No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The movement in India to abolish indentured emigration to tropical colonies (particularly Fiji, Trinidad, British Guiana and Natal) had its origins in the "Moderate" era of Indian nationalism and the politics of G. K. Gokhale. It began with the concern of the Indian middle class that their status in the British Empire was denigrated by that of their "coolie" compatriots. However, as the details of the indenture system were brought to light, the anti-indenture movement came to encompass almost every group in India, from village to metropolitan centre, from the conservative, orthodox Marwaris of Calcutta to the westernized Parsi elite of Bombay. The issue joined the era of Gokhale to the era of Gandhi, and was the vehicle for Gandhi's transition from overseas politician to a major political figure in India. The issue came to be seen by most Indians--and many imperialists--as a direct struggle between Indian national honour and the capitalist interests of colonial entrepreneurs. When indentured emigration was finally halted in 1917 it was in response, not to a moderate constitutional effort, but to India-wide political agitation and a threatened satyagraha movement. In the process, the confidence of Indian citizens in both imperial equality and the efficacy of constitutional methods was undermined at a crucial point in the development of Indian nationalism and the evolution of Empire into Commonwealth.

The objective of this study is to understand the logic of popular mobilization in Sao Paulo (Brazil) and New Delhi (India) and to explain why subaltern groups use their political freedoms to mobilize on some issues and not on others. More specifically, the study attempts to address a puzzle: Why do the popular sectors not mobilize to make claims for health when the vast majority of the urban poor experience severe health deficits? My contention is that the nature of public discourse determines both the emergence of popular movements and the issues on which they engage in claims-making. Competing ideas about what democracy is and what it ought to be, the meaning of social justice, and the relationship between democracy and social justice, constitute the 'raw materials' around which mobilization frames are created. The empirical evidence presented in this study supports my claim that the nature of public discourse is crucial for democratic deepening from below. / Based on extensive field research in low-income communities in Sao Paulo and New Delhi, my study explains the differences and similarities in the political actions of the urban poor. In India, the near-absence of a public discourse on health accounts for the lack of mobilization by subaltern groups to seek improvements in their health situation. In contrast, I find that there has been a tradition of public discourse on health in Brazil since the 1970s when "external actors" such as doctors and progressive Church officials became engaged in social causes and contributed to the emergence of health movements. However, since Brazil's transition to democracy, this public discourse has fractured, becoming more receptive to "new" health issues such as violence, even though "old" health problems continue to persist. While the popular sectors experience the dual burden of "old" and "new" health problems, they are perceived to be the cause of many "new" health hazards like violence rather than its victims. The disengagement of "external actors" from "old" health issues and the widespread perception that the popular sectors are themselves to blame for the "new" health problems has inhibited popular mobilization for health in democratic Brazil.

Royal endowments to Brahmanas have been interpreted either as a factor of political integration or disintegration in Indian history. Through the first thorough presentation and analysis of the epigraphic data from Orissa, this study argues that the period 300-1147 C.E. was one of intensive state formation and political development in which royal grants played an important integrative role. During this period, Brahmanas, many of whom were ritual specialists associated with the Yajur Veda, emerged as land-holders endowed by royal decree with privileged control over land. Despite the consistent appearance of sectarian affiliations in the royal inscriptions, temples did not benefit from royal patronage on a comparable scale. Until the close of the period under review, it was the gift of land to Brahmanas, not the royally-endowed temple establishment, that was a major basis of royal legitimation and political integration in Orissa.

No description available.

No description available.