{"title":"考虑到德里农民的抗议,或Kisan Morcha,重新思考抗议、宗教和民主","authors":"H. Grewal, Tejpaul Singh Bainiwal","doi":"10.1080/17448727.2022.2087416","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Farmers from Punjab and Haryana began a march to India’s capital, Delhi, in late November 2020. The central government had unilaterally passed three controversial Farm Bill on 20 September 2020, but concerns about the bills had been building prior to this, with a Farmers Union representative stating that the government had not done any consultation. The unions had organized to raise awareness about the bill and had staged a protest to the three ordinances on 16 September 2020. On 25th September, farmers’ leaders called a Bharat bandh, or All-India general strike, in protest of the newly passed farm laws. Shortly after announcing this strike, the farmers’ leaders realized their authority as protest organizers might be contested when Punjab’s political parties – the Shiromani Akali Dal Badal, the Congress Party, and the Aam Aadmi Party – began to use their sphere of influence to stir up popular sentiment. Punjab’s actors and singers, many of whom are from farmer and labourer families, tried to assist leaders of the unions like Joginder Singh Ugraha and Ruldu Singh by using their platforms to spread awareness of the issues with the laws. These attempts to rally support for the issue were met with resistance by union leaders who claimed the protest would be diluted, or overrun, by entities with less genuine commitment to supporting a prolonged protest against the farm laws. From the initial stage of organizing there were shared concerns about the impact of the legislation from a variety of economic, political, and cultural factors which, at critical stages, would threaten the frail alliances that slowly developed after protesters arrived at the border of Delhi. Since partition, Punjab’s governments have diligently invested in agriculture by increasing the amount of arable land, investment in irrigation, seed, fertilizer, and pesticide technologies. This strategy, not without its pitfalls, was able to ensure the state’s GDP growth year after year until about the 1990s. The economic liberalization of the 1990s in India coincided with political destabilization within Punjab. Since then, there has been a marked shift in Punjab’s prosperity. During these years, the Punjab state government invested comparatively less in its economy than other Indian states. This lack of capital investment caused Punjab’s economy to suffer a deep decline. At the same time, a number of sociocultural and health issues had been plaguing farmers and labourers for decades. The central government claimed to have penned the farm laws to address some of the challenges facing the entire agricultural sector, not just Punjab’s economy. Nonetheless, the stipulations around creating a free market led many to question whether the government was liberalizing the agricultural industry and exposing farmers directly to global market pricing. This created a sense of existential threat and anxiety around indebtedness as well as land insecurity, especially in Punjab and Haryana where government-regulated markets were seen as guarantees of livelihood for farmers with less than 1 acre of land. To some degree, the friction between farmer and larbourer interest groups, politicians, and entertainers was cemented in the economic and sociocultural context that developed after the so-called ‘Green Revolution’ in Punjab.","PeriodicalId":44201,"journal":{"name":"Sikh Formations-Religion Culture Theory","volume":"30 1","pages":"1 - 4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rethinking protest, religion, and democracy considering the Delhi farmers’s protest, or Kisan Morcha\",\"authors\":\"H. Grewal, Tejpaul Singh Bainiwal\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17448727.2022.2087416\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Farmers from Punjab and Haryana began a march to India’s capital, Delhi, in late November 2020. The central government had unilaterally passed three controversial Farm Bill on 20 September 2020, but concerns about the bills had been building prior to this, with a Farmers Union representative stating that the government had not done any consultation. The unions had organized to raise awareness about the bill and had staged a protest to the three ordinances on 16 September 2020. On 25th September, farmers’ leaders called a Bharat bandh, or All-India general strike, in protest of the newly passed farm laws. Shortly after announcing this strike, the farmers’ leaders realized their authority as protest organizers might be contested when Punjab’s political parties – the Shiromani Akali Dal Badal, the Congress Party, and the Aam Aadmi Party – began to use their sphere of influence to stir up popular sentiment. Punjab’s actors and singers, many of whom are from farmer and labourer families, tried to assist leaders of the unions like Joginder Singh Ugraha and Ruldu Singh by using their platforms to spread awareness of the issues with the laws. These attempts to rally support for the issue were met with resistance by union leaders who claimed the protest would be diluted, or overrun, by entities with less genuine commitment to supporting a prolonged protest against the farm laws. From the initial stage of organizing there were shared concerns about the impact of the legislation from a variety of economic, political, and cultural factors which, at critical stages, would threaten the frail alliances that slowly developed after protesters arrived at the border of Delhi. Since partition, Punjab’s governments have diligently invested in agriculture by increasing the amount of arable land, investment in irrigation, seed, fertilizer, and pesticide technologies. This strategy, not without its pitfalls, was able to ensure the state’s GDP growth year after year until about the 1990s. The economic liberalization of the 1990s in India coincided with political destabilization within Punjab. Since then, there has been a marked shift in Punjab’s prosperity. During