Democracy and the Politics of Social Citizenship in India

Democracy and the Politics of Social Citizenship in India by Anil Mathew Varughese A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of Political Science University of Toronto © Copyright by Anil Mathew Varughese (2013) DEMOCRACY AND THE POLITICS OF SOCIAL CITIZENSHIP IN INDIA Anil Mathew Varughese Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of Political Science University of Toronto 2013 Abstract Why do some pro-poor democracies in global South enact generous and universal social policies accompanied by empowering outcomes while others, similar in many ways, do not? If lower-class integration and programmatic commitment steers policy outcomes to be more egalitarian, what explains the variance in redistributive commitment within the cluster of radical democracies? These questions are examined in the context of two celebrated cases of pro-poor reform in the developing world: the Indian states of Kerala and West Bengal. Despite a host of similar background conditions (democratic framework, programmatic political parties, strong labor unions, and a high degree of subordinate-class integration), the cases display considerable variation in their redistributive commitment. Using the comparative-historical method, this dissertation seeks to explain the variance. It argues that the welfare divergences of Kerala and West Bengal are a function of their divergent modes of lower-class integration. In Kerala, a radical-mobilizational mode of ii lower-class integration has organized the poorer sections of the working classes—landless laborers and informal sector workers—in autonomous class organizations. This has enabled them to vigorously assert their interests within the working-class movement and harness state power to advance their interests through a wide range of legislative protections and statutory entitlements. In contrast, a clientelist-corporatist mode of lower-class integration in West Bengal relies on dependent mobilization of the poorer sections, without effective self- representing class organizations and without the strategic capacity to pursue class action independent of middle-class collaborators. These distinct modes of lower-class integration engender qualitatively different state-poor relationships and, in turn, divergent visions of social citizenship. The origins of these distinct modes are then traced to their historical and peculiar patterns of class formation, class struggle, and class compromise. This dissertation provides nuance to the welfare-state literature by proposing analytical differentiation within a subset of radical democracies and then by specifying the conditions under which lower-class power and state power can be harnessed to create more redistributive and empowering social outcomes in the global South. It also makes a contribution in linking agrarian labor movements to the nature of welfare regimes and more broadly to social citizenship. iii Acknowledgements Writing this dissertation has been a long and arduous journey and, and along the way, I have accumulated innumerable debts. I owe an extraordinary intellectual debt to my supervisor, Prof. Richard Sandbrook for his guidance and patience throughout the dissertation process and my entire graduate career. The ways in which his ideas have shaped this work will be obvious to those who are familiar with his scholarship. The involvement of my committee members, Joseph Wong and Paul Kingston, went beyond offering incisive comments on various drafts to preparing me for a career in teaching and research. Their contributions have greatly enriched the dissertation and my intellectual development. I am also grateful to Prof. Arthur Rubinoff for offering thoughtful suggestions for improvement. I am immensely thankful to my external examiner, Prof. Atul Kohli, for his rigorous reading and critical engagement. His endorsements of the key argument and ideas in the dissertation have significantly enhanced my confidence. Outside the academic circle, my biggest debt is to Dr. Mary Jo Leddy who has been a friend and mentor for the last decade. She was involved in every stage of my doctoral studies, beginning with writing reference letters, to helping in finding a place to live, to offering a quiet place to write, to reading my chapters carefully. I am immensely thankful for her as well as the Romero House community for their warm friendship. Professors Judith Teichman, Susan Solomon and Jeffrey Kopstein were key people involved in my intellectual formation at the University of Toronto. At various stages of writing, I have benefited from discussions with Patrick Heller, Ananya Mukherjee, M. A. Oommen, Joseph Tharamangalam, Thomas Isaac, P. Govinda Pillai, Sanjeeb Mukherjee, Bipash Bagchi, iv Rajarshi Dasgupta, Rene Veron, Vivek