Modern Ce)'lon Studies, Volume 6: 2, Jllly 1~15

Production Relations and Classes in a

Kandyan Village-
NEWTON GlJNASINGHE

"The specific economic form in which unpaid surplus-Iabour is

pumped cut of direct producers, determines the relnt ionship of
rulers and ruled, as it grows directly cut of product icn itself and
in turn, reacts upon it as a determining element. Upon rhis however,
is founded the entire formation of the economic community which
grows up out of the production relations. thereby simultaneously
its specific political form." (Marx; 1962:772).

I
Studies on social stratification in Sri Lanka have hitherto concentrated
exclusively on caste structure. Ryan refers to class in a rather impressio-
nistic way in his study of caste in Sri Lanka.' Yalrnan refers almost exclusi-
vely to caste stratification. Even those instances where class dominates
social relations appear to him merely as instances of the flexibility of
caste princlples.! Tambiah, in an essay.on savings has attempted to identify
class in rural and urban sectors) But as this paper is mainly devoted to a
study of saving potential, the remarks on class take the form of a back-

• This article is based 011 research carried out in the Kandyan Village. Delumgcda.
during 1975- 1976.
1. In the urban context Ryan identifies two major classes; "English educated, shoe and
trouser wear ing white collar and professional upper class and the saronged, barefooted,
vernacular speaking labour class." (Ryan; 1953 : 308). Then he proceeds to differen-
t iate "the trouser wearing clerical workers" from "the elite" or "the urban upper
classes" (Ryan; 1953: 312 - 313). As Ryan deals with caste structure it is perhaps
Improper to expect a detailed discussion of class in his work. However, it should be
pointed out that Ryan takes appearance to be the essense, a common fault with many
an empiricist sociologist.
2. Yalman cites the case of a wealthy man from blacksmith caste who owns ten acres of
paddy land worked by Goigama (cultivator caste) labourers and observes: "Subtle
problem, of etiquette arise here. The high caste Goigama labourer. treat their blacks-
mith landlord as if he were of higher caste than themselves. In his presence, they make
place for him to sit while they stand. This is the reverse of the traditional custom."
(Yalman: 1962: 85). From this Ynlrnan arrives at the concluston that the principles
underlying the castle structure are flexible. However, the structure has become flexible
not due to an inner dynamism of its own, but due to the emergence of ~ parallel
mode of stratification, which competes with and often dominates it. The labourers
do not treat the landlord "as if he were of higher caste;" they treat him as One who
belongs to a higheT class.
3. Tambiah indentifies three classes in the urban sector , (i) upper middle class or "the
elite" (ii) lower middle class "composed primarily of government and mercantile
clerks. lower grade teachers and supervisory wcrkers, which is essent ial lv a product of
urban mercantile employment" and (Hi) work ina class dtfferenrrared "from the pea-
sant and middle classes by the nature of its work, income, residence and housing"
(Tambiah; 1963 ; 62). He presents no such clear cut division in relaricn to the rural
sector. Having observed that westernizing influences have disrupted the traditional
order he concludes that caste still persists in particular avenues of economic activity
and proceeds to intermix two different modes of stratification, i, e. caste and class.
The discussion on class In rural sector ends with 911 attitude survey of occupational
prestige, which hu very little to do with class as an objective phenomenon.
 NEWTON GUNAS1NGHE 117
------ -------------
ground briefing, rather than that of a sustained study. As class is acquiring
the position of the dominant mode of stratification, to leave out the
objectively existing class structure from social analysis amounts to losing
sight of social reality.

This curious refusal to deal with class structure is partially related

to the social anthropological concern with what is disappearing rather
than with what is 'emerging. This essay is a contribution to the clari-
fication of some aspects of the problem primarily in relation to a Kandvan
village (Delumgcda in Udunuwaraj, But class, unlike caste, cannot be
discussed in relation to a village community; class, by definition, is a macro
phenomenon that transcends the limited realm of the village 'microcosm'.
Hence to sustain the analysis, data that pertain to Kandv district as a whole
will have to be presented.

Class is here taken as an objective phenomenon arising from diverse

production and exchange relations people have with the elements of the
economic formation. It concentrates on the relations that groups of people
have with the means of production and distribution, which express themse-
lves as ownership/control of these means or lack of such ownership/control.
In the pre-capitalist modes of production as well as in the pre-capitalist
elements within capitalist formations, such ownership/control is often
mediated by various degrees of possession rights. In the actual process of
production, whenever the actual producer confronts the non-producer as
one devoid of ownership/control of the means of production, the crucial
problem of surplus extraction aristes. It may be objected that in the case of
small holding peasantry (where they own the primary means of production
i. e. land) the problem or surplus extraction does not arise. But they do
not control the means of exchange; here surplus is realised in labcur but is
extracted through exchange. Marx, commenting on petty production bas
pointed out; "The need for exchange and for the transformation of the
product into a pure exchange value progresses in step with the division of
labour i. e. with the increising social character of production. But as the
latter grows, so grows the power of money, i. e. the exchange relation
establishes itself as a power external to and independent of the producers"
(Marx; 1973 : 146). Moreover, the small holding peasants in question are
not isolated individuals but are a social group located in a general network
of bourgeois exchange and dominated by it. Of such a small holding
peasantry Lenin remarked; " . " .. the peasant is completely subordinated to
the market, on which he is dependent as regards both his personal consu-
mption and his farming, not to mention the payment of taxes" (Lenin:
1960: 172)

The concept of class formed an organic part of Marx's conceptual appa-

ratus from the very beginning. Indeed, it is difficult to point out a single
work of Marx which docs not take the existence and struggle of classes as the
118 rRODucnON RELATIONS AND CLASSES IN A KANDYAN VILLAGE

point of departure ill analysis. However, he never precisely laid down his con-
cept of classes. An attempt to do so is found in the last chapter of Capital
Vol. III entitled 'Classes'. But after five brief passages it comes to an abrupt
end and we read Engels' comment "Here the manuscript breaks off." Hence,
it is necessary to follow the method of Marx and reconstruct his concept
of class from the numerous specific applications where it has been used.

Marx rook the bourgeoisie and the proletariat as the major classes of
capitalist society. Nothing would be further from the truth than the asser-
tion that Marx took account only of these two classes; these classes were
major in the sense that only the revolution and the overcoming of the
antagonistic contradiction between these two classes provided the basis for
the formation of a socialist society. In Revoltttion and Counter Ret'ol:ition
in German~ Marx enumerates eight classes; the feudal groups, the hourge-
oisie, the petty bourgeoisie , the big and medium farmers, the small peasants,
the serfs, the agricultural workers and the industrial workers. In Class
Struggles in France he identifies seven classes; the financial bourgeoisie,
the industrial bourgeoisie, the mercantile bourgeoisie, the petty
bourgeoisie, the peasants, the proletariat and the lump en proletariat.
Thus in the mid-nineteenth century the German bourgeoisie formed an
internally cohesive class, whereas the French bourgeoisie of the same period
were divided into three factions, financial, industrial and commercial. The
emergent German bourgeoisie still engaged in a struggle against feudalism
formed a cohesive class in comparison to their French bretheren who had
already overcome feudal fetters. Thus class structure is determined by the
production and exchange relations which constitute a region in the wider
continent of the mode of production. As each historical period as well as
every national development lays its peculiar stamp on the formation of
classes and their contradictions, each specific instance should be concretely
grasped in order to comprehend the different classes at war. In the analysis
of classes one should ascend from the concrete to the abstract, from
actuality to theory. Definite groups of individuals who are productively
active in a certain way enter in to definite social and political ralations. In
every single instance concrete observation must demonstrate the relations
between political structure and production and exchange without any
speculation or mystification.

