Q1) ‘Tribal societies work on the principle of equality.’ Enlist the features of tribal ways of living in support of your answer.
Answers
Answer:
TRIBALS AND TRIBAL POLICY
Manifest Pedagogy
The issue of tribes has been a lot in news – Tribal displacement owing to Bullet train project or construction of Sardar Vallabbhai statue, forest rights issue during elections in Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh, a US Christian missionary killed by Sentinelese tribe. All these have brought the issue of government attitude towards tribes back to the focus. Governmental attitude includes Constitutional provisions, policies, Acts, schemes and programmes and institutions.
In news
Protection of indigenous people and recent Sentinel issue.
Placing it in syllabus
Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation.
Welfare schemes for vulnerable sections of the population by the center and states.
Static dimensions
- Tribal policy: Pre-independence and post-independence
- Different models of tribal development
- Current dimensions
- Draft National Policy on Tribals
- Content
Tribal policy since the time of British:
During the British rule in the pre-independence period, most of the tribal communities in India remained isolated from the mainstream of national life. Tribal areas were kept secluded and cut off from the rest of the people. The policy of the British government was solely directed and dominated by the colonial interests and based on isolation and exploitation of the tribals.
Different models of tribal development:
The approaches to the development of the tribal people in India can, be divided into three categories such as;
- 1. Isolationist Approach,
- 2. Assimilation Approach,
- and 3. Integration Approach
Isolationist Approach:
- It was followed by the British after the policies of the British led to revolts against them by the Tribes. It manifested in the form of British designating tribal areas as ‘excluded areas ‘ based on the principle of non-interference
- Under British rule, the extension of a centralized administration over areas, which previously were outside the effective control of princely rulers, deprived many aboriginal tribes of their autonomy.
- Though British administrators had no intention of interfering with tribesmen’s rights and traditional manner of living, the very process of establishment of law and order in outlying areas exposed the tribes to the pressure of more advanced populations.
- The areas which had previously been virtually un-administered have been unsafe for outsiders who did not enjoy the confidence and goodwill of the tribal inhabitants, traders and money-lenders could now establish themselves under the protection of the British administration and in many cases they were followed by settlers who succeeded in acquiring large stretches of tribes’ land.
- Administrative officers who did not understand tribal system of land tenure introduced uniform methods of revenue collection. But these had the un-intended effect of facilitating the alienation of tribal land to members of advanced populations.
- There were some tribes, however, who rebelled against an administration, which allowed outsiders to deprive them of their land.
- In the Chhota Nagpur and the Santhal Parganas such rebellions of desperate tribesmen recurred throughout the nineteenth century, and there were minor risings in the Agency tracts of Madras and in some of the districts of Bombay inhabited by Bhils.
- Santhals are believed to have lost about 10,000 men in their rebellion of 1855. None of these insurrections were aimed primarily at the British administration, but they were a reaction to their exploitation and oppression by Hindu landlords and money-lenders.