Meitei was never tribe : A reply

Dr L Krishnamangol Singh
One should have some unexpressed reservation and respect in submitting press release on the enlisting of Meitei as Scheduled Tribe under the Indian Constitution. In fact, it is necessary to understand that respect sharing is essential in giving opinion on the demand for inclusion of Meitei in the Scheduled Tribe list whether we consider that Meitei  (not the concept of Meetei) was a tribe or not Again, we need not, without any reason, provoke and irritate the sentiment of others. We usually understand from our school and college life in the 1960s and seventies that any debate should be based on merits and drive home the real conclusions in order to provide benefits to the society and concerned authorities, and correct the wrong thinking of the Treasury bench or the Opposition bench. We were debators in our College life  and (ershwhile DM College of Arts in the early seventies (ie upto 1973). Now my subject in Master degree and PhD degree is in the subject Economics under the ershwhile JNU, Imphal (for MA 1975 batch) and present Manipur University (for PhD in 1987) I served in the Economics Department as a faculty mamber for a short stint in 1990. (appointed by a formal committee). But, I resigned from the post to join Imphal College, Imphal, Government of Manipur. Prior to this, I also worked in different private colleges of Manipur and research cells/institutions including Data cell on Tribal Demography in Manipur in ershwhile JNU Imphal (1976-78) under the guidance of late Professor BK Roy Burman, eminent Professor of Anthropology and Social Sciences (who was also the Chairman of Other Backward Class (OBCs) for North Eastern region of India under the Mandal Commission till the inclusion of Meitei came into final shape in Manipur. He was also the Deputy Register of Census of India, Government of India before he joined Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi and he was also the expert on tribal demography including Northeastern region of India. Even the late Shri Rishang Keishing, the respected former Chief Minister of Manipur recognised him as an eminent social scientist and extended full suport to the organisation of  Seminar on Tribal Demography in Manipur (1977) at the premises of ershwhile JNU Imphal. I along with some of my colleagues, worked as Technical Associates in the said Data cell. Here I am constrained to mention the names  of those who were associated with me as I have a long gap from them now. However, they were also helpful to the research team in providing date inputs for the said seminar on tribal Demography in Manipur. Thus, from the early school life through college and University life, I pleaded for patriotism and Nationalism (in the contexual sense of India including Manipur.) Today, I am now in the Opposition bench of the debate on the inclusion of Meitei in  the Scheduled Tribe list under the Indian Constitution.  And, I have been consistently arguing in giving my opinion that Meitei was never tribe or tribal or Meitei community was never tribe or tribal. This does not mean that tribes or presently called tribals were inferior or superior in terms of human relations or status. In fact, it is a question of historical factors and mode of production relation or mode of social relation in the Marxian framework or modern development  framework.
To begin my argument, against the motion that “Meitei should be included in the Scheduled Tribe list of the Indian Constitution”, it is necessary that we first understand the evolution of human creatures and human beings, and the concept of tribe. It is necessary to understand how the term “tribe” is generally replaced by the term “indigenous people”. And, other discussions against the “motion” will  be followed. Very little is known about the knowledge of human civilisation and development from the starting point or the stage of metaphysics (ie the study of evolution of human creatures or human beings) to the pre-history or pre-premitive society in ancient times in terms of evolution of human creatures or human beings, human institutions and other aspects of civilisation and development.
However, there have been a number of literature and accounts that have traced and explained the evolution of human beings, society and progress of civilisation and development  that took place in ancient times. Thus, without going into the philosophical and anthropological or any other aspects of the theories of the evolution of human creatures or human beings, which is quite abstract and subtle  and which is also not relevant for the purpose of the present article, we shall deal with or bring out the basic features of the primitive society or the primitive stage of development in the process of human civilisation in order to get a correct insight into the emergence of tribes and non-tribes (i.e. the non-tribe peoples/peoples other than tribes).