In an analysis of this sort it is essential to clearly identify and grasp

those means of production and exchange dominant in a social formation.
This raises a crucial problem and takes us to the choppy waters where many
reefs lie hidden, i. e. the intricate realm of the mode of production. It is
impossible to speak of production and exchange relations as if they wert
abstract categories. A production relation is always a relation located in
and determined by a particular mode of production. Devoid of the mode,
the relation has no meaning. I will examine the form and content of the
production and exchange relations found in the area under study and will
work towards a formulation of the basic traits of the mode of production.
 NEWTON GUNASINGHE 119

Some production relations in Kandvan rural areas arc pre-capitalist, some

are petty capitalist. Take the crucial area of paddy production; five different
forms of surplus extraction are found here.

(i) Labour rent

This is a primitive feudal form of surplus extraction. Surplus labour
is extracted as labour without being converted into any other form. "If we
consider ground-rent in its simplest form, that of labour rent where the
direct producer, using instruments of labour (ploughs, cattle, etc.) which
actually or legally belongs to him, cultivates soil actually owned by him
during part of the week, and works during the remaining days upon the
estate of the feudal lord, the situation here is quite clear, for in this case
rent and surplus value are identical" (Marx; 1962: 770). Labour rent is
based on the separation of the plot belonging to the landlord from the plot
possessed by the cultivator. The same principle could be extended to cover
other services where the tenant enjoys the fruits of a particular plot of land
and performs services demanded from him. In the Kandy district, the alloca-
tion of temple land to cultivators who are obliged to perform various duties
to the temple (rajakariyaJ is an instance of labour rent. The duty of a
nilakarayCl (a duty bound tenant) who enjoys the fruits of a nila pClnguu'Cl
(plot associated with service) may be the cultivation of mU(fe1tuuie (temple
portion) and render its total product to the temple, without obtaining any
payment. Other nilakarayas may hold land subjected to the performance
of various services; dancing at the annual procession of the temple, taking
part in the musical ritual performed at the temple, clearing the temple
premises etc. Whatever the form it takes here the surplus is always
extracted as labour.

(ii) Produce rent

In this form of surplus extraction the exploited labour does not appear
as such, but as labour already converted into produce. The separation
of the lord's domain from the tenant's plot no longer exists. The tenant
cultivates the whole plot and renders the surplus to the landlord. Various
types of share-cropping (ande) relations present in Kandyan rural areas
come under this category. The widespread pattern, irrespective of the
Paddy Lands Act and subsequent legal revisions is as follows. The landlord
gives seed paddy, fertilizer and insecticides to the cultivator. The cultivator
works the land and on certain occasions may employ labour to meet
labour requirements. When the harvest is reaped, the cost of the
fertilizer and insecticides is converted into paddy using the current market
prices as the norm. An interest of 500/&is charged on the seed paddy. The
landlord removes frcm the total product, what is due to him for the
inputs he has advanced as the first step in the division of the product. The
remainder is divided into two equal halves, one portion going to the land-
lord and the tenant getting the other. As the cost of inputs has increased
nearly threefold during the last three years, the share going to the tiller
 PRODUCTION RELATIONS AND CLAsSES IN /'. Y-ANDYM: VILLAGE 120

has declined. In a few instances, well-to-do tenant cultivators have

successfully challenged the landlords and have implemented the law with
the help of Productivity Committees. Here only 25% of the product goes
to the landlord as surplus, but in such instances the landlord does not
supply the inputs needed. However it should be stressed that the ovcrwhel-
ming number of landlords in the Kandy district do not observe the law and
continue the old pattern of extraction. Produce rent assumes a certain level
of complexity in agrarian relations. Marx observed; "Rent in kind presup-
poses a higher stage of cilivization for the direct producer, i.e. a higher level
of development of his labour and of society in gr neral" (Marx; 1962: 775).
The fact that produce re nt implies a higher productivity of labour in
comparison to labour rent has indeed not been missed by some landlords.
Thus in certain temples, mutrettuwa and nila pangliwas have been
combined and all the nilakawyas associated with those plots have been
converted into share-croppers (ande kara)'as).
(Hi) Monev rent
The surplus is extracted here as labour converted into money; the
tenant pays his rent in monetary form. Money rent implies the existence
of commodity exchange as well as monetary circulation. Commodity
exchange cannot exist without land itself being converted into a commo-
dity which is sold in the market. Thus money rent attaches itself to
agrarian relations necessarily at a time when the feudal fOTmdieon is in a
period of dissolution. However, Marx was careful enough to distinguish
money rent from industrial ground rent. "By money-rent as distinct from
industrial and commercial ground-rent based upon the capitalist mode of
production which is but an excess over average profit - WI:' here mean the
ground rent which arises from a change in form of rent in kind, just as the
latter in turn is but a modification of labour rent.' (Marx; 1962: 777).
Money rent in agriculture, with the exception of those parts of the surplus
extracted in inputs and commodity exchange when the tenant sells a part
of his produce in the market, is equivalent to the total surplus extracted.
Industrial I:round-rent is different as it is paid by the capitalist to the land-
lord as the sum that is above the average level of profit. Thus industrial
ground-rent is only a part of the surplus. Money-rent is the full surplus,
subject to the qualification we introduced above. In the rural areas of
the Kandv district, a number of forms which could be indentified as money
rent exist. Leasing of land to actual producers for a stipulated period of
time for a given amount of money is the predominant form. Sometimes
money rent may replace certain forms oflabour rer.t. "A" holds land from
a temple subjected to dancing at the annual procession. He may pay a
stipulated sum of money to the temple or may employ another to perform
the service. If he pays money it has to be taken as a structural change: from
labour rent to money rent. If he employs another, it is labour rent in form
but actually money rent in content. A few instances in share-cropping
relations where rent is paid in money, can also be cited as belong'ng to this
 NBWTONGUNASrNGHE 121

category. The important tendency in money-rent is the fact that it is a

transitional form. It points towards two directions - to owner - cultivation
or to capitalist farms-both of which equally assume the dissolution of pre-
capitalist .enancv, Marx has pointed ounvln its further development money
rent must lead aside from all intermediate forms e. g. the small peasant
tenant farmer - either to the transformation of land into peasant freehold,
or to the form corresponding to the capitalist mode of production, that is,
to rent paid by -the capitalist tenant farmer" (Marx; 1962 : 778).

