what is colonialism ?discuss its impact on indian peasantry.(in 500 words
)
Anonymous:
I know the answer but l have short paragraph only can you adjust ?
Hello
Answers
Answered by
1
- Colonialism is taking over the territory of another country to exploit it politically or economically.
- This is either done by the people of their own country or someone from the outside.
- The peasantry in India was broken with the introduction of some of the cash crops.
- Mostly this is the done for the economic gain.
The conflict in rural society was essentially centered on the appropriation of agrarian surplus by various agencies. The colonial state extracted surplus through heavy land revenue demand, taxes and fines. In addition, various intermediate agencies, like usurers and landlords, extracted a large portion of produce in the form of interest and rent. It pressed heavily upon the small peasants and tenants and led to numerous anti-usury protests and rent conflicts between the superior and inferior land holders (Nand 2003: 739-740).
In 1873, an influential Kili of Jamburi in Poona organized a series of attacks with the help of a well-trained group on the professional moneylenders who habitually cheated and oppressed the hill tribes. In May 1875, peasants unitedly attacked the property of usurers in the Deccan districts. In several places stocks and houses belonging to the moneylenders were burnt and their property was plundered. Usually Marwari and Gujarati moneylenders, who constituted the dominant sections of usurers, were the exclusive targets of these attacks. The village panchayats also declared complete boycott of Marwari and Gujarati moneylenders. Through common agreement called sampatras the village communities forbade all section of rural society to assist moneylenders in any form, and fines and social boycott were declared for ryots who violated the agreement (Nand 2003: 756).
In Bengal, the rebellion was witnessed among the peasants of eastern and central districts. In 1873, the Agrarian League was formed in Yusufshahi pargana of Pabna district, where the oppression of a few landlords pushed the peasants to the threshold of tolerance. In this area, the rate of rent had been continually going up, along with the illegal cesses or abwabs. Here the peasants through legal means took landlords to the court of law. Agrarian Leagues came up in Dacca, Mymensingh, Tripura, Bakarganj, Faridpur, Bogra and Rajshahi districts, where civil courts were choked with rent suites. Peasant protest against landlord oppression was not confined to Bengal alone. The fight of the Moplah peasants against their jenmis continued in Malabar, while in Sitapur district of Awadh and in Mewar in Rajasthan peasants resisted rent enhancements and imposition of illegal cesses by their landlords in 1860 and 1879 respectively (Bandhopadhyay 2010: 194-195).
Another immediate and proclaimed motive of the peasant uprising was reduction in the land revenue burden. From the beginning, the colonial land revenue demand had been very heavy but it became unbearable after the enhancement of rates during the revision of 1868-71 which coincided with falling prices, shrinking markets and contraction of credit. The Poona Sarvajnik Sabha prepared the report on unjust rent and with the campaign carried out by native newspaper had to make reduction in 1875 (Nand 2003: 758). In the Kamrup and Darrang districts of Assam for instance, a new revenue settlement in 1893-94 which enhanced rates by 50 to 70 per cent was met by the organization of raij mels, mass assemblies of villagers led to the rural elite (Brahmins, Gossains and Dolois) which enforced non-payment of revenue through the weapons of social boycott or ostracism of those who broke the popular consensus by submitting to the government. In Maharashtra Deccan in 1896-97, famine conditions led to looting of grain-shops and demand for revenue-remissions under the Famine Code – a demand which the government rejected. The Poona Sarvajanik Sabha sent agents out into the countryside between 1896-97 to popularize the legal rights of cultivators in the famine situation (Sarkar 2008: 53).
In the initial phase there were sporadic instances of protest but later on the political parties tried to channelize this discontent through various anti-colonial movements. Apart from the submission of petitions and memoranda, there were sporadic incidents of violent protests by the peasantry against the land revenue system. In July 1917, the Home Rule League started an organized political campaign in north Gujarat. Its strongest centres were Nadiad and Godra (Nand 2003: 779). The Indian National Congress launched the “No-Tax” movement in Kheda in 1918. During the 1921-22 (time of Non-Cooperation Movement) the centre of political activities shifted to bardoli taluka in the Surat district, and a very intense propaganda was concentrated at non-payment of taxes. In 1928, the Congress launched another no-tax campaign in Bardoli. (Nand 2003: 779-83) And similar other movements were witnessed in later periods as well throughout the colonial rule in different parts of the country.
- This is either done by the people of their own country or someone from the outside.
- The peasantry in India was broken with the introduction of some of the cash crops.
