificate. Leaving School Secondary their attained already in terms of have two and school to go the children Ammini’s all phone, a mobile afford to vulnerability able being not Despite of her slight upward a smile, behind her disappointment hiding barely only continued, Ammini And Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis why I would need a mobile phone..”. a mobile need would I why asked – they it heard they when upset were castes] other from women [Neighboring phone. me amobile promised had me.They with happy are really “They [activists] marry the girl]. She had no choice...”. no had She girl]. the marry [thathersonwouldhaveto herjust like that andtold mysister “his relativescameto Theyasajoke”. joking. saidit were “they [activists] Salaried subalterns Salaried 181 CEU eTD Collection 6.2 Chasin 2000: 18) and Sreekumar and Parayil (2006: 224), though often critical of the Kerala of the critical often though 224), (2006: Parayil and Sreekumar and 18) 2000: Chasin and (Franke respectively cent 51 per and be74 in1997to STs and female SCs amongst rates literacy found 18) (2000: Chasin and Franke case. the longer no is that Kerala in “uneducated”, willbe andadivasis dalits of majority the that granted for taken almost often it is states Indian other in Whereas “backward”. considered being avoid and aspirations mobile upwardly their - signal and - ensure to in invest Malayalees asset important most the is education land, Besides P more easily expressed interms of their adivasi or dalit identity than inclass terms. is experience they humiliations the every-day as well as people “their” with solidarity their both Instead espouse. Kerala in groups splinter Naxalite the and parties Communist major the both that discourses “class” orthodox any of the into fit to difficult muchmore seem Ammini and Sunny like by people encountered experiences of kind the known), now is it as corridor”, red (“the belt central India’s in outfits by indigenist more than even groups by Naxalite contested – is – and can corporations mining by large dispossession land whereas Kerala: in clearer even seems thereby politics of identity conditioning Its 90s. early in the liberalization India’s after market free of the influence increased of the expression connected, though different, a be to seems concern such Kerala in of dispossession, threat by the triggered is groups adivasi amongst land about concern the India, of parts other in Where Kerala. post-reform in prevail come to has that – phones likemobile gadgets and jewelry durables, consumer including also but land, on – centered competition of consumptive kind the with up keep to takes it effort by the background social of their reminded beintensely to continue hence labor, manual on depending longer no and of income flow a steady achieved having Ammini, and Sunny Both Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 104 adds: she ofagriculture, decline the about complaints upper-caste about remark skeptical of Sunny’s version a gendered In defensively, says she because, her anger They women. working about gossips the well too knows Ammini and do generally sisters her fields, the in work for out go not does herself Ammini Though Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis RIVILEGING EDUCATION RIVILEGING Expression workers in Kerala often use to refer to their employers, including small farmers, small- farmers, small including employers, to their torefer use often Kerala in workers Expression scale industrialistsscale ortraders. work the field!”. the work and out go daughters and wives their Let of work. kind that refuse We should profits. “We plough and work andthe “We plough and women.” honest aren’t we because not is it work, to out go us to forcing necessity economic is “it : ADIVASI IDENTIFICATION AND THE mudalali (lit. “the one who owns capital” owns who one “the (lit. “ ST LIST 104 ” ) takes all the ) takes Salaried subalterns Salaried 182 CEU eTD Collection has also intensified since the number of such jobs has almost stagnated since the 1980s (Kannan 1980s the since stagnated almost has jobs of such number the since also intensified has – essential are reservations ST/SC which in arena – another jobs service civil for competition becomecrucial. subsidies, government receiving institutions educational in SCs and STs for (quota) “reservations” ordained constitutionally colleges, best the into get to necessary contacts and thetraining provide to likely more schools private to children their send to and teaching tutorial ofextra practice widespread the in invest to money the have to fail who those For stratification. significant to subject becoming is Kerala in of education arena the argue, 2010) Oommen 2010; Lukose ff; 140 2000: Osella and Osella (e.g. scholars many As (ibid.). 30.5% 39to from declined – fees of free those i.e., – schools government attending of students number the Meanwhile, (ibid.). 8% for already accounted they 2006-07 in students, %of 2.5 for accounted only still these 1990 in whereas schools: of unaided mushrooming the and education of commercialization the with in hand hand gone has expenditure government Reduced 77). 2010: (Oommen 18% barely to decreased now has it budget, state the 40% of almost up took education 1970s the in whereas that means which year, 2% per has been decrease the 1990s, From trend. new a signaled 1990 after education on expenditure government in decrease of The rate others. to of education standard asimilar achieve to be able would they in principle that feeling 70s the and 50s,60s, in the up growing adivasis and dalits of generations the gave university, in quotas) (i.e. “reservations” SC/ST and schooling public of decent acombination hand, other the On 2010: 20). (see Dilip education secondary higher reach instance for STs 16% of only – still stratification educational no left model Kerala the mean not does this rate, literacy Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 106 105 of thepopulation. rest the and STS and SCs between gap educational the deepens which schools, by private overshadowed becoming education of public result the is Kerala in process this in groups ofsubaltern vulnerability The economy. liberalizing a in ofcompetition stone corner become the has today education model, Kerala ofthe stone corner the being once from Yet 18). 2000: Chasin and 90s (Franke late the in general in India men; 1999 data)–ST 66% for all (and STs female for 57 percent of rates incomparably literacy show even achievements, model’s higher than the 24 and 18 per Conditioningcent indigenism: the “Kerala model”for in crisis SCs and STs across Vinod George Joseph’s (2005) novel “ M.A. Oommen (2010: 79) demonstrates the growing disparities in education, showing that whereas in Kerala belong. Kerala only 3.4is this schools, private to of children their percent send 55.5 in Kerala fourth ofhouseholds richest percentothers intermsofthenumberyears of asto schoolingcompleted the fact well the that whereas as for and students SC/ST between gap toapersistent this the links moreover He 8 percent. already to rised poorest1990-91 quartile only 2.5 ofpercent households, of students towent which to “unaided” almost (i.e. all private)adivasis schools, and dalitsby 2006-07 in this had competition in contemporary Tamil Nadu. Tamil incontemporary competition high-school, powerfully dramatizesprovincial theeverydayat experiencea educational (caste) ofsuch Hitchhiker ”, whose protagonist in a young Dalit-Christian student young Dalit-Christian in a protagonist ”, whose 105 Though Kerala claims a100% claims Kerala Though 106 On top of this, the Salaried subalterns Salaried 183 CEU eTD Collection 6.2.1 is actually adivasi himself –itisonly recently he himself has started claiming this identity. he discovered have neighbors of his some that therefore recently only is It politics. adivasi into energy all his putting started recently has and retired since has He teacher. school a primary as built the house himself, he tells heritage.He me, “adivasi” his by taking confronting recently middle-class up Malayalee the of a member loanvulnerable at the time when he was still employedyet established of an that is story Mamman’s apologetically. almost comments he forward”, very are here –people house adivasi an very much not “It’s street: his in homes middle-class other at his home aboutof 2006 inApril him Iinterviewed “vice-president”. half movement’s as the media in the catapulted an hour from became hesoon the person, resourceful a relatively Being jail. in were city leaders AGMS many of Thrissur. The spacious house fit well with the Mamman Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist “I reasons. utilitarian direct for not if indigenism, to turn their conditioned nevertheless Kerala ofpost-reform landscape educational in shifts how concretely study to experiences politics directlyindigenist activists I discuss in more detail in this section did not become involved inindigenist The background. historical and ofcultural notions on depends also but aseconomic merely the resultnot is status of “tribal” definition state’s the because also exceptional, still – however yet – as of being is reclassification ST-SC Such list. ST from the removed being community ofhis injustice the and takenof adivasis” treatment government’s the of off ineptitude the “address to order in AGMS the joined the ST Ashogen nothing!”. we’re between, in list. falling it, “We’re put Ashogen As list. SC the to them add Yet to failed I government central the advice, on KIRTADS’ list will ST the from them removing though turn Yet SCs). for than lower generally are STs for attainment toeducational of levels the (since quota discuss ST the for than difficult more be would quota SC the for competing since community theirAshogen’s for aproblem –already a caste beconsidered to ought but a tribe beconsidered longer no could Vedan the decided responsible, institution government the KIRTADS, reclassification. of object unfortunate rather became the Vedan, the his community, it when joined who AGMS the of leader secondary another of Ashogen, that is case Asalient list. ST the on be to need their to related is directly politics indigenist with engagement leaders’ cases, some In increasing difficulty of getting public sector jobs forthe substitute to available are not jobs sector --private high exceptionally have remained of unemployment levels 1990s, the since rates growth rising Kerala’s despite And 175). 1999: Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis T IS WORTHY TO WORK FOR ADIVASIS WORK T ISWORTHYTO mashe (teacher) became involved in the AGMS after the Muthanga struggle, when struggle, theMuthanga after AGMS the in involved became (teacher) , SO I AM TAKING UP THE ADIVASI ISSUES THE ADIVASI AMTAKINGUP Salaried subalterns Salaried …” 184 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist it was his “duty” to help “uplift” them: that and his than different was situation their he realized me hetold communities, adivasi some of condition the upon reflected and struggle Janu’s of CK he heard When his. than community adifferent from children, adivasi mostly anarea with Itwas appointed. teachers more three were later only – school the in teacher the only was Mamman time long a For union. teachers’ party’s Congress of the member becoming also village-- the in teacher school primary first as the a job landed and officer” “recruitment appointed was home Mamman return his Upon him put hisreceivingCPI(M) off.Congressalsosupported himinteacher’s training. attracted toCongressbecause“thewasHe it was oldestof andbecausethe“violence” party” the campaigner. a as rounds the do to used and unit the of secretary as party the joined He unit. local a organizing begun just had party Congress the where Thrissur in college to went Mashe Mamman community, his in value a key being Education settlers. non-adivasi other, of that as same Mamman’s experience of acquiring the land where he has spent most of his life now is hence the now: live they area where the came to father Mamman’s that WWII after wave migration great of the as part was it Rather, kind. any of land” “ancestral not is now on lives Mamman land the landowners, adivasi other many Like practice: backward a debasing, is farming that idea the labor, manual on stigma increasing the of aware critically is he middle-class Malayalee of the member aspiring and teacher school asa work, grandfather’s his in pride take farmed his own land, asinstead but many plantation the at work not did people well-educated, also though grandfather, own Mashe’s from his community did. Mamman Though plantation. the at clerks) (i.e., became “writers” –and time the at certainly Mammanlevel, would like to – ahigh standard 10th to up way allthe studied brothers grandfather’s ofhis Two plantations. their expand to wanting planters from pressure under of it, most sell to compelled was but time atthe of land acres a hundred almost owned grandfather Mashe’s Mamman plantations. as well as upschools set to century nineteenth the came in Baker Henry missionary famous the where Kottayam near hill-area a from originally community, Maleria to the born was Mashe Mamman Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis hard now.” hard – it’s occupied is forest all the almost days These more food. grow to order in occupied being was land the knew they strict: too wasn’t also department Theforest permission. silent gave it but land the us give legally didn’t government The followed. here and land was there knew we how that’s so here come had village our from people “Some much exercise!”. –too teeth their brush to want even won’t people future In now. bad considered is work other good, considered is work Some work. physical and farming towards attitude a negative There’s jobs. white-collar prefer study who those different: it’s days “These Salaried subalterns Salaried 185 CEU eTD Collection emphatic about his true “adivasiness”: also is Mamman God”, for “choice Maleria of the genuineness the on story this shared Having Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist me: to legend community following the retold Mamman “money”, than rather education for desire a sincere had always had community his that fact the and identity Christian and adivasi his of both nature genuine the prove to Eager threat: under came community his for reservations educational the when changed this Yet identity. “adivasi” claim to not to him encouraged had earlier status, “ST” with coming discrimination potential the with combination in This, church. (protestant) India South of Church the to belonging a Christian, he is explaining not, hedoes admits he language adivasi an speaks himself Mamman whether I ask When humiliation: face potentially he would position his in person a for because partly an “adivasi” as himself reveal to reluctant been had He quota. ST access to order in bureaucrats necessary the to identity “ST” his revealed only had he Earlier, public. ageneral to background his revealing to used not was he – himself adivasi an actually he was people telling started healso Gradually justice”. social of issue upthe “take to he needed felt He Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis adivasis but he didn’t. He is more interested in Christians than in adivasis..”. in than in Christians more interested is He he didn’t. but adivasis for up spoken have could He as well. bishop aMaleria is There issues. adivasi the up soIam taking foradivasis, towork is worthy work forthem [politically] before. It not Idid though even adivasi I am Iknow Christian. became but adivasi are “The Maleria blessed”. aredoubly Sowe God. choose who we was it our case, in but – Israel choose God blessed… aredouble So we there. went they when That’s education. bring come to should they that and education only for money, not for education. The final time, final The education. for not money, for only he came thought missionaries the time every but times five four, went He missionaries. them advance. C K Janu’s struggle was a real eye-opener for me”. for eye-opener areal was struggle Janu’s CK advance. them help to something do to I had then felt Ialso meet. makeends to struggling were “they day a palm reader came to the to came reader apalm day One there. living Catholics by the then exploitation was There lived. Maleria the where hills five were there so ago, years or hundred A missionaries. the to went we case, our In them. to came missionaries that converted, who those that say people “Usually list”. ST the off us take to want they higher, us Theyconsider opposition. of a lot us are giving Congress in groups – some days these facing are we problem the is That adivasis. arenot we mean not does that But missionaries. Christian the through got we schooling of the because a lot benefitted that a community are “The Maleria culture…..”. adivasi have they Actually culture’?! no have hear‘adivasis we then but languages know two Adivasis itjustlikeallothers. is not abadthing, is –adivasi thing a negative be to that take and adivasi as an yourself you see when is problem The this. to attention no I pay but all and caste about particular very are people Some knew. worker office the Only adivasi. an I am know not did children the asteacher, school the I joined When know. not from ordinary people–fortheydid [ofbeing anST].Butnot discrimination this experienced I job promotions, – in knew they bureaucracy and “The government moopan’s [headman] house and said he should go the go he should said and house [headman] moopan insisted he camefor insisted Salaried subalterns Salaried 186 CEU eTD Collection 6.2.2 weaken the adivasi movement” by taking some of the richer adivasi communities off the ST list: ST the off communities adivasi richer ofthe some taking by movement” adivasi the weaken “caste” – but on the other hand insisting own his than other on communities to the generally referring – needcommunities adivasi “poor” to supporting resist what he called “a political plot hand one onthe with to preoccupation a twin demonstrates Krishnakumar Mamman, Like sense: ina“traditional” it, puts ashe not, yet adivasi as identifies he did, parents his than strongly More organization. their joined Krishnakumar College, Engineering Kozhikode at days his during Panthers of Dalit a group meeting After Movement”. Renaissance “Adivasi the he joined Instead parties. inpolitical faith little had but ideology “Leftist” toward tended Krishnakumar Battery Sultan in Mary’s St at days college his During educated: get would son only their sure make had to they up everything saved and education of importance the realized however they themselves, education had formal having not Despite Gandhi. and independence Indian with associated they which party, Congress the with traditionally were They labor. day of mostly lived but land some owned parents Krishnakumar’s Wayanad. in Panthers Dalit the of leader (ST) aKuruma ofKrishnakumar, those as such activists, indigenist leading other of stories the in are echoed status ST community’s his to threats the about annoyance and fears Mamman’s Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist “I AGMS, the join to reasons his both collapsing me, to Asheemphasized adivasis”. of “poor onbehalf fight to helping of teacher, school a pensioned of worthy task, upthe take and adivasi as identity explicitly both thereby and AGMS the join to upon called felt Mamman list, ST the off them take to efforts party’s Congress the and of Malerias identity adivasi the emphasizing in church his of negligence the both Against Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis F WE GET EXCLUDED FROM THELIST F WEGETEXCLUDED reclassification]. What they do is to weaken the adivasis’ vigor to strike. Every time the time Every strike. to vigor adivasis’ the weaken to is do they What reclassification]. [of policies government these with agree don’t I organize. to adivasis for is difficult “it things..”. modern embrace but things good the retaining in be sensible should life…we way of their in good something is there Though changed. so we forest the in live don’t –we live you where place by the formed is Culture tune. acertain to according dance haveto they survive to want adivasis If survived. and changed have they Brahmins, Takethe survive. won’t they change, don’t adivasis If oldtraditions? to the pointofsticking so fastnow what’s changing “the worldis school”. to be sent I should that just be taught, to ofwhat idea – no school me to sending of necessity of the awareness this “They had Being an adivasi myself, I felt I had to take up this cause…”. up myself,Ifelthadtotake this an adivasi I Being life. abetter to chance any stand not will adivasis reservations, ST without “Nowadays, …” Salaried subalterns Salaried 187 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist he eyes when his to tears bring to enough but very serious” me, “nothing told he discrimination experienced had college, engineering a prestigious at highly-educated being despite himself, He he claimed, As AKS. the form to decided party the when relief his expressed he also Yet party. theCommunist with remain to adivasis for need the emphasized instance for generally member, party a Communist and Kerala in I encountered men Paniya wealthy few the of one Suresh, AKS. – the wing “adivasi” an start also to CPI(M) the on pressure lead to did they basis, indigenist “autonomous”, an on organize and party the leave to them led not had identity with aconcern Though concerns. similar I encountered categories, these to belonging members party Communist amongst even that Ispoketo activists adivasi and dalit amongst widespread so was landscape political-economic changing Kerala’s in “identity” with concern This “identity”. their in takepride to adivasis enable and quota, right the set colleges ensuring about vigilant be of adivasis, oppression continuing the expose both to movement a for necessary was – it reservations SC/ST using of possibility technical the ensure to or education improving generally for push to enough longer no was is context, this In true. was opposite the whereas communities, adivasi and ofdalit supportive and generous historically was state the itpretended that was argued, Krishnakumar of reservations, effect pernicious A phenomenon, of this me speaking told Krishnakumar As could. they than “merit”, less on grades, lower with college enter could STs and SCs that fact the criticize passionately would to spoke I upper-castes many Indeed, of “merit”. name the in quota SC/ST an on entering those for humiliations increasing claim, activists many as and, media the in coverage increasing received has issue the filled, are service civil in the and colleges at inKerala) 2% forSTs and SCs for 8% (generally quotas SC/ST sure tomake activists indigenist of efforts the and education in ofreservations importance increasing the With said, he As quotas. ST using with associated stigmas the counter to precisely movement an adivasi for need the on vision wider a developed however also Krishnakumar Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis struggle ..”. struggle [adivasi] the continue be ableto won’t we list, the from excluded get we –if cause adivasi forthe fighting are now Kurumas excluded. become will groups more powerful the good parts of their [sic] culture”. oftheir the goodparts promote and beliefs of superstitious communities adivasi rid to a chance have we “Now self-esteem”. our lower to issue this up bring always will understand…they to want they what only They understand this. understand never castes 95 %.Upper as good as is this centuries, past the for to us happened has that oppression allthe considering [grade] 50percent gets adivasi an If college? medical enter they should why percent or 90 80percent gets aperson because just But grades. and merit about “They shout pride”. with adivasis ourselves call to beable to aneed is “there Salaried subalterns Salaried 188 CEU eTD Collection 6.3 unemployment. This structural bind makes it again understandable why people emphasize their emphasize people why understandable again it makes bind structural This unemployment. Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist ( labor low-status paid, badly relatively do to needing – of generation past of a position the to back of falling threat the with faced increasingly nevertheless are they laborers, as manual engaged being longer of no aposition from Yet 201: 165ff.). (Kannan work educated find to takes as it as long almost for work agricultural refuse to afford can programs, welfare generous relatively and sizes family smaller ofrelatively because who workers of ex-agricultural number considerable of the terms in exceptional somewhat is Kerala vulnerability. historical of their reminded areincreasingly they jobmarket, private and global the in those to comparison in pale jobs government as and schools private) (i.e., “unaided” by offered those behind drastically fall to started have education by public offered opportunities the as Yet workplace. at the marriages, at school, at neighborhood, – intheir sites many in communities “other” of members with rub shoulders now adivasis and dalits mobile upwardly confronttheir increasing social insecurity. As we saw inthe vignettes in this chapter, most to “identity” caste – their – “substantiated” on fell back and discrimination caste of resurgence as the this experienced groups subaltern became stronger, logic market a polarizing as soon as communities, other to relative than “absolute” more was model Kerala the under mobility their since of caste”: the“substantialization to leads of consumption, in that and production of arena the in both market, the of power increasing the that ff.) 353 (2000: Osella and by Osella argument the confirms emerges that picture overall The ofworkers. collectivity of a part as than rather communities adivasi and of dalit members as them threatening something as subalterns mobile by upwardly articulated and experienced become often job market and education of thenew uncertainties increasing the that chapter in this presented vignettes the from We see C personally. most him affected clearly – that orexploitation of poverty questions than – rather adivasi being of “identity” the was it youth, educated mobile, anupwardly As identity. stigmatized their behind leave could they that so adivasis the uplift to activities AKS’s the about was he glad how me telling stop not could he Yet politics”. “identity against line party’s Communist by the restricted probably could not Suresh as aPaniya. discriminated ofbeing issue the than rather articulate membership party Communist on his had focused settlement the explained: Suresh Iwas”, who realize not did exactlyhosts] marriage [the –“they party why Communist the by “settled” been had issue The earlier. years few the founding a dinner a marriage attending while others from a distance at seated been had he how recalled of the AKS had beenConditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis so important for him – ONCLUSION Salaried subalterns Salaried pani ) or face ) 189 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist turn in the next chapter. I that workers agricultural adivasi ordinary so many amongst program land-focused indigenist, AGMS’ the of popularity the conditioned of what question this to hence is It wages. higher of issue the over priority take would ofland issue the adivasis, “poorest” the on focused AGMS the if even of why, question the leaves moreover It thereof. visions secular-socialist existing the than rather politics of indigenist in terms emancipation their envisioning to attracted become also –would confrontations political direct of such aloof were who Adiya the and Paniya the like workers agricultural landless – AGMS the of followers ofthe majority the why unexplained leaves Yetthis basis. indigenist an on “autonomously” organize instead and reform land such of vision Communist the with break to her for incentives political clear were 4,there chapter in saw we As adivasis. landless to land of providing importance of the that is movement the to brought always has she concern main the her personally, for becameimportant also “identity” and “pride” adivasi with do to issues of the some Kerala, in figure public a well-know becoming of course the in Though own. of her land any owning without laborer, agricultural as an work simply to used and education formal hadno she subaltern: a salaried of that is not background whose AGMS of the leaders few onethe of is AGMS, the of leader primary the Janu, K C land. to right ,their i.e. adivasis, the amongst poorest of the issues material the prioritize they that fact the – from themselves also perhaps and sympathizers wider followers, towards – legitimacy its acquires leadership movement’s the though movement, of the aim symbolic a key as “pride” adivasi emphasizing in together come themes These indigenism. of apolitics to turn to AGMS of the leaders class middle- aspiring and moreeducated most ofthe conditioned that keyissues the form still they Yet movement. the of demands secondary more than anything havebecome quota SC/ST service civil and educational to access with concerns their nor environment, economic competitive increasingly an in middle-class Malayalee of the as part position their retain to adivasis and dalits of right the Neither campaign”). “reservations this during even raise, to continued leaders issue (an land receive would adivasis landless ensure to reform” land of “comprehensive issue the on focused generally has - it reservations” of SC/ST “safeguarding the for 2007 October in a campaign in instance –for explicitly (quota) reservations SC/ST of issue up the taken times at has Sabha Maha Gothra Adivasi the though that fact by the exemplified is argument actor” “rational aplain from forinstance differs interpretation class arelational such That experiencesrelational they encounterineffortstomakea living tosecure their children’sfuture. ofevery-day the kind lies indigenism in that to turn structuralconditioning oftheir a more with activists – return in the stories of the activists discussedhere, such political dynamics interplay and Communist and intimacybetweenindigenist conflict chapter– the of previous the themes saw we Though vulnerability. continuing their of source primary the as identity adivasi or dalit Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis Salaried subalterns Salaried 190 CEU eTD Collection 1990s, though the idea of progress was still very much alive in adivasi workers’ communities, its communities, workers’ adivasi in alive much very still was ofprogress idea the though 1990s, they still had a significantadmits yet programs, “poor-relief” these calls (1999) Kannan impactworkers. adivasi most for progress in lifting rural households of idea an alive keep to managed - had laborers agricultural for scheme pension outsubsidized of poverty (1999: 163). agovernment- which amongst least – not policies Bywelfare social and theof redistributive a host and provision, atemployment attempts mediation, 1980s, government and the1970s during Yet agro-processing industries since the 1970s. As Kannan (1999: 162) puts it and agriculture labor in for demand adecreasing to led already had 1960s the of movements reform land and labor of the as part achieved were that work agricultural for wages The higher states. Indian other from and abroad from products cheaper with compete to sector agricultural the of difficulty the and Kerala from ofcapital withdrawal further the following labor their for demand the in decrease a drastic faced workers adivasi paleas to starting were expectations these even 1990s, in the Yet labor. manual from move away and school in well to do children their for chance the perhaps and wages living against employment steady of having rather but job government ahigh-ranking holding or college of entering not were time this at expectations labor. Their bonded ending to commitment national-level renewed the and movement, Naxalite the by put pressure the introduced, migrants settler that of power balance changing the with 60s late the in labor relations of bonded themselves free to managed - only workers agricultural of percentages largest the find whomwe –amongst Adiya and Paniya many chapters, previous in haveseen we As positions. low-waged precarious, most the at namely is economy political- Kerala’s into workers ordinary of incorporation The nature. adifferent quite are of they Yet 1990s. early the in economy ofIndia’s “liberalization” the during accelerated adivasis, and dalits mobile moreupwardly the affected that ofthose case the as in have, changes These movement. ofthe file and rank the who form workers adivasi ordinary of the lives the affected have that development and accumulation of regimes in of changes kind of the discussion a to Sabha Maha Gothra Adivasi of the leadership the form generally who subalterns salaried the facing context political-economic the in changes of study the from turn I chapter, this In Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis provide for regular employment” (Kannan 1999). (Kannan employment” regular for provide to obligation traditional their up by giving responded Landowners wages. higher demanding in moreforceful became laborers gone, had eviction of threat the “once A DIVASI LABOR : O CHAPTER 7 F WORKERS WITHOUT WORK Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 191 CEU eTD Collection 7.1 “adivasi” dances and traditions-- something Thankamma suspects is a plan by the“educated” a plan is suspects Thankamma something traditions-- and dances “adivasi” learn they where Wayanad in children “adivasi” for school alternative famous the (“Dreaming”), Kannavu of moreover, more suspicious, even is Thankamma them. with a game” “playing was leader) AGMS (the Janu C K suspect even and culture “adivasi” of expressions of suspicious become have Thankamma, as such others, Incontrast, candidate. “adivasi” an herself: candidate a as stood – unsuccessfully if even – proudly instead and parties political for non-adivasi voting stop to alsodecided She gods. “our own” with “stay” to preferring tochurch, going avoided and patterns “tribal” with her home decorating started instance – for text the in later reappear grown skeptical of the politics of indigenism. One of the women in the colony, Manjuhave others - who while willidentity” “adivasi the embrace visibly to people some leading colony, in the debated hotly become since have themes political Indigenist 3). chapter 2003 (see in AGMS the by organized occupation land in theMuthanga participated colony entire the because workers agricultural amongst ofindigenism therise study to site exemplary an is colony Kottamurade A employment. with laborers ex-bonded adivasi provide to up set originally were areathat in the plantations government ofthe some on living been had who workers Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 107 ( labor day through a living making to used 60sbeen late the since had who “colony” a residential in living Wayanad in workers of groups related closely two on model Kerala of the crisis the with coming of changes impact the detail greater in analyze Ihence strikes. wages and struggles union of path the along continue of instead indigenism to - toturn adivasis and dalits salaried to compared when as reasons related but different - for workers these for more likely it made lives their in changes structural how suggest I AGMS. of the backbone the became who workers adivasi the amongst of indigenism rise the conditioned changes economic political- how moreconcretely demonstrate will chapter this in vignettes ethnographic The 69ff.). 2008: (Aerthayil category this into fell of them 4 percent only 2003, in year, per of employment days 200 more than had workers of adivasi 40 percent about still 1980s, late the in where labor: manual rural for demand less even moreover, Therewas, mismanagement. and under-funding through ahalt to grinding were schemes and welfare provision as employment rethought bedrastically to had nature Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis N ADIVASI COLONY MEETS THE THREAT OF ABSOLUTE EXPEDIENCY OFABSOLUTE THE THREAT MEETS COLONY N ADIVASI As described in chapter 3, Wayanad is the district ofKerala thehighestnumberofadivasis and the district 3,Wayanad chapter Asdescribed with is in birth place oftheAGMS. place birth cooli pani ) for local landlords and contractors; and secondly, a group of adivasi agroup secondly, and contractors; and landlords local for ) Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 107 : firstly, a group of people agroup : firstly, 192 CEU eTD Collection 7.1.1 (mostly against TB) in the colony, the “teacher” of the colony’s small colony’s the of “teacher” the colony, the in TB) against (mostly camps” “medical conducting nurses and doctor the to promoter”, “tribal municipal the from colony, the frequent of visitors sorts All village. of the rest the from isolated from far is it road, paved nearest the from of sight out ahill, of corner the around located is colony Kottamurade Though of Kerala”. “Dubai the as known was awhile for village the economy crop cash booming its for world: inthe pepper quality the finest of some producing for famous village the made also had farmers settler these 1980s, By the area. the into moving Kerala Southern farmersfrom settler ofChristian thousands by the claimed being its land prevent (unsuccessfully) to temple Devi Sita famous village’s the at camped was that force Police Special the against 1968 in attack Naxal-led successful ofa site the been having for known inhabitants 30.000 ofabout village (sprawling) Malayalee typically ofa edge the at of land 2,5 acres on families forty-four housing ghetto rural poverty-stricken and muddy, acramped, is colony Kottamurade entering the colony looking for skilled day laborers if such were not to be found at the informal at the befound to not were such if laborers day skilled for looking colony the entering seen be can orcontractor landowner white-clad big-bellied, occasional the Also customers. of search in day other every square mud main the into motorcycle his drives who seller fish Muslim the and struggle, Muthanga on the stories on up following myself) (and journalists Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 108 K colony. the within people of different experiences of the terms in particularly more then and a whole, as colony the of level the at firstly changes, such to reactions apparent people’s and economy political local the in changes recent discuss I which after colony, of the history the into insight some give first Iwill therein. changes and lives working everyday at people’s bylooking Kottamurade in of indigenism rise the moregenerally and reactions divergent these trace Iwantto paragraphs, following the In them. “exploit” to school of the head Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis OTTAMURADE To prevent all too facile (google) recognition of the village, I will not mention its name here. notmentionitsname will ofthevillage, I recognition (google) too all facile To prevent 108 . The village in question is question in . Thevillage : S HORT HISTORY OF A HISTORYOF HORT “rurban” P ANIYA COLONY Kottamurade in the rain the in Kottamurade Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi anganwadi (kindergarten), 193 CEU eTD Collection appointed as the “gang leader” of a group of bonded laborers, “bound loyally to look after the lookafter to loyally “bound laborers, of bonded a group of leader” as the“gang appointed village”. Indeed, Aiyyappan (1992: 80) claims the claims 80) (1992: Aiyyappan Indeed, village”. the of inhabitants other the for him to be responsible and interests, his after look to Janmi Nayar moopan The for. worked they landlords the to of thePaniya relations the of context the in emerged the of institution the in alllikelihood Yet custom. adivasi ancient from authority It is often assumed by outsiders that the that by outsiders assumed often is It enclaves). residential such for used term general the being (“colony” colony” as “Kottamurade known now hence is place Paniya.The in “murade” called was said – anactshe deities it tothe offered to, I spoke woman Paniya elderly an to according and, “kotta” fruit of type this called Paniya The bore. there oftree a type that afruit after colony callthe to decided and of trees area the cleared neighbors, colony’s the now moopan’s the ofKottamurade, site to the coming When marriages). (cross-caste marriages” “love so-called of --because (“SCs”) Pulayas – mostly “castes” ofother people acknowledged, reluctantly usually as is also, but elsewhere from Paniya mostly are Kottamurade in live cameto who outsiders These in. havecome outside from people marriage through now though relatives, were to it, the the received and land the claimed Having Kottamurade. called now is that land of fallow piece the on family his with settle and efforts colonization settlers’ the join to time workers living in Chiralle – a place about half an hour’s walk from the village – decided at this many possibilities for these Paniya workers and the then and the workers Paniya for these possibilities many hire Paniya labor themselves. labor Paniya hire to desire the and conviction of “Christian” – out labor bonded oppose to and “humans” as them to treat first the were settlers Christian to, talked I Paniya elderly the to According eviction. of threat landlord’s the from free stay to a place gained time first the for Kottamurade at Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 109 Kurichias andKurumas) area(mostly in the tribes land-owning of the some when time same the - landlords feudal and temple the villagefrom the around land claiming were Kerala southern from Christians when time the during was it village’s: the to tied closely is itself colony the of The history day. the for recruited ofbeing hope in the morning each travel Kottamurade from men many where Mananthavadi) and Bathery (Sultan towns larger the in points meeting Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis A pattern we know from earlier anti-bonded labor campaigns, notably by British colonial British by notably campaigns, labor anti-bonded earlier from know we pattern A administrators and missionaries eager to access labor for their plantations (Kooiman 1989). (Kooiman theirplantations for labor eagertoaccess missionaries and administrators was most probably the person described by Thurston (1909: 64) as “appointed bythe “appointed as 64) (1909: by Thurston described person the probably most was moopan relatives, together with the Chettys, an “indigenous” but not “ST” community who are who community “ST” not but “indigenous” an Chettys, the with together relatives, invited relativesto come and live there. Originally all the people in the colony the in people the all there.Originally live comeand relativesto invited lost parts of their land - that the older generation of Paniya now living now of Paniya generation older the - that land their of parts 109 In combination with the Naxalite movement, this opened up opened this movement, Naxalite the with combination In moopan is the “traditional” chief andlends his moopan Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi moopan ishistorically a senior Paniya (chieftain) of a group of a group of (chieftain) pattayam (title deed) (title moopan 194 CEU eTD Collection assertion of ‘worker’s dignity’, claiming welfare as ‘people’s right’,seems undeniable. Kerala’s undeniable. right’,seems ‘people’s as welfare claiming dignity’, of ‘worker’s assertion the 1970s through inthe instituted Boards Welfare and system, distribution public legislation, wages minimum reforms, land Kerala’s of history recent the this, In colony. the at built be to lavatories and electricity better or for school to of thecolony children the take to arranged be to a vehicle for instance for demands their of legitimacy the about them to doubt no was There advantage. their to offer to had model development Kerala’s whatever putting to used been had they that clear was – it colony their to assigned promoter” “tribal the through and meetings during – municipality the with negotiations their in Kottamurade at people Following past. “pre-development” some for nostalgia create not did and Kottamurade at people most by granted for taken was needed they getwhat to bargaining constant such Yet lever. as a him to had colony the at people most that the credit used and ration correct the provide to pressured beconstantly to needed moreover cards ration the for responsible owner Theshop “BPL”. as noted not poor, desperately though were, or yet cards ration received not had Kottamurade at families new several enough sure owner and shop the with negotiating involved this Surely theshop. from food get card to ration (BPL) Line” Poverty “Below government-assigned her use and wages earn to preferred much Akkathi allday!” fields the in working after especially work, is hard eat to tubers for “digging shesaid, As stores. the in food buy her now could she glad was she “tradition”, their was as tubers for dig to forest the to access having about worry than rather me that told colony, the from woman middle-aged a Akkathi, youth. their in was it than now” much better is “life that -- tellyou and degradation of loss stories expecting visitors of surprise the to often all– will Kottamurade in people older the Instead, destroyed. have claim, scholars assome may, “development” that glories lost of trace no show Kottamurade pukka built -- program (100.000) lakh“one housing” of its –aspart government the when evidence in moreover was Progress move. liberating significantly as a experienced certainly At the time of the to obligation its foundingrent- of rather but ownership land” of“communal one not isalso Kottamurade at arrangement in the 1970s, the workers often ran up debts to the to debts up ran often workers and hands work with owner the plantation by providing lot their improve to sought who Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist the of exaggeration an is probably that (though master” of the interests Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis likewise called likewise were teaplantations Nilgiri nearby for the workers Caste Scheduled rural recruit 1930s to the in emerged who contractors the that acoincidence be hardly can It ceremonies. certain through colour” a “religious given appointments aresecular these Aiyyappan, to According (proper, concrete) houses on the site. In the stories on their more recent past, people of people past, more recent their on stories the In site. the on houses concrete) (proper, moopans moopan. (Lindberg 2001: 62-63). These 2001:62-63). (Lindberg moopan (ibid.). It should be no surprise, then, that the living moopan’s moopans Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi initiative to found the colony was colony the found to initiative were often ordinary workers ordinary often were moopan’s true loyalties). true 195 CEU eTD Collection 7.1.2 “S engagement. political or worker-oriented citizen general from apart emancipation of routes possible other follow to prone more people made see, will aswe that, –processes Kottamurade at people of lives working the affecting processes bypolitical-economic beundermined to started decade past in the have they continue, state the on claims as such even But as worker-citizens. integration towards progress further expect to people enable did circumstances—but present in the see, we will as not, certainly Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist compete to sector agricultural Kerala’s of difficulty the and Kerala from ofcapital withdrawal further the following labor their for demand decreasing drastically of a time were 1990s the sector, plantation the in employed those as as well laborers as day employed those both For lives. working everyday their in of changes as part rather but lenses culturalist, nor utilitarian, through not indigenism of politics a to turn Kottamurade at those as such laborers day made that conditions the consider to want I “poor”. less become to want simply and rights “adivasi” about in talking uninterested are who Kottamurade at of people number a significant still are there why and land than rather wages higher for struggling were they ago, ageneration why – earlier so do not did Kottamurade at people why apuzzle remains it however, case, that In as such. politically themselves articulate and adivasis as themselves see to people for natural only it makes that adivasiness “authentic” another, is there over, haggled are strategically that of adivasiness discourses the beneath that reading cultural-primordialist by a arguments such complement to tempted are scholars some route, new this took people why explain cannot clearly arguments utilitarian purely Since as “adivasis”. autonomously organize to need the advocated passionately still colony the in people many occupation, Muthanga of the break-up disastrous the after even Yet meant. this what and adivasis, as “autonomously” organize should they not or whether and entailed, this what and “traditions”, their reclaim to aneed was there or not on whether colony the in of debate alot with came it since a move so straight-forward not was AGMS the Joining instance. for municipality or the parties political – through land get to of trying ways other There were me, told Kottamurade, in AGMS the of leader first the Chimbren, As land”. needed “we plainly: usually was answer their struggle, Muthanga AGMS’ the joined they why directly Kottamurade at people I asked When not did clearly development ‘pro-poor’ on emphasis rhetorical Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis UFFOCATION land” - adding “even with you with “even -adding land” us promise to came who anyone with gone have would we – way other no was “There ” ANDEXPENDABILITY chechi [elder sister]..!”. [elder Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi guarantee such development— such 196 CEU eTD Collection administrative costs of running the board. Particularly in regions with the highest concentration highest the with regions in Particularly board. the of running costs administrative the defray to diverted was apension with them provide to was that Board Fund Welfare Workers Agricultural the to laborers by agricultural contributed money the even revealed, (2008) Mohanakumar As period. same this in laborers agricultural for measures security social neglected has but farmers small support to of measures ahost implemented has government the that noted been also has it of distress, forms relational other than suicide to inductive more is farmers small amongst and property all status of loosing threat the and indebtedness high of stress the whereas Yet workers. Paniya to employment less even provide could farmers capital” for the number of farmers committing suicide (Nair and Menon 2007) andMenon (Nair suicide committing of farmers number the for capital” “suicide Kerala’s as known became village the and 1990s the during slumped crops of cash price the when trouble more even in were they time, the at crops cash other and pepper, rubber, in economy regional abooming from profiting neighbors mobile,land-owning upwardly their by 1980s ofthe in thecourse behind left been already had at Kottamurade workers while Hence Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 110 The stress thisproduces ispalpable inChimbren’s words: me told Kottamurade, at women ofthe one Akkathi, As hired. being migrants Tamil of trend a however was there dignity, their within still were that wages fetch did Paniya where area, in the works construction and Onroad a Paniya. remaining while compromise can one far how to limits (relational) absolute were apparently, –there, do” we than less 10 rupees even for work can [Kattunaikans] me “they told Kottamurade at people “fact” of amatter As food). supplementary for forest the into trekking to used more still were they because (also Paniya the than wages lower even for work to willing were apparently who community “adivasi” small another Kattunaikans, were fieldwork of my time the at itself colony Kottamurade around fields paddy few the working seen people only The work. of finding possibilities their in decade past the during decline amarked indicated to Ispoke whom Kottamurade peopleat of majority large The mismanagement. and under-funding to 1990sdue the in ahalt to grinding were moreover schemes welfare and provision Employment elsewhere. produced products cheaper with Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis For a compelling analysis of how industrial agriculture and, later, speculative agri-business created the created agri-business speculative and,later, agriculture industrial ofhow analysis acompelling For political-economic and environmental context for these farmer suicides seeMuenster(2011). suicides farmer forthese environmental context and political-economic out of grief...” out mother, father, brothers in law, we all want all we law, in brothers father, mother, kanji “If we can’t find work, we can’t have wecan’t find work, can’t“If we anymore.” work for us calling not are They money. much too for asking are Kottamurade] from people the and Chettys [the these that saying outside from people they hire Instead breadwinners]. main the considered were husbands their since wages very low for work to willing were women whose neighbors ST not but “indigenous” wealthier [the Chettys the call even don’t they “Nowadays at home. We have four or five children here, not only mine, my sister’s also. Then mysister’s mine, only not here, children or five four have We home. at kanji (rice soup). If there is no work, we won’t have won’t we work, no is there If soup). (rice kanji . Chechi Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi [elder sister], Iam this saying [eldersister], 110 .Debt-ridden 197 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 111 of“ shooting of the setthe found I day One Kerala. in well is doing that industry film the for attraction bean to seem moreover Adivasis institutes). such from by students vain in on solicited often was opinion “expert” my (something attraction as adivasi the on focus to fails ofwhich none yet adivasis enroll which of few 530), 2002: Parayil and (Sreekumar inWayanad institutes and courses management of tourism a mushrooming There’s experience.” andfascinating enchanting is an forest the of people these with time “spending that us tells and dance” “tribal exotic-looking an of a picture with homepage its adorns there, stationed was that battalion military the to be traced often can offspring whose mothers” adivasi “unwed of so-called number large for the area known an Thirunelli, in Retreat” The “Jungle patio. ofits middle the in dress “traditional” in woman 1992 in held was adivasi first the where town the Manathavadi, in hotel Brahmagiri Theluxurious attraction”. a “tourist as large figure abstractly they though sector, in this employment no have generally workers “Adivasi” 110). 