(iv) Small peasant proprietorship

The cultivation of small plots by peasant owners comes into existence
on the basis or commodity production and the predominance of bourgeois
exchange relations. It assumes the dissolution of large feudal estates. Radical
agrarian reforms accompanying bourgeois revolutions often create peasant
proprietors as the most numerous segment in rural society." In Kandyan
rural areas the peasant often has legal title to the plot of land.He is not
subjected to surplus-extraction by a landlord who sits upon him. But as he
sells a part of his produce in the market, he is subjected to surplus extraction
in the process of exchange. He is also exploited when he purchases agrarain
inputs. This type of ownership, when it is predominant in countryside gene-
rates petty individualism and also works in the direction of confusing the
consciousness of the rural workers by positing to them the idea of owning
a plot of land as desirable. It also prevents the rationalistntian of agriculture.
"Proprietorship of land parcels b'f its very nature, excludes the develop-
ment of social productive forces of labour, social forms of labour, social
concentration of capital, large scale cattle raising and the progressive appli-
cation of science." (Marx; 1962 : 787)

(v) \Vage labour

Here the actual producer is completely alienated from the means of
production. Unlike in the previous forms which ties the tiller to the soil,
wage labour alienates the tiller from the soil. The labourer confronts the
means and instruments of production as one devoid of ownership/control.
In Kandyan rural areas \\ age labour links itself with a number of different
production relations. A tenant cultivator may employ labourers to supple-
ment the labour of his family in weeding or harvesting which require
quite a number of workers. An owner cultivator may do the same. In
addition to this there is a non-cultivating petty bourgeois stratum who
cultivate their paddy fields exclusively on the basis of wage labour. The
complex character of the agencies that employ labour has to be stressed, as
wage labour can exist in the rural· scene with small farms, intermediary
tenancies and a very low level of development of the large capitalist farm.
But once wage labour is introduced it has a tendency to disrupt all the pre-

4. "After the first revolution had transformed t hc peasants from semi- ville Ins into
freeholders, Napoleon confirmed and regulated the conditions under which they
could exploir uadlsrurbe I ! he soil of Era-ice." (Marx s.. Engels: 1962 : 336)
122 PRODUCTION RilLA TlONS AND CLASSES IN A KANDY AN VILLAGE

capitalist patriachal forms of social relations in the countryside. It is not

necessary to assume the large scale capitalist farm as a sine qlw non tor the
generation of wage labour in the rural sector. The presence of money rent
is quite sufficient for such a development. "The transformation of rent in
kind into money rent is furthermore not only inevitably accompanied but
even anticipated, by the formation of a class of propertv -Icss day-labourers
who hire themselves out for money" (Marx; 1962 : 779.)

In all modes of production, where the actual producer is in possession

of the means of production, the surplus could only be extracted by non-'
economic pressure. Hence the importance of the political superstructure
and power relations in these formations. Labour rent and produce rent
are clearly pre-capitalist extractive relations. Money rent is a transitional
form. Smail peasant proprietorship and wage labour necessarily assume a
certian degree of capitalist development. In the concrete formation all these
contradictory extractive relations coexist forming a unity of opposites. Marx
defined actuality as the unity of the diverse. "The concrete is concrete
because it is the concentration of many determinations, hence unity of the
diverse" (Marx; 1973 : 101).
In paddy agriculture pre-capitalist forms of surplus extraction such
as labour rent and produce rent continue to exist. They are supplemented
by other parallel relations in crafts - the produce being divided between the
labourer and owner of the instruments of production. In service and excha-
nge too, this form occurs A man hires out his car, the chauffeur does not
receive a wage; but 1/3 of the earnings (excess over expenditure). These
ralations I wili call semi feudal. The word feudal testifies to the fact that
here the actual producer is in possession of the primary means of production
and is not alienated from them. It further refers to the method of surplus
extraction which has to use non-economic pressure. Indeed, herein lies the
peculiarity of the feudal form of exploitation. The adjective 'semi' applied
in front of the word 'feudal' clarifies the specific situation present in the
Kandyan rural areas. Though some of these production relations are feudal
in form they are located in a general structure which is bourgeois in content.
This lacks the 'purity' of a feudal production relation located in a feudal
general structure. Moreover, the presense of commodity exchange, mone-
tary circulation etc. has subjected the very basis of feudalism, land itself, to
market forces. Hence, these relations taken in general context, are not
feudal but semi-feudal.

But as 1 pointed OUt earlier, these semi-feudal relations do not exhaust

the totality of production relations even in the limited sphere of paddy
production. Owner cultivation and employment of wage labour are present
here. These two are not antithetical forms; most often they supplement
each other. The small Owner cultivator as well as the tenant employ labour,
especially in those instances where pre-capitalist systems of labour mobill-
sation such as attam (exchange labour) have disintegrated. The owner
 123
---------------- ..-.-.. -.-~---
cultivator himself may become a partial wage labourer in order to supple-
ment his income. In addition to these changes taking place among the
peasantry, the passing of land into the hands of the petty bourgeoisie has
accentuated the spreading of bourgeois relations of production.

The cultivation of paddy fields by the employment of wage labour,

where the actual producer is not in possession of land, where the relations
between the landlord and the tiller is reduced to a cash nexus, undoubtedly
contains an element of a bourgeois relation. But the landlord exercises
extra-economic pressure on the wage labourer, thus introducing a semi-
feudal element in to the structure. The free movement of labour, though
present, exists only to a certain degree. Even where concentration of land
ownership exists, the landlord most often gives it to the cultivators on a
share cropping basis. Here concentration of ownership and dispersion of
cultivation units result. The capital employed in this crucial sector is rather
limited. Kandyan villages do not give an indication of moving in the dire-
ction of the large capitalist farm, where rnechanised agriculture will be
combined with mass employment of wage labour. The development of
capitalism in agriculture is slow and protracted " .... because agriculture in
general and the peasantry in particular are weighed down most heavily by
the traditions of patriarchal Iife, as a consequence of which the transforrna-
tive effects of capitalism (the development of the productive forces, the
changing of all social relations etc.) manifest themselves here most slowly
and gradually" (Lenin; 1960 : 173).

But still, the petty bourgeois form occurs, persists and expands; three
acres owned by a shop keeper, five acres owned by a school teacher, where
production proceeds exclusively on wage labour. In the crafts this form is
still more developed, where the master craftsman who has accumulated
enough capital to purchase instruments of production employs labour.
It is therefore necessary to identify the salient elements of petty-capitalism
and understand them in terms of concepts.

(i) Capital that comes to the petty capitalist, though like all capital
finally rests on surplus value, is often extracted in exchange and bears the
character of merchant capital. This is the case of the shop keeper or usurer
who converts his monetary capital into the means of production.

(ii) It is petty production; capital employed in production is limited;

concentration of workers in the place of work does not assume a mass
character. Though the production is mainly geared to the market, the
output is low.

(iii) Capital is privately owned, and the relation of the owner to capi-
tal is of a personal nature. Unlike the dominant form in industrial capital.
it is not mediated through stock holding companies. Nevertheless. the
direct ownership is not blunted by a series of intermediary possession rlghts
as in the cast of feudal properties.
124 pl\.ODIJCnON RELATIONS AND CLASSES IN A KANDYAN VILLAGE

(iv) There is an absence of productive activity on the part of the petty

capitalist or at least the limitation of these activities to a supervisory level.
Employment of workers for a wage is the dominant form of surplus
extraction. It is the introducer, expander and perperuator of wage labour
in the rural economy.

In the Kandvan rural areas, along with elements of semi-feudalism,

there are elements of petty - bour&eois production. They stand in contra-
diction to each other, penetrate each other ani! determine each other. These
two elements exercise a control over social relations in rural society with
the petty bourgeois element being the dominant one. This implies a high
degree of development of bourgeois exchange relations not necessarily
suplemented by bourgeois production techniques.

The mode of production in the Kandyan areas is neither a feudal nor

a bourgeois one. It isa semi feudal - petty bourgeois mode of production.
This characterisation takes into account the content of production re lations
present inside the Kandyan village. However, this characterisation is insuffi-
cient as it takes the village as a 'thing-in-·itself' and fails to locate it in the
complex network of national and international relations, which exercise a
dominant influence over it. What are the major elements or this extra -rural
dominance.

