INTRODUCTION

The empirical point of departure for this study is the process of change at the village level in the wake of technological and social innovations induced by the so-called “Green Revolution”. Seen in broader terms, the theme is that of the transformation of agrarian structures, here as elsewhere, as a result of the penetration of capitalism into agriculture. This problematique has been a central concern in development sociology in its effort to understand the phenomenon of underdevelopment; its theoretical underpining however has been enriched by the discovery of the “peasant” by various other disciplines in the last decade — in particular anthropologists, rural sociologists and historians. In this chapter, an attempt shall be made to outline the various theoretical issues involved and to make explicit the analytical concepts and theoretical framework which have guided the interpretation of the empirical material presented in the following chapters.

THE CLASSICAL BATTLE LINE: LENIN VS. CHAYANOV

The terms of the debate were set by the differing analyses offered by Lenin and Chayanov of the “state of the Russian peasantry” (in response to the expanding capitalist market) at the turn of the century. In brief, Lenin's position was that

For Chayanov on the other hand, the peasant economy is characterized by the existence of a unit of production and consumption (the “Family Labour Farm”) which has the capacity to survive, even in the face of the expansion of commodity production. Changes in the size of farm units, which Lenin attributed to the process of concentration and social differentiation, were explained by Chayanov in terms of demographic differentiation.