Politics today has become a buzzword all over the world. There are a large number of political ideologies. Earlier, the world was divided into the socialist social order and democratic social order.
With the disintegration of Soviet Union, it appears that democracy has become a world social order. Added to it is the capitalist system.
It is argued that democracy and capitalism go together. They have come to stay in present-day politics. However, social anthropology is weak in its political analysis. Before the African political system came into existence in social anthropology, it was believed that the primitive people had nothing of the kind of political system as we understand it today.
Image Source: thyblackman.com
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The third world countries, including that of Asia, Africa and Latin America, which were considered to be less developed in their political systems, have now begun to integrate themselves with the mainstream of national political system. In Africa, the Negroes have very much taken to democracy, so is the case with the people of other third world countries.
India is a developing nation, and it is essential for all the minority groups including Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to integrate them with the nation’s mainstream.
Social and political integration in India has become a catchword. More than 400 tribal groups of the country are required to integrate themselves with the national mainstream.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
They are persuaded to accept democracy, socialism, secularism and scientific ethics as their new ideology. The civil society of the tribals, therefore, has to merge with the wider framework of citizenship and human rights at the global level. Social anthropology, therefore, is required to study the elements of politics in the tribal society.
Power is a crucial and comprehensive variable in any political analysis. It is, on one hand, linked with political power, and on the other hand, with the wider social relations which people have with others.
Though political science discusses power distribution, it is also concerned with the prevention of lawlessness and insecurity. In other words, politics focuses on the maintenance of law and order in society. It is also concerned with conflict resolution and social integration.
All the societies, whether civilized or tribal, have some kind of political system. However, the nature of the political system differs considerably. In the previous chapter on primitive economic system, we have argued that economics is inbuilt in the primitive social system. It does not have a separate identity.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
In the same way, the tribals do not have any distinct and identifiable political system, in terms of assembly and parliament. In tribal society power is integral to all other social systems.
The comprehension of political system in modern societies is altogether different from that in the primitive societies. For instance, in a Gond or a Bhil society, it is difficult to isolate politics from their kinship and religion. Therefore, politics in tribal societies is inbuilt in their family, kin and religion.
Modern societies give a distinct position to the political system in the form of identifiable political institutions. Making a comparative characterization of the political system of modern society and primitive or tribal society, Thomas Hylland Eriksen observes:
Politics can be identified analytically in all societies, but by no means all societies that anthropologists have studied have political institu- – tions distinct from other societal realms. In modern state societies, it may seem fairly easy to delineate what is politics and what is not.
Political science, developed to study politics in such societies, deals with the formal political institutions, with a legislative assembly, local administration, voting patterns and other aspects of society recognized as political. In non-industrial societies, it may be far more difficult to single out politics as something distinct from the ongoing flow of social life.
The social anthropologists who have studied African political systems brought out certain conspicuous data, which have created a stir not only in social anthropology but also in political science.
The African studies indicate that there are tribal societies which do not have any state but they have a government. It is argued that the political system is concerned with the analysis of power and not the state.
A central problem in African studies during the 1940s to 1960s was to find out as to what extent the stateless societies were integrated. In the absence of any central authority they managed to maintain law and order and resolve conflicts. The findings of these studies have strengthened the content of political anthropology.
In India, we did not have any stateless societies of the kind of those in Africa. The regional rulers in central India brought the tribals within the feudal framework. In such a framework, the tribals often engineered revolt and rebellion. But, by and large, they were domesticated and worked as loyal subjects of the feudal rulers.
Indian social anthropologists, who were highly influenced by Malinowski, Evans- Pritchard and Rivers, did not take up the study of political systems among the Indian tribals.
Normally, they talked about tribal ethnicity and autonomy. Therefore, there were no tribal political studies in India on the pattern of African studies. As a result of this, political anthropology in India could not make any significant contribution.