(I) the tea and rubber plantations primarily controlled by the state
and which are organiscd on the basis of capital concentration and mass
employment of wage labour exert an influence. A certain stratum of villag-
ers have been provided avenues of employment in smaller private holdings
as well as in plantations taken over by the government. The urban centres
which arose in response to plantation agriculture exercise an influence
over the villagers. Some people resident in the village work in the town
commuting daily for work. Agricultural produce goes to the markets in the
town. The expansion of the transport network which covers many rural
areas in the Kandv district has brought the town closer to the village.

(ii) The control exercised by the metropolis in the supply of inputs to

agriculture also acquires decisive importance. The widespread use of new
varieties of paddy and vagetable plants has necessitated the application of
chemical fertilizer and insecticides. This indeed has become a new method
of extraction of surplus which is exported to the imperialist metropolis. As
I pointed out earlier, in share-cropping as well as in wage labour, the
landlords have succeeded in transfering this burden to the actual producers
by reducing the portion going to the share-cropper or keeping the real
wages depressed. In the field of commodity exchange too, agricultural and
handicraft production has come under the dominance of extra-rural agencies
such as the bureaucratic co -operatives and the privately owned trading
organisatlone.
 :-:II:W"IO" GlJNA::ilNGHi: 125

(iii) Extra-rural influences are also dominant in the field of rural

consumption. The rural dwellers are heavily dependent on a large array
of manufactured products coming to the village from urban centres, such
as clothes, footwear, baby food and certain food items. Lenin has demonst-
rated very convincingly how the pauperisation of the peasantry is logic.ally
related to the expansion of a domestic market. It is a process invariably
connected with transforming the independent peasant into a consumer
related to 'the mass market.

What is the character of this extra-rural dominant mode of produc-

tion? It is a dependent bourgeois mode of production, a system of production
dominated and determined by the imperialist centres. I will avoid the
temptation to embark on a long voyage on definitional problems and
state that it is an under-developed bourgeois mode of production. Needless
to say, imperialism which sucks the economy dry is the cause of this
continuing underdevelopment.

Thus in defining the mode of prodution in Kandyan rural area one

must take into account three levels-the village level which is semi-feudal-
petty bourgeois, the national level which is under-developed bourgeois
and the international level where countries such as Sri Lanka are subjected
to exploitation by imperialism.
There is nothing unusual in the village being semi-feudal-petty bour-
geois while the national mode is underdeveloped bourgeois. Marx has
pointed out: " .... since bourgeois society is itself only a contradictorv
form of development, relations derived from earlier forms will often be
found within it only in an entirely stunted form, or eventravesrled" (Marx;
1973: 106). Such is the case of labour rent and produce rent which conti-
nue to exist in rural society. 1 have spoken of three leveis or instances in
the general economic formation. But in the determination of the content
of social relations they are not of equivalent importance. They maintain
relations of dominance and subordination. It is the nationally dominant
structure which determines the character cf the rural economic structure.
"In all forms of society there is one specific kind of production which
predominates over the rest, whose relations thus assign rank and influence
to the others. It is a general illumination which bathes all the other colours
and modifies their particularity. It is a particular ether which determines
the specific gravity of every being which has materialised within it." (Marx;
1973: 106: 107). In Sri Lank this dominant "kind of production" is the
underdeveloped bourgeois economy which has plantation agriculture as its
primary base. To use a metaphor the mode of production in Kandyan rural
areas has a triangular character. Two contradictory elements at the village
. level, semi-feudal-pettv bourgeois, determined by the nationally hegemonic
.structure, the underdeveloped bourgeois economy which is in turn domina-
redbv imperialism. All these elements maintain contradictory relations, but
yet they function as a unity of opposites.
126 PRODUCTION RELATiONs AND CLASSES IN A KANDYAN VIllJ'>CE

After this characterisation of the main traits of the mode of production

It ISpossible to identify the major elements constituting the means of
production and exchange in Kandyan rural society.

(A) Land: Ownership and control of land continues to play the major
role in economic dominance in countryside. In Kandyan rural areas, land
olttlying the. village is occupied by State Corporations which maintain
tea or rubber plantations? owned directly by the.governrnent or is held by
semi-feudal interests. The land located in the village can be classified into
three broad groups; (0 paddy land (Ii) high land and (iii) home gardens with
the last two combining in many instances. In terms of productivity in
relation to the extent, paddy land acquires predominance. Highland may
also be valuable especially if different varieties of spices are grown there.
Slash and burn cultivation is not practised in Udunuwara area. The land
located within the village is owned by the following agents; (i) temples,
(ii) ancestral feudal families, a non-cultivating rentier group, (iii) other
petty bourgeois non-cultivators, such as shop keepers, teachers, salaried
employees etc. and (iv) small holding peasants.

(B) Instruments of production: There are two types of production

instruments, a traditional set which assumes little or no capital accumulation
and a modern set that does. As far as agricultural implements are concerned
the traditional set includes ploughs, buffaloes, sickles, etc. The modern
set includes tractors, water pumps, mills, ete. Mechanisation of agriculture,
that is, a shift to the latter area in the realm of instruments of production
invariably presumes accentuation of the process of class differentiation
among the peasantry.

In villages where crafts predominate, the ownership of the instruments

of production acquires a decisive importance, somewhat akin to the owner,
ship of land in agrarian communities. As the instruments are not equitably
distributed among small craftsmen, those who do not own them are
compelled to work fOT those who do, either for a share or a wage.

(C) Industy: Kandvan rural areas are not devoid of medium scale
factories and workshops mainly owned by the government; handloom
workshops and power 100m factories come under this category. As the
development of state capitalism is of decisive importance to the economy
in general and to class formation in particular, it is necessary to discuss its
impact on the village. Such enterprises have a tendency to draw away a
certain portion of the surplus labour from subsistance agriculture. But the
workers relate to these factories as non-owners of the means of production

;, It is too simplistic to charactertse village-estate relationship as one between two

autonomous regions, as it is done In the 'dual economy' theory. The village and the
estate maintain manifold relations and both are located in the underdeveloped
bourgeoil economy.
 -'-""---------------,---,~--.---.iil
NEWTON GUNASIKGHE

and as people who have no control over the working of the enterprise. This
is organically related to the expansion of the power of bureaucracy which
invariably accompanies ti.e development of state capitalism.

In addition to state owned workshops there are privately owned petty

industries in the countryside, brick and tile manufacturing, granite quarrying,
beedi manufacturing, etc. Out of these, bcedi manufacturing has suffered a
setback due to the scarcity of raw materials and the expansion of the state
monopoly. Brick and tile manufacturing now relates to the state throi ..lgh
the Building Materials Corporation. Here the Corporation buvs tinished
products from the petty capitalist and supplies him with a ready market.
Tradttlonal crafts also could be taken as a form of small scale industry;
I will return to this theme later in the analysis of empirical data.

