Revisiting agrarian questions of capital: examining diversification by capitalist farmers in Punjab, India

Why Does the ‘Provincial Propertied Class’ Remain Provincial? Reading the Agrarian Question of Capital Through Caste

“…This narrative of failed transition into the non-provincial urban accumulation by the Jats mirrors observations by Sinha (2021) of Jat diversification in Punjab as well. Mapping the diversification strategies of 59 capitalist Jat farmers with large landholdings (those with 4 hectares and above) since the 1960s, Sinha once again points out that most diversification had been into petty businesses or into agroprocessing or trade.…”

Caste, diversification, and the contemporary agrarian question in India: A field perspective

“…Dependent on the use of agrarian surpluses towards costly private education, this type of diversification both mobilizes and builds social capital and should therefore be understood as diversification of both capital and labour (also argued by Upadhya (1997) and Sinha (2021)). These groups constitute the village elite or dominant classes; their power is derived from control over local commercial activities, credit, strong social networks, and landownership.…”

“…Several studies explore the mobilization of agrarian surplus by better-off producers into agricultural diversification and non-agricultural diversification as industrial, merchant, and commercial capital (Chari, 2000;Damodaran, 2018;Jeffrey, 1997;Kalaiyarasan & Vijayabaskar, 2021;Pritchard et al, 2017;Rutten, 1986;Sinha, 2020Sinha, , 2021Upadhya, 1988Upadhya, , 1997. The works of Upadhya (1988Upadhya ( , 1997 in particular reveal the importance of caste networks in these diversification pathways.…”

“…Some scholars like Lerche (2013), Sinha (2021), and Swaminathan and Rawal (2015 ) continue to explore and emphasize agrarian class relations as opposed to a straightforward pauperization. As Lerche (2013) has argued, India may have by‐passed its Agrarian Transition in the neoliberal era, but peasant differentiation (i.e., “economic contradictions among the peasantry”; Lenin quoted in Ramachandran, 2019, pp.…”

“…This has been argued in the Indian context as well, particularly since the late 1990s, when Indian agriculture underwent a decade-long crisis in the wake of the double whammy of diminishing State-led investment and integration into liberalized global markets (Chandrasekhar & Ghosh, 2004;Patnaik, 2012;Reddy & Mishra, 2010). Some scholars like Lerche (2013), Sinha (2021), and Swaminathan and Rawal (2015 ) continue to explore and emphasize agrarian class relations as opposed to a straightforward pauperization. As Lerche (2013) has argued, India may have by-passed its Agrarian Transition in the neoliberal era, but peasant differentiation (i.e., "economic contradictions among the peasantry"; Lenin quoted in Ramachandran, 2019, pp.…”