Harvest of Anger: Peasants, Power, and the Politics of Betrayal in India

 From Revolutionary Promise to Fragmented Protest—Why India’s Agrarian Question Remains Unresolved

-Ramphal Kataria

Abstract

The history of peasant movements in India reveals a persistent yet unresolved agrarian question rooted in colonial extraction, postcolonial compromise, and contemporary neoliberal transformation. While peasants have repeatedly mobilized—ranging from localized revolts like the Indigo Rebellion to mass protests such as the 2020–21 farmers’ agitation—their struggles have largely failed to produce structural transformation. This essay, written from a Marxist perspective, argues that the failure lies in the internal contradictions of the peasantry—class differentiation, caste hierarchies, and regional disparities—combined with political co-option and ideological fragmentation. It critically examines the evolution of peasant movements, the role of Kisan Sabhas, the divergence from Congress politics, and the limitations of contemporary farmers’ agitations. By situating Indian developments within the theoretical frameworks of Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, and Mao Zedong, the essay concludes that the absence of a sustained worker-peasant alliance has prevented the emergence of a transformative agrarian politics. The ongoing crisis has rendered agriculture economically precarious, turning it into a site of survival rather than prosperity.

Keywords

Peasant Movements; Agrarian Crisis; Kisan Sabha; Marxism; Farmer Protests; Punjab Agriculture; Class Struggle; Political Economy; Rural India; Left Politics

I. Introduction: A Century of Resistance, A History of Deferral

At the borders of Delhi in 2020, the Indian farmer did not arrive as a stranger to protest. He came with memory—of indigo fields, of unpaid rents, of broken promises, of reforms that never reached the soil.

The 2020–2021 Indian Farmers' Protest was not an isolated upheaval. It was the latest expression of a historical contradiction that has persisted since colonial times:

the agrarian question in India remains unresolved.

“The Indian peasant rises again and again—not because he forgets, but because nothing fundamentally changes.”

II. Colonial Origins: The Making of Agrarian Distress

Colonialism did not merely exploit agriculture—it reorganized it for extraction.

The Indigo Rebellion and Deccan Riots were early responses to this transformation. Yet, these revolts were reactive, not revolutionary.

Even under Mahatma Gandhi in the Champaran Satyagraha, the peasantry was mobilized within limits. Gandhi’s politics sought moral reform, not class rupture.

III. The Left Intervention: Making the Peasant Political

The formation of the All India Kisan Sabha marked a decisive intervention by Left forces.

Leaders like Swami Sahajanand Saraswati, N. G. Ranga, and E. M. S. Namboodiripad attempted to transform peasants from a suffering mass into a political class.

They demanded:

Abolition of zamindari

Reduction of rent

Redistribution of land

These demands directly challenged both colonial authority and indigenous elites.

“The peasant must cease to be a subject of pity and become a subject of politics.” — Swami Sahajanand Saraswati

IV. Radical Peaks: Tebhaga and Telangana

The 1940s saw the most radical articulation of peasant power.

The Tebhaga Movement demanded two-thirds of produce for cultivators.

The Telangana Rebellion went further—seizing land and dismantling feudal authority.

Leaders like P. Sundarayya,  B. T. Ranadive and Harkishan Singh Surjeet sought to build a revolutionary alliance of peasants and workers.

For a brief moment, India approached a transformative agrarian revolution.

“Telangana was not merely a revolt—it was a glimpse of an alternative rural order.”

V. Theoretical Tensions: Marxism and the Peasantry

Karl Marx saw peasants as fragmented. Friedrich Engels emphasized gradual transformation.

Vladimir Lenin provided a strategy:

ally with poor peasants, neutralize middle peasants, oppose kulaks.

Mao Zedong went further—placing peasants at the centre of revolution.

India’s Left attempted to apply these frameworks but struggled against caste, regional diversity, and political compromise.

VI. Post-Independence Betrayal: Reform Without Justice

Independence marked not transformation, but containment.

Land reforms were diluted. Movements like the Bhoodan Movement, led by Vinoba Bhave, replaced class struggle with moral appeal.

The State integrated rural elites into democratic structures, preserving hierarchy under a new legitimacy.

VII. The Rise of Elite Farmers: A Shift in Politics

The farmers’ movements of the 1980s, led by Mahendra Singh Tikait, shifted focus:

From land redistribution → to MSP

From class struggle → to price negotiation

This marked the rise of dominant farmer classes.

“The farmers’ protests ceased to ask who owns the land—and began asking at what price it sells.”

VIII. Exclusion Within: The Invisible Rural Majority

Modern farmers’ movements often exclude:

Landless labourers

Dalits

Women farmers

This reflects deeper contradictions.

The “farmer” is not a unified identity—it is a hierarchy of interests.

IX. Political Appropriation: The Betrayal by Parties

Mainstream political parties have consistently used farmers as instruments.

From the Indian National Congress to regional parties like Shiromani Akali Dal and Samajwadi Party:

Movements are mobilized during elections

Demands are diluted after victory

Structural reforms are avoided

“The farmer is remembered at the ballot box—and forgotten in the budget.”

X. The Delhi Protest: Victory and Limits

The 2020–2021 Indian Farmers' Protest forced repeal of laws—an undeniable victory.

But:

It remained regionally concentrated

It excluded the most vulnerable

It fragmented after success

Punjab’s ongoing mobilizations reflect internal divisions, weakening collective strength.

XI. The Crisis Deepens: Agriculture as a Death Trap

Data reveals the severity:

Majority of farmers are small and marginal

Indebtedness is widespread

Farmer suicides persist

Agriculture is no longer sustainable—it is precarious survival.

Recent data underscores the depth of the crisis:

Over 85% of farmers are small and marginal (Agricultural Census)[2]

High levels of indebtedness persist (NABARD All India Rural Financial Inclusion Survey)[3]

Thousands of farmer suicides are reported annually (NCRB)[4]

Agriculture is no longer a stable livelihood. It is increasingly a site of precarity.

XII. Conclusion: Between Resistance and Revolution

The Indian peasantry stands at a crossroads.

It has:

A history of resistance

A capacity for mobilization

But lacks:

Unity across class and caste

A transformative ideological vision

“Without a worker-peasant alliance, the revolution remains incomplete; without unity, resistance remains repetition.”

The agrarian question remains open.

And until it is resolved, the farmer will continue to march—

not toward revolution, but toward another negotiation.

Footnotes

1.     NABARD, All India Rural Financial Inclusion Survey (NAFIS), 2016–17.

2.     Government of India, Agricultural Census 2015–16.

3.     NSSO, Situation Assessment Survey of Agricultural Households.NCRB, Accidental Deaths & Suicides in India, various years.