(D) Means of exchange: These are of decisi ve importance in the

study of class differentiation. The means of exchange in Kandvan rural
areas are controlled by three different agencies; (0 state enterprises, (ii) co-·
operatives and (Hi) private entrepreneurs. The state agencies and C(,!-0Pf.-
ratives do not necessarily function in opposition to the entrepreneurs as it
is often erroneously assumed. They complement and assist the entrepreneur-
The state agencies, rural banks, marketing department etc. are large bureauc-
radc organisatlons over which the peasant enjoys no form of control. The
co-operative ill village society does not mean any more an association of
small producers and consumers who collectively own and control its destiny,
It appears to them as a governmental force introduced from above with
which they come into contact as alien beings. The high degree of bureaucra-
tisatloa prevalent in co-operatives, With the controlling levers held by the
affluent has demolished the dynamic potential of the co-operative as a free
association of small producers and consumers, In an economy of cornrno-
dity scarcity, this opens many avenues for corruption, speculation and the
siphoning off of commodities to the black market which further alienares
the small producer and the consumer (this is the bulk of the population)
from the co-operative. Thus the increasing importance of the control
exercised by co-operatives in the sphere of exchange in rural society can in
no way be regarded as having a fundamental impact on the relations of
exploitation existing in the countryside.

Moreover, co-operatives do not tend to eliminate the entrepreneur

from the scene. It is true that in those times when the agricultural priers
prevailing in the market approximated the guaranteed price offered by
the government, the bulk of the surplus grain produced in the market
eventually reached the co-operatives or the Paddy Marketing Board. But
this is not what is at issue. The problem is whether the price paid for the
grain reaches the poor and the middle peasant. There are manv instances
where the shop keeper has become the intermediary between the producer
and the co-operative, the peasant obtaining much less than the ~uaranteed
price. Here the co-operatives have supplemented the Mltrepreneur rather
lZ8 PRODUCTION RELATIONS AND CLASSEs IN A KAND'iAN VILLA(;Jj

than demolishing or even discouraging him. Many scarce commodities which

only the co-operatives should be in a position to supply can be obtained from
privately owned shops, which clearly indicates the siphoning off of commo-
dities to the entrepreneurs. These facts have a bearing on class structure as
they necessarily tend to strengthen the petty bourgeoisie by introducing a new
form expropriation of the surplus of the peasantry. The co-operatives have
definitely failed in getting rid of the exploitation to which the small produ-
cer and the consumer have been subjected. On the contary the co-oper rive
has become a bureaucratic organisation that has complemented the existing
patterns of exploitation. Far from wiping out the exploitative petty-bourge-
oisie, it has strengthened it. In the sphere of exchange it has merely added a
dominant new element to the existing exploitative structure.

II
The foregoing consideration of the basic traits in the mode of produc.
tion and the constituent elements of the means of production and exchange
permits us to proceed to an investigation of the empirical data, those of
Delumgoda in particular and those of the area in general.

The total paddy acreage of Delumgoda is 43; out of this 19 acres (45%)
are owned by a single aristocratic family who are absentee lords. Only 1 1/2
acres of this are cultivated by wage labourers. The rest is divided among a
number of share-croppers who generally cultivate plots of half an acre.
Imrnediatelv below the absentee lords, ranks a stratum owning 1-3 acres
of paddy consisting of owner-cultivators ~.S well as non cultivating salaried
employees: Then come the small holders who own less than one acre, In
fact many of them cluster around less then half an acre category. In certain
cases ownership is shared, as in ta~tumart(. Here one partner may cultivate
the plot in a specific season leaving this right to the other in the next
season. In addition to owners, there are a number of non-owner
cultivators who have different rights to land as ande cultivators and
temple tenants. It is necessery to stress that no less than 55% of the heads
of households in Delumgoda do not own a single inch of paddy land.

TABLE I
Distribution of Paddy Land located in Delumgoda.
EsttDt in aerea No. or 01l'oen
Over 5·00 2
i·Ol- 5·00 1
3·01- 4·00 o
2,01- 3·0J i
1·01-2·00 3
·76-}·00 2
·51- ·75 6
·26 - • SO 11
·01- ·25 18
TOTAL
 NEWTON GUNASINGHE 129
---------------- ..--~-----
TABLE 11

Land owned by the Heads of Households

Resident in Delumgoda
No. of Households owning
Extent in acres Paddy land Highland House snd garde~
5.·01-6·00 0 I
4·01-5·00 0 o
3·01-4·00 0 2
2·01-3·00 0 1,
}·01-2·00 7 7 9
·76-1·00 5 5 (;
·51- ·75 6 5 6
·26- ·50 H 7 H
·01- ·2S 18 6 45
None 63 78 21
Total no. of Households 113
-113 113

The information contained in Tables I and II is not exactly

comparable as they refer to two different sets of data. Table I supplies
information relating to paddy land located in Delumgoda, whereas Table
11refers to land owned by residents. The major landlords of Delurngoda
are not resident in the village and the residents tend to own land outside
the village.

The distribution of highland is not less uneven. Here highland ill

defined negatively as land that is not a part of home garden. The aforemen-
tioned aristocratic family owns more than 50 acres of highland located in the
village. Immediately below this come those who own 2-4 acres of highland
who turn out to be more or less the same group of people who own 1-3
acres of paddy. The rest of the highland is unevenly distributed among
small cultivators. 69% of the heads of households in the village do not
own any highland.

The ownership of houses and home gardens is widespread among th;)

villagers. Indeed only 19% of the heads of households are living on land
not directly owned by them. A substantial number of them are squatters on
government land on which they have built huts. The fact that more than
80% of the householders reside on land belonging to them should however,
not lead to a false sense of equality prevailing in this sector. Houses vary
from WalauwwIS (Manor houses) to mud huts. The land occupied by
most of these households (61%) is less than 1/2 acre in extent. In such
instances, land is not primarily a means of production, but an element in
consumption.
An important institution around which land is concenrrared does not
emerge adequately in the analysis of empirical data pertaining to Delumgods.
Though the historic temple of Lankatilaka stands within the village bounda-
ries it does not own much land in the village. The principal temple villages
 130 PRODUCTiON RELATION:; AND CLASSES IN ;\ KANDY A.N VILLAGE

surround the temple from other directions. The temple controls no less
than 5113 acres of land consisting or 148 acres of paddy and 370 acres of
highland. It is the major landlord in Udunuwnra area.

The commission on the Tenure of Lands of Viharagam, Devalagam

and Nindagam compiled information pertaining to the bud owned by
temples in various districts in 1956. As land reform has not affected temple
land it is safe to assume that the following table compiled in 1956 is still
valid.
TABLE III

Land controlled by the Principal Temples in Various Distrlcte."

Vilaar.~am Dt~alagalD
DistrIct No. Extent No. Extent
am.- pl. -ku. am.- pl. -ku.
Kandy 226 1817-3-6 58 989-2 - 3
Matale 54 1830-1-4 9 276-0-5
Nuwaraeliya 9 157-3-9 23 476-3-2
Badulla 29 179- 3-4 144 1325-3-1
Ratnapur a 12 1161- 0··9 46 4378-0-0
Kegallc: .IS 74- 3- 2 80 2296-1-6
Kurunezala 132 3235-1-9 152 2970-3-4
Anuradhapura 46 229-0-3 5 16-2- 5
Polonnaruwa 2 70-3 - 5 nil nil
Matara 55- 2- 3 nil nil
TOTAL 546 9655-0-4 517 12730-0 -6

(6) ,,11\. = amuna, pl. = pela, ku. = kurini. The generallv accepted equivalents are; amuns>
2 acre'. pela = 1/ Z acre, kurini =1/20 acre.