2006: (Jacob the rise on visibly areais the in hotels of luxury number andthe district” a “tourism declared been recently has Wayanad sectors. manufacturing and agricultural of the collapse forthe compensate to hoped 2002), Parayil and (Sreekumar engine” “growth as a promoted actively is It tourism. of that is Wayanad in booming visibly is that sector the of labor, sources cheaper even to are turning other sectors and crisis in is agriculture While 28). 2008: (Mohanakumar benefit” the of avail to alive remains ifshe/he fortunate be considered should “a labourer that delays such encountered benefits of due settlement Palakkad), and Idukki, (Wayanad, Kerala in Tribes of Scheduled Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis participate in what was almost a casino gamble, considering the fluctuation of prices of ginger of prices fluctuation the considering gamble, a casino almost was what in participate to beable to order in landlords local from border the across land leasing were servants civil pensioned or farmers Malayalee Many plantations. banana and ginger owned privately the in basis a on temporary worked they There “Coorg”). (formerly Kodagu to particularly of Kerala, outside places homeand their between migrate to forced increasingly - were 2005) Mosse 1996, Breman (see India in adivasis many – like atKottamurade people living, makea to order In sidelines. the on by standing were adivasis actual the of most but Wayanad in prominently figured violence.ofa re-enactment “adivasis” moviestarMohanlalin theMuthanga Kerala’s Imaginary of a glimpse get to hoping Kottamurade from people with crowded adivasi), occasional the See chapter 3.1. See chapter 111 , has a huge picture of an adivasi an of picture a huge , has The photographer” , a movie about a aboutphotographer(and ofwildlife , amovie sangam Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi Adivasi woman on tourism poster tourism on woman Adivasi 198 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 112 altogether. anymore society of local part being longer no and expendable made of being that exploited: being of that than worse is that reality creeping a to a counter-claim posing also but exploitation their to just not pointing meaning, a double have to seems statement, this described, just context economic changing the in Yet theirs”. work to come longer no we would land, own would if we that afraid were “people because evicted was at Muthanga occupation land me their tell often would Kottamurade at People citizenship. Malayalee proper from metaphorically and literally both them excludes further in engage to areforced Kottamurade at those like laborers day adivasi migration circular the Hence “affairs”. have and drunk, get to morals”, “lax practice to cream and skin (whitening) lovely” and “fair as such items” consumption “silly and “jeans” tobuy only Kodagu to going workers adivasi as villagers by interpreted usually - is 130 ff.) 2010: (see Shah of consumption circuits and relationships worldly more regulated, traditionally less in part take to – thechance ofmigration advantage Theone place. “immoral” and a as scary known isgenerally Kodagu stigmatized. is highly migration because also but of Kerala outside plantations private the at conditions living and working bad ofthe because stressful was way. the only on happened negotiation the times, other At Kodagu. to them taking jeeps the mounted they before negotiated were wages Sometimes months. those in even Kodagu to move to had they Lately season. the was it when March and February in cultivation in pepper work find able to still were they first At worse. gradually become had Things 90s. early the in started Kodagu to migration the me, told Kottamurade in people As home. at dinner and breakfast ate they since plantation the at aday meals three than rather one only needed they families: by their absorbed partly were workers of native reproduction social of costs the also because but workers, migrant of other presence of the because partly Kerala, from workers for wages on pressure downward a was there Kodagu In workers. runaway the find to where know would contractors the strangers, no being since done was work the before home back go off to run workers could of norms, violation in obviously alltoo were contractors when Only keeping. book false through or simply wages, their from money the withholding and liquor byselling instance – for on later wages full their them paying of not ways many find would contractors the Consequently, farmers. these for working labor contractors by the 1000 rupees) 500 and between (usually them to given advances through plantations on these to work be attracted would Kottamurade from People crops. cash other and Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis As the farmers leasing land in Koddagu told me, there is a lot of financial stress on them since the price the since stressonthem of financial alot is toldme,there inKoddagu land leasing As thefarmers leased outtheirland. who Karnataka in landowners large werethe all it from benefiting the onesreally these farmers, the price ofof leasing land isginger constantly increasing and stands at more thanfluctuates 30.000 rupees an acre (in 2009) while as much as from 2000 to 300 rupees per 60 kilograms. According to Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 112 The migration experience Themigration 199 CEU eTD Collection houses. Chimbren describes the atmosphere in the colony telling me, telling colony the in atmosphere the describes Chimbren houses. the renovate to municipality by the approved scheme upthe take or evento land the on huts new build to Kottamurade at people forbidding of form the in comes also pressure The colony. inthe fights for spark the provides of alcoholism, context the in particularly often, and families the earlier (whereas rent of payments late for allow to of Vasi part the on unwillingness increasing an of form the in comes Thepressure condition. their of character the“suffocating” emphasizing constantly as experience people which colony, leavethe to people get to trying been gradually hence has Vasi Kozhikode. and in Bangalore middle-classes urban of the homes weekend and resorts corporate for investment capital value as a new acquired has Wayanad in land since case the more all the is This colony. of the poverty abject the from escape narrow Vasi’s sustain effectively could land the others, out to or rented sold If relatives. distant unemployed of largely a group by housing than profitably much more be used could that land stand: houses the which new as the Vasi recognize not did Kottamurade of people the that nothing for not is it -- employers potential and at Kottamurade the workers between brokering in indeed , or claims moral traditional such in for the respect their come with that obligations traditional the at hint also thereby they But land. on the live to them “allowed” having On the one hand, people in the colony often emphasize their “gratefulness” to the to “gratefulness” their emphasize often colony the in people hand, one the On the colony. haunting redundancy of specter wider the reflects the around tensions as strain particular under is it present at Yet, consensus. “traditional” on just founded been never historically saw, the between relation coolies.”The as here living all are all We authority. his under is colony whole “this me, told colony, Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist living in – progress considered was ago a generation what Indeed, “suffocated”. being but bondage, nor starvation, literal not was problem Their situation. their describe to Kottamurade at by people used often most a metaphor in revealed is also processes political-economic such of The nature Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis the land the of onpart grown crops cash fromthe profits also who Vasi, to rent allpay Kottamurade deceased of the son the Vasi, of name in the registered is today land Kottamurade’s itself. colony the -- in skin the on close –and miniature also in happening are society, of Kerala out pushed increasingly are people whereby processes structural the of how aproduct is “Suffocation” “colonization”. of process a as ghettoes: rural ofthese founding the to refers generally Janu CK way in the experienced moopan moopan pukka was happy to have people indebted to him), which in turn increases tensions within tensions increases turn in which him), to indebted people tohave happy was managed to keep uninhabited for that purpose. As Karuppen, one of men of the ofmen one Karuppen, As purpose. that for uninhabited keep to managed houses erstwhile only permitted to higher caste communities - is increasingly communities caste to higher permitted only erstwhile houses moopan moopan when his father died. What Vasi is more interested in is the land on land the inis interested ismore Vasi What died. his father when , who himself lives outside of the colony. Inhabitants of Inhabitants colony. ofthe outside lives himself , who moopan moopan’s and the rest of the people at Kottamurade has, as we has, Kottamurade at people of the rest the and moopan ownership of the land are escalating in what are escalating land of the ownership . Vasi, however, seems little interested little seems however, . Vasi, Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi moopan 200 for CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist public like just schooling, public that well know Kottamurade at People Kerala. contemporary job in of semi-skilled kind any acquire to enough longer no is itself in which exam, school-leaving the pass to managed yet has colony the in child a single not since surprising hardly is This lunch. a free get could children their where a place best at was school that more cynical view the usually expressing study yet may diligent make through they hoping itbig future, children’s their envisioning when extremes between torn were atKottamurade to spoke I people Many dissolved. but all has while a short for out held education that emancipation steady ofgeneral, hope – the classes skip won’t they promise children their making school, to children the bring to foravehicle municipality the pressuring running, (kindergarten) the – keeping education children’s their for struggle to more allthe continue parents some While mere illusions. children their for hopes erstwhile their considering increasingly moreover are parents inflation, educational and unemployment of increasing context the In school. for bemotivated to children for conditions favorable create not do parents or unemployed oft-absent particularly and fights, family nightly quarters, living overcrowded Yet servant. a public or keeper toashop assistant being to make it even perhaps and say), often would they are”, we (“as as ignorants treated be longer no to rights, their know to enough educated become would children their hope least at to used they say parents men”, —“police popular particularly or – stars”, “movie “teachers”, becoming of dream would to I spoke children Though school. to go children seetheir to eager people many made turn in which 1980s, of Campaigns Literacy the during writing and reading to introduced first were Kottamurade at Adults obligations). labor and “domestic” other their with this combining of difficulty the (despite literacy attaining to committed most those amongst were men, than rather women, as smaller much seems there gap gender the though colony Kottamurade in my experiences by are confirmed that – data 27) 2003: (KIRTADS women for 25 percent and men for percent 40 about of rate literacy a have Kerala, in poorest very the are among who Paniya, the Even Kottamurade. at people affect that landscape educational in the come changes of this top On themselves. for land of a piece have to Kottamurade at people of desire the does so increases, colony the in them on pressure the As headds, resigned, more Later, Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis end up infights…” we always And frustrated. it! Weare in living families six are there there… down house the … us. chocking is It here. live We can’t ... suffocation. this in here, live can’t “we more people every day. The number never decreases…”. never number The day. every more people There’s here. live can one no that is fact the But don’t. who those are there and drink who people Thereare situation. suffocating this in live to but way other no “We have Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi anganwadi 201 CEU eTD Collection 7.1.3 Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist each twenties, late in their women literate both Thankamma, and Manju were differences their in outspoken particularly were who people Two divided. were opinions onwhich topics were continue to how and come about had this how Yet loss. oftotal one was ofMuthanga aftermath classes.The many too “skipped” had they that pretence the under school to back refused were meanwhile, Children, return. their all on at work any find to for them difficult it made which Muthanga, at were ofKottamurade people the while workers migrant other, hiring started had landlords local the of Many month. every localmagistrate the to besummoned to continued husband, Manju’s other, the while after, soon hedied health bad in such returned of them One later. weeks cameback only and in jail tortured menwere Two handicaps. lasting sustained they that so badly injured were ofthem Some Kottamurade. to back Muthanga from way all the them, denounce to willing locals and police the escape to for days walked Many all destroyed. it see to only owned they everything virtually them with brought had whom of most Kottamurade, of people the for experience atraumatic was Muthanga at occupation land of their The eviction D level. personal a more at indigenism towards conditioning people’s study to Kottamurade at women prominent two of these experiences the follow Iwill section, following the In direction. opposite in the moved Thankamma, suchas others, Yet situation. their of interpretation “adivasi” of an convinced more ever become have moreover – asManju –such Kottamurade in people some occupation, land Muthanga of the eviction violent the 2003. After in Muthanga move to and belongings few their gather to became motivated inhabitants Kottamurade’s why explain best world, the on outlook their shape inturn which lives, working everyday people’s in changes These “suffocation”. present its from it save and identity this “reclaim” to desire the and identity “adivasi” of their terms in others to difference their seeing of popularity growing the to contributed processes same These society. of Kerala rest the from apart “autonomously”, live to organizing and somewhere own of their land a pieceof ofacquiring idea the to more receptive atKottamurade people made education,all proper through them around others with integrate ableto being children oftheir few prospects having and elsewhere, migration of seasonal periods long from hometo come least at could still they land the off pushed being workers, as agricultural role traditional their in expendable increasingly made Being after-hours. doctors visit and tutors private pay to money you need care, health proper and realschooling to access have to days: these afaçade only is care, health Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis IVERGENT PATHWAYS OFBELONGING IVERGENT PATHWAYS Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 202 CEU eTD Collection readings on the radio and heavy drinking. heavy and radio on the readings Bible to listening as such relief, possible of venues other to resorts also he though future, of his vision “adivasi” different, aradically towards moreinclined Chimbren made as aworker-citizen integration his of improbability The family. his for provide able to being about desperate often is and neighbors orthrough municipality the either from support of financial form any received has not moreover Chimbren Vellichi, and Thankamma Unlike colony. the in role public erstwhile his helost which of process the family—in his sustain to order in Kerala of outside plantations other and Koddagu at end on months spend to forced he is that fact the with coincidental be to seem not does turn in This Kottamurade. at by staying living a decent sustaining other hand ismuch more inclined towards indigenism and pessimistic about the possibility of onthe over, took Manju before Kottamurade at AGMS the of leader first the was who Chimbren, moopan the from ofland buyapiece to used she which farmer, the from money of sum considerable a receive to managed she case, acourt through her rights her claim help to willing organization a women’s and brothers three having and mother”, “unwed an thereby Being son. a to birth gave and nearby living afarmer with “affair” an had she died, husband herfirst after own doing: of her extent some to and contingent, rather is land this owns she reason The colony. the to adjacent of land plot asmall owns she as society in Kerala foothold of asolid something has already she Thankamma, than more so even that, fact the with coincidental not probably is which skepticism regarding their participation in the AGMS, towards inclined generally is instance for Vellichi friend Thankamma’s involved. determinants structural andthe contingencies the both demonstrates that position middle ambiguous a more occupy people Many respectively. Thankamma and Manju of paths or anti-indigenist indigenist the either follow neatly Kottamurade at people all not that though, note, must I first indigenism. rejecting of trajectory the of other the politics, of indigenist embracement an to leading conditions ofthe one the cases, as “ideal-typical” extent some to them Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 113 colony. the two“ ofthe one chairing Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis These . kudumbamsree 113 In the following paragraphs I zoom in on the stories of these two women, treating women, two these of stories the on in I zoom paragraphs following the In projects were part of a state-wide campaign initiated in1991. initiated state-wide campaign ofa part projectswere kudumbamsree ” (family luck/prosperity) female micro-financegroups in female micro-financegroups luck/prosperity) ” (family Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi Vel lichi on heradjacentplot to Kottamurade 203 CEU eTD Collection Thankamma to voice her opinions in public. Both Manju and Dasen live off live Dasen and Manju Both inpublic. opinions her voice to Thankamma than shy much less is and up speak to the first is often -Manju landscape Kerala the of feature panchayat the municipality, amongst others in her role as chair of the other the of chair role as in her others amongst municipality, the to well-connected alsoherself but is activities Thankamma’s eye on an keeps Manju shop, the and kindergarten the to next Living Kottamurade. from kids other with fields paddy nearby the roaming found mostly was time school during but age school-going reached just had daughter eldest this my fieldwork, During daughter. one had only they ofMuthanga time the at though children, young three had they fieldwork ofmy time the At roof. their under living generations five than less had no in contrast Dasen her husband and colony, the into married who Manju, acquiring. been had brother Thankamma’s that land the on living indeed of possibility the about uncertain were and existence precarious a less up building to forward looked asthey Muthanga goto to others the join to decided nevertheless Lalu and Thankamma regularly. school attend to seemed monitoring, constant her under children, Thankamma’s find and try to day every out went Lalu colony. the homein inasmall live to continued however daughters her two and herhusband, Lalu, and she time, that Till too. someday herself for a house build to planning was Thankamma where colony, ofthe outside 100 meters about of land plot in asmall invested over time and shop alocal job in a acquire to managed brother elder Her her up. brought that herbrothers were it and young still was she when TB) and (jaundice of diseases died both parents Thankamma’s an orphan. up grew Thankamma because be maypartly which neighbors, Christian of the some to close particularly is and colony the outside people with work her daily in alot interacts the through her family for insurance health a government-subsidized arranged 18. Shemoreover project for girl children girl for project savings government new the in enrolled 2006 -both in fieldwork ofmy time the at old years 8 6 and – of daughters two her had She colony. the in people most than off better significantly be to manages fact in she programs, support government about information and connections public to her access gives jobthat isasteady asthis Yet, themunicipality. from 9 EUR) (about month per rupees 500 mere of a asalary earns she assistant an As “teacher”. the to assistant Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 114 the beside right basics, other and soap, rice, selling colony, inthe shop atiny runs closely, more at look will I story whose Thankamma, Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis Presented as an emancipatory policy aimed providing emancipatory policyaimed thenecessary fundstopay for Presentedat women with an as dowries. education, most people in Kerala today see it as a policy to help people save up for the rising costs of kudumbamsree (municipal) meetings – since the “people’s planning campaign” of the 1990s a regular a 1990s the of campaign” planning “people’s the since – meetings (municipal) (the women’s micro-finance group) and had some money in the bank. She bank. the in money some had and group) micro-finance women’s (the 114 , which will ensure a sum of money becomes available to them at age at them to available becomes money of sum a ensure will , which anganwadi (kindergarten) that she works for as for works she that (kindergarten) cooli panni Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi (day labor) while both of both while labor) (day kudumbamsree cooli panni . During (day 204 CEU eTD Collection care for them: care for health get to occupation leavethe to wanted had Thankamma and ill fell Muthanga at children ofthe some when intensified further Tensions of Muthanga. asthat such community “adivasi” in an than farmers by Christian surrounded live to preferred she claimed eventually and leaders the by upon down looked felt Thankamma faiths”. of “many people themselves considered colony the in people most and -- she traditions” old the backto “go to had no desire and temples stick to her original “adivasi”should and church to upgoing give to was she that leaders AGMS by the told deities. was she day one This upset her ashow describes Thankamma she traditions. of“adivasi” was issue over the developed usedconflictmoreover A to going to church and to claimed, she excess rhetorical some With colony”. the in were they than persons different into “changed suddenly Dasen and Manju methat to also complained Thankamma for. hoped had they thing last the about was sight in schools alone let shops or water running no with elephants of wild threat the under Living at. land claim to them for Sanctuary a Wildlife selected had theleaders why understand not –could preparations the in involved intensely less been had who Kottamurade from as others – Thankamma Muthanga. at erupted Thankamma and Manju between tensions enough, school.Soon children’s her indeed and neighbors, to connections her good kindergarten, in the job steady her shop, her small behind leaving about worried hesitantly, Muthanga for left Thankamma occupation, the during position a leadership on took and Muthanga for preparations the led Manju Whereas Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 115 colonies other of a number in AGMS the for organized also and “classes” political receive to of times number a CKJanu Theyvisited atKottamurade. AGMS of the leaders local the became eventually and colony in the campaigns literacy organize to used initially that organization the through CKJanu with contact into Theygot own. calltheir to land a pieceof lifeon “adivasi” an up build to eager Dasen were and Manju both existence, migratory by this stigmatized and with Unhappy Koddagu at women and men that adds immediately and this admit to eager not however is Manju there. plantations ginger the in work to Nadu, Tamil with border the over Koddagu, in weeks spend often and labor) Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis They also tried to organize Manju’s native colony, which however stayed with the CPI(M) instead. theCPI(M) with however colony,which stayed native Manju’s triedto organize They also not ready for it. We went there for land, not to live like their slaves...”