Class

Class is broadly perceived as a social group having identical skills, incomes, wealth and material well
being in general.

Marx popularized this concept in sociology and he perceived it as a social group which has similar
position vis-à-vis mode and forces of production in terms of their ownership and roles.

He identified only two broad classes. There are only two classes – the haves and the have nots.

It differs from other forms of stratification in terms of following characteristics –

I. Class stratification is fluid and open.

II. There are no legal or traditional sanctions on mobility between different strata.
III. Class positions in some part achieved and not ascribed.
IV. Class has an economic basis.

Weber defines class as – ‘A body of people having identical position in a market situation’. He broadly
defines class structure in terms of 4 classes –

I. Propertied upper class

II. White collar workers
III. Petty bourgeoisie
IV. Manual laborers

He rejected Marxist idea that different classes tend to polarize toward two dichotomous classes.
According to him inequalities are highly dynamic. Besides ‘class’, there is also ‘status’ and ‘power’
dimensions to inequalities.

According to Giddens there are three main sources of class power – the possession of property,
qualifications, and physical labor power. These tend to give rise to three-class structure: a
dominant/upper class based on property, an intermediate/middle class based on credentials, and a
working/lower class based on labor power.

SOCIAL CLASSES IN RURAL INDIA

Landlords

Permanent Settlement a new type of landlord was created out of the erstwhile tax collectors viz., the
zamindars.

Zamindar’s only obligation was the payment of fixed land revenue to the British Government.

The zamindari settlement gave rise to a class of landlords,

Broadly, there were two types of landlords:

(i) the zamindars/taluqdars (old landlords) and

 (ii) (ii) money-lenders, merchants and others.

The abolition of Zamindari system in the 1950s had several consequences. It led to the formation of
new classes. For instance, the intermediaries like the zamindars declared themselves as the owners
of the land. Previously the zamindar used to lease out their lands to the tenants

The tenants who were actually cultivating the land prior to the land reforms were thrown out of their
lands and most of them became landless agricultural labourers. It led to the pauperisation of the
peasants

2. Peasant Proprietors

Ryotwari Settlement. This was introduced in Madras, Bombay Presidencies in the nineteenth century

Instead the cultivators came into direct contact with the State which replaced the oppressive role of
the landlord. The settlement thus gave rise to a class of peasant proprietors

The peasant proprietors, in the past as well as in the present, hardly constitute a homogeneous
category. They may be broadly divided into three categories, namely, (i) the rich, (ii) the middle, and
(iii) the poor peasants.

i) Rich peasants: They are proprietors with considerable holdings. They perform no fieldwork
but supervise cultivation and take personal interest in land management and improvement.
They are emerging into a strong capitalist farmer group.
ii) Middle peasants: They are landowners of medium size holdings. They are generally self-
sufficient. They cultivate land with family labour.
iii) Poor peasants: They are landowners with holdings that are not sufficient to maintain a
family. They are forced to rent in other’s land or supplement income by working as
labourers. They constitute a large segment of the agricultural population.

3. Tenants

Those who failed to pay were evicted from land and were replaced by those ready to pay higher
rents. Similar practice prevailed in estates, which were leased out by the zamindars.

Broadly then there were two categories of tenants in zamindari areas- tenants under zamindars and
tenants under lease (tenure) holders during the British period.

Tenants under tenure holders were thus sub-tenants. Of course, various categories of tenants under
subtenants too had grown up in Bengal.

The lowest in the hierarchy were sharecroppers. This process of creating tenants and subtenants is
called sub-infeudation.

4. Agricultural Labourers
The growing indebtedness among peasant population, followed by land alienation and displacement
of village artisans was largely responsible for this.

Three types

held a small plot of land in addition to drawing their livelihood from sale of their labour.

landless and lived exclusively on hiring out of their labour. In return for their labour, the agricultural
labourers were paid wages, which were very low.

Wages were generally paid in kind

5. Artisans

In rural areas the class of artisans form an integral part of the village community.

They have existed since the ancient periods contributing to the general self sufficient image of an
Indian village.

Some of these are like the carpenter (Badhai), the ironsmith (Lohar), the potter (Kumhar) and so on.

Daniel Thorner gives a three fold classification in his ‘The Agrarian Prospects of India, 1956’ as –
Malik, Kisan and Mazdoor on the basis of right over land. He also maintains that these three classes
also reflect social structure too as most of Maliks belong to upper castes and Mazdoors from lower
castes and Kisan belong to Artisan class. Maliks are those whose income is derived primarily from
property rights in the soil and whose common interest is to keep the level of rents up while keeping
the wage-level down. They collect rent from tenants, sub-tenants and sharecroppers. Kisans are
working peasants, who own small plots of land and work mostly with their own labor and that of
their family members. They own much lesser lands than the Maliks. Mazdoors don’t own any land.
Development of capitalist relations in agrarian sector of the economy has also changed the older
class structure. For example, in most regions of India, the Maliks have turned into enterprising
farmers. Similarly, most of the tenants and sharecroppers among the landless mazdoors have begun
to work as wage laborers.

