© Under the fair use provision of the copyright law of the U.S. (17 USC 108), this page was reproduced for reference use only from material held at the Presbyterian Historical Society, 425 Lombard St., Phila. Pa. 19147. Unless permission is granted, neither this copy nor in content may be reproduced or in any way used by unauthorized persons or placed in collections of any institution or individual. The copyright notice from the work from which this copy was made is attached.

Biographical file

Agricultural Missions Foundation, Inc.
156 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York
Mimeograph Series No. 71

THE ECONOMICS OF POVERTY

W. H. WISER M.A., PH. D.*

Dr. Warren H. Wilson, rural economist and rural sociologist, author of one of the first studies of the life of a rural village in the U.S.A., who has been one of my most esteemed counselors in my village studies, and who has himself studied village conditions in India first hand, describes the Indian village as demonstrating the economics of poverty. If we can think of the village economic set-up in these terms we can have a pretty clear understanding of conditions as they are. We of the West have been thinking so largely in the terms of maximum production and maximum efficiency that we have little patience with a type of mentality that thinks in terms of minimum production and minimum efficiency.

In terms of the Hindu Jajmani system we must understand that we are able to see at work in the villages the most marvelous economic system that one will find anywhere in the world, based on minimum production. Nowhere will one find as little unemployment, as little production and as little demand on the part of producers in exchange for services. So long as each villager can have a bit of ground large enough for a mud hut to shelter his wife and his babies, a few morsels of food for his family, a few bits of cloth to cover the nakedness of his family and protect them from the cold when it comes, a bit of fuel with which his wife can prepare for him a bit of hot food, a few herbs with which he can prepare a fever, constipation, or diarrahoea mixture, a bit of money to help him meet occasional ceremonial demands on the family, a bit of tobacco and a crude clay pipe to share with his friends, a few simple utensils with which his wife can prepare his food, a string cot or two and a few bed coverings which he can share with his wife and children, a chance to own or borrow a few simple tools to enable him to do his work, enough raw material from which he can produce his assigned allotment, leisure to sit and talk with his friends or go to visit a relative in another village, assurance that no one is going to steal his wife, so long as he has these things, he can live content. He has all the new experience, all the security, all the recognition, all the response, all the self-giving and all the self-expression he desires. With his outlook on life the Jajmani system provides the Indian villager with the satisfactions which modern psychologists and sociologists say that men require.

The marvel of the system does not stop with the simple demands of men but is increased by the intricacy with which men in a village have divided labor responsibilities. One intercedes with the deities, one reads the signs in the heavens, one keeps the accounts of those who have accounts to keep, one fashions gold and silver for those who have gold and silver to be fashioned, one supplies flowers for offerings to the deities, one grows vegetables, one grows rice, one grows other grains, one makes wooden implements, one beats out metal implements, one shaves and lets blood, one sets bones, one weaves cloth, one bears water, one keeps sheep, one keeps cattle, one parches grain, one fashions pots, one presses oil, one makes mats, one cures leather, one washes clothes and so on and so on. Thus are the simple needs of the Indian villager met in a wonderful cooperative set-up. So long as each does his little bit happily, all is well.

*Dr. Wiser is a member of the faculty of the United Theological Seminary, Saharanpur, N. India, a missionary of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., author of THE HINDU JAJMANI SYSTEM and co-author of BEHIND MUD WALLS.

M.S. 71

- 2 -

The system of remuneration, too, is marvelously worked out. Daily, monthly or at harvest time payments in grain are made. Money is being used increasingly for these payments. On special occasions, such as weddings, deaths, births, investitures, birthdays, and special religious celebrations, food and cloth are distributed. Money is now used in many cases but very sparingly. But this system, developed according to the Brahmanical code of thought, meets the test of socialism, namely, "From each according to his ability, and to each according to his work." The Brahman who intercedes with the deities does the most important work and is most highly remunerated. The sweeper does the least important work and receives the lowest remuneration.

Man in this system had nothing to worry about. With simple needs, simple tasks and simple remuneration he was happy. The only clouds that came over his horizon were those that come over men's horizons everywhere when men steal one's possessions, among which are included wives, when men destroy one's possessions, one's family or one's friends, and when one reviles or assails one's self-respect or that of one's friends. The villager made provision for this, too, in the councils of elders, the various panchayats, class and community.

Why should anyone desire to change this system? Not once, but hundreds of times have my wife and I honestly asked ourselves this question. On one occasion after speaking enthusiastically about this system to a group of university men in the States, a quiet professor came up to me and said: 'It is quite evident that you are very keen about the Indian village and its economic set-up. If you had the chance of being born again, would you rather be born there than in your own American home?' At once there flashed into mind my childhood with co-educational schools right through high school, free education