. their like live to not land, for there Wewent it. for ready not Wewere beobeyed. to had That important. considered was said they what importance; any given not was said we What rule us. and dominate to there were Manju and Dasan there, reached we When other. the dominate will nobody Kottamurade] [at “Here men will assure that they will sleep separately anyway”. separately sleep will they that assure will men our then places, separate any aren’t there if sleep…..and to places separate have “always 115 in preparation of Muthanga. preparation in Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 205 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist but: elections the winning actually of hope vain in the not – elections local the during a candidate as stand to was Muthanga after undertook she actions the of One culture. “adivasi” with associate to come had she that life autonomous dignified, of kind the live to which on ofland apiece attain to fight to her resolve hardened Manju matriarch. household’s of slave” “personal the as alone works one groups, in working than rather and informal and low-paying is extremely work servant rice, planting than back-breaking less though as even resented particularly she that – ajob families neighboring of the one to servant household as contribute could mother Dasen’s that income on the dependent household the leaving time, a long for work for go to unable was and ill fell toKottamurade, returning him – andheld and him tortured They his police. the over to handed and people of local by agroup caught was young daughter – husband – Manju’s Dasen Kottamurade, to back way his On Muthanga. to them with took they – in all lose however, did, They violence. of the worst the the escaped of them most hence and frontline central direct the from distance some werecamped ofKottamurade people Most evicted. districtviolently was occupation the atMuthanga, jail ofliving months two almost after 2003, 19th, February On for over two months.intense. becoming occupation land Manju, the within pressures the imagine easily can one increased, occupation to the threats outside on the As labor. or day services government for out venturing than rather community organized self- a self-sustaining, in living of ideal the to people keep to tried They ofattack. case in land occupied the defend to put stay to – and in trapped become had they indigenism authentic of discourse the to of conforming ways in participants “educate” to pressure the felt leaders AGMS circumstances, such under Understandably occupation. in the participants and leaders amongst tensions intensified moreover, identity, “adivasi” participants’ the of “authenticity” they used to consider theirs. As I described in chapter 3, the way they did so, by land focusing the over taking and on assertive theall too becoming workers adivasi with preoccupied notables local as well as movement political ofanew rise the of afraid parties political opposition: fierce of backdrop the against theoccupation of sustaining task difficult leadership’s of the result the foremost as contextualized be however, should, Muthanga at developing were that tensions the frustrationsand Thankamma’s this. about sensitive particularly was Thankamma that surprising it is –nor two the of influential more the became she Muthanga at that fact the relished Manju us that surprise not should it Thankamma and Manju between rivalry the Considering Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis them. They asked us not to go out!” go to not us asked They them. ok with not was they…that Then them. for medicines get to out go will ofus some and are sick our children that them told and went we fever.… and cold also And scurf. with infected were Children climate… ofthe because Perhaps of illness. kind orother some having were our children All Manju. and Dasen with a quarrel picked had we day “One Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 206 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist the restart helped moreover clothes and blankets out hand to Muthanga after Kottamurade come to had that NGOs of number A time. in just Muthanga from away family her take come to had assault, police impeding of the heard having brother, elder her as unscarred relatively violence the escaped she though even bitterness a lotmore with Muthanga to back looked Thankamma municipality as victories of the AGMS. the from time by that getting was colony Kottamurade that attention renewed the saw and struggle in the participated having in pride Shetook land. adivasi of claiming opportunity anew to forward looked and a failure as purely see Muthanga not did moreover Manju before. colony the in seen anywhere not had I patterns “tribal” with her home decorated since had When I visited her again in 2009, it struck me that she Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis moving too far away from her native place, where all the connections through which she which through connections the all where place, native her from away far too moving of idea the to opposed fiercely was who Thankamma but notManju was it “homelands”, adviasi of discourse indigenist of the of view point the from Ironically, colony. Kottamurade from bus by hours nine about farm government-owned –a7000-acre farm at Aralam land distributing proposed had government the AGMS, the from pressure under and adivasis landless to land redistributing to commitments its honor to wasthat Muthanga after developments the of One politics. “adivasi” with do to haveanything to want longer no to Thankamma had led Muthanga of experience the resolve, indigenist hardening Manju’s Unlike school. on than childhood their spend to things exciting more had they like looked and out and in ran children where the colony in household Manju’s in was there home than child two- nuclear-family her composed in atmosphere different astrikingly was there and school attending diligently were daughters Her of Thankamma. those decorate to come had of Jesus pictures patterns, “tribal” in become decorated had walls WhereManju’s kindergarten. the and shop the in there working still though colony, ofthe outside lived now she and completed been had 2009 thehouse in again Thankamma I visited When acquired. had her brother land the a build her to allow would that grant a housing for application Thankamma’s up we can withhold our vote if we wish to”. wish we if our vote withhold can we that us, for work that parties to vote our give only will adivasis we that makeapoint: “to anganwadi (kindergarten) and the municipality sped Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi Thankamma's home Thankamma's Manju's home pukka house on house 207 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist but adivasi assertion. struggle class on not depending as and futures pasts their of vision AGMS’s the join to people with the kind ofwider political dynamics discussed inpart IIof this dissertation -encouraged combination – in of conditions kind towhat an answer provides and Kottamurade at people of of belonging pathways diverging the captures best histories or cultural self-interest rational ofstrict one than rather perspective class expanded an way, Inthis of integration. strategies on hopes renewed placed and movement adivasi ofthe becomeskeptical to started however, them, to open of integration avenues considered still who Others, more strongly. even of indigenism vision the cherish to came moreover, Kottamurade, in people some as adivasis, exclusion further and repression violent experiencing and AGMS the of actions the in of participating course the In own. one’s on life of way “adivasi” an organize instead and institutions social fading such without do can one that is ofland a piece ofowning ideal the “workers”, as toeducation rights secure and employment stable through society in “integrate” to able being than Rather grew. life “adivasi” an starting and own of their ofland a piece of occupying attraction the located, were homes their where land the off literally even but citizenship Malayalee proper realm of of the out just not people push to worked pressures similar As that. just been as having past their interpret and society Kerala from apart future their envisioning start to people motivated It indigenism. of politics the to attracted become to others, more than it in people certain and a whole, as colony the preparing in role a crucial haveplayed to seems -- expediency” “absolute call to prefer I labor of army as areserve function ultimate their of because what or -- 1996) (Breman redundancy” absolute of “specter The solutions. indigenist to attracted became hunter-gatherers”, “wage or laborers “footloose” calls (1996) Breman Jan what into made of being process the experienced intensely most who Kottamurade at people those particularly how see can we 1990s– the of course the in indigenism to turned laborers day adivasi which under conditions ofthe example as an – of Kottamurade story the To conclude it. with to do nothing wanted and forest” of the “animals as them portray to attempt as an it saw Thankamma adivasi, be to proud people cultureandmaking redeeming adivasi in AGMS of the of thevictory part was claimed this Manju Whereas billboards. hotel decorating seen be could dress “adivasi” of all kinds in women and steam up picked had area the boom in tourism the more since hereven to confirmed was This them. “exploit” up to set a “game” in fact was “adivasis” of talk all this that suspicious moreover was Thankamma toschool. going were children her where and were herfamily sustained Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 208 CEU eTD Collection 7.2.1 7.2 abolition of bonded labor and the project was designed to employ and “rehabilitate” ex-bonded “rehabilitate” and employ to designed was project the labor and of bonded abolition formal another included also program point 20 latter’s The campaign. Poverty” “Eliminate Gandhi’s Indira of wake the 1978, in in up set was project Hill”) (“Fragrant The Sugandagiri “W politics. unionist class-based, for basis them the with and crumbled regimes working older how is -- Kottamurade at people of stories the than clearly more and -- particular in emphasize here I present stories the What misleading. somewhat see, we will as is, this but 2006:132) Initiative (Wayanad organizations” tribal from demand to the is “owing this that claim Many workers. erstwhile its amongst distributed land the and disbanded entirely have been farms Pookkot and TheSugandagiri hectares. its half of than less uses and its workers, it owes wages paid not has a loss, at so it does yet running, still is that Tea Estate Priyadarshini the only is it Wayanad in estates government-run Of 10). 2006: Initiative (Wayanad defunct now are (1979), Cooperative Farming Collective Girijan the and (1978) Project Cardamom Sugandagiri the 1958), in (founded project coffee Cheengeni the including adivasis, ex-bonded to employment provide to decades in earlier projects rehabilitation” “tribal as so-called set up projects all ofthe Almost 2009). Pritchard and (Neilson coffee and tea of particularly prices, toregulate onquotas agreements trade international sustain to eager longer no US the made that USSR of the disintegration the to related was trouble in the course into got fact in ones, owned privately including Wayanad, in ofall plantations almost Yet thespending. 1990s due to thecutting of collapse conditions byits abide and Bank Development Asian the to turn to government of the price ofKerala’s forcing cash 80s, late the in levels record reached deficit crops.budget Kerala’s as plantations This, in turn, in government mismanagement and subsidies diminishing to related partly is collapse The 1990s. the of course inthe sector plantation the of collapse the following expediency of specter the with faced are increasingly workers ofadivasi type this also Yet quarters. workers’ plantations’ the in live to place a free and week per of work of days number guaranteed a Theyhad Wayanad. in plantations crop cash in the employment havefixed to used workers these aspect: one in differ they Yet agriculture. in laborers manual arelikewise here discuss I experiences whose people the related: closely are stories following The with. faced being were they of expediency” “specter of the impact the and sector, agricultural the in primarily labor, day on depending of people indigenism towards trajectory the showed Kottamurade of The story Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist (D Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis IS E CAN COMPLAIN PERHAPS )P OSSESSION AMONGST ADIVASI PLANTATION WORKERS …. BUT THERE ’ S NO ONE WHO WILL HEARIT WHO ONE S NO Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi !” 209 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist government. the from support no gotten it but for agitated had and of land 5acres get would they told been had they of theproject start the since ever that said He Gandhi”. Indira Minister Prime by adivasis the to given “was project Sugandagiri the that was interview the meduring to emphasized Raman thing first The 1984. since of Congress a member been Ramanhad party, Communist the support to used family his though that I learned – cultivating hewas fields banana ofthe middle the -- in house large comfortably ofhis veranda on the Raman with my interview From well-educated. now are whom of and many –land-owning are still –and traditionally were of whom most “tribe”, Kurichiya the to belonged Raman adivasis. to land the redistribute and farm the up parcel to government the force to Sugandagiri at place taking been had that strikes the led had that organization the Committee), (Struggle Samithi” “Samara of the leader the was Raman K V out turned It added: and hehesitated on, walked home and Raman’s KV me to pointed he As heretorted: of cynicism anair With him. to speak Icould whether adivasiand was he whether my way on I met workers ofthe one asked and Sugandagiri visited I I gotwhen story underlying at the hint The first known. well so not is continue to support given than rather up parceled was project the why and of how story the Yet Kerala. in known generally is it as history abbreviated the is This 1 acre. received families dalit while land of acres 5 receiving family adivasi each 438families, to allocated land the and disbanded was project Finally in the course wages. daily than rather monthly manage to of reserves enough having not when theinstance for 1990s, Sugandagiriout, dropped families Paniya when camein they but laborers, startedbonded been not had they since to run at a heavy groups, latter these for intended initially not was Theproject loss (SCs). Pulayas and Kurichiyas and by 2003 the afew alsoquite though Paniyas – mostly families adivasi 750 about to accommodation and work provided project In all,the at Sugandagiri. planted were of pepper 160 hectares and coffee of ofhectares 133 of cardamom, hectares 850 Eventually work. with them also provided forest of the clearing the adivasis, for net safety this destroying While to. tied were they landlords the by them to provided diet meager the supplement to earlier used adivasis same these of many that – land of forestland 1500 hectares assigned was Theproject Society. Farming Cooperative Wayanad ofthe supervision the cultivationunder in cooperative employment steady with society in citizens asfull integrate to chance the be given would They laborers. adivasi Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis “But actually you should talk to Paniyas – we are the real adivasis…” real arethe we – Paniyas to talk should you actually “But are.” adivasis who exactly know to seems He Raman. KV to speak probably Youshould that. about know Idon’t “Adivasi? Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 210 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist lay a to and project the continue to government onthe up pressure build to order in months, for wages paid been not had they though even plantation, the in work to continued workers Many a week. of work days four least at get to continue would workers that so support financial and give order to project the of management the call to in step government the that demanded initially had of them most out that turned It outcome. its over and waged been had struggle the way ofthe skeptical often were however, to, I spoke workers (SC) Pulaya and The Paniya Kerala. all over but Sugandagiri at adivasis for just not struggle his continue to hoped and Congress Adivasi the Kerala of president district Wayanad the also become Ramanhad plantation, Sugandagiri the defunct at infrastructure better for struggling from Apart facilities: of a lack of because uncultivable – remained own his – unlike land whose workers adivasi of those terms in particularly struggle the legitimized He land. the cultivate properly to impossible itwas this without since infrastructure for struggle the to turned had meanwhile, Raman, Kurichiyas. the up with ending land good the all almost for enough just been have to seemed discovered, Ilater negotiation, room for That living. been already had they where plot in the invested had people as some negotiation for room some however, There was, system. alottery through assigned were plots and workers the amongst distributed got land the Finally says, Raman As bedismissed. to was society cooperative the that order the got finally and Court High the to go to decided organization Raman’s delay, the to reaction In heard: up beparceled to estate the for demand the getting in finally success to Raman’s contributed also itself AGMS of the rise the farms, cooperative government-subsidized supporting to favorable less increasingly of policies top On Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis so while the officials here get 10.000 rupees..”. 10.000 get here officials the so while or 500rupees only get –workers this from benefits that staff upper-caste the mostly is It fund. tribal other some from collecting by wages out pay to managed they somehow still But listening. started government the that of funds out run had government the and starving were people came, when crisis wage this when only was “It really pathetic, they are getting no government aid atall”. aid government no getting are they pathetic, really facilities, irrigation, electricity….the situation of some of the adivasis up inthe hills is also roads, but redistribution land just not was idea the project Sugandagiri the “Under system”. open an just malpractice, no Therewas plot. their got people how that’s numbers, plot box with a was “There else”. nothing land, We want have representatives. don’t we which in a cooperative want “We didn’t delay..”. some was there parties other and officials of some opposition the to due But adivasis. here to land the redistribute to also decided government the Then Minister]. Chief then [the Anthony with agreement havean to managed and program astrike with came also Janu 2001 CK “In Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 211 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist me: told Sugandagiri, at still workers Paniya of the one as,Prabhagan, Yet, instead. plot individual an receiving toward inclined favorably and undertaking a collective of weary workers of the most made had strike the later and mismanagement of years the upduring building been had that The tensions me tells women Paniya of the One land. the up divide to call the joined eventually and hopeless was demand their saw running project the keep to struggled initially had who those even and Sugandagiri at left families 750 original ofthe 450 about only were there Eventually however added he nearby standing men Paniya ofthe one eye on an With got): STs most 5acres to the opposed (as land of 1 acre received eventually and on stay who did men (SCs) Pulaya one ofthe As right. legal adifferent have case any in would they realized they as altogether workers adivasi the from off split to decided point that at project, the of interior the in somewhere farm and on live to land of apiece receiving on than roadside the near plot a small on living and estate in the employed being in interested more were of whom most estate, on the working The SCs adivasis. to land but employment provide to not been had aim actual project’s the along all claimthat to started had and support gaining was meanwhile plots individual into up parceled be to project the demanding workers of Theblock weakened. gradually was block this land, than rather employment and wages demanding block the to belonged had who and on back fall to nothing had who those mostly were left who those Since long. so for wages without do not could they because estate the leave to had families many on, dragged as thestrike Yet strong. initially was employment provide to continue to project the demanding of workers block The wages. the receiving to claim moral Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis noone who will hear it!” hear will who noone there’s but perhaps complain can we complain…. can’t we But now. condition pathetic a in living all we’re so lands worthless got Kattunayikans and Paniyas – lands fertile got [Kurichiyas] adivasis forward the all almost settled, was strike the finally “when salary….”. getting and working still are they staff, [managerial] the at Look manageable. it was but crisis, a wagecrisis.Itwas the andexploits story mancomesupwitha5acres this of asudden all Then blankets. clothes, allowance, insurance, wehad leave, maternity wehad work, had we good, was here life Actually isolated. got of work 4 days 1 acreand demanded who those All man. 5-acres-of-land the supported Sopeople arising. problems wage many so were there Because fund. provident the get least at will we story 5 acre intothis andgive we stopworking thinking if some peoplestarted and time werehaving problems allthis Butwe Raman. bythis isorganized “All this5acresstory forward”. are Kurichiyas Paniyas, to compared see people, lower-caste for stands Dalit dalit. term umbrella the under come adivasis All people. all lower-caste for organization an means just It adivasis. the all includes “Dalit dalits”. as separately fight to decided we when That’s land. us give not might so they caste, as aforward SCs considers government the that rumor this came there “Suddenly Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 212 CEU eTD Collection 7.2.2 interviewed at other occupied plantations mentioned Sugandagiri and how it ledpolitical how and Sugandagiri mentioned plantations occupied other at interviewed I activists ofthe Many crisis. in plantations other to signal a clear sent Kerala, in cooperatives government-run largest ofthe one Sugandagiri, up of parceling subsequent and The strike Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist “T land: the distribute to made was decision the once arisen have that conflicts internal the describes eyes, in her tears with woman, (SC) Pulaya A me: told land than rather work demanding of favor in originally was who workers Paniya ofthe one vengefulness, some With revealing rather were to I spoke workers Paniya ofthe one of Thewords struggle. ofthe course the in become hegemonic had that ofindigenism discourse the employed Kattunaikans and manyPaniyas situation, at this frustration their airing In owned: supposedly they plots the on trees the felling from them preventing even was latter The department. forest the soby do to forbidden be officially would they it irrigated, get somehow and land the work to needed resources the buy be ableto would they if Even ofpossession. acertificate it,only to titles given not were they so and forestland still officially was up with ended Kattunaikans and Paniyas most The land Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis HEN THE PROMISE CAME THAT ADIVASIS WOULD BE GIVEN LAND BEGIVEN THATADIVASISWOULD CAME HEN THEPROMISE has started to pester them. We are still only living in the workers’ quarters”. theworkers’ in living only are still We them. pester to has started and now] on he lives land [the land his assigned were who those out searching been has Sohe land. bad is it but elsewhere land of 5 acres got adivasi] [“forward” Kuruma This SCs. the to beredistributed it to designated authorities the now but already time long a for there living been had he actually land.. onthe coffee planted man This speaks]. as she [cries him with quarrel huge a had we yesterday before Theday us. pestering he willbe 5acres and there –thatmanowns anotherfamily isliving we got, cents 10 on that And of land. 1 acre received who those are teasing land of 5 acres got who people these So now there! living are people other anyway, and title the us gave never he But else. somewhere cents us 10 he promised and collector the approached we facility, irrigation an with land demanded Sowe cultivate. to impossible irrigation, no get ofahill,with now I land, ontop 1acreof herefor28yearsand “I have working been have work.” to better have been itwould thinking started have they land, got they after Now work. wanted who those and land, wanted who ones the in two: divided became “People work.” to need we eat to order in thing: one know We just for. intended really was project this what of aware least are the we adivasi, wecanabout all being think Butyoutalk the bestland. not should getting are Kurichias now but Kattunaikans and Paniyas for intended was Sugandagiri first. here wecame people, primitive are the we because adivasis [sic] became “We Paniya make fromit…”. a living could generation next the perhaps land the work to allowed were we if least At survive. for goout to Weneed anything. cut us letting are not “They Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi cooli panni ..” (day labor) to 213 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist much better were plantation off the of part thata fertile in thoseup set have to who happened got who ones struck the Now fairly. withland the less productive areas. There was talk of redistribute to made benefits little land, been consciouseffort hadtrying to the divide ratherthan and to claimtheirwages way to intendedheld anda symbolic occupation was tobe theinitial they Since Seventy-three. plantation at existed also Sugandagiri at arose that problems the time, same the At land. adivasi for demand the raise also one to this like plantations other at workers led in combination with a trend set in bythe redistribution of Sugandagiri’s land amongst adivasis, benefits workers and employment demanding of difficulty the way the signals clearly story Api’s occupation. land a real had become occupation land The symbolic me: Api told As strike. aland into transformed AGMS, the of rise of the dynamics political wider the of background the against gradually, – economy plantation ofthe decline by the triggered – employees its to obligations its fulfill plantation the demand one to as began had that astrike Hence me: to Apiexplained As each, whileadivasiswhohadnot butfrom acolonyworked joined there nearbywouldget1acre. plantation and had agreed thatoccupation the 60 or so originalin the activist leading and workersinitiative.the (ex-)plantation at worker aKattunaikan Api, interviewed I three”, of the project would About“Seventy- Atplantation allworkers. adivasi for land occupying get on focus to and organization 2 parties acres200 Paniya and KattunaikanConditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis families were occupying the 250 acre then the promise came that adivasis would be given land..”