Mainstreaming means imposition of Capitalist Mode

Bhaskar Majumder

The practices of the core state often shows it is for the promotion of mainstream interest or the interest of the majority of people or the majority of voters. This writer is not very sure about it. An alternative idea could be that the state is for the promotion of at most the top ten percent of the population. Other alternative ideas could be like the promotion of one major language, one major religion, one major region,

Ravindra Nath Tagore’s language, (‘nana bhasha, nana mat, nana paridhan’ (different languages-different ideas–different dresses) has been subverted to ‘na bhasha-na mat’ (No language-no ideas) for the state needs homogenisation. Mathematical homogeneity is understood, but cultural homogeneity in a sub-continent of 1400 million population?

The Adivasis, Dalits, women, income-poor, and workers show diversity or non-homogeneity that the core state may or may not like. But they exist in villages and forests. It is a different question if each of them has an existence value. There are other socio-economic categories like the money-elite, the corporate, the civil society and so on. The interlinks between all these are not always transparent.

The manifestations of these categories at the bottom, like Adivasi and Dalit, are large families with children dropped out of schools, early entry into ad hoc and often hazardous jobs, collection from common pool resources for biological survival, which often require living near the forests and water bodies. Their art of living may not include all the types of activities mentioned and may include some not mentioned. Naturally, their nature-dependent living comes into conflict at one stage with the profit-seeking, nature-transforming corporate. The core state has to play a role as a custodian of natural resources.

One major conflict comes in terms of access to and ownership over natural resources–forests-water-mountains-rivers. All need these–some for bare survival, some for accumulation.

The political arrangement of profit-seeking corporations is far ahead of the politics of the governed and far ahead of the thinking of the civil society–in fact, a tiny section of the civil society becomes executives to implement the plans of the tycoons, where it is understood who is the invisible hand. In case of resistance by the forest-dependent Adivasis, coercive actions are adopted by the core state, for national wealth has to multiply through the ‘creation of wealth’ of the capitalists or through price-profit. Nature by itself has no price-profit; it needs transformation into timber, medicines, paper and other public utilities. Adivasis cannot do it–corporates can.

Adivasis seem adamant not to leave nature understood by them as forests-water-mountains. Mainstream development does not care for the existence-value of nature; it understands natural resources that is cardinal, priced and marketed. Hence, the system captures the forests, makes it transformed or cuts hills to size to be consistent with roads and tunnels to facilitate the transport system. If in such situations the Adivasis remained tuned to their living that was centuries old, the core state may very well penalize them by eviction, killing etc. The United States may be the glaring example of killing Adivasis–the ‘Red Indians’–to make their mainstream system. India cannot be far behind.

The problem is with the advent of vote-based political democracy and the voice of the radicals. Hence, the core state may identify the ‘Adivasis with voice’ and identify them as Naxals or militants or anti-state, and take measures that may not be pro-humanity. However, humanity is different or distanced from a system that is based on private property or on the appropriation of nature.

The non-fulfilment of non-satiety of the corporate opens the gate for money-based economic growth that comes into conflict with the Adivasis and original settlers who were living in a social economy or in a collective system. The core state is for economic division of labour in ascending order, which may even lead to deforestation. The derivative consequences are obvious–pauperization of the Adivasis. I am not confident to opine that the footloose people in India who live in tents at different locations come from the forest-displaced Adivasis.

One probable safety of the Adivasis is conversion of their identity into Buddhism or Christianity–the latter is prevalent in selected regions of the state of Arunachal Pradesh, particularly among the Nyishi tribe. Of course, they were also gradually coming to be part of modern living, with food habits not much changed, that continued to be based on digging soil and keeping minor weapons for hunting in their bamboo-made house or room. All the Adivasis may not be such fortunate, and many may suffer as in the states of Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. It also depends on mineral-rich locations where the Adivasis reside, where the corporates may be of interest in.

It does not matter much for the civil society or specifically for the educated mobile sections that are displaced or evicted from forests so long as this section is assured safe visits to these forests and wild animals inside as a bonus. Staying in tree-houses and resorts is another attraction. The task of the corporation supported by the core state, gets easier–conversion of forests into economic resources for tourism and production purposes. The rules that centre on private property are beyond the comprehension of the Adivasis–historically, they understood a collective mode. The collective mode is not the capitalist mode.

It is not known so far what section of the forest-displaced Adivasi people has been rehabilitated with what life-support system. The task is, of course, difficult if not impossible for different languages, food habits, clothes and the like. To narrate one example, in Arunachal Pradesh this writer found some years ago one super-elderly lady who never got relocated from her bamboo cottage since her age around ten and never been passenger of any automobile vehicle. It might have been inhuman to drag her to the city of Itanagar for rehabilitation. Of course, sane human living and insane development may come in conflict at some stage for development provides benefits to sections different from the people displaced or evicted.

There is often a consensus among people unaffected by land acquisition or displacement. The displaceable Adivasis were not at the roundtable meeting to arrive at a consensus. Money compensation, announced, if at all, does not compensate for the livelihood requirements of the displaced. The Adivasis do not understand the intricacies of money or pricing, or the money market. One way of mainstreaming could have been to engage them in National Rural Employment under the MNREGA programme, with all its limitations that have miles to go.

So, the final question remains: whose mainstreaming?

[Source: Based on the author’s project works on land acquisition, 2008-2014 in the states of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh as well as participatory observations at different regions of India.]
[Bhaskar Majumder, Professor (Retd.), G. B. Pant Social Science Institute, Allahabad 211019]

Back to Home Page

Frontier
Vol 57, No. 51, June 15 - 21, 2025