It is now well known that human beings on human creatures passed through the stage of primitive society or premitive stage of development since their evolution and that with the breakdown of primitive stage of society, there was the emergence of two classes (ie one class of people who had lands and other personal properties including “capital accumulations” eg. equipments, tools, rare materials and other resources and another class of peoples who did not have their own lands/ownership in lands and other properties including capital accumulations). Yet, they depend on or used common property resouces (CPRs) for their livelihood. This took place within the same primitive society or primitive stage of development. Here, it can be pointed out that in the initial stage of human evolution, there were animal creatures or animal kingdoms where there were no distinction of tribes and non-tribes. Hence, it would be wrong to say that Meiteis had “tribal roots” in the initial stage of evolution of human creatures. Again, it would be essential to bring out some of the salient features of the socio-economic system of the “primitive stage of civilisation and development”
Now economists use the concept, “economic development”  or economic growth and development or very lately “development economics” which includes new literatures (new theories and policies dealing with economic growth and development with dignity/with freedom)in order to understand the emergence of tribals in the ancient times (i.e. in those days of primitive society).
In fact, an essential feature of the primitive society is that primitive peoples lived on different types of common property resources (CPRs) like lands, water resources, forests etc. It is also well known that in a primitive society, peoples lived in a collective way” (ie they worked together and shared the products) and each family did not have “private property”. Another essential feature of the primitive stage is that each family supplied the economic needs (ie agricultural and industrial items/products and other tools and equipments) of other numbers of the family by practicing simple economic activies.
In fact, the peoples in the primitive system lived in a cooperative system or collective system in all economic activies or in the social and economic life of the peoples. And, as already noted, productions in the primitive stage of development were based on the common property resources (CPRs), which implied the collective use of the CPRs (eg. lands, forests, water resources and other equipments or means of production.) As already noted, there have been a number of studies dealing with the evolution of human creatures or human beings and civilisation from the stage of the genesis of metaphysics to pre primitive or primitive stage of society. And, it is not our purpose here to investigate into how the human creatures or human beings had emerged or developed as it fall within the field of or area of other experts (eg scientists, anthropologists, sociologists, geographers or earth scientists, historians, philoso- phers etc. However, economists of political economy of development and change, transformation, and other growth and development economists had critically looked into and deal with the various stages of development in different analy- tical or conceptual frameworks.
Marx believed in the evolution of the society and economy starting from the primitive stage of development. Friedrich Engels believed in the existence of animal creatures and animal kingdoms as prior stage of primitive society. And prior to the primitive society, Marx believed in the existence of nature. But, it was the society in which peoples lived, which managed and utilised the natural resources gifted by the supernatural power (known as God). Thus, Marx had given top priority to the human beings or society for managing the nature. In fact, according to Marx, human beings or society preceeded natural environment in his scheme of analysis as resources will be useless without human beings. Thus, although human creatures are the product of nature, the peoples or the human beings were given primary importance in the evolution of human beings, civilisation and development. Marx begins with the existence of human beings in the primitive stage of human society and progress of human civilisation in subsequent stages of development.
Thus, Marx and Marxism believed that primitive stage of society existed about 2 thousand million years ago (Fundamentals of Political Economy, Progress Publishers, Moscow). In fact, there were records that there were also human creatures deriving from different forms of nature prior to the primitive stage of development. And philosophers believed the human creatures or human beings as the products of God (Nature), which is a “supernatural power”. Although Marx placed primary importances in the evolution of the society or the socio-economic system, there are many beneficial effects or aspects for Man’s believing in God as the different doctrines shape self-development, moral development, preservation of ethics, human values etc. In fact, believing in God helps promotion and protection of morality and ethics free from crimes, violence and war. This does not mean that the human life should be entirely idealist or devoted to idealism as against the material aspects of life/materialism or other aspects of life. In fact, there should be proper blending of idealism and materialism or materialistic ideas in order to build up a proper civilisation and technological development. Thus, against this background it is essential to understand the genesis of tribes band the process of civilisation.
Today, the term “tribe” has undergone a gradual change and transformation. And in the present context, “tribal” literally exists in the tribal society only due to their historical cultural factors. But, practically or virtually, there is no tribe or tribal now in the broader concept of the society.
(To be contd)