. be given would adivasis that came promise the then But secretariat. of the front in including anywhere, it held have could –we Muthanga in like Janu’sstrike it wasastrike, is concerned that timeasfarmyunderstanding At ourbenefits. distribute and harvest pepper sellthe to then decision the took collector blue.the beat But usblackand they would alotWe thought with of[police]vehicles. we When project. Sugandagiri the after modeled is project this Actually, here. police the with clash no was “There bebetter….” will things land, get we if that feeling a had we and own of our land no have we so, More land. the seize to Sabha Maha Gothra or AKS like organizations other want didn’t we because plantation] all [their it occupied Sowe adivasis. to given was a plantation Sugandagiri, in that, before and Muthanga in on going strike the was there it… occupy would organizations other land, the seize didn’t we if so, land.More the occupied we juncture critical that at So conditions. living our improve to be able not would we and much work get not wewould plantations in this that realized we then And us. to concessions all those sanction to interfered police the and collector the that After office. their seized We them. [encircled] Then we itintime. notgive main holiday]bonustheywould [Kerala’s Onam our for asked we When month. per available were days working or ten eight five, even…only wages aid, fund, medical provident the like – law provides labor the that concessions workers’ the us give to reluctant being were management] [plantations they But our good. for government by the up set was plantation this Actually plantation. this at laborers Wewere worse. getting were plantation this at “The problems gherao -ed the field assistants the district collector came collector district the assistants field the -ed Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi gherao -ed 214 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist a building for working when accident a serious had son Their support. occasional AKS’ the off living family Urali an was there I met families “complete” few ofthe One atmosphere. bleak a rather occupation ofthe side adivasi the gave plantation, coffee the cultivating continue to resources and of experience lack and of facilities lack the with combination in which, land the occupying be found could who anyway work not could who household of the member asickly was it Usually work. find to order in places away further or other (Karnataka) Kodagu away in being others the itself, at the plantation be found could that household of each member one only was it Mostly plantation. the occupy comeand to AKS by the encouraged of Wayanad, parts different many from moreover and Paniya) Kuruma, Mullu (Urali, different“tribes” many from people were there plantation, Marianade ofthe side adivasi the At occupation. land ofthe side non-adivasi the on were time same the at but service civil and education in quota ST access to list ST the onto back get to lobbying were they since situation complicated more the all an was Theirs list. ST the off taken been recently had but beSTs to used who Kunduvadians, of acommunity to belonging those also were there side), non-adivasi (the “workers-side” the On plantation: the at Christians the and adivasis the between difference cultural the stress to eager -- was neighborhood Christian nearby a from – asettler occupation the managing leader AKS The adivasis. landless amongst land plantation’s the redistribute to out buy them would as they government the from receive to expected they benefits retirement forced the so through doing and city) nearest (the Kozhikode in education children’s their financing with concerned primarily were to I spoke workers Christian of the Most land. the cultivated and on lived meantime the in and compensations for clamored workers non-adivasi) (mostly original the land the of half other onthe while land of the half one claim colonies nearby from adivasis and workers ST having two, in estate the by dividing it with dealt had They settlers. Christian were workers other most –where minority a were workers adivasi the where in crisis plantation asimilar with to do what of issue the confronting was Samithi Kshema Adivasi CPI(M)’s the area, in the plantation occupied another estate, Marianade At complained, Api As position. their solidify hence and charges transportation the afford could who land of pieces better the had already who those were it plantation, the on negotiate to authoritya was collectororother called meeting wheneveraformal that problem was district by get those who had more productive pieces of land to share their profit with others but the Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis drums?”. their playing night at them heard you Have them. for land buy the should government place, ofthis people primitive the are they culture, different a very “They have land”. productive less with those for apenny provide “They won’t Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 215 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist economy. local of the part expedient an of being hardship everyday the from away promises, it life “adivasi” autonomous more a of vision the for primarily workers of category latter this attract to seems – indigenism impoverishment and further migration circular with comes that hardship ofthe because humiliated increasingly being moreover and – anymore worker-citizens as society Kerala into integrating for venues other no Seeing under. living havebeen Kottamurade at people that expediency of specter same the face migration, and labor of day alife into back areforced who workers, ex-plantation adivasi poorer land”, adivasi “reclaim to desire their with resonated it they because indigenism embracing start background) orKuruma Kurichia of (mostly families adivasi resourceful more relatively the While not). (or living a earn to which from basis primary the becomes again ownership individual as as soon enlarged become project, cooperative a joint, in employment through balance in kept were which wealth, in differences see initial we case each in Instead, concerned. all for outcome useful most itthe is nor land, “their” re-possess to wish “adivasi” an of age of coming victorious the considered be hardly can This land. to employment from demands in workers’ shift agradual to led running, plantations cooperative keep in to step to – unwillingness perhaps and – inability government’s the and economy plantation collapsing the how hand one the on hence is Wayanad in plantations occupied other and plantation Sugandagiri the see from can we What emphasizes she Koddagu, mentions she time every Yet me. tells she ones”, poor the are “Adivasisi and others. adivasis between difference cultural little saw me, Thankammana told leader AKS Christian the stories the Unlike from! return ornever diseases, with from return people where a place – it’s fear her with inspires Koddagu of mentioning Themere hospital. the to go to money no had they because days afew after died it but a baby had her neighbor ago a week just admits: she plantation, the at hard is Life months. fortwo custody in kept them cameand police and the occupation the started just they when jail: in was eat to enough had having remembered she time last the however, Thankamma, for Even AKS. the through support some receiving asby well it as and selling plantation the from material other and wood by collecting themselves sustained -- they work to unable was therefore and pain chest had however husband Her site. the at I met people healthy few of the one and leader AKS local the was Thankammana, woman, APaniya dead. were had they children other All to work. old too were woman and man the while work longer no could and contractor Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis “It’s better if adivasis live on their own, without interference from others..”. from interference without own, their on live adivasis if better “It’s Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 216 CEU eTD Collection 7.3 Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist activist of isaproblem indgenism that arguing imply probably would this II, part in saw as we Indeed, line. party’s Communist the reproduce to intending one not but analysis aclass is This poor. ofthe as representative course its run clearly had that party apolitical with associated became strikes wage and of employment provision the where chapter previous in the discussed dynamics political the with interacting provision, employment such continue to onthegovernment constraints structural the to due demand latter the of defeat the with came only land on Theemphasis employment. providing of role cooperatives’ these restore to intervention government for than rather rights land adivasi for call the to lead would sector plantation cooperative the of collapse the that automatic not likewise was It “roots”. their rediscovering started “adivasis” middle-class many –that party “Communist” credible longer by ano led it was against resistance since also again –but Kerala in change of political-economic direction general the considering irresistible seemed education private of momentum the when only was It citizens. “secular” unmarked, remain to “adivasis” allowing schools, of private rise the resist to a movement than rather identity “adivasi” and quotas ST on an emphasis to lead would field educational commercialized an increasingly in experienced adivasis difficulties the that instance, for automatic, not was It land. and autonomy, identity, of pride, issues on focusing wave ofresistance a new also shaped but triggered just -- not II part in discussed dynamics political with interaction in have – that ofdevelopment model Kerala’s of period “post-reform” inthe coming changes the it isprecisely that instead, argued, I have altogether. them bypassed having model Kerala the be about must uprising their that conclude and Kerala of hierarchy economic and social ofthe bottom the at of adivasis position current the at only look commentators most crisis, of this background the against themselves sustain to how about anxieties people’s of context same this in of indigenism the rise interpret to logical seem might it Though people. of experiences everyday the also in but Coefficients and Gini spending government on figures in just not palpable, is model egalitarian of the acrisis dissertation, of this III part in have seen as we Nonetheless, opposite. the signify to come has by now Kerala to reference in state” “model epithet the Luckily, well-being. general in of investments expense at the profits corporate facilitating in amodel was Kerala words, other In 1997). (Baak costs infrastructural bear its state local make the and labor, control land, acquire to efforts planters’ towards attitude lenient exceptionally government’s by theTravancore impressed administrators, British but then label that it gave who organizations development human not was It State”. Model “The labeled frequently was Kerala) now is of what part southern (the Travancore century, nineteenth the In C Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis ONCLUSION Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 217 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist joined who workers of ordinary that from different is AGMS of the leaders activist the of many of trajectory the characterizes that and clears dynamic this that politics identity to The path altogether. past living that of inequalities the eliminate to wish the and in, them keeps past the grip negative the breaking for mobility, for concerns own their pursue to desire the combines persons these for identity adivasi and/or Dalit discrimination. of interms primarily injustice see to and mobilization political for as abasis descent ethnic of acommunity to turn to them for likely it makes combination The all. at mobility such experienced havenot who of those reminded constantly moreover are they background historical of this others, of remarks derogatory the as by well as position their of maintaining stress bythe reminded, constantly Being or pride. humiliation of potential a source as itself presents that condition present fragile their than background historical their more itis production, than rather consumption of sphere the in primarily tensions experiencing and mobile upwardly somewhat already solidarity.Being ofclass one than rather “identity” and “culture” determined orethnically ofcaste- alanguage into translated more easily anxieties produces society polarizing time same the at and consumerist increasingly an in position their of vulnerability reach, the within have come education and ownership middle-class to aspirations whom for adivasis and dalits those for particularly chapter, previous the we saw in as And, achievement. educational and on land centers that status social for competition the in participate adivasis and dalits many even Kerala, In mobility. and prestige for competition bourgeois the in participates available, generally education and ownership land made policies redistributive of how because population, ofKerala’s amajority which to extent the is eccentricity One excesses. and eccentric path-dependent certain with neoliberalism, of version a milder than more beno to seems concomitantly Kerala in situation new The South. the in developmentalism and West the in dominated policy economic Keynesian when a time at flourishing democracy, social Nehruvian of general version implemented more consistently and radical a more as understood best perhaps is model The Kerala tamed. diligently so erstwhile were that processes capitalist endogenous reinforces and society into penetrates logic capitalist intensified an which in ways myriad the withstand itself in cannot model” “Kerala the poor, the for better life making on focus to desire hegemonic almost and cultivated, shared, by thecommonly untouched few leaving and millions by the intellectuals producing despite that clear too all becomes it afocus, such With a living. making in experiences every-day people’s in by changes conditioned structurally been has process this that but indigenism, to rise have given that II part in studied dynamics of political kind the just not it is that show is instead does analysis class or “expanded” relational a What consciousness”. of“false a form promoting and followers their “misleading” leaders Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 218 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist certain has ofindigenism Thediscourse to. a reaction is movement the of what understanding our reduces that a simplification is done, often as is revival”, a“cultural Tocallthis present. the of problems the with to deal on how inspiration new need they because but reflex primordial a out of not past their to turn activists adivasi and Dalit theorizing. sterile to leads appropriation and production of relations changing under life everyday shape and reflect, express, they ways the from apart such considerations pulling Yet ofindigenism. rise the to leading conditions structural the in studying irrelevant are not utilitarianperspectives or Cultural resources. development to andaccess landlessness of issues material to back and religion and literature, philosophy, upper-caste with confrontation their and struggle cultural from away leaders mobile upwardly of attention the shift helped action practical and survival economic on emphasis workers’ landless hand, other the On challenge. political general amore represent not anddid adivasis to relevant only were her movement as if leader”, “tribal epithet the escape to allowed be to Janu CK for necessary also was challenge cultural This laborers”. not of land, beowners to want they labor”, “agricultural term this accept not does AGMS “the claims, as he – the AGMS in involved workers rank-and-file also for respect self- and of dignity notions emphasized instance for Sunny like Activists happened. other the to one from borrowing and other the with shared were group one of experiences the mobilization, of process the In struggle. of political dynamics of the aquestion however is program political of their articulation particular the and platform a joint in other each found -- followers and leaders – of trajectories class different two the that Thefact indigenism. to turn to people for likely more it made that conditions are the chapter this in describe to tried I have What out. them pushing so obviously is that asociety into integration ofsocial one than autonomy of a politics in believe to them for likely more it make processes These society. Kerala from excluded increasingly themselves see workers these collapses, – – agriculture on dependent are traditionally they sector the and cut, are care health and aseducation such integration for avenues basic workers, local with compete to comes labor migrant collapse, cooperatives government-run As Kerala. post-reform in stressful become increasingly has life here that is it and power labor their onselling dependent more the all become consequently have They slave. personal as their them treat can who landlord particular of a independently live and work to ability the is them for meant model Kerala the What them. employ to willing those from orders take and quarters or workers colonies ghetto-like in live of them most of equality: pretences few out hold lives everyday Their status. ahigher to up living about stressed particularly not are therefore and unchanged or less more middle-class the vis-à-vis position relative their seen have but model Kerala the under mobility absolute some enjoyed generally have latter The vision. political indigenist its to attracted became or occupations land its in AGMS the Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 219 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist strong see nevertheless we mobilization, “class”-based on emphasis its and party Communist the to opposed generally is that a program In processes. these to challenge anobvious time same the is at It adaptation. an simply more than is it But lives. people’s of conditions changing of these out grew Indigenism expedient. made being of pressure the felt increasingly moreover sector agricultural the in as workers employed Those abroad. and sector private the in offered opportunities the to comparison in to pale started position, a high-ranking at unless sector, government the in job A steady stagnant. was that sector aproductive from aside consumption, of sphere in the unfolding competition a status reinforced afloat economy Kerala the keep to are said that remittances The nonetheless. Kerala in happened changes Yet for. fought passionately parents of their the generation or they rights social away taking or land their off people ordinary dispossessing with away get easily not will they that well too all know Kerala in power in those are: governments state Indian other than commodification dramatic resisting to and equality social to committed more generally isstill it, at out meted critiques the despite government, Kerala’s local. the by – shaped are – and shape they how and processes global these rethink me to allowed memoreover with shared people that experiences The lives. working everyday people’s in changes helpsdiscern dispossession and polarization of increased direction the in of globalcapitalism tendencies changing the of understanding a theoretical Using Kerala. in post-reform impotent increasingly become have rights citizen’s general that fact the primarily is has changed what argued, has chapter this As context. wider the in changed has what lookfor to us shame forces than rather pride of asource into categories these turn to attempts attracting are now - and independence since existed have categories these -though role today important an such plays of SC/ST categories legal the Thefact “meritorious”. enough being of not them to attaches that shame the for categories these avoided have “STs” and “SCs” mobile – upwardly extent tosome –andstill time along role.For determining priori a their assume is to it than lives people’s a rolein playing start laws how look at to interesting more is it Yet ways. particular in on act and about think people something is limitations and opportunities legal to according acting and or not Tribe” “Scheduled a Being proceses. class of be divorcd not again, should, yet of indigenism rise the in a role play also structures Legal life. of everyday insecurities increasing of kinds by the shaped process more agradual but circumstances changing to reaction a rational purely or isnot land anddemanding identity or“adivasi” “dalit” claiming Proudly life. everyday in experiences people’s and processes social larger on depends interest best people’s as in interpreted become action of courses particular how but them for best is what on act indeed People attention. government receive to likely most one is the this where instance, for land, for – thedemand present the fit that advantages Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 220 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist dissertation. this of epilogue the in I turn that this is to It Kerala. in Left theexisting with continuities Conditioning indigenism: the “Kerala model” in crisis Adivasi labor: Of workers without work without Of workers labor: Adivasi 221 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist EPILOGUE PART 5 222 CEU eTD Collection Communism as the most obvious and hegemonic means of articulating the issues now taken up taken now issues the of articulating means hegemonic and obvious most the as Communism from away turned workers adivasi and dalit why explain to then, pertinent, more the all It became invites. of “adivasiness” notion onthe centered a politics that dilemmas political difficult and baggage historical problematic the demonstrating dissertation this started I making a living. of strategies everyday people’s to power of relations connected globally link to helps that tradition scholarly Marxist the within tool as atheoretical class particularly but focus political party’s Communist the to referring as class of notion emic the just not – of class notion the been has question this to Crucial frames. political indigenist to Communist from alliance and conflict of class displacement the led to what Istudied words, Inother shift. political this for ground the prepared changes more structural what and ofclass repertoire modern-secular existing the in bearticulated to conflicts underlying the prevented that existed dynamics political what the rise of indigenism asking similar questions to those usually posed about the rise of nativism: study to has been dissertation this of aim The system. world contemporary the within power of ofrelations critique general amore from them isolate can however ultimately themselves movements these by made claims public the through than rather analysis social critical of tools the with of indigenism rise the explain to hesitation The urgent. less “explanation” their and form political oftheir “deconstruction” the making ideals, more positive considered are what forward carry usually movements Indigenous popular. are less perspectives such however, movements, people’s indigenous to comes it When 2007). Froerer (e.g., spread to nationalism Hindu for ground the laying changes socio-economic of kind at the looking to and 2003); Jaffrelot 1999; cp Hansen Blom (e.g., of democratization toprocesses of Hindutva rise of the relationship contradictory and complex the analyzing to 2004); Breman 2007; Shani (e.g., frames cultural onto displaced becomes conflict of howclass question the addressing to also but 2005) Ludden e.g. “nation”; (“Hindu-ness”, concepts core formal its deconstructing historically to only not been paid has attention ample instance, for rhetoric, ofthesoil” “sons its nativist and Hindutva of rise the to comes it When politics. neo-nationalist wing, right on studies in common more approach an is lives working people’s in changes induced, globally yet experienced, locally the analyzing by and previously people attracted that programs political the to happened at what looking by articulation ofpolitical form asanew indigenism of rise the Explaining Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Epilogue T HE ( DIS ) PLACEMENTS OF CLASS EPILOGUE The (dis)placements ofclass The (dis)placements 223 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist of demanding attractiveness the determined had that itself restructuring neoliberal of process gradual the it was that suggested Kerala in fieldwork my Rather, livelihood. people’s to threats of face the in upon berelied to abstract in waiting given, not were of “adivasiness” attachments cultural and benefits strategic The well. Kerala of case the fit not – did century twentieth of the quarter last inthe movements rise ofindigenous for the given explanation structural prevalent most –the of neoliberalism threat the faceof the in attachments of cultural mobilization strategic asthe indigenism to turn the interpreting that Inoted of indigenism. politics a to turned Kerala in groups various which under conditions the shaped that shifts structural more of the that was indigenism of the rise studied Isubsequently which at level The second nation-state. liberal-secular the of framework the within of progress possibilities the - for patience some muster – and in believe to subalterns encouraged earlier that oppressed” ofthe an “optimism of words, other in end, The history. indigenism of rise the that perspective: adifferent to contributed Kerala in findings my peoples, oppressed withinhistorically for freedom ever-greater towards trajectory a progressive in step another being the currentthan rather that I suggested and system world capitalist modern late the throughout developing worlda process is It Kerala. to confined a phenomenon however, wasnot, power of relations systemstructural confronting to commitment their lost and power to come had they after movements signalsand peasants”-centered “workers anti-systemic with disillusionment This Kerala. in theindigenism end of rise the for trigger of main the were reform of neoliberal pressures the with compliance a reformist practical its with combined struggle” “class of rhetoric alienated increasingly party’s Communist cycle the that signs clear were There of indigenism. rise the shaping role in a major played had Left in world existing the with interaction and encounters but contacts, international nor democratization, not that found I vision, political and narrative historical indigenist of an contours the producing dynamics political the into andlooking biographies activist Following Sabha. Maha Gothra the Adivasi for abenefit than liability of apolitical more often and limited very been has movements indigenous with networking International identity. indigenous their emphasizing of benefits the to people indigenous attracts that networking international primarily it is that argument the for moreover, be found, could much evidence Not independence. since Kerala in ofgovernance mode only the has been democracy Liberal Kerala. in ground hold to seem not did “democratization” of liberal a process is there where arise movements indigenous that idea prevalent the interactions, ofpolitical level atthe of indigenism rise the for reasons for searching ofall,when First movements. indigenous