these years, the Punjab state government invested comparatively less in its economy than other Indian states. This lack of capital investment caused Punjab’s economy to suffer a deep decline. At the same time, a number of sociocultural and health issues had been plaguing farmers and labourers for decades. The central government claimed to have penned the farm laws to address some of the challenges facing the entire agricultural sector, not just Punjab’s economy. Nonetheless, the stipulations around creating a free market led many to question whether the government was liberalizing the agricultural industry and exposing farmers directly to global market pricing. This created a sense of existential threat and anxiety around indebtedness as well as land insecurity, especially in Punjab and Haryana where government-regulated markets were seen as guarantees of livelihood for farmers with less than 1 acre of land. To some degree, the friction between farmer and larbourer interest groups, politicians, and entertainers was cemented in the economic and sociocultural context that developed after the so-called ‘Green Revolution’ in Punjab.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44201,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sikh Formations-Religion Culture Theory\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sikh Formations-Religion Culture Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17448727.2022.2087416\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ASIAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sikh Formations-Religion Culture Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17448727.2022.2087416","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
旁遮普邦和哈里亚纳邦的农民于2020年11月下旬开始向印度首都德里游行。中央政府于2020年9月20日单方面通过了三项有争议的农业法案,但在此之前,对这些法案的担忧就已经积累起来,一名农民联盟代表表示,政府没有进行任何咨询。工会组织起来提高人们对该法案的认识,并于2020年9月16日对三项条例进行了抗议。9月25日,农民领袖发起了全印度大罢工,以抗议新通过的农业法。在宣布罢工后不久,农民领导人意识到他们作为抗议组织者的权威可能会受到挑战,因为旁遮普的政党——Shiromani Akali Dal Badal,国大党和Aam Aadmi党——开始利用他们的影响范围煽动公众情绪。旁遮普的演员和歌手,其中许多来自农民和工人家庭,试图通过他们的平台来帮助工会领导人,如Joginder Singh Ugraha和Ruldu Singh,传播对法律问题的认识。这些为该问题争取支持的尝试遭到了工会领导人的抵制,他们声称抗议活动将被那些不太真正致力于支持长期反对农业法抗议的实体所稀释或泛滥。从组织的最初阶段开始,人们就对立法的影响有着共同的担忧,这些担忧来自各种经济、政治和文化因素,在关键阶段,这些因素会威胁到抗议者抵达德里边境后缓慢发展起来的脆弱联盟。自分治以来,旁遮普政府一直在努力投资农业,增加耕地面积,投资灌溉、种子、肥料和农药技术。这种策略并非没有缺陷,但却能够确保该州的GDP年复一年地增长,直到20世纪90年代左右。20世纪90年代,印度的经济自由化与旁遮普的政治动荡同时发生。从那以后,旁遮普的繁荣有了明显的转变。在这些年里,旁遮普邦政府在经济上的投资相对少于印度其他邦。资本投资的缺乏导致旁遮普的经济严重衰退。与此同时,一些社会文化和卫生问题几十年来一直困扰着农民和劳动者。中央政府声称已经起草了农业法,以解决整个农业部门面临的一些挑战,而不仅仅是旁遮普的经济。尽管如此,关于建立自由市场的规定让许多人质疑政府是否在放开农业,让农民直接面对全球市场价格。这造成了对债务和土地不安全的生存威胁和焦虑感,特别是在旁遮普邦和哈里亚纳邦,政府监管的市场被视为拥有不到1英亩土地的农民的生计保障。在某种程度上,农民和劳工利益集团、政治家和艺人之间的摩擦在旁遮普所谓的“绿色革命”之后发展起来的经济和社会文化背景下得到了巩固。
Rethinking protest, religion, and democracy considering the Delhi farmers’s protest, or Kisan Morcha
Farmers from Punjab and Haryana began a march to India’s capital, Delhi, in late November 2020. The central government had unilaterally passed three controversial Farm Bill on 20 September 2020, but concerns about the bills had been building prior to this, with a Farmers Union representative stating that the government had not done any consultation. The unions had organized to raise awareness about the bill and had staged a protest to the three ordinances on 16 September 2020. On 25th September, farmers’ leaders called a Bharat bandh, or All-India general strike, in protest of the newly passed farm laws. Shortly after announcing this strike, the farmers’ leaders realized their authority as protest organizers might be contested when Punjab’s political parties – the Shiromani Akali Dal Badal, the Congress Party, and the Aam Aadmi Party – began to use their sphere of influence to stir up popular sentiment. Punjab’s actors and singers, many of whom are from farmer and labourer families, tried to assist leaders of the unions like Joginder Singh Ugraha and Ruldu Singh by using their platforms to spread awareness of the issues with the laws. These attempts to rally support for the issue were met with resistance by union leaders who claimed the protest would be diluted, or overrun, by entities with less genuine commitment to supporting a prolonged protest against the farm laws. From the initial stage of organizing there were shared concerns about the impact of the legislation from a variety of economic, political, and cultural factors which, at critical stages, would threaten the frail alliances that slowly developed after protesters arrived at the border of Delhi. Since partition, Punjab’s governments have diligently invested in agriculture by increasing the amount of arable land, investment in irrigation, seed, fertilizer, and pesticide technologies. This strategy, not without its pitfalls, was able to ensure the state’s GDP growth year after year until about the 1990s. The economic liberalization of the 1990s in India coincided with political destabilization within Punjab. Since then, there has been a marked shift in Punjab’s prosperity. During these years, the Punjab state government invested comparatively less in its economy than other Indian states. This lack of capital investment caused Punjab’s economy to suffer a deep decline. At the same time, a number of sociocultural and health issues had been plaguing farmers and labourers for decades. The central government claimed to have penned the farm laws to address some of the challenges facing the entire agricultural sector, not just Punjab’s economy. Nonetheless, the stipulations around creating a free market led many to question whether the government was liberalizing the agricultural industry and exposing farmers directly to global market pricing. This created a sense of existential threat and anxiety around indebtedness as well as land insecurity, especially in Punjab and Haryana where government-regulated markets were seen as guarantees of livelihood for farmers with less than 1 acre of land. To some degree, the friction between farmer and larbourer interest groups, politicians, and entertainers was cemented in the economic and sociocultural context that developed after the so-called ‘Green Revolution’ in Punjab.