- Mostly this is the done for the economic gain.
The conflict in rural society was essentially centered on the appropriation of agrarian surplus by various agencies. The colonial state extracted surplus through heavy land revenue demand, taxes and fines. In addition, various intermediate agencies, like usurers and landlords, extracted a large portion of produce in the form of interest and rent. It pressed heavily upon the small peasants and tenants and led to numerous anti-usury protests and rent conflicts between the superior and inferior land holders (Nand 2003: 739-740).
In 1873, an influential Kili of Jamburi in Poona organized a series of attacks with the help of a well-trained group on the professional moneylenders who habitually cheated and oppressed the hill tribes. In May 1875, peasants unitedly attacked the property of usurers in the Deccan districts. In several places stocks and houses belonging to the moneylenders were burnt and their property was plundered. Usually Marwari and Gujarati moneylenders, who constituted the dominant sections of usurers, were the exclusive targets of these attacks. The village panchayats also declared complete boycott of Marwari and Gujarati moneylenders. Through common agreement called sampatras the village communities forbade all section of rural society to assist moneylenders in any form, and fines and social boycott were declared for ryots who violated the agreement (Nand 2003: 756).
In Bengal, the rebellion was witnessed among the peasants of eastern and central districts. In 1873, the Agrarian League was formed in Yusufshahi pargana of Pabna district, where the oppression of a few landlords pushed the peasants to the threshold of tolerance. In this area, the rate of rent had been continually going up, along with the illegal cesses or abwabs. Here the peasants through legal means took landlords to the court of law. Agrarian Leagues came up in Dacca, Mymensingh, Tripura, Bakarganj, Faridpur, Bogra and Rajshahi districts, where civil courts were choked with rent suites. Peasant protest against landlord oppression was not confined to Bengal alone. The fight of the Moplah peasants against their jenmis continued in Malabar, while in Sitapur district of Awadh and in Mewar in Rajasthan peasants resisted rent enhancements and imposition of illegal cesses by their landlords in 1860 and 1879 respectively (Bandhopadhyay 2010: 194-195).
Another immediate and proclaimed motive of the peasant uprising was reduction in the land revenue burden. From the beginning, the colonial land revenue demand had been very heavy but it became unbearable after the enhancement of rates during the revision of 1868-71 which coincided with falling prices, shrinking markets and contraction of credit. The Poona Sarvajnik Sabha prepared the report on unjust rent and with the campaign carried out by native newspaper had to make reduction in 1875 (Nand 2003: 758). In the Kamrup and Darrang districts of Assam for instance, a new revenue settlement in 1893-94 which enhanced rates by 50 to 70 per cent was met by the organization of raij mels, mass assemblies of villagers led to the rural elite (Brahmins, Gossains and Dolois) which enforced non-payment of revenue through the weapons of social boycott or ostracism of those who broke the popular consensus by submitting to the government. In Maharashtra Deccan in 1896-97, famine conditions led to looting of grain-shops and demand for revenue-remissions under the Famine Code – a demand which the government rejected. The Poona Sarvajanik Sabha sent agents out into the countryside between 1896-97 to popularize the legal rights of cultivators in the famine situation (Sarkar 2008: 53).
In the initial phase there were sporadic instances of protest but later on the political parties tried to channelize this discontent through various anti-colonial movements. Apart from the submission of petitions and memoranda, there were sporadic incidents of violent protests by the peasantry against the land revenue system. In July 1917, the Home Rule League started an organized political campaign in north Gujarat. Its strongest centres were Nadiad and Godra (Nand 2003: 779). The Indian National Congress launched the “No-Tax” movement in Kheda in 1918. During the 1921-22 (time of Non-Cooperation Movement) the centre of political activities shifted to bardoli taluka in the Surat district, and a very intense propaganda was concentrated at non-payment of taxes. In 1928, the Congress launched another no-tax campaign in Bardoli. (Nand 2003: 779-83) And similar other movements were witnessed in later periods as well throughout the colonial rule in different parts of the country.
Answered by
0
the policy or practice of acquiring full or partial control over another country and exploiting it economically is called colonialism. like india was colonised under Britishers. Indian peasantry suffered a lot in this situation. In Champaran peasants were forced to grow indigo as it was used commercially by Britishers. Britishers were having control over plantations on Assam. under inland immigration act 1859, workers were not allowed to leave the tea gardens without permission. they also used to impose taxes on their land. in this way colonialism made the Indian peasants to suffer a lot.
I hope these points may help u.
I hope these points may help u.
Similar questions