Chibber, Gerry Helleiner, Pinaki Chakrabarti and Malcom Blincow. I am also grateful to Nissim Mannauthukkaren and Graeme Auld for reading some of the chapters and offering thoughtful suggestions. At the Department of Political Science, the intellectual companionship of Stephen Trott and Su-mei Ooi is gratefully acknowledged. They were part of a dissertation group and I thank them for listening patiently and always thinking positively. Mitu Sengupta, Thomas Teiku, Juan Marsiaj, Jeff Webber, Elinor Bray-Collins, Mellisa Levin, Ruben Zaiotti, Luc Turgeon, Stephen White, Jennifer Wallner, Victor Gomez and Reuven Shlozberg continually reminded me that graduate school could be fun, too. Prasad Bidaye and Anirudha Chowdhury provided much needed company during long hours at Robarts library. My involvement with CUPE 3902 was a key part of graduate school experience and I thank the staff and fellow members for the many heated debates and disagreements. I would also like to thank the staff at the Department of Political Science: Joan Kallis, Carolynn Branton, Mary Alice Bailey, Hyla Levy, and Louis Tentsos. Outside the university, my dear friends and comrades, Aparna Sundar, Shubhra Gururani, Sanjay Talreja, Sara Abraham, Raghu Krishnan and their families provided a crucial support network. At Carleton University, my colleagues, Susan Phillips, Manfred Bienefeld, Leslie Pal, Frances Abele, Lisa Mills and Marc-Andre Gagnon have provided much needed support. I was fortunate to win a doctoral fellowship from the IDRC which allowed me to conduct extensive field research. I would also like to acknowledge funding from the Centre for International Studies, University of Toronto, for travel to India, and from the Department of Political Science at the University of Toronto. v Many individuals generously helped me during the field research. They provided key contacts, arranged housing and transportation, welcomed me into their homes and shared priceless wisdom with infinite patience and generosity. While I cannot name everyone here, I thank all of them for their kindness. For providing me with key contacts, resources, access to meetings and documents, I thank Dr. Dwaipayan Bhattacharya at the Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Kolkata, and Dr. K. N. Harilal at the Centre for Development Studies, Trivandrum. Their insights and logistical help were vital to my field research. During field research, l benefited generously from the assistance of the staff and librarians at CSSS and CDS. Parthasarathi Banerji provided endless insight into all aspects of life and politics in West Bengal. Aktar Ali, Suman Ray and Partha Dutta in Bengal and Gipson Varghese in Kerala provided assistance with research and translation. Kausik Bhadra helped in the collection of statistical data. I should also acknowledge fondly the lasting impact of life at Jawaharlal Nehru University campus in New Delhi. When I arrived in JNU, the tumult of the Mandal agitation had not set on campus. And, mirroring a national trend, Hindu nationalism had begun to raise its ugly head on campus. The crumbling of the socialist bloc hadn’t sunk in. All these made for six tumultuous years of political baptism by fire. I am thankful to my professors and fellow- JNUites for this invaluable experience and for profoundly shaping my thinking. The help and support of my family has been priceless. My parents always supported my endeavours even when they didn’t agree with my choices. I thank them for their unconditional love. My siblings, Asha and Ajith, have shaped my life in more ways than I can describe. My parents-in-law and brother-in-law, Joy, have motivated me persistently yet gently, almost every time I spoke to them. I am thankful to all of them. vi Last but not least, to Chandrima, my compagnon de route, for putting up with my idiosyncratic ways of working, for taking on a bigger share of the parental responsibilities so that I could finish, for her exemplary work ethic, and above all, for not losing faith. She edited the whole thesis with a keen eye for precision, forcing me to clarify my ideas along with my writing. Without her love and support, this dissertation would not have seen the light of day. Our two boys, Ayush and Adarsh, showed up along the way and quite happily settled for playing with tupperware containers of various shapes and sizes, while we pored over pages. Without them, the last several years would have been too boring. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………….ii Acknowledgments………………………………………………….………………………iv Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………..viii List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………….x List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………....xi List of Appendices………………………………………………………………………....xii

Load more