The information complied in Table III gives information regarding the

land held by temples from the days of the Sinhalese Kingdom. Here the
land is occupied by tenants who are service bound to the temple. In addi-
tion to this, there is land purchased by the temples in the modern period,
which do not count as Viharagam and Devalagam.

No less than 44,760 acres are owned by temples, with service bound
tenants, in ten districts. Most of this land is cultivated by tillers who
perform various prescribed duties to the temple; the surplus as I pointed
out earlier is extracted directly in terms of labour. The income of these
temples due to land rent as well as offerings can DC enormous. According
to the Administration R.eport of the Public Trustee, Sri Padasthanava
(Adam's Peak) earned Rs. 196,405.CJJ, Kolawenigana Raja Mana Viharaya,
Rs. 109,555.00, Ratnapura Saman Devalava, Rs, 105,232.00, Kiriella Nedun
Viharaya R:3. 63,934·00, Peradeniva Raiapavanceramaya Rs. 59,740.00, and
Kelani Raja Mana Viharava Rs. 50,384.00 in the year 1972 CA.R.P.T.: 1973).
Some major temples have tailed to submit their accounts to the Public
Trustee before the report was published. As a big land-lord and a receiver
of valuable offerings, the Kandvan temple constitutes a major centre of
surplus expropriation. But in the analysis of class, it is not the institution that
counts, but the people who control it. 1 will return to this theme later.
 NEWTON GUNASINGHE 131

As far as traditional instruments of production are concerned, even

agrarian labourers in Delumgoda own knives, sickles, ploughs etc. but not
buffaloes. But devoid of access to land they count for nothing, and they
do not constitute interest bearing capital as they cannot be rented Gut for
money. Buffaloes whom 1 would include in the same set are different as
they constitute interest bearing capital whenever they are rented cut. But
the village has only 8 buffaloes who arc primarily hid by effluent peasant
families- Thus traditional instruments except buffaloes arc more or less
equitably distributed among the population.

The modem instruments of production are quite different from the

former set. Firstly, they assume a certain degree of capital concentration in
the hands of the owner. Secondly they constitute: interest bearing capitn]
as they can be rented out. Due to the fragmentation of cultivation units
(though the ownership is concentrated) mechanisation of agriculture is
almost absent in Delumgoda and surrounding villages. There are only two
hand tractors for five adjoining villages. These are used primarily for conve-
yance and not for cultivation. The only mechanical device related to
agriculture available in the village is a threshing mill owned jointly by a
shop keeper and an absentee land lord. Though isolated instances of using
tractors are undoubtedly present, the Kandyan area ::>.5 a whole presents an
extreme underutilisation of machines in agriculture.

Delurngoda has no community of craftsmen. But the adjoining villages

boast of communities engaged in crafts from the days of the Kandyan
kings. The nattonaltst interest in the Kandyan crafts on the part of urban
affluent classes and the thirst of the tourists for Kandvan crafts have resul-
ted in a substantial expansion of the market for these product". The
increasing demand has caused a rapid increase in money flowing into the
hands of the master craftsmen and some of this has been successfully
converted into capital. Among the wood carvers and brass workers, mecha-
nical saws, lathes, mechanical devices for polishing etc. have come into use.
In the field of craft production ownership of these instruments is decisive.
These communities of craftsmen who were relatively undifferentiated only
two or three decades age ate now dividing into layers, those who own
means of production and those who do not. In many instances the master
craftsman employs his "assi6tants" for a wage.

In a discussion of exchange it is necessary to get rid of simplistic

notions which categorise agricultural output into mutually exclusive slots
such as subsistance crops and commercial crops. Rice, the subsistance staple
par excel/ance is a major commercial crop at the same time. Vegetables
when produced are consumed as well as soid. Certain vericties of spices
and tea grown in small highland plots are the only crops grown exclusively
for the market. However, the role of these crops is not decisive in msnv
villages.
132 PRODUCTION RI!L!\ TIONS AND CLASSES IN A KANDY AN VILLAG!!

Delumgoda is located quarter of a mile away from a road junction

where a bazaar of shops is located. The trade here is monopolised by
Muslim shopkeepers from adjoining villages. Apart from a single person
from Delumgoda who operates a furniture shop there, no one from the
village has any hold over means of exchange in the bazzar. Within the
limits of the village itself there is another small shopping centre over which
the villagers exercise a greater control. Infrequently the villagers also travel
to Kandy and Peraderuva both for selling and buying.

Exercising control over means of exchange in the village context is

based on a number of necessary conditions: (i) possession of a place of
business preferably located in a shopping centre, (ii) possession of monetary
capital to be used in buying and lending, (iii) control over means of
transporr-carts, lorries, vans, cars, ere. It is erroneous to assume that those
who control means of exchange are exclusively active in this sphere. Having
based themselves on exchange they extend their activities to other spheres
of exploitation. A shop keeper whose major economic activity centres around
exchange (i. e. buying and selling) may be a money lender and a landowner
at the same time.
III
It is possible to classify the population of Delumgoda into following
classes in terms of their relations to the means of production and exchange.
In the classification, nuclear families were taken as units of analY5is and the
production relations maintained by the head of the household were given
emphasis.
TABLE IV

Classcs in Delumgoda
No. of ramllies ~
I. Non-rnident semi-feudal landlords 3 2.59
1\. Middle bourgeoiaie o o
iii. Petty bourgeoisie 15 12.93
iv. Middle peasants 19 16.38
v. Poor Peasants 34 29.31
vi. Urban workers 1-4 12.07
vii. Rurallaboureu 31 26.72
TOTAL
-----
116 100.00

(I) Semi-feudal landowners; Some of these families hail from

the days of the Kandvan Kingdom. Their ancestors were state officials who
manned the feudal state bureaucracy. It is true that most of these families
will not be able to trace their ancestry to a Kandyan noble and the scene
is largely dominated by 'new comers' who acquired prominance during the
British period. However the myth of continuity prevails and it is of
importance.

The British annexed the Kandyan Kingdom in 1815 with the support
of leading Kandvan nobles. The British undertook to preserve and main-
tain the privileges of the nobles. Though the rebellion of 1818 signalled
 NEWTON GUN •.\SINGH!
-------------------------------133
a breach in this compromise, it by no means indicates the alienation of the
Kandvan aristocracy en bloc from the British administration. By the mid
nineteenth century (the days of the plebian insurrection of 1848) the Kand-
van aristocracy had already become an accomplice of British colonialism.
They continued to be state officials. True, they were not allowed to retain
the senior provincial administration positions they used to occupy. The
Government Agent who replaced the Disawa (senior provincial adminis-
trator) was an English civil servant almost till 1940's, but the Rate Mahar-
maya (midd-Ie level provincial administrator) system permitted the indivi-
duals from feudal families to occupy a series of positions one stratum lower
down. The Government Agent governed the population and dealt with
the petty officials through the Rare Mahatmaya. To the peasant the
system appeared as a continuation of the old staws quo. Many Rate Mahat-
mayas, accordingly were addressed as 'Disa HamudulUwo', the title of a
district administrator of the Kand van Kingdom.

Though the King sometimes granted land to his favourite nobles 'in
perpetuity', land in the Kandyan Kingdom were primarily associred with
bureaucratic office. During the British period land became a commodity
sold in the market. Though the nobles who participated in the 1818
rebellion lost their land, this cannot be taken as a general trend applicable
to the class as a whole. The British period also witnessed the expansion
of the land held by some feudal families.