Industrial Class Structure

Industrial class refers to strata that form due to division of work in factories.

Initial industries were – Iron, Jute and Cotton. Impoverished/pauperized peasantry oppressed by
land lords gradually moved to sporadic industries and led to further rise of working class.

Working class was often localized, concentrated around ports.

Capitalist class was also marked by representation of certain castes. Certain groups of Parsis,
Marwaris, the Khojas, the Bhatias and Gujarati traders benefited from their collaboration with the
European companies and pumped their resources into the manufacturing sector.
Post Independence industrial class structure was initially largely governed by state driven socialist
economy.

According to Sharat Bhowmick rise of public sector gave birth to multiples classes, but they carried a
distinct status of ‘government employees’ and not of ‘industrial employees’ in strict capitalistic
sense.

Further, at the top of hierarchy of these state run enterprises were political appointees cum
administrators and not elite capitalists.

At the same time, emergence of organized sector through these public undertakings and other
industries a distinction between organized and unorganized sector emerged representing a structural
divide between the two.

Post liberalization saw another shift in Industrial class structure which was marked by informalisation
of labor on one hand and swell of middle management on the other. Burdhan and Rudra claim that
globalization and liberalization has grossly inflated the assets of capitalist class at the expanse of
working class. Occupational diversification has led to sub-classes in the previously tightly defined
industrial class structure.

Middle Class in India

structurally they are placed in the middle and have characteristics of both upper and lower classes.
Weber for the first time talked about middle class as a positive outcome of capitalism and a sign of
reduction of poverty.

Middle class makes a living by way of selling mental and physical labor in the market. Unlike Working
class it is not homogenous and is highly heterogeneous with no fixed boundaries.

B B Mishra in his seminal work on Indian middle class – ‘The Indian Middle Class – Their Growth in
Modern Times, 1978’ – attributes emergence of Middle Class to British rule and not to
industrialization per se as some sort of industries and trade such as guilds, textile industry etc existed
before also.

The British rule resulted in the emergence of a class of intermediaries serving as a link between
people and the new rulers. They mostly included traders and translators.

They belonged to castes which were educationally forward traditionally, but they exhibited their
caste identities to lesser degree. In fact, they were the pioneers of social reforms and donned a
liberal and secular outlook. Thus, though, it had caste origins, but it was not hesitant to shake its
roots for a liberal outlook.

The members of the educated class such as government servants, lawyers, college teachers and
doctors constituted the bulk of the Indian middle class.

While the European middle class was independent, the Indian middle class was under foreign rule.
Initially, the middle class helped in the establishment of British power and promotion of European
commerce and enterprise in India.

During British period, middle class were mainly urban oriented.

Expansion of middle caste in post independence period is due to diversification of occupation,
economic liberalization and expansion of educational and entrepreneurial opportunities.

Middle class today is not only urban centric, it is a phenomenon of rural areas also due to expansion
of administrative machinery, market economy, Green Revolution, farm mechanization, transport,
cooperative movement etc.

Today, burgeoning middle class also symbolizes decrease in poverty and deprivation as well.

‘Old Middle Class and New Middle Class’ are two further conceptual classifications of middle class on
a chronological basis according to D L Seth.

I. Old middle class is the one that emerged during the rule of the British as a result of
colonial mercantilism and flourished till independence. It largely had membership from
upper castes which came forward to reap the early benefits of colonialism. Further, it
was largely urban oriented.
II. II. New Middle Class is the one that is of recent origins in post independent India. Rise in
white color jobs, emerging public sector, rise in IT and Service industry gave rise to this
new middle class.

Urban Class Structure

I. Capitalists or commercial and industrial class – Origin of Indian capitalist can be traced
in the merchant traders that were there before the arrival of British rule. When
industrialization started, they were the first to reap gains out of it. Today, in the age of IT
and Technology, innovation and entrepreneurship is making ‘overnight billionairres’
possible and ‘rags to riches’ stories come true. So, this class has a much diverse social
background today.
II. Corporate sector – Indian corporate sector is substantially large and highly diversified.
Top most management is still controlled by the business owners, but middle
management is occupied by the members of upwardly mobile middle class. Education is
the prime medium which is making it possible.
III. Professional classes – Bureaucrats, management executives, technocrats, doctors,
lawyers, teachers, journalists etc belong to this class.
IV. Petty traders and shopkeepers – They are the one who have little capital and little skills.
They are the local small time entrepreneurs and traders. They are a result of growth of
new cities and urban centers.
V. Working classes – Origin of the working class could be traced back to the British rule.
This was the modern working class which was the direct result of modern industries,
railways, and plantations established in India during the British period. This class grew in
proportion as plantations, factories, mining, industry, transport, railways and other
industrial sectors developed and expanded in India. It was formed predominantly out of
the pauperized peasants and ruined artisans. Post independence industrialization further
led to swelling of this class and more so after Industrial Policy Resolution of 1991. It has a
diverse base including casual labor, industrial workers, domestic help, wage-labor and so
on. They are also the most vulnerable of all as they don’t have any organizational
capabilities and have little job or income security.