PM Vishwakarma Samman Yojana and BJP's beneficiary politics

We used to listen and read in our history books that before the advent of Britishers in India, the traditional crafts were highly developed in their techniques and forms. Indian handicraft products were much in demand within the country and in other parts of the world. In our oral tradition, we used to hear that Indian clothes, fabrics, and muslin (malmal cloth) were so refined and attractive that British mems (ladies) used to wear them. Whenever we listen to Kabeer, it reminds us of the vibrant culture of traditional craft in pre-colonial India. We all know during the colonial regime, Indian craft tradition and industries suffered a lot, and we mostly became dependent on exports of everyday use from Britain and other countries of colonial masters.

In post-independence times, these traditional crafts remained at the margin in the model, vision, and governance of development. However, these traditional craft industries were very crucial and central to the Gandhian vision of development, such as the notion of Gram Swarajya, but in the Nehruvian model of development, which was largely based on evolving heavy industries, these craft-based cottage industries remained at the periphery.

More from Opinion

‘Madman diplomacy’: Trump didn’t break the system, he exposed it Iran is not fighting for liberalism: How feminism is misreading the moment

The recently held grand announcement of PM Vishwakarma Samman Yojana (scheme) by PM Narendra Modi enthused hope among various Dastkari (traditional handicraft)-based local entrepreneurs and a larger section of Dastkar communities of the country. This scheme, which offers a loan of 3 lakhs and a toolkit incentive of Rs 15000, is made for 18 communities such as carpenters, boat makers, armorers, blacksmiths, hammer and toolkit makers, goldsmiths, potters, sculptors, stone breakers, cobblers, masons, basket makers, toy makers, washerman, tailors and fishing net makers.

These are mostly traditional craft-based communities that used to work under the jajmani system for a long time. When the jajmani system weakened due to various social-political changes, their products lost the market. Due to the emergence of modern technology-based heavy production, their occupation became marginalised. Due to that, on the one hand, they lost their livelihood, and on the other hand, they could not be fully accommodated as labourers in the field or in various infrastructural developments. I see most of the ‘community in confusion’- who lost their livelihood and could not fully accept their marginalisation as labourers. During my field works in the villages and quasbas of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, I observed that most of them believe that they are knowledge communities and they have expertise in their skills, so they are not ready to cope up with their transformation as labourer or other available minimal work in the towns and cities.

Quick Reads

View All

When power knows no bounds: How Trump’s imperial ambition is upending rule-based global order

India is a ‘dharma democracy’ but this doesn’t make it any less democratic or liberal: Salvatore Babones

Most of these communities are small in numbers, so they never remained an electoral attraction for any political party. Most of these communities have not yet been able to produce community leaders who may articulate their desires in the politics of democracy. In one of my books, Fractured Tales: Invisible in Indian Democracy, I find most of them as invisible communities. They have not yet acquired the capacity to take sufficient benefits from various protective discrimination policies such as reservation.

Different from Nehruvian post-independent modes of development, PM Narendra Modi’s focus on traditional craft and communities related to them may provide the capacity to aspire among these communities to reach the door of democracy for acquiring their visibility in democracy and development. Secondly, through various skill-based training, they may refine their traditional skill to make them appropriate to modern society and new markets. Thirdly, some of them may emerge as an entrepreneur, and their products may get proper space in the contemporary market. It will also evolve new possibilities and choices for the Indian markets and consumers.

If someone does a political reading of this policy, he may find that this scheme may evolve trust among these small and invisible people towards PM Narendra Modi. Some of these communities may join in the base vote of BJP in the long run. Since most of these communities come from the most backward caste (MBC), it may also weaken the Mandal mode of politics among marginal communities, which may weaken identity-based mobilisation. It may also perceive another expansion of beneficiary politics of BJP, which attracted poor and marginal people beyond castes towards the party in the past few elections of the state legislatures and parliament.

It is interesting to observe that some of these craft-based communities may also be found among both Hindus and Muslims. Darjee, barbers, and weavers may be found among both religious communities. So, through this policy, the BJP may also evolve its trust capital among a section of Pasamanda Muslims. Similarly, some listed communities may be found in most backward and Scheduled Castes. So, the range of beneficiaries of this policy covers multi-religious and multi-category-based economic communities.

Some of the opinion makers raised questions on such capacity-building schemes of traditional occupation-based communities that this may push people to stick to their caste-based occupation, which is considered low work in the hierarchical caste-based system. This may again remind of the Gandhi-Ambedkar debate about traditional caste occupation. Ambedkar was critical in encouraging such marginal people to stick with their occupations. He was arguing for freedom of choice for opting for occupation for livelihood. While Mahatma Gandhi was looking at it as strengthening the village republic and skills of rural people in India.

However, modernity and developmental vision are trying to cultivate a condition in which people from marginal castes may diversify their occupations. They may use freedom of their choice to opt for occupation. However, a section of marginal communities have not yet acquired the capacity to cross over into other kinds of occupation and have already lost their traditional occupation. Once, I met a Dalit rickshaw puller in the city who was eager to live in a village and come to the city as a slum dweller/ rickshaw puller. He told me, “Kya kare bhaiyya- hamare jat-samaj ke logo ne hume apana paramparik kam karane pe rok laga diya hai.kahate hai ye malechh kam hai,karoge to jaat se nikaldenge.” (What to do, brother? Our own community fellows have stopped us from doing our traditional work. They say this work is filthy; if you continue, we will throw you out of the community).  Similarly, many of these traditionally skillful communities do not want to write their destiny as Dihadi labourer (daily wage labourer) in the ongoing infrastructure development project in the country.

Now, many big businessmen and successful entrepreneurs see these occupations as economic activities, reinventing and modernising them and promoting them as the brand. They are employing people of such traditional castes as their workers. One can see how Mochies (Cobblers) have emerged as a brand for making leather goods. Similarly, carpenters are employed in the shops and karkhana of wooden crafts run by big businessmen in cosmopolitan cities. For Handloom and Handwork, ‘Fab India’ and new start-ups like ‘I-tokri’ are very popular in the market. These businessmen and even new entrepreneurs claim that no middleman is there but earn a huge percentage of benefit from the work of these traditional craft-based communities.

So, PM Vishwakarma Samman Yojana may evolve capacities among these traditional craftsman communities to develop themselves as small, medium, and big entrepreneurs. This may allow them to write their destiny with their traditional knowledge resources. In that way, PM Modi is trying to distribute democratic resources to the various invisible communities of Indian society.

The writer is professor and director of GB Pant Social Science Institute, Prayagraj, and the author of ‘Republic of Hindutva’. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost_’s views._

Read all the  Latest News,  Trending News,  Cricket News,  Bollywood News,
India News and  Entertainment News here. Follow us on  Facebook,  Twitter and  Instagram.