on literature general the dominate to tend that indigenism of rise the on ideas complicated my fieldwork during I found clues empirical the and program research theoretical My Kerala. in by indigenism Epilogue The (dis)placements ofclass The (dis)placements 224 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist once had that ideals emancipatory the to commitment its lost Kerala, in as had, party the that more asign but democratic) formally already always was (it of “democratization” asign simply not – was revolution Mexican the of legacy the on carried that party hegemonic long-time the – PRI the of demise the that fact tothe attention draw would perspective world-systems and Ahistorical-political globalization. against resistance of indigenous support in networks international by played role key the oron diversity ethno-cultural to open more become to state Mexican the forced movement how the on focusing in analyses neglected are often that history movement’s of the parts highlights instance, for here, developed perspective the from Chiapas in movement Zapatista of the case the at Looking satisfactory. entirely not is neoliberalism against resistance strategic and of democratization argument the where elsewhere and America of Latin parts various in of indigenism rise of the history of the aspects illuminate help also – can identification working-class of bases political-economic ofthe disappearance gradual the and Left traditional the of thedemise stressing – in Kerala ofindigenism rise the of explanations alternative Suggesting case. “exceptional” an simply often, as so is, Kerala that argue to not is this Yet India. of corridor tribal central the in evidence garner can argument Thesame studies. of indigenous field the in prevail to tends which America, Latin in movements indigenous on literature the from particularly arises argument This indigenism. of rise the triggered other on the dispossession by of accumulation threat the with of dealing strategies emancipatory culturally and strategic politically and hand one on the diversity ethno-linguistic for tolerance greater and democratization is that studies in indigenous argument prevalent Themore Kerala. of of thecase specificities the from emerge clearly ofindigenism rise the on arguments These in doing so, triggering different political imaginations. and, lives every-day people’s shaping gradually a process but communities subaltern to threat external an simply not was neoliberalism that suggested of Kerala case The schemes. protection workers and employment of collapse the and crisis agricultural of the wake the in economy local in the expedient increasingly becoming of experience of the out grew that reaction a was It by “themselves”. determined a up life building envision and ofland apiece claim to desire growing by their encouraged hand other the on was identity “class” over “indigenous” to turn the Sabha, Maha Gothra oftheAdivasi file and rank the forming workers agricultural adivasi the Amongst group. social despised toaculturally of belonging carried they stigma the of a legacy as but system acapitalist within competition and ofprivatization injustice general the from so much not as resulting interpreted understandably was position middle-class their of fragility increasing the in Kerala, movement indigenist of the leadership subaltern mobile upwardly recently the For “adivasi”. being by their determined as experiences historical and position social their interpreting start to people enticed had and labor wage than rather land Epilogue The (dis)placements ofclass The (dis)placements 225 CEU eTD Collection repression of protests increased with every subsequent popular revolt in the 1980s – an – 1980s the in revolt popular subsequent every with increased of protests repression political as the mobilization class-based dominate to came indigenism that shows moreover 139) (2005: Veltmeyer and byPetras study A Ecuador. in adjustment of structural basis the formed had and policy in neoliberal but in rhetoric Left was latter The 70ff.). 1999: Klak and (Hey Hurtado of presidency the by measures” of “emergency years after 1985, in focus “ethnic” dominated by aclass-based dominated still was it Ecuador, in arose that movement indigenous major the of ECUARUNARI, years early the in that fact also the But 2008). (Becker organizing Leftist of out grew so explicitly movement indigenous Ecuador’s that fact the one For Kerala. with parallels shows that evidence historical highlight however will perspective alternative an to sensitivity here, even that We see 2005). (Yashar of existence means basic of their dispossessed of being facing were communities indigenous that threat the resist to need growing the with combination in state authoritarian culturally-homogenizing erstwhile of an democratization the to due arose Ecuador in indigenism that strongly argued has (2005) Yashar Indeed, far. so studies indigenous in frame dominant the with fit a perfect seem would land, indigenous to companies oil by threats obvious the 1979and until dictatorship corporatist of its because that, a country Ecuador, for even relevant is Kerala from emerging perspective the that suggest and further go I could 151). 2008: (Young identities” of class expression political the for space structural and ideological the constricted … time same the “at it of rights” language the “universaliz[ing] while that and policies” development liberal neo- and of democratization a “combination fact in was transition democratic of wave” “third so-called global the that be heard can now argument the America, Latin from Even 2008). Speed (e.g. protest of political forms new and reform of neoliberal intertwining the and represented Zapatistas the that rights indigenous to class from shift the to precisely more attention paid have accounts later reform, neoliberal for plans government’s the resisting and democratization of a wave heading was it that claims movement’s the elaborated often movement Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist so-called owned communally on functioning cooperatives agrarian to support its retreating started and reform land prioritized de- had drastically government the crisis financial the following when onwards, 1982 from least at reform by neoliberal shaped become already had Chiapas in relations –local neoliberalism “prevent” to trying as perceived often hence and – treaty trade free NAFTA of the enforcement of the beginning the 1994, at in launched symbolically though 1998). Moreover, (Harvey leaders indigenous movement but urban socialist-inspired intellectualsjoining upwithindigenous international the not involved in Kerala, as movement, Zapatista of the phases early the Chiapas, to came activists international many though Also, poor. Mexico’s of loyalty the attracted Epilogue campesino edjido (peasant) focus that only changed to a more exclusively amore to changed only focus that (peasant) land. In fact, whereas earlier accounts of the Zapatista the of accounts earlier whereas fact, In land. The (dis)placements ofclass The (dis)placements 226 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 116 Communist party to open the discussion on “identity politics” ( intellectuals how two public on reporting PhDstudent Malayalee a from e-mail an 2010, June in dissertation, this on working I was As ground. the on realities ethnographic complex the within observable always not trends certain to point able to being of advantage the had moreover currents political two the between distinction formal the Making articulations. and values “economic” and of“cultural” unity lived and relational the emphasize perspective, Marxist a from instead, and workers and people indigenous between distinction substantive the challenge politically and historically to determined Iwas because precisely matters Communism and indigenism between distinction formal clear The experience. historical substantive and expression political of formal collapsing frequent the was avoid to wanted I that movements ofindigenous study in the problems main the of one because important is which ofbeing, state existential over form political emphasizes it because term the preferred I of indigenism. phenomenon international the to references local these also tied as it belonging “adivasi” to references political these uniting a concept as “indigenism” of heading the Ichose workers”. “agricultural versus “adivasis” ideology”, “Communist under different headings such as “identity politics” versus “Marxism”, “Dravidian culture” versus if Kerala, in acknowledged generally one itis since be convincing could that distinction formal –a indigenism and Communism between distinction formal clear a make meto for wasnecessary it indigenism, of rise the on perspective different this to attention draw to order In by indigenism. overtaken was mobilization based “class”- where Kerala outside places many also to relevant is restructuring neoliberal actual with of protest forms of indigenist entanglement the on afocus with politics “class” traditional of demise the and cycles movement systemic to attention combines that a perspective that indicates this All unemployment. soaring to due mid-80s the in defective politically become had unions labor after popular becameparticularly indigenism that is ofEcuador study Veltmeyer’s and Petras in be found can that Kerala in of indigenism rise the to A parallel indigenism. of rise the to led what was repression fact in but “democratization” not perhaps that indication Epilogue prevalent in public debate and the Communist party had been trying to, publicly at least, turn a turn least, at publicly to, trying been had party Communist the and debate public in prevalent been not had indeed politics” “identity term Theemic discussed. explicitly was politics” “identity of emergence the of reality the that attended he conference CPI(M) recent the at only was it political strategy [identity politics] is at work in this state since the 90s.”, continuing that in fact the in article an [ in observed you have that know came to I that background this is in me“It to wrote The student on this. my intuition K.E.N. Kunhammed and P.K. Pocker. Journal of South Asian Development swathwa rashtriyam 116 The (dis)placements ofclass The (dis)placements had just challenged the challenged just had ] that this particular ) confirmed 227 CEU eTD Collection 7.1.1 just as much about laying claim to the promises of land reform that were extended to a to them extended were that reform of land promises the to claim laying much about as just however, is, it occupations land AGMS’ in the participating those of many For territory. ancestral re-claiming about is ownership land AGMS, the to According land. of issue the movements: both in issue is akey what in clearly particularly be seen can politics indigenist and Communist between Continuities activism. indigenist new the and Left” “traditional the called now is what between continuity a strong is there that be clear should –it histories life their from and activists of different words the from especially – and dissertation in this told stories the From lenses. contemporary through recognized longer no a history – history ahidden into turned are two the between continuities the by which process the to contribute to mean not I did contrasts, on formal focusing in Yet place. taken had articulation in formal theshift why wonder me made that initiatives indigenist and Communist between continuities substantive the of awareness my precisely is It them. before members party by Communist done work the on heavily depends success their fact in where agenda political new awhole formulating on based is success their claim often activists indigenist turn in how to apply moreover would It declined. movements these that time same the at popularity in grew and movements anti-caste earlier the of by some on carried justice social for campaigns the appropriated movement Communist the ofhow acritique to relevant be equally would it Yet heritage. adivasi of of elements forms art Hindu by appropriation theunacknowledged to me inreference told once K Janu C allegory This Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist H history. of world cycles to relates indigenism of rise the of how question the on or currents ascontrasting Communism and of indigenism question the on either closure any against by warning dissertation this end to like I would reason this for and that role in akey play can they Rather, itself. of history making the foresee cannot but history make people which under conditions and relations the foresee allmay after scientists Social unsatisfactory. be would however, indigenism, of rise the about note “predictive” confirmatory, this on my analysis Ending process. the to reference emic became aprevalent it before “identity” to “class” from trend asocial see to difficult not nevertheless was it distinctions, analytical formal with observation ethnographic Combining by indigenism. posed challenge the eye to blind Epilogue IDDEN HISTORIES INTHE MAKING is good, and the other one decayed.” (C K Janu, 25 June 2005). 25 June Janu, K (C decayed.” one other the and good, is tree this on fruit the thing: one only We see fruits. great those it got how and why think We never one. other of the fruit the at marvel and good, no was tree one the say we But fruit. better have will other the other, of the basin the at decays one -- if fruit less have would both alike, grown had two the If then. fruit more bare certainly will other the manure; becomes and one other of the basin the at decays then tree plantain this that Say die. soon will one that ofthem, one fertilize don’t and plantains, two plant we “If ? The (dis)placements ofclass The (dis)placements 228 CEU eTD Collection well be related to what he called the “hegemony of class-thinking in Kerala”. in class-thinking of “hegemony the he called what to berelated well may this admitted however he even workers, of ordinary over those elites) (subaltern layer” “creamy the of needs the towards a bias and competition sub-caste from suffered hardly India, in elsewhere movements adivasi and dalit most to contrast in has, in Kerala theAGMS why on him pressed I subsequently When heads!”. their in have Marx still leaders adivasi] and our [dalit me“even to complained movement, Communist in involved parents had only but a Communist himself not was who leaders indigenist few ofthe one Sunny, As in Kerala. taken has indigenism form onthe effects its had has clearly movements in Communist engagement political their started leaders indigenist all almost Kerala in that fact The socialism. by democratic than tothe visions circulating inindigenous networks incountries significantly less influenced visions socialist to closer discourses these brings that a way in Kerala in become interpreted generally – of indigenism models” – “travelling discourses indigenist international of versions Vernacular elsewhere. movements indigenous to comparison in viewed when moreover, apparent, certainly is inKerala indigenism and Communism between continuity The strong Kerala. bay in at logic neoliberal the keep may help that land on visions and Communist indigenist formally between blurring even and dialectics strong the precisely is It oppressed. the of emancipation of the in support toimplement aduty has state the that a right as land to access framing or by 2006) (Ghosh compensation monetary by can besubstituted that commodity another notjust itis that so land to attachment emotional the emphasizing by either model, this critique implicitly Both 2004). Verdery and Humphrey also see 229f.; 2004: (Rajagopalan rights” onproperty orexplicitly implicitly based ofempowerment “model neoliberal of a theshadow under are articulated moreover, land, on views and Communist indigenist Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 118 117 states Indian in other even than so more – citizenship Malayalee proper in significance of primary culturally and is historically what to aclaim time same atthe is land owning activists leading its of some for indeed –and AGMS the through land claiming people the of many for Yet independence. greater gain and life autonomous amore live to start can adivasis which from basis as the AGMS by the represented usually is ofland a piece owning Likewise, 1991). Nieuwenhuys (cp materialized never but movement Communist bythe ago generation Epilogue Personal communication with anthropologists Daniel and Ursula Munster doing research on land- on research doing Munster and Ursula Daniel anthropologists with communication Personal 2008),“Beyondjustahomeanname”. (Kapikadu See e.g. compared to Tamil Nadu. toTamil compared Nadu – according toTamil in experience them,research previous but with Kerala in the issues environmental) and continuing(farming related symbolic value attached to land in Kerala was notable even The (dis)placements ofclass The (dis)placements 118 . Both 117 229 – CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 119 wesaw, As as “caste”. read being to open entirely turn are in of“class” notions emic Kerala, In of “class”. exclusion the to “culture” about as being articulated is suddenly identity adivasi that party Communist the within elements dogmatic with confrontation in – or arises raising” “consciousness quick for need the – when transmission in only is It state. the from “protection” of need in and margins, the to pushed poor, downtrodden, being with do to signifier contested and a complex fact in is identity” “Adivasi movements. indigenous rising and Left old between battle ofpolitical frontline ofthe outside certainly down, break sometimes distinctions formal the even close, arevery indigenism and Communism of politics the substantively Whereas in Kerala. mobilization indigenist and Communist between allpolarization) (despite continuity actual ofthe an outcome as seen be probably should left-inclined isso AGMS the that quo, thefact status the atfixing attempts authoritarian than rather reform social structural towards inclined more automatically are populations subaltern assuming of mistake makethe we Lest contemplated. even hardly – is 2007) Froerer e.g. (see visions by Rightist shaped have been could movements adivasi –that alternative the that obvious so is this Kerala, In visions. by Leftist shaped predominantly been has century twentieth the of course the in organizing indigenous America Latin how in is striking it history, contingent and morerecent this to attention pay do actually we if argues, Becker As decades. recent more in place have taken that processes social more contingent and concrete the in interest little with “culture” and belonging indigenous of history adeep to mobilization of indigenist now and thehere from made is leap an analytical that movements of indigenous analyses many in problem the to relates This past. morerecent the in organizing class-based of history whole the leave out and America Latin in colonization against struggle indigenous old” centuries “five the at abstractly only look that histories many of the critique necessary and still an important is however, work, Becker’s so, doing In issues. class and indigenous on thinking activist in fluidity the and activists indigenous rural and intelligentsia left-wing urban between cross-fertilization levantamiento indigenous on the work Becker’s Marc noted. always are not organizing indigenist and socialist between continuities much stronger, been historically have movements socialist where 2001) (Boughton unacknowledged entirely almost remains Party Communist on the by andbuilt wassupported rights for struggle theaboriginal which to extent the marginal, – remained in theUS as – have generally movements socialist where country a InAustralia, obvious. less often are continuities socialist-indigenist of theworld, parts other In Epilogue Bob Boughton (2001) also acknowledges the problems in this relationship – for instance in the instance in –for relationship this in the problems (2001) alsoacknowledges Bob Boughton particular than “the lowest rung of the proletarian ladder”. the proletarian rungof “thelowest than particular more anything culturally as workers aboriginal to acknowledge hesitance party’s Communist (uprising) in June 1990 in Ecuador explicitly sets out to examine the preceding the examine out to sets explicitly Ecuador 1990in June in (uprising) 119 The (dis)placements ofclass The (dis)placements . Even in Latin America, Latin in . Even 230 CEU eTD Collection 7.1.2 cosmopolitans versus a mix of fanatic regional, ethnic and religious identities amongst other amongst identities religious and ethnic regional, fanatic of a mix versus cosmopolitans nation-less afew into fragmenting and is disintegrating system world contemporary the 190ff.) (1994: Friedman to According approach. Friedman’s in seem would it necessity Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist precisely is of indigenism rise the showed myresearch theory, systems global Friedman’s with inKerala of indigenism rise ofthe “fit” surprising, almost the, despite how out pointing time same at the but argument Friedman’s recapturing worth well therefore is It system. world the in decline” “hegemonic of phases under trend a dominant as indigenism on view Friedman’s Jonathan to close – come integration economic of platforms political of modern demise the and accumulation and (re)production of regimes global – changing Kerala The main reasons that presented themselves inthis dissertation for the rise of indigenism in T history. ofworld course determinant the vis-à-vis action human of contingency of the expression an nevertheless is struggle indigenist the limitations, and pressures structural under place taking if even how show also Kerala in movements indigenist and Communist of blurring formal even and continuities substantive the of how aconsideration is finally to turn to I want what respect, this In change. will addressed been have conflicts social which through keywords political different of meaning the challenge, indigenist an ongoing of influence the under how ask mayalso we Likewise of power. balances inglobal shifts and histories political of local junctures critical various at mobilized be will frames political what wonder hence may One academia. outside struggles political by the influenced more the all be will or “culture” “caste” “identity”, “class”, as concepts such of meaning the on consensus academic the debates, by scholarly be influenced will struggle political of process the in remade notions of meaning the in change outright even or blurring the Though Kerala. in ofprotest wave indigenist of the beginning at the was interpretation dominant their than meanings dynamic and relational more much on taking “identity” and see“culture” maywell we process, the In “dignity”. and landless” the for “land to live”, right “the on focused increasingly has Muthanga after AGMS –the state ethnographic the from borrowed were arguably that – phrases culture” adivasi our “recovering on and all tribes” of unity “the on focus initial its from that respect this in note to interesting is It “adivasis”. for concern their than vehemently more even “poor” for the concern their stress “adivasis”. When not inexplicit opposition to Communism, indigenist activists likewise will and “dalits” to references with filled increasingly are moreover speeches its challenges, indigenist with terms come to to trying slowly party Communist the With caste”. one to belong beings human “all that idea the as Communism translating to prone were early Communists Epilogue HE COHERENCE OF CRITICAL STRUGGLES OFCRITICAL HE COHERENCE The (dis)placements ofclass The (dis)placements not the historical the 231 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist indigenous an that notion – the objects to attached as of culture notions analytical abstracted entirely on him, to according relies, criticizes Friedman that perspective deconstructivist The 398). (1999: nation-state the to prior empirically) necessarily not (though logically are identities such that fact the to and territory” to relates it as ofgenealogy rootnedness, of identity an of identity, kind a of particular “practice the against judgments moral on rely to tend Friedman, to according efforts, deconstructivist all”. Such it “above from worldview own elites’ these to according world the shape to efforts as coherence or cultural belonging territorial of notions deconstruct to attempts elite he considers what debunks Friedman world. the of of themajority tendencies indigenizing the - of 406) (1999” circuit” cocktail global “the – elites liberal of cosmopolitan fears the by ridiculing route: another via also them defending by movements indigenous of advocates most than further goes moreover Friedman 2003). Kuper 2003against Lewis and Kenrick (e.g. movements indigenist majoritarian and subaltern between difference crucial the for arguing by of indigeneity notion the under hiding tendencies political exclusivist potential the of criticism against argue who movements of indigenous proponents the from fundamentally differ not does Friedman sense, this In 401). 1999: (Friedman state” the within nationalism extreme produce can it conditions other in state, the against identities alternative it produces conditions certain “in forms: different very on takes it process, one indeed is indigenization though that stresses fact in Friedman since reading – amistaken movements ofindigenous critical is particularly Friedman that idea the to led sometimes has It palpable. is view Friedman’s -of pessimism think, would most hence, -and inevitability historical the produced, “deterministically” or “mechanically” not though Yet, sense”. deterministic a mechanical in mere product this large systemic process” (ibid.: 198), though Friedman adds thatof is part “this movements is not ofindigenous “therise Hence to say elites. world’s thatof the it is a cosmopolitanization the and populations world’s the of majority the --of “rooting” for – thedesire indigenization the of process the behind mechanism driving the is nation-state, ofthe decline related the with together polarization”, “class Friedman, to According 408). 1999: (Friedman system” global of the transformation of the expression powerful a is that arena global contemporary the in of identification “a process asabout groups” indigenous concrete about so much not “is this, in turn, leads to intensified identity politics (ibid.). Inall of this, the politics of indigeneity And sustained. it difference of ranking and homogenization global the of demise the also comes space cultural hegemonic ofUS decline the with that and 235) (1998: world the in dominance economic its of limits the reached has imperialism US that fact ofthe Friedman, to according part, is process Thepolitical world. (indigenous) “fourth” the in exit-strategies and world, third inthe “modern” a vanishing at stabs consumptive symbolic, desperate core populations, Epilogue The (dis)placements ofclass The (dis)placements 232 CEU eTD Collection democracy. What demand our attention instead are the instances where “adivasiness” in “adivasiness” where instances arethe instead our attention demand What democracy. ofliberal discourse hegemonic still and existing the as within themselves present they what be to betaken automatically not should movements “indigenous” perspective, struggles critical a From system. world contemporary ofthe contradictions in the engaged as fundamentally but of history rules repeating circularly set, obeying simply as not movements these posits capital and labor between struggle class global ongoing an in role their to attention with AGMS the like movements “indigenous” by posed challenges epistemological the to attention Combining force. space-making a continuous become would capital which under conditions social the tointroduce trying been has henceforth and by capital captured became time first the for century seventeenth late the in which state the through struggle class by - but on focuses view historical Friedman’s of “capital” kind – the invented were money) (n.b. accumulation such for means the when time the since places particular in wealth of abstract concentration by the just not driven it is that is makes economy world acapitalist Thedifference capital. labor versus but capital versus culture about not is economy, world ofacapitalist emergence the acknowledge McMichael and Wallerstein like who those for hand, other onthe Struggle, 2004). (Wallerstein partners crucial are academia and movements social which in endeavor an - quo status the “unthink” to need the world: the of views granted for taken challenging epistemologically entails terms, world-systems in Critical, analysis. of center the –at capital or culture than rather – struggles “critical placing by Ages: Dark new of a harbingers the being necessarily from movements indigenous rescuing of route promising a more provides McMichael Friedman, as thought of school world-systems same the in working Though McMichael. by Philip taken route the follow to have preferred I herethat Itis or fragmentation. integration global towards tendency global the determines that wealth accumulated endlessly as capital and lives, of people’s structures produced historically the as culture history: of keydrivers arethe capital and culture Friedman, For regression Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist apath signal movements these that notion the with –left determinism and analyses mechanical against – still are we movements, indigenous defending despite that is however, vision, Friedman’s about problematic is What dissertation. this out in I worked argument the with believe, I –nor, perspective systemic global Friedman’s with problem the is not movements indigenous for ofsupport Lack identities. indigenous coherent culturally and movements indigenous of defense in squarely down comes fact in Friedman that is hence, see, we What (ibid.). lives their live people way by the shaped coherence of structure a as of culture a notion on than –rather “hybridity” of proof is i-phone an into talking person Epilogue from the moment of modern democracy and class reformism (see also Rata 2003). also Rata (see reformism class and democracy of modern moment the from back to a survivalist reliance on more local, territorially rooted ways of life, a of life, ways rooted territorially local, more on reliance asurvivalist to The (dis)placements ofclass The (dis)placements pace caveats 233 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist continues. struggle the progressed: also has capitalism overcome to rationality collective the which to extent of the glimpses see can have, we it before intellectuals) (or movements any than open more much “adivasi” the of category the leave to atendency with oppressed most the of needs the to priority combined AGMS’ the in Kerala, in manifestations its and capitalism of world “progress” the Notwithstanding accumulation. capital endless of process the on influence enduring an has oflabor struggle the how see we where aplace time same the at is it emancipation, of liberal march forward in aglobal step next the as of indigenism interpretation the complicates that a place is Kerala If it. defies potentially that asolidarity creates fact in but logic this reproduce simply not does AGMS the logic, by its affected inevitably and economy world of acapitalist part being While into. it quo forces status the that “culture” and “class” between dynamic political polarizing of kind the escapes movement the where instances – thought our present ruling concepts the in recognizable hardly meanings on takes struggle Epilogue The (dis)placements ofclass The (dis)placements 234 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist END MATTER PART 6 235 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist End matter gherao Ezhava EMS Dalit CPI(ML) CPI(M) CPI Congress “communities”, between antagonism create to attempts to Communalism refers Generally C KJanu CITU Cochin BJP Ayyankali Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (14 April 1891 — 6 December 1956), also known as Ambedkar AGMS AKS AITUC Adivasi Adiya shout slogans. and leaving, from her) him (or prevent (mudalali), “capitalist” or functionary a government encircle activists whereby tactic protest – political Encirclement century. twentieth the in mobility vertical great experienced that “Shudras”) considered (religiously Kerala century nineteenth in untouchables as treated community/caste A as OBC. Listed Tiyya. as in Malabar Known 1992. until 1977 from CPI(M) of the Secretary General 1969. October 1967- March from again and 1959 1957-July April from Minister Chief known. is Initials bywhich Kerala’s first Chief Minister EMS Namboodiripad (1909-1998) Caste”. “Scheduled with interchangeably used Often system. caste the by oppressed those to generally referring “crushed”, Lit. wake oftheNaxalbari 22, uprising. in April 1969 inCalcutta on Sanyal byKanu founded Party (Marxist-Leninist). ofIndia Party Communist 2006-present) May 2001; 1996-May May 1991; 1987-June March 1981; 1980-Oct Jan 1969; 1967-Oct March 1964: after government in (Periods Namboodiripad. of EMS leadership under 1964 Communist 1920. formedin CPI was original Party the theCPI(M) to 1925, according in formed ofwas party original the CPI (now) India the to according level, a national At Congress. with (Marxist)cooperation of favor in party ofthe split, 1964 the after name, and Party” Socialist “Congress of the out 1939 – name in level at Kerala formed party original the Nameof ofIndia. Party ofCommunist party splitINC or Congress National Indian off fromusually meaning Hindu versus Muslim communities. the CPI in AGMS. the leading woman Adiya CPI(M). to affiliated Unions, Trade Indian of Centre Kerala Southern in State Princely offormer also name but City diaspora. Indian the among fund-raising in active organization, VHP international and the RSS anti-Muslim paramilitary the includes that Parivar Sangh the group, umbrella of part party, nationalist Hindutva/Hindu Party. Janata Bharatiya 1941. 1863– from 1910. Lived in MLA Became Kerala. of leader (Pulaya) dalit Early Constitution. Indian of the architect chief and India, of leader dalit prominent most Babasaheb, Council”) Grand Clans “Indigenous (lit. Kerala in movement adivasi new prominent most by the in 2001 adopted name Sabha, Maha Gothra Adivasi Adivasi Kshema Samithi, CPI(M)’s adivasi wing inKerala founded in2001. CPI. to affiliated Congress, Union Trade Indian All Tribe”. “Scheduled with interchangeably used often language common In “aboriginal”. Lit. “slave”). (lit. laborers agricultural ex-slave landless mostly Kerala, in Tribe a Scheduled Name of GLOSSARY Glossary 236 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist panchayat Paniya OBC Nehru India, in groups Communist militant anti-parliamentary, for used Naxal/Naxalite term Generic Namboodiri Nayar Muthanga moopan MLA Malayalee Dravidian language formally spoken in territory of what with the States Malayalam Malabar LDF KSKTU Kuruma Kurichiya Formerly Scheduled Tribe, now “Other Eligible Community”. Kunduvadian KIRTADS of a by living making background collecting landless, Tribe, generally Scheduled Kattunayakan jenmi jati INTUC goonda End matter grama panchayat (at village level), block panchayat (at the “taluka” level) and level) “taluka” the (at panchayat block level), village (at panchayat grama democracy”), level- “direct (ward sabha grama levels: four into areas rural in divided 1994, administratively of Act” Municipality & Act Raj Panchayat “Kerala the With government. municipal or village the to refers parlance common In “worker”). (lit. laborers agricultural ex-slave landless mostly Kerala, in Tribe a Scheduled Name of STs yet still “historically disadvantaged”. and SCs than better-of considered formally Communities Class. Backward Other 1964. 1947to from India of minister prime First 1964. May 1889–27 November (14 Nehru Jawaharlal Group. War People’s the and Centre Communist Maoist the include groupings other though CPI(ML) the to back origin their tracing mostly warriors/“Kshatriyas”). considered interpretation religious Hindu to (according Kerala in caste” a “forward so-called of aprominent Name 2003. in AGMS bythe organized occupation land prominent most of Site Wayanad. in Department Forest the under 1973 in established Sanctuary of Wildlife Name chieftain”. a“tribal for name the considered Generally Assembly of Legislative Member “Mallu”. as also known – popularly Malayalam) (speaking Kerala from originating Person dialects aswell as (caste-specific) sociolects. regional many has language The Kerala. became of 1956 Act Reorganisation (Chennai). Madras rulefrom British direct under period colonial the during – Kerala now is of what part Northern Kerala. in by CPI(M) lead coalition Front, Democratic Left CPI(M). the to affiliated Union, Workers’ Agricultural i.e. Union, Thozhilali Karshaka State The Kerala farmers. small mostly Tribe, Scheduled Development. SC/ST of Ministry the under 1979 in up set organization Governmental Tribes. Schedules and castes of Scheduled Studies Development and Training Research, for Institute Kerala forest products. caste. Namboodiri or of Nayar Landlord castes/untouchables). out- (and artisans/Shudras and merchants/Vaishyas, warriors/Kshatriyas, priests/Brahmins, of scheme four-fold Hindu religious in color) lit. (or “caste” means which varna from Different occupation. traditional particular a to refer usually names Jati in India. sub-groups religious and social different all to reference in – used “caste” or as “community” translated Commonly Congress. to affiliated union trade Congress, Union Trade National Indian Thug “Highest” Brahmin caste in Kerala. in caste Brahmin “Highest” farmers. small mostly Tribe, Scheduled Glossary 237 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Wayanad UDF Former Princely State in what is now southern Kerala. Travancore Syrian Christians ST SSLC SNDP Name given in Kerala to government complex housing the highest echelon of the Secretariat SC Savarna RMS Pulaya Pillai End matter or Municipal Corporation. or Municipal Municipality the only there is areas urban In level). district (at panchayat district data). STs (17 percent; roughlyof concentration highest with of Kerala a third district hilly Malabar), (former ofNorthern all STs in Kerala according Kerala. to in 2006of Congress leadership under KIRTADS coalition Front, Democratic United converts. Christian lower-caste, often later, to opposed As Thomas. St. by of Christianity days early in converted havebeen to said origin) caste girijan). (or “adivasi” for as synonym used language daily – in action affirmative for eligible “tribe” a as listed a community i.e. Tribe, Scheduled Certificate. Leaving School Secondary today. active still is 1903 and in founded was organization The reformer. spiritual Ezhava an Guru, Narayana by Sree organization yogam, Paripalana Dharma Narayana Sree state’s administrative structure. harijan). (or “dalit” for as synonym used language daily – in action affirmative for eligible as a“caste” listed a community i.e. Caste, Scheduled religious caste hierarchy: Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas. Hindu the in varnas three first the upper-castes, “twice-born” The so-called 2004. 19, February on launched AGMS, to attached party ofpolitical Name Sabha. Maha Rashtriya laborers. ofagricultural mostly consisting Kerala in Caste a Scheduled Name of name). last (and Kerala in sub-caste Nayar “Forward” community of Christians (considering themselves of upper- themselves (considering Christians of community “Forward” Glossary 238 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 20 on impact Its legacy: Stalinist The 1984. ed. Tariq, Ali, Women’s struggle: the within Aspace Sen, Ilina In Wynad. from Reminiscences K.1990. Ajitha, the of aspects some on Notes transnational: the of allure 2007.The Ananthakrishnan. Aiyer, Research ofSocial Institute India. South of Tribe ex-slave an – Paniyas 1992.The A. Aiyappan, Delhi: New of Kerala. context the in tribals on of globalization Impact 2008. Mathew. Aerthayil, End matter Baxter, Matthew. 2009. Non-Brahmin Political Thought and The Communist Manifesto: The Communist and Thought Political Non-Brahmin 2009. Matthew. Baxter, in nationalism Hindu with engagements Adivasi indigeneities: Indian 2007. Amita. Baviskar, In nature. over struggles in class for Looking claw? and tooth in Red 2005. Amita. Baviskar, to Contributions Environmentalism’, of Discourses and Politics ‘Tribal 1997. Amita. Baviskar, Baviskar, Amita, Subir Sinha, Kavita Philip. 2005. Rethinking Indian Environmentalism: Routledge. London: 1600. since Asia South Raj: and Subalterns 2007. Crispin. Bates, movements adivasi interpreting of innocence": loss the and innocents “Lost 1995. Crispin. Bates, Social debate’. peoples’ ‘indigenous the and Vienna revisionism, Kalahari Alan.2006. Barnard, Zed London: uprising. TheNaxalite revolution: simmering India’s 1984. Sumanta. Banerjee, economic ofnew significance and capital of relations Space 2008. Swapna. Banerjee-Guha, Communist the of organ Weekly democracy: People’s path. war on Adivasis 2002. Aboo. Backer, Communist the of organ Weekly democracy: People’s path. war on Adivasis 2002. Aboo. Backer, Press. W QJudge Bangalore: Nadugadhika. 1993. KJ. Baby, OUP. Dehi: power. political and production Plantation, 1997. P.E. Baak, development in Experience TheKerala desiyata: dalit The 1990. Abraham. A.M. Ayrookuzhiel, 36-49. 3(1): anthropology Cultural place. its in hierarchy Putting 1988. Arjun. Appadurai, of Spread and Origin the on Reflections Communities: Imagined 1983. Benedict. Anderson, participation in people’s movements. Delhi: Kali for Women. for Kali Delhi: movements. in people’s participation 640-658. 22(4): anthropology Cultural India. in of water economy political Calcutta. Anthropology, and Publications. Rawat Reception and Projection. Cornell University South Asia Program Seminar, 23November. Seminar, Program Asia South University Cornell and Projection. Reception Publishers. Berg 275-303. Starn, Orin and Cadena la de Marisol Today, Experience Indigenous In India. Littlefield. & Rowman Katzenstein. M.F. and Ray R. eds. India, in movements Social 195–223. 31(2): Sociology, Indian E Sharpe. M York: New environments. contested and livelihood Justice, environmentalism: Forging Kerala. in Fisheries Delhi and in pollution Industrial 19. 103- B. Kingsbury, and Gray A. Barnes, R.H. ed. Asia, of Peoples Indigenous In Asia. South in 1-16. 14(1): Anthropology Books. 22: 51-59. Nov. Weekly. Political and Economic India. in SEZs enclaves: Vol.XXVI, (Marxist) 28,July21,2002. no Party ofIndia Vol.XXVI, (Marxist) 28,July21,2002. no Party ofIndia and class struggle. Delhi: USOCJ, Verso. London: Nationalism. Lynne Rienner Publishers. BIBLIOGRAPHY th century world politics. Boulder: politics. world century Bibliography 239 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist political. the about debates and adivasi Theglobal unlimited: Politics 2005. Dipesh. Chakrabarty, historical and thought Postcolonial Europe: Provincializing 2000. Dipesh. Chakrabarty, exclusivism indigeneity, On toda: aboriginal The 2005. Sutton. Deborah and Gunnel Cederlof, from Translated Bulletin. PUCL to Muthanga’. Return ‘The 2003. Geethanandan, M. and Janu C.K. Great Four Decades, Four Countries, Four Method: Case Extended The 2009. ------. Global al. et Burawoy 1-40in Pp. Global” the for Reaching “Introduction: 2000. ------. and Theory Trotsky. vs. Skocpol Science: of Search in Methods Two 1989. 1-47. Michael. (1): Burawoy, 29 Society and Theory “identity”. Beyond 2000. Cooper. Frederick and Rogers Brubaker, Press. University Oxford London: India. village in regime The poverty 2007. Jan. Breman, Amsterdam Amsterdam: more. no mill the in Working 2004. Shah. Parthiv and Jan Breman, Cambridge Economy. Informal India's in Working Labour: Footloose 1996. Jan. Breman, for struggle the in involvement ofAustralia’s Party The Communist 2001. Bob. Boughton, Kendra. Prakasha Naudin Delhi: Knowledge. movements: agrarian Transnational 2008. Kay. Cristobal and Edelman Marc Saturnino, Borras, Press. University Princeton wave. saffron The 1999. Thomas. Blom Hansen, India. colonial late in governance market and culture, Law, capital: of Stages 2009. Ritu. Birla, Outside and Hindu Nation, the Constructing Reports: Census Early the in Tribe The 2009. ------. the reading dominant, the Reading identity: Adivasi the Constructing 2003. C. K. Bindu, Recover to Movement Story—Adivasi Real The ‘Muthanga: 2003. Raman. Ravi and R. C Bijoy, political and Economic UN. the at people Indigenous submerged: ofthe Emergence 1993. ------. personally. author from obtained Document region. Southern The n.d. ------. Coca-Cola. vs. groups Adivasi n.d. C.R. Bijoy, New Shanker. Ravi N. Trans. Janu. C.K. of Story Unfinished The Forest: Mother 2004. Bhaskaran. 187-92. 39(2): Anthropology Current people. ofindigenous idea The 1998. Andre. Beteille, indigenous modern of Ecuador’s making the in Leftists and Indians 2008. Marc. Becker, the to century eighteenth the From India: in politics and society Caste, 1999. Susan. Bayly, End matter In Indigeneity in India, ed. Bengt Karlsson and Tanka Subba. London: Kegan Paul. Kegan London: Subba. Tanka and Karlsson Bengt ed. India, in Indigeneity In Press. University Princeton Princeton: difference. Paul. Kegan London: Subba. Tanka and Karlsson Bengt ed. India, in Indigeneity In India. South Hills, Nilgiri the in land to access privileged and Thirichhupokku—Oru “Muthangayilekkulla Malayalam Original the Press. California of University Berkeley: Tradition. Theoretical One and Transformations, California. World. a Postmodern in Imaginations and Connections, Forces, Ethnography: 18:759-805. Society University Press. University Press. Press. Wollongong of University Wollongong: 263-294. Markey, R. ed. essays, Historical community: and Labour In 1920-1970. Rights Peoples’ Islander Strait Torres and Aboriginal 169-204. 8(2-3): Change ofAgrarian Journal impact. and campaigns politics, and Origins BlackSwam. Orient Delhi: Edinburgh. 1, 30-April March Conference, BASAS at presented Paper Hindu. ofHumanities. School of Hyderabad, University dissertation, Adivasi.Doctoral 1975–82. 17: May Weekly, Political and Economic Land’, 1357-. 26: June weekly http://ghadar.insaf.net/September2006/pdf/Bijoy.pdf. Unlimited. Women and Women for Kali Delhi: Press. University Duke movements. Press. University Cambridge Cambridge: age. modern Bibliography 240 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Classics. Routledge York: New and London ofKnowledge. Archaeology 2007. Michel. Foucault, Bombay: 1937-1969. power, ofCommunist Rise India. of Yenan Kerala: 1970. Victor. Fic, Latin in movements social of Making The 1992. eds. E.Alvarez, Sonia and Arturo Escobar, social of study the and politics—Anthropology and practice Culture, 1992. Arturo. Escobar, University the of TheFuture Interdisciplinarity: and Freedom 2009. Yehuda. Elkana, Annual of politics. and forms paradigms Changing movements: Social 2001. Marc. Edelman, HarperCollins. e. New Hierarchicus. Homo 1972. Louis. Dumont, Perspectives. Regional Selected Development: Indian 1997. Sen. Amartya and Jean Dreze, Orient India. of modern making the and Colonialism Mind: of Castes 2001. Nicholas. Dirks, differentials. and Trends in Kerala: attainment educational School 2010. TR. Dilip, Question the and Developmentalism Egalitarian Development? in United people A n.d. J. Devika, NewDelhi: Jharkhand. in protest and Culture ethnicity: of Discourses 1992. BC. Susana Devalle, India. Kerala, in inequality look at A disparity? define still caste Does 2000. Ashwini. Deshpande, world. third of the making the and famines El nino holocausts: Victorian Late 2001. Mike. Davis, a in cultures Colonial empire: of Tensions 1997. Stoler. Laura Ann and Frederick Cooper, American Chest. Treasure Amazonain the in Pirates versus Shamans 2002. Beth. Conklin, of Politics and Poetics The Culture: Writing Marcus.1986. George and James Clifford, Blackwell. Basil Oxford: state. the against Society 1977. Pierre. Clastres, Agarwala Rina In studies. Asian South in analysis class of decline the On 2009. Vivek. Chibber, in India.Princeton industrialization late and State-building place: in Locked Vivek.2003. Chibber, Report Citizen’s A Justice: for 1997. ASearch Edwin. and Bijoy C.R. K.Narayanan, Anita, Cheria, of Experience Recent The Development: Tribal in ‘Issues 2006. John. M.S. and J. Chathukulam, of Experience Recent The Development: Tribal in ‘Issues 2006. John. M.S. and J. Chathukulam, 1—23. JRAI2(1): a name? in what’s Untouchable: 1996. S. Charsley, Stree. Calcutta: lens. feminist a Through caste: Gendering 2003. Uma. Chakravarti, End matter Nachiketa Publications Limited. Publications Nachiketa Press. Westview Boulder: democracy. and strategy, identity, : America 395-432. 12(4): ofAnthropology Critique movements. 933-42. 2009: 3 :Fall :No 76 Vol Research Social Curriculum. 285-317. 30: Anthropology of Review Oxford. Press Claredon Longman. Paper. Working CDS Thiruvanathapuram: Communication. Paper—Personal Unpublished yet As India. State, Kerala in of Caste Sage. 322-325. 90 (2): Review Economic The American Verso. London: Press. California of University Berkeley: world. bourgeois 1050-1061. Anthropologist104(4): Press. California of University Berkeley: Ethnography. Books. Lexington Asia. South from Reflections class? to happened Whatever Herring, Ronald and University Press. publications. Paul’s St. Bangalore: India. South in Experience Adivasi the on 82–202. pp. Publication, Sage Delhi: New Debate. The Contemporary India: in Development Tribal (ed.) Govinda C.R. in Kerala’, 82–202. pp. Publication, Sage Delhi: New Debate. The Contemporary India: in Development Tribal (ed.) Govinda C.R. in Kerala’, Bibliography 241 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist bodham and Manas body: of the studies anthropological Rethinking 2001. Murphy. Halliburton, Viking. Fly?Penguin BooksIndia: CanIndia ------. 2009.Thecagedphoenix: SAGE. Delhi: New 1939-45. colonial India, in nationalism and Communism 2008. D.N. Gupta, of Politics the and Identity, Space, Culture: Beyond 1997. Ferguson. James and Akhil, Gupta, the and capitalism global Soros, George world: the Reforming 2007. Nicolas. Guilhot, Cambridge Cambridge: 1200-1991. inIndia, ethnicity and Environment 1999. Guha, Sumit. Delhi: Society. and History Asian South on Writings I: Studies Subaltern 1982. ed. Guha, Ranajit, Black. Permanent Delhi: other essays. and Marxist the among Anthropologist 2004. ------. ed. 1st India. and Tribals, His Elwin, Verrier Civilized: the Savaging 1999. Guha, Ramachandra. Essays of Environmentalism. Varieties 1997. Martinez-Alier. Juan and Guha, Ramachandra Archives States Satyagraha. Vaikom on documents Selected 2006. of Kerala. Government JackGoody.. ed. societies, traditional in Literacy In Kerala. in Literacy 1968. Kathleen. Gough, presentation CASCA politics. in Bolivian indigenous the Questioning 2009. Kathy. Gordon, York: New and London comparison. by Anthropology, 2002. G. Fox. Richard and Andre Gingrich, the and locality indigenousness, local dams: and flows global Between 2006. Kaushik. Ghosh, Change. for Books Bangalore: Hitchhiker. 2005. Vinod. Joseph, George Karl in evolution of social question the and state, Community, 2006. Ward. Christine Gailey, ofHindu TheEmergence Conflict: Social and Division Religious 2007. Peggy. Froerer, Press, Altamira Anthropology. Global 2003. Friedman. Jonathan Ekholm, Kajsa Friedman, of World Journal systems. global in culture and class Globalization, 2000. Jonathan. Friedman, bourgeoisie. of the charm discreet the and struggles Indigenous 1999. Jonathan. Friedman, The re-organization: dis-integration, Globalization, 2003. ed., Jonathan Friedman, a ‘post-socialist’ in justice of Dilemmas recognition? to redistribution From 1995. Nancy. Fraser, the from Lessons Sustainable? Model Kerala the ‘Is 2000. Chasin. Barbara and Richard, Franke, End matter in Kerala. American Anthropologist 104 (4): 1123-1134. 104 (4): Anthropologist American Kerala. in 33-51. 1997,pp. Press), University Durham, Duke ( Anthropology Critical in Explorations Place: Power, Culture, (eds.), Ferguson and Gupta in Difference, 477. 448- 33: Sociology Critical sciences. social of the management philanthropic Society. and History in Indian Studies Oxford University Press. University OfChicago Press. Ltd. Publications Earthscan London: South. and North Department 132-160. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vancouver. Routledge. 501_34. 21: Anthropology Cultural India. Jharkhand in sphere transitional York: Berghahn. New 31-52. egalitarianism, of Politics Solway, Jacqueline In Notebooks. Ethnological Marx’ NewRural India. York:BerghahnBooks. Nationalism in Creek. Walnut 3:636-656. VI, Research Systems 391-411. 1999, 2summer research ofworld-systems Journal Creek. Walnut Press, Altamira violence. and State, the Globalization, In violence. of transformations I/212 Review Left New age. 16–39. Zed Books,pp. London: Experience. Development Kerala: (ed.) G. Parayil in Future’, the for Prospects Past: Bibliography 242 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist the and liberalism Critical politics: of indigenous force The moral 2008. Courtney. Jung, of University Trivandrum: of Kerala. development economic and Migration 1986. K.V. Joseph, March 18 Countercurrents.org. Chitralekha. and Left, The Guru, Narayana Sree 2010. S. Joe, M. Delhi: New Model’. ‘A became Kerala How Well-being: and Women Politics, 1992. Robin. Jeffrey, Brazil, Argentina, Power: State and Movements Social 2005. Veltmeyer. Henry and Petras James edition. New Castes. Lower ofthe The Rise Revolution: Silent India's 2003. Christophe. Jaffrelot, in South situation TheDalit question: caste the on Reflections 2002. P. Bandhu. and T. G. Jacob, Cash the in Crisis Ongoing the on bowl.Essays emerald an in Misery Wayanad: 2006. T. G. Jacob, Decentralized for Campaign - People's Development and Democracy Local 2001. Thomas. Isaac, Indian an in work at Democracy 1998. Raghavan. Pyaralal and Franke, Richard Thomas, Isaac, v.2:Value Question: in Property 2004. Verdery. Katherine and Caroline, Humphrey, introductory Some world-economy: capitalist ofthe study The 1979. Terence. Hopkins, the in change Social In issues. Methodological analysis: World-system 1978. Terence. Hopkins, the from Selections Gramsci: Antonio 1971. eds. Smith, Nowell Geoffrey and Quintin Hoare, Ecuador Neoliberalism: Towards Protectionism From 1999. Klak. Thomas and Jeanne Hey, agrarian Kerala’s of roots deep The power: to ‘fanaticism’ 2008.From Ron. Herring, Decentralization ofGlobalization: theAge in Power Public ‘Reinventing 2005. Patrick. Heller, of Capitalism Transformation the and Workers Development: of Labor The 2000. Patrick. Heller, Duke Democracy. and Land for Struggle The Rebellion: Chiapas The 1998. Neil. Harvey, Press. University Oxford Oxford: imperialism. new The 2003. David. Harvey, Books. Haymarket Chicago: 1918-1923. Germany revolution: lost 2003.The Chris. Harman, the in Connections &Global LocalPractice Burning: Is OurFury 2003. Eva-Maria. Hardtmann, York: ideas.New ofhis legacy The global ours: and time his in Gandhi 2004. David. Hardiman, Routledge. ed. 1st Practice. Local and Ideologies Ideals, 1993.Socialism: C.M. Hann, End matter Zapatistas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. University Cambridge Cambridge: Zapatistas. Kerala. 2010. Oxford University Press. Press. Pluto London: Ecuador. Bolivia, PublishersLtd. &Co C Hurst India. Bangalore, Nesa, India. Kendra. Adhyayan Vikas Mumbai: Economy—Kerala. Crop LeftWord. in Kerala. Planning Press. University Cornell Ithaca: Cooperative. Industrial Publishers. Berg Ed. English GlobalEconomy. the in Transformation Publications. Sage present. and Past ofcapitalism: The World-system In considerations. publications. Sage 199-217. Kaplan, Hockey Barbara economy, world capitalist Publishers. International York: New notebooks. prison 1999. Fall / Development International Comparative in Studies (1981-1996). Administrations Four Across Manohar. Delhi: New 277-320. Pinch, William ed. Hauser, Walter of in honor politics and history Indian on Essays of peasants: Speaking In exceptionalism. 79–107. Littlefield: & Rowman York: Politics.New and Power Poverty, India: in Movements Social Katzenstein, M. and Ray R. in Kerala’, in Politics of Movement Transformation the and Press. University Cornell Ithaca: India. Kerala, in University Press. Universitet. Stockholm Movement. Dalit Columbia UP. Bibliography 243 CEU eTD Collection Kurien, Prema. 2002. Kaleidiscopic ethnicity: International migration and the reconstruction of reconstruction the and migration International ethnicity: Kaleidiscopic 2002. Prema. Kurien, G. Paraiyil in “Outlier”’, the and Tendency Central Its Model: Kerala ‘The 2000. John. Kurien, 389-95. 44(3): Anthropology Current native. of the The return 2003. Adam. Kuper, London: an illusion. of Transformations society: of primitive The invention 1988. Adam. Kuper, London: School. British The Modern Anthropologists: and Anthropology 1996. Adam. Kuper, its and struggle Class Bihar: rural in aNaxalite Becoming 2006. J. George Kunnath, and Economic analysis. intra-regional An ofKerala: economy tribal The 1985. M. Kunhaman, Party Communist Pillai. Krishna of‘Sakhavu’ Life Communist: first Kerala’s 1971. T.V. Krishnan, 13-26. Oct. 18(21), Frontline struggle. adivasi The 2001. R. Krishnakumar. Manohar. Delhi: India. in equality social and Conversion 1989. Dick. Kooiman, the in Peoples Indigenous Locating or Exclusion? Integration 2004. Darley. Kjosavik, indigenous and dynamics rights Property 2007. N. Shanmugaratnam. and Darley Kjosavik, the for Report Feasibility and Study Situational A Initiative: Wayanad 2006. KIRTADS. Hamilton. Hamish London: of India. idea The 1997. Sunil. Khilnani, Power. and Water for Struggles Transnational Development: Dams and 2004. Sanjeev. Khagram, fieldwork, of memoir A bones: the from Anthropology 2008. Cynthia. Mahmood, Keppley term of the politics the and rights peoples’ 2004.Indigenous Lewis. Jerome and Justin Kenrick, Kaviraj, S. andKhilnani, S. (2002) Civil Society: History and Possibilities. Cambridge University (4): 23 ofanthropology Critique slot’. ‘indigenous the and Anthropology 2003. Bengt. Karlsson, 3,July– XXVI Marxist, The Rights. Adivasi for Struggles Intensified Towards Brinda. Karat, Translated 2008. 14 June Kafila a name’”. and ‘a home just 2008.“Beyond M. Sunny Kapikadu, on Reflections Kerala: in dilemmas development and relations labour Rural 1999. KP. Kannan, Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist End matter Kalb, Don. 1997. Expanding class: Power and everyday politics in industrial communities, The communities, industrial in politics everyday and Power class: Expanding 1997. Don. Kalb, of enslavement and degradation, Alienation, Valli: Withering 2004. Mariamma. Kalathil, community identities in India. London: Rutgers University Press. 178–98. pp. Books, Zed London: Experience. Development Kerala—the (ed.) Routledge. Routledge. 33 Vol (1):89-123. Studies Journal ofPeasant contradictions. 466-474. 11: XX Vol Weekly: Political Publication. 2:231–73. Studies, Development for Forum India. South Kerala, of Process Development 1183-1260. 41 (6): Studies Asian Modern perspective. institutional-historical An India: South Kerala, highland in communities Management. and Excellence of Centre Kozhikode: of Wayanad. Communities of Adivasi Development Comprehensive Cornell University Press. 1-11. 33(1/2): humanism and Anthropology commitment. and survival 4-9. 20(2): Today Anthropology ‘indigenous’. Press 403-423. 2010. September and-a-name/#more-339 http://kafila.org/2008/06/14/beyond-just-a-home- Html: Devika. by J. Malayalam from 140-181. 26(2): Studies of Peasant Journal economy. growing a slowly in labour force transforming of asocially dilemmas the Netherlands, 1850-1950. Durham: Duke University Press. University Duke Durham: 1850-1950. Netherlands, 66. no paper discussion CDS Attappady. in tribalwomen Bibliography 244 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist 1989. since India contestation: and Power 2007. Nigam. Aditya and Nivedita, Menon, Pondicherry: India. modern in oncaste Essays of insight: blindness The 2006. Dilip. Menon, 1900-1948. Malabar India: south in communism and nationalism Caste, 1994. Dilip. Menon, in reservation electoral and Representation margins: the at 2005.Standing Alistair. McMillan, Routledge. York: New Change. Social for Struggles Critical Development: Contesting 2010. ed. ------, of Agrarian Journal please.. as they just not but history, own their make Peasants 2008. ------. 347-355 46 (4): Sociology ofComparative Journal International of poverty? end The 2005. ------. comparison. incorporated and globalization analysis, World-systems 2000. Philip. McMichael, and Dalist Muslims, XII: Studies Subaltern ed. Skaria, Ajay and Pandian, S. M. Shail, Mayaram, 70-88. 2(1): Society and Economy body. of the Techniques 1973. [1934] Marcel. Mauss, Press. Joseph’s St. Thiruvanathapuram: Kerala. in situation Tribal G. 1977. PR Mathur, (ed.), Tharamangalam, inJoseph andExperience’, Promise Plan: People’s 2006.‘The George. Mathew, Delhi. Company, Publishing Concept Kerala. asecular to road Communal 1989. George. Mathew, Wildside Rockville: Bonaparte. Louis of Brumaire eighteenth The 2008. [1852] Karl. Marx, Chicago: Engels). byFrederick introduction an (with Capital and Wage-Labor 1935. Karl. Marx, of multi-sited Theemergence system: world the in/of Ethnography 1995. George. Marcus, the and Chatterjee Partha society: political of ‘poverty’ The 2010. Nissim. Mannathukkaren, 29. September weekly political and Economic Vevey. from view 2001.The Toft. Stig Madsen, in citizenship consumer and youth Gender, children: Liberalization’s 2010. Ritty. Lukose, Cultural Globalization’, Eraof the in Politics Protesting Citizenship: ‘Empty 2005. Ritty. Lukose, press. MIT consciousness. class and History Marxism? orthodox is What 1923. Georg. Lukacs, of Facsimile India; Services, Educational Asian Manual. Malabar 2006. [1887] William. Logan, gender and caste of class, account historical A identity: and Experience 2001. Anna. Lindberg, Current of dispossession. management the and capitalism Indigeneity, 2009. ------. tribal the and politics Resource Indonesia: in identity indigenous Articulating 2000. Tania. Li, - India in by Dispossession Accumulation and Zones Economic Special 2011. Michael. Levien, 6:455-479. Theory Anthropological indigenism.” century “Twenty-first 2006. Borshay. Richard Lee, End matter Halifax/Winniped: Fernwood Publishing//London, New York: Zed Books. Zed York: New Publishing//London, Fernwood Halifax/Winniped: Navayana. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Oxford: OUP. India. 205-228. (2): Change8 http://jwsr.ucr.edu/archive/vol6/number3/pdf/jwsr-v6n3-mcmichael.pdf 3. VI Research Systems World of Journal Black. Permanent Delhi: New History. of Fabrications the 313–37. pp. Delhi: OrientLongman. New andDevelopment. Action of Public Paradoxes The Kerala: Press. Company. & Kerr H. Charles 24. of Anthropology Review Annual ethnography. 295-314. 31 (2): Quarterly World Third India. in Kerala, Campaign Planning People’s 3733-3742. globalizing India. Duke University Press. 506–33. 20(4): Anthropology, edition. ed 1887 University. Lund 1930-2000. of Kerala, workers cashew the among 385-414. Anthropology51(3): 42(1):149-79. history and in society studies slot.Comparative 454–483. (4): 11 Change ofAgrarian Journal . Bibliography 245 CEU eTD Collection Niezen, Ronald.2003. The origins of indigenism. Berkeley: University of California Press. ofCalifornia University Berkeley: indigenism. of origins The Ronald.2003. Niezen, in Thandans labor of and land to Access survival: for Emancipation 1991. Olga. Nieuwenhuys, and “Race”, Maya, The live”: you will more the kill more you “The 2003. M. Diane Nelson, the n governance and institutions struggles: chain Value 2009. Pritchard. Bill and Jeff Neilson, of age an in autonomy for question the Visions: Mayan 2001. June. Nash, Hindu and of science critiques postmodern backward: facing Prophets 2003 Meera Nanda, Publications Chintha Trivandrum: aCommunist. I became How 1976. EMS. Namboodiripad, Printers. Naveen Delhi: Kerala. in Slavery 1984. K Ramachandra. K Nair, households: agrarian among suicides and debt Distress 2007. Menon. Vineetha and N. K. Nair, study A strategies: livelihood and distress Agrarian 2007. Menon. Vineetha Vinod, N, C.P. K Nair, land. Minister’s occupy to tribals Kundala starvation: to due dies 2001.Tribal CM. Mukundan, The resistance: “reactionary” meets dispossession “Communist” 2009. Bihari. Projit Mukherji, Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Hill in ofProduction Mode Neoliberal A Speculation: to Farming “From 2011. Daniel. Muenster, Allied Bombay: Place. ADangerous 1975. Weaver. Suzanne with Patrick Daniel Moynihan, Western in migration labour seasonal Adivasi city: the of margins the On 2005. David. Mosse, Studies Asian Modern farmer. Kerala the of embourgeoisement The 1997. M. Barrie Morrison, Jersey: New Pandaram. Hill the of study socio-economic A traders: Forest 1982. Brian. Morris, Political & Economic a crisis. of Victims laborers: agricultural Kerala’s S. 2008. Mohanakumar, Report capital: big Indian against rises worker Kerala 1988. Raman. K Ravi and KTRam Mohan, Susie and K Satyanarayana In suffering. slave of history the Narrativizing 2011. Sanal. Mohan, Kerala. century twentieth in agency dalit and society civil space, Social 2008. Sanal. Mohan, State’. ‘Ethnographic the Inside from AView Recognition: Tribal 2010. Townsend. Middleton, of Social Journal anthropology. applied in of “knowledge” Problem 2009. Vineetha. Menon, Books. DC Kottayam: history. of Kerala Asurvey 2007. Sreedhara. Menon, End matter Kerala. Modern Asian Studies 25(3): 599-619. 25(3): Studies Asian Modern Kerala. Press. DukeUniversity Pandian. Anand and Kosek Jake S Moore, Donald ed. difference, of politics the and nature Race, In Guatemala. in peace for hopes biopolitical Wiley-Blackwell. Oxford: India. of South districts plantation globalization.Routledge. UniversityPress. ,New N.J.:Rutgers India Brunswick, ;London in nationalism 397. Paper Working CDS Kerala. in studies village three from findings Paper. Working CDS Kerala. District, Wayanad Panchayat, Pulpalli in http://ambedkar.org/news/tribaldies.htm. e-forum. Dalit 89–96. 54(2009): Anthropology of Journal Focaal—European West-Bengal. in Left parliamentary of the ironies July 13 seminar, India” in Transformation “Agrarian the at presented Paper Agriculture?” Produce Publishers. 3025-3038. 9, July Weekly Political and Economic India. 61-87. 31 (1): Press. Athlone 27-29. 2008: 10, May Weekly, 2: 1259-1364. July weekly political and Economic Struggle. Workers’ on Rayons Books. Penguin Delhi: sight. in alphabet No ed., Tharu, of Pennsylvania. University India, of Study Advanced the for Center 2008. 3-5, December Conference Studies The Dalit at presented Paper Bonn. ECMSAS, at presented Paper 101-114. (1): Sciences11 th , Oxford University. Bibliography 246 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist age’? middle ‘new A revivalism: ethnic and capitalism Late 2003. Elizabeth. Rata, Berkeley: India. modern of politics the and Dalits Question: Caste The 2009. Anupama. Rao, 126-135. 1 (48): Analysis Social of Hope. Spark A Muthanga: 2004. Ravi. Raman, Experience. TheKerala Practice: and Theory in Reforms Land P.1981. Radhakrishnan, Colonial British and tribes’ ‘Criminal by history: Dishonoured 2001. Meena. Radhakrishna, A Kerala: in alienation land Tribal 2001. Vijayabalan. Lekshmi and George, Tony Puthucherril, Press. Grove York: New Communism. of history A flag: red The 2009. David. Priestland, 189-201. 43 (1): Review Studies African unite! earth, the of Afro-dalits 2000. Vijay. Prashad. May combat Communalism socialism. live Long more: no is EMS 1998. Bhan. Chandra Prasad, anti- of making the Elwin Verrier romanticism: ecological Against 2003. Archana. Prasad, Press. DukeUniversity recognition. of cunning The 2002. A. Elizabeth Povinelli, 1st Bolivia. Postmulticultural in Politics Indigenous Citizens: We Are Now 2006. Nancy. Postero, India. South Colonial in modernity and resources Race, natures: Civilising 2003. Kavita. Philip, orCaste-Ending Varna, orSudra Aborigines, For Search 2009. Sharad. Patil, (ed.) G. Parayil in a“Model”?’ Experience Development Kerala’s ‘Is 2000. Govinda. Parayil, Essays Three Delhi: New essays. other and action cultural for agenda An 2006. K.N. Panikkar, 15 4 -17 Frontline (7)Apr. . Panikkar, K.N.1998.EMSashistorian. 1836- Malabar in Uprisings Peasant and Religion State: and Lord Against 1992. N. K. Panikkar, Economic ofMalabar. study caste A classes: social and legislation Agrarian 1978. K.N. Panikkar, in Identity and Modernity Kerala: in Mobility Social 2000. Osella. Caroline and Filippo, Osella, Capability Sen’s on Based Critique A “Model”: Kerala the and Reform 2010. M.A. Oommen, Indian an on Construction the and Movement The Anti-caste Visions: Dalit 2006. Gail. Omvedt, 4881. 19: November EPW adivasis. and dalits globalization, and Capitalism 2005. Gail. Omvedt, Dalit the and Ambedkar Dr Revolution: Democratic the and Dalits 1994. Gail. Omvedt, in tradition socialist the and movements social New revolution: Reinventing 1993. Gail. Omvedt, University Berkeley: adaptation. political in :astudy Kerala in Communism 1982. T.J. Nossiter, End matter Anthropological theory 3: 43. 3: theory Anthropological University of California Press. 129-137. (52): 16 Weekly Political and Economic Longman. Orient Policy. 25. CULRvol betrayals. and ofpromises tale 5: 33-34. n vol 5, Collective. Essays Three Delhi: New identity. tribal modern Press. University Stanford ed. Longman. Orient Delhi: New 11. no. XLVII, vol Equality?Mainstream 1–16. pp. Books, Zed York: New and London Experience. Development The Kerala: Collective. 1921. Oxford University Press. 880-888. 13 (21): weekly political and Press. Pluto Conflict. Routledge. London: ofDevelopment. Model Kerala the Critiquing State: the and Democracy, Development, ed., Raman, Ravi In Approach. Longman. Orient ed. 2nd Identity. Ltd. Pvt. Publications Sage India. Colonial in Movement Sharpe. M.E. York: New India. Press. of California Bibliography 247 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist Tribal on Ghurye and Elwin sociology: indological vs anthropology Colonial 2004. A.C. Sinha, Kerala. in struggle Adivasi lining: silver the and clouds dark The 2001. Sanjay. Kumar Singh, Survey Anthropological Calcutta: policy. tribal and tribes Nehru, Jawaharlal 1989. ed. K.S., Singh, North in people Tuscarora and Lumbee Histories: Indian Living 2003. Gerald. Sider, schizophrenic the of rise the and Neoliberalism multiversity: the Beyond 2010. Chris. Shore, Gujarat. in Violence The Nationalism: Hindu and Caste 2007.Communalism, Ornit. Shani, Working Institute Enterprise American rest. to model theKerala Putting 2010. Apoorna. Shah, and environmentalism, politics, Indigenous state: the of shadows the In 2010. Alpa. Shah, in development and rights people, Indigenous ofindigeneity? side The dark 2007. Alpa. Shah, Southeast upland of history anarchist An governed: being of not art The C. 2009. James Scott, Yale Resistance. of Peasant Forms Everyday Weak: the of Weapons C. 1987. James Scott, History. Social Writing In Studies. Subaltern in Subaltern ofthe decline The 1997. Sumit. Sarkar, Macmillan. Delhi: New 1885-1947. India, Modern 1983. Sumit. Sarkar, People’s Delhi: Kerala. of pulayas The slave-caste: ofa Emergence 1980. K. Saradamoni, in Democracy Social 2007. Teichman. Judith and Heller Patrick Edelman, Marc Richard, Sandbrook, Durham: Nationalism. Postcolonial of Politics the and India Belief: Beyond 2007. Srirupa. Roy, 2010. 20September India.com. Outlook revolution. trickledown The 2010. ------. 2009. 30 September Guardian The attack. under is of India heart The 2009. ------. House. Random York: New things. of small The God 1997. Arundhati. Roy, the in erasure amidst resistance discursive Dammed: of the Voices 2003. Paul. Routledge, D. and G. Joseph In ofContention. Language the and Hegemony 1994. William. Roseberry, Press. University Oxford Ambedkar. B. R. of writing essential The 2002. ed. Valerian, Rodriguez, after Claims Land and Modernities Indigenous Modernity? 2003.‘Whose Steven. Robins, of History The Hidden Hydra: Many-Headed The 2001. Linebaugh. Peter and Marcus Rediker, End matter in India, ed. T B Subba and Sujit Som. Orient Longman. Orient Som. Sujit and TBSubba ed. India, in Question Tribal the and Elwin Verrier fiction: and ethnography Between In India. in Policy House. Printing Kalpana Delhi: New of India. Press. Carolina of University Hill: Carolina.Chapel 15-29. (1): 18 anthropology Social university. Cambridge University Press. Rest-September-10.pdf Http://www.aei.org/docLib/Putting-Kerala-Model- Policy. Development on Series pPaper Press. University Duke Durham: India. Jharkhand, in insurgency 1806-32. 5/6: Compass History India. Asia. Yale University Press. University Press. 82-108. pp. India, Press University Oxford Delhi: Publishing House. Press. University Cambridge Cambridge: Prospects. Challenges, Origins, Periphery: Global the Duke University Press. http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?267040. www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/30/mining-india-maoists-green-hunt 243-270. (3), 22 Geography Political India. Valley, Narmada Durham, NC: Duke University Press. of Rule. Negotiation the and Revolution Formation: of State Forms (eds),Everyday Nugent 265–85. 34(2): Change and Apartheid’.Development Press. Beacon London: Atlantic. Revolutionary the Bibliography . 248 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist theory. Social Lemert, Charles In elbow. invisible the and science social Future 1999. ------. Press. California of University Berkeley: inequality. Durable 1998. ------. Addison-Wesley. Mass.: Reading, revolution. to mobilization From 1978. Charles. Tilly, Government Madras: India. Southern of tribes and Castes 1909. K. Rangachari. Eand Thurston, Books. Penguin London: class. working English of the making The 1970. E.P. Thompson, The (eds.), Saville and J. Miliband R. In English. of the Peculiarities 1965. E.P. Thompson, Joseph In Agenda? orIncomplete Paradox A Kerala: 2006. Vinod. Thomas, of the The Problematic Paradoxes: Kerala’s ‘Understanding 2006. Joseph. Tharamangalam, patterns voting dalit/adivasi and development De-alignment, choices: Poor 2008. Tariq. Thachil, for note concept A movement: the Dalit for strategies Rethinking 2010. Anand. Teltumbde, Navayana. Delhi: New crop. bitter and strange A Khairlanji: 2008. Anand. Teltumbde, Press. University Cambridge Cambridge: movement. in Power G.1998. Sidney Tarrow, American indigenism. global and identity San truth”: and water “Land, 2002. Renee. Sylvain, 14 Vol Society and Culture Theory, of disidentification. circles Widening 1997. de. Abram Swaan, Books. Roli Delhi: New harvest. iron An 2006. Surendran,CP. and Ethics Accountability, in Studies Anthropological Cultures: Audit 2000. Marilyn. Strathern, in Woman' ‘Non-Western Category the of Critique A Fictions: Feminist 1989. Julie. Stephens, Publishers. JK Bombay: essays. other and India modern in Caste 1962. M.N. Srinivas, andSreekumar, K.K. Govindan 2006.‘Interrogating Parayil. Development: NewSocialMovements, as tourism of contradictions and Contention 2002. Parayil. Govindan and K.K. Sreekumar, Chiapas. in Rights Human and Struggle Indigenous Rebellion: in Rights 2008. Shannon. Speed, comparative A authenticity: cultural and indigeneity Self-government, 2005. Selma. Sonntag, Focaal beyond.” and anthropology in interpretations critical “Hegemony: 2004. Gavin. Smith, 1999. Skaria, HybridAjay. Forests, Histories: FrontiersWildnessandin Western OUP India. India. Books. Reaktion London: Futures. their and Cultures Indigenous people: First 2005. Jeffrey. Sissons, the and movement Social In review. A India: in movement solidarity Tribal 2002. Surajit. Sinha, End matter Westview Press. Press. Press. Merlin London: Register. socialist 69–93. pp. Longman: Orient Delhi: New Development. and Action of Public Paradoxes The Kerala: Tharamangalam,(ed.)., 1–37. pp. Longman, Orient Delhi: New and Development. Action Public of Paradoxes The Kerala: (ed.) Tharamangalam J. in of Development’, Model Kerala 441-464. 16(4): Asia South Contemporary states. Indian in 10-18. Bulletin, Dalit discussion. 1974-85. (4): Anthropologist104 105-122. (2): Routledge. London: Academy. the Oxford University Press. Delhi: 92-126. Guha, Ranajit ed. volume VI, studies Subaltern India. on Writings Feminist 215–57. pp. Longman, Orient Delhi: New Development. and Action Public of Paradoxes The andDemocracy,Tharamangalam IndigenousKerala’, People’sStrugglesin J. in (ed.) Kerala: 529-548. 23 (3): Quarterly World Third India. ofKerala, case the option: development Press. University Stanford Stanford: Paul. Kegan London: Subba. Tanka and Karlsson Bengt ed. India, in Indigeneity In States. United the and Indian of study 2004:99-120. Sage. London: Shah. Ghanshyam state, Bibliography 249 CEU eTD Collection Indigenist mobilization: ‘Identity’ versus ‘class’ after the Kerala model of development? theKerala after ‘Identity’ versus‘class’ mobilization: Indigenist battle the and women, Hindu/Muslim scripts, Media violence: Intelligible 2004. Usha. Zacharias, Achievements revolution? social for Science 1994. Sooryamoorthy. R. and Mathew Zachariah, ofIndigenous TheRise America: Latin in Citizenship Contesting 2005. Deborah. Yashar, 34 weekly political and Economic India. of people as indigenous 1999.Tribes Virginius. Xaxa, In:PathwaysofPower:Building NewPower, Old Questions, Insights, 2001.------.[1990] Facing Press. California of University Berkeley: history. without people the and Europe 1982. ------. inc. Prentice-hall Jersey: Peasants.New 1966. Eric. Wolf, Robben. and Nordstrom ed. Fire, under Fieldwork In attack. Rape 1996. Kathy. Winkler, Chicago desert. Kalahari of the economy political A flies: with filled Land 1989. Edwin. Wilmsen, in Communists Democratic democracy: participatory of roots The 2008. Michelle. Williams, State- and Environmentalism Neo-Gandhian Adivasis, Voices: Sunken 2007. Judy. Whitehead, and of Revolution Studies Comparative Rebells: Reluctant 1984. John. Walton, Duke Durham: introduction. An analysis: World-systems 2004. Immanuel. Wallerstein, ethnicity. nationalism, Racism, of peoplehood: construction The 1987. Immanuel. Wallerstein, Agency. Frontier North-East Shillong: NEFA. for philosophy A 1959. Elwin. Verrier, Indian in aSouthern Kinship and Caste Gender, Barriers: Invisible 1994. Den. Marion Uyl, selected of study case A policy: development and unemployment 1975.Poverty, Nations. United of Cunning the and Theory Anthropological Resurgence, ‘Indigenous 2007. Terance. Turner, of contradictions the and consciousness, social projects, Class 2003. Terance. Turner, and Central in anthropology Physical race? Whither Introduction: 2010. Marius. Turda, laCadena de Marisol ed. Today, Experience Indigenous In voice. Indigenous 2007. Anna. Tsing, Press. University Princeton Connection. Global of Ethnography An Friction: 2004. Anna. Tsing, : Cambridge movements. of social analysis :An eye the and The voice 1981. Alain. Touraine, 355-372. (3): theory1 Anthropoligical inequality. of origins Relational 2001. ------. End matter for citizenship in Kerala. Cultural dynamics 16 (2/3): 169-192. 16 (2/3): dynamics Cultural Kerala. in citizenship for Books. Zed Yersey: New London, Parishad. Sahitya Sastra – TheKerala movement of adevelopment dilemmas and Press. University Cambridge Cambridge: Challenge. Postliberal the and Movements 3596. 3589- (51): 381-97. pp. 2001, UCP, Berkeley, World, Modern the of Anthropology an Press. California of University Berkeley: IL: Chicago University Press. Macmillan. Palgrave, York: New India. Kerala, and Africa South 49(2). Antropologica 1998-2001. Valley Narmada the in Relations Society Civil Press. University NY:Columbia Underdevelopment. University Press. 388. 373- 2 (2): Forum Sociological Books,Netherlands. International Village. Nations. United York: New Trivandrum). Studies, Development for Centre by (prepared Kerala to reference special with issues 118–23. 49: Anthropology, of Journal Focaal—European History’, Rowman &Littlefield Publishers. York: New Friedman. Jonathan violence,ed. and state, the Globalization, In ‘globalization’. Anthropology. Historical and Global of Focaal—Journal 1945. after Europe Southeastern Berg. Orin Start. and Cambridge University. Bibliography 250