The control exercised by the Kandyan aristocracy over the crucial

means of production in rural areas, i. e. land, has been reduced to a certain
extent by the recent land reform legislations. But it has not radically
altered the social relations existing in the village. The land ceiling is too
high as far as land located within the village is concerned. In many villages
it is redundant. Moreover, the privileged position of the land held by
the temples, which are exempted from land reform, tend to perpetuate
the power of the semi-feudals in countryside.

It is erroneous to take temple land as being controlled by the temple,

as if the temple were an isolated institution. The temples in Kandy
district are primarily controlled by the semi-feudals. As far as Viharagam
(villages owned by Buddhist temples) are concerned, they are directly
under the control of the chief priest. He can nominate his successor. What
happens is a sort of a matrilineal transfer of property. It is possible for the
chief priest to ordian his sister's son as a novice and pave the way for his
e~entual succession. Devalagam (villages owned by temples of deities) are
controlled by lay trustees who are elected by limited electoral colleges;
here the serni-feudals have a greater tendency to be appointed.

Direct or indirect control of land remains the major SOurce of econo-

mic strength of the Kandyan semi-feudals. This source of strength is
supplemented by their occupation of bureaucratic positions. The develop-
134 PRODUCTION &ELATIONS I,NO CLASSES IN A KANDYAN VILLAGE

ment of state capitalism which inevitably expands the bureaucracy has

created ample opportunities for those interested in such a career. Very
few semi-feudals however, have become successful entrepreneurs.

It should be stressed that the sense of class solidarity is high among

the semi-feudals, Non-economic elements too tend to unite this class. It is
a class of people bound to each other by kinship ties. The incidence of
in-group marriage is high. These forces work to give cohesion to this class.

As stories of tite decline of aristocracy are current, it is important to

emphasize that no such general decline is proved by the data in our
possession. Nor have the semi-feudals become totally bourgeoisified. In
the village they perpetuate semi-feudal forms of exploitation such as share-
cropping and labour rent: in the city where many of them are resident,
they hold bureaucratic positions. In the sphere of production relations, they
combine two forms of exploitation, semi-feudal and bourgeois.

(u) Middle bourgeoisie»- The middle bourgeoisie in the Kandyan

areas primarily rest on non-industrial ventures. This class controls land, r
bourgeois instruments of production, means of exchange and occasionally !
small industrial enterprises. In those instances when they own paddy land
they too resort to pre-capitalist forms of surplus extraction such as share
cropping. However, the tendency to move in the direction of wage labour
I
is most pronounced in this class and it is possible that the legal protection
given to the share-croppers has retarded the speed of such a develop-
ment. They also own middle level tea and rubber plantations often
exceeding hundred acres (land reform legislation permits the landlords to
retain 50 acres per adult child). The production in these plantations is
exclusively based On the employment of wage labour.

This class also controls instruments of production

transport, such as tractors, mills, trucks and cars.
and means of
These constitute
I
productive as well as interest bearing capital. This class is also in possession
of substantial amounts of monetary capital, which is used in buying

I
commodities, lending and undertaking government contracts, etc.

The village of Delumgoda has no family that could be classified as

middle bourgeois. But in Udunuwara area there are a number of families ~.
who possess enough capital to be assigned to this class. For instance,the !
entrepreneurs engaged in manufacturing tea by domestic methods could
be cited. They buy the 'left overs' from large tea factories, mix it with
the tea grown in smaller plantations and do a thriving business. They own
shops, trucks and cars.

The middle bourgeoisie lacks the internal homogeneity and cohesi-

veness that is present in the aristocracy. They may come from any caste or
fOT that matter from any ethnic group. They do not form a social bloc
 NEWTON OUNASINGH£ 135

related to each other by kinship. Most of the members of this class have
grown wealthy in the recent past. Hence they still maintain social relations
wlrh the masses.

The middle bourgeoisie are frequently active in parliamentary politics.

The powerful individuals who surround the representatives to the
National State Assembly mainly come from this class. It is a politically
divided class. But their party loyalty is not strong, and they tend to
support those who are in power.

(iiO Petty-bourgeoisie: The petty-bourgeoisie bases itself upon

petty production and exchange in agriculture, crafts and commerce. As
petty production and exchange is the dominant form in our rural economy.
members of this class art numerous. A substantial number of them earn
salaries, which they combine with the surplus that comes from the owner-
ship of the means or production and exchange.

Take a school teacher who owns two acres of paddy land and three
acres of highland. 1·1.; may either give his land to a share-cropper or mny
employ wage labour. Though his basic sources of income may be the salary
that he derives from teaching, the ownership of land and the fact that he
confronts real producers as an exploiter makes him a member of this class.

As I pointed OUI: earlier, the expansion of the market for traditional

crafts disrupts the pre-capitalist relations and creates an additional breeding
ground for the pettv-bourgeoisie.

It is the most vocal class in rural society. They are the people who
are treated as being the so called 'rural leaders'. The bureaucrats in charge
of rural development projects, community programmes etc. come in to
contact with the members of this class. To PUt in a nutshell, it is they
who represent the village to the town in the present social system.

The pcttv-bourgeoisie is essentially a class that controls petty produc-

tion and exchange. On the one hand they are suppressed by the semi-feu-
dals, On the other hand they are exploited by the middle bourgeoisie.
They are also confronted by the poor peasants and rural workers. It is a
vascilating class. In the realm of agrarian relations they support the land
reform laws, but oppose the Paddy Lands Act. Their ambition is to rise to
the middle bourgeoisie, but the hard facts of economic reality thwart these
attempts. It is a heterogeneous class. Like a lobster it has many limbs and
claws which it extends in to various spheres of rural economic activity.
There is neither internal unity nor cohesiveness. These are the small time
exploiters, in turn exploited by the big.

Various conceptual problems inevitably arise in a discussion of class

differentiation among the peasants. It is impossible to arbitrarily set stansti-
cal limits. to the extent of land owned and divide the middle peasants
136 l'RODUCTION RELATIONS hNO CLASSES IN i\ KANDYAN VILLAGE

from the poor peasants. As 1 pointed out earlier, class is an objective pheno-
menon that exists in society. What is important here is to identify those
classes that really exist rather than to impose a subjectivist and mechanical
divisions on the populace. Hence what is crucial is not the extent of land
owned, but the nature of the production relations.

Though the production relations in Kandvan TU ral areas are diverse,

three basic tvpes could be identified.

i. Those who do not work, but exploit the labour of others;

ii. Those who do not work and refrain from exploiting others; and
iii. Those who work and are exploited by others.

In fact many sub-varieties could be indentif ied such as those who

work and exploit others. But in the analysis of class ditferentiation among
the peasantry, 1 will take these three basic types as the point of departure.
They grasp at the root three different ways in which labour is mobilised in
the rural economy. .

Rural society consists of many types of real producers who spend their
labour in production-small holding peasants, share croppers, rural workers.
service bound tenants, master craftsmen, etc. Each of these groups consists
of people who are identically located in economic activity. But should these
groups be taken as classes? Could one, for instance, speak of a cias5 of
share croppers? If one could, then one is logically led to speak of a class of
small holding peasants, a class of service bound tenants etc. But such an
approach certainly reduces the concept of class to an economic relation
per Sf. Though class bases itself on production relations one must not reduce
the former to the latter. In other words. one must distinguish production
relations from classes. Thus class is the concentrated expression of various
production relations which are identically located in the social formation.

In discussing various patterns of exploitation, we identified a class

of non-working (or at least those limiting 'work' to supervision) owners at
the means of petty-production.

In the Kandyan areas, a class of rich peasants as distinct from the

petty-bourgeoisie do not exist as an objective phenomenon. Though there
are a few rich peasants who may work in their fields. they always exploit
the labour of others. This implies that the rich peasants have successfully
elevated them to the petty-bourgeoisie. The affluent master craftsmen too
belong to the same class. The crucial aspect in this group is not the fact
that they spend their labour but that they exploit others .

. .. (iv) Middle peasants.- The basic production relation in this class

is that the middle peasants spend their labour or the labour of their nuclear
families without exploiting others. Craftsmen who engage in production
relying on family labour also belong to the middle peasantry. Middle
 NI!WTON OUNASINOHE 137

peasants however are not compelled to sell their labour to supplement

their income. Though the archetype is the small holding peasant. those
share-croppers and service bound tenants who are not compelled to enter
the labour market are also middle peasants. Middle peasants own the
traditional instruments of production. In those villages where the buffalo
population is high they also own buffaloes. As petty producers who own or
possess instruments of production, they are subjected to exploitation in the
exchange network. In the case of sharecroppers and service bound tenants,
they are also subjected to direct exploitation by the landlords. The slogan
'land to the tiller' mainly emerges from this class. They attempt to preserve
their plot of land and continue the petty production they are used to. They
are not in agreement with the principle of collective ownership. An econo-
mic situation where every peasant would own the land that he could
cultivate with his family labour appears to them as the ideal. On the
one hand they arc suppressed and exploited by the semi-feudals, On
the other hand they live in continuous fear of losing their land to the
petty or the middle bourgeoisie. At the same time they are conscious of their
distinct position which separates them from the poor peasants and rural
labourers. Some of them are related by kinship to the members of the petty
bourgeoisie. It is a class that is numerous and their position in rural society
drives them inevitably against the serni-feudals and the middle bourgeoisie.
They are living under a continuous threat of being pressed down to the
poor peasant class. A drought, a decline in prices for agricultural produce,
an unexpected turn of events in family life, in short any disruption of
their socio-economic activity will press them down to the level of the poor
peasantry.

(v) Poor peasants: The poor peasants own or possess land; in this
way they are not different from the middle peasants. They are not alienated
from all means of production. But the land they own or possess is absolutely
insufficient for them to keep their body and soul together. Hence, they
are compelled to sell their labour. In this Sense they are semi-proletarians.
They are also oriented towards obtaining a plot of land that would satisfy
their requirements. They urc petty producers who own or possess a small
plot of land, and their world view arises from this base. They hope that
they will get land from land reform. village expansion or colonisation
schemes. The poor peasant wages an uninterrupted fight to preserve his
plot of land and not to become a rural worker. As he is tied to a plot of
land his geographical mobility is limited. In those situations where work is
available their income is actually lower than that of the rural workers. As
Lenin pointed out, "The existence of a small peasantry in every capitalist
society is due not to the technical superiority of small production in agri-
culture, but to the fact that the small peasants reduce the level of their
requirements below that of the wage workers and tax their energies far
more than the latter do ... " (Lenin: 1960; 27). Poor peasants are subjected
to semi-feudal and bourgeois exploitation. The contradictionbetween the
1.38 PRODUCTION RELATIONS AND CLASSES IN A KAND'i AN VILLACE

poor peasant on one hand and the semi-feudals and the middle and petty
bourgeoisie on the other is intensifying. The poor peasants arc in 5UPPOtt
of a basic structural change.

(vi) Rural workers: The basic trend in rural society in Kandv

district is the uninterrupted and inevitable expansion of the number and
proportion of rural workers. Though petty production is the basic chara-
cteristic of the rural economy, along with it wage labour grows and increa-
singly assumes a decisive role. All the rural workers are totally alienated
from all the means of production. They do not even have rights of
possession such as share-cropping rights. Their living standard in general
is not different from that of the poor peasants, A male earns around
Rs, 6.00-Rs. 7.00 per day if he finds work. But the rural worker spends
most of his time looking for work. If more work had been available in
Kandvan rural areas he would definitely earn more than a peer peasant. But
the chronic unemplovment that exists in the rural areas works against this.
Though they arc alie~ated from the means of production their situation is
by no means identical to that of the urban workers. The urban workers are
engaged in work centres where workers are concentrated. Their employ-
ment has a regular character. The rural worker often finds himself in a
situation where he is the only employee as for instance when he is asked to
pick coconuts in a small garden. His work generally has no regular chara-
cter. He goes where he can find work. He has no guarantee of regular
employment at a periodic wage. Unlike the urban workers they are not
organised. Their class consciousness, which is still at an embryonic stage,
is related to these objective conditions. The rural workers in the recent
past have achieved a degree of geographical mobility. In the drv zone where
mass scale paddy cultivation takes place, a need to import labour from
other areas arises due to the lower population density. Same rural
workers of Kandv distict who are not bound to the soil, migrate to the
dry zone during the peak demand period. Though the middle and poor
peasants tend to limit their economic activity to the village, the rural
workers increasingly tend to liberate themselves from this narrow context.
The rural workers are subjected to a bourgeois form of exploitation. In
other words they have nothing but their labour to sell. They are exploited
by all the exploitative classes in rural society. If there is a basic structural
change this class stands to gain more than any ocher class in rural society.

(vii) Urban workers resident in villages: In comparison to manv

other under-developed countries Sri Lanka ranks high in the availability of
public transport. The fare is sufficiently low, so that a person with a
monthly wage is in a position to commute daily for work. As a result the
place of residence is sometimes 20 to 25 miles away from the place of work
in the case of an increasing number of workers. The transport network
cushions the contradiction between the urban and rural areas.
 NJ;WtON OiJNA5iNCiHll
----------_._._--,----------139
A largeor number workers arc actually resident in the villages that
surround major cities. Their income is high by village standards. They earn
more than the rural workers or poor peasants. They are a link that unites
the urban worker's movements wirh the village folk. Most of these
workers resident in the village are not people devoid of property. They
live in the village primarily because they hold property there. They are
subjected to exploitation not in the rural context, but in the national
context. Though a certain limitation to the growth of class consciousness is
let by property ownership, this cannot be cited as a major set back.

Outlining the production relations and classes in a district, with an

emphasis on the rural areas, does not amount to outlining these relations
and classes in a country. Thus, some forms of production relarions (worker-
management relationship in the large factories) and some classes (the upper
bourgeoisie or the plantation workers) did not figure in the present analysis.

However, it is important to point out some general trends in the

structure as a concluding remark. In the current period of monopoly and
state capitalism, it is impossible for the middle bourgeoisie to accumulate
enough capital and advance to the upper bourgeoisie. The petty bourgeoisie
gains from the land reform legislations and strengthens itself, but is
incapable of advancing to the middle bourgeoisie. On the contrary, many
younger members of this class whose socio-economic position depends on
their fathers holding salaried white collar employment are threatened. If
they could not find white collar employment, (which many of them will
not) they would turn out to be a large mass of declasse elements in rural
society. The middle peasants and the poor peasants are faced with the
danger of losing their land. All this could work only in one direction-an
inevitable expansion of the proportion of rural workers who would
increasingly depend on selling their labour for sustenance.