Parochialism In Ancient India

The Indian tribes are a unique phenomenon, It says something for the absorptive capacity of Hinduism that it allowed them a niche within Indian society, striking a fine balance between individuality and cohesion. The tribes were closer to nature and an eco-friendly way of life, within themselves they did not know distinctions and hierarchies. They were spirited and independent, hardy and self confident. They were the denizens of the other India, the groves and forest, in close touch with nature, and yet always a part and parcel of the Indian order. They had not been absorbed into the urban society, while the Hindus had been reconciled to foreign rule and service under foreign rulers, the tribes were not inured. The Hindu order shrank back into

They were exploited by their more sophisticated visitor, whether money lenders or forest officials.

Gandhi curiously inflexible and parochial on occasion in his views and position. Maybe it was the mixture of parochialism and innovation that was such an effective combination, he could usher in the new while clothing himself in the symbols of the past and the rustic. A magic touch where human relations and human psychology, whether individuals or the mass, is concerned.

The Tribals had their own folk tales, their own languages, tribes and traditions,…they were free of many of the vices and social evils of the mainstream society.

The Indian peasantry never executed a successful urbanization or embourgeoisiement . They never became prosperous but remained undeveloped, illiterate under the non-productive Zamindari system, with minimal irrigational or scientific agricultural

This has allowed the unique capacities and problems of the tribals to be understood. The exploitation of the tribals shows capitalism at its most malevolent. They are a society which remain outside the conventional modern society and so are an extremely interesting study.hey form an exotic population, a parallel society from mainstream India, relatively untouched by modernity and ‘clean’, noble savages.

The peasantry and the tribals are a strange mixture of the radical and the conservative. In some senses they are the salt of the earth, and yet they are also some of the most marginalized groups. The lower castes, the proletariat are the other elements.

Peasantry concerns often got sidetracked into side issues and not the main issue of the ownership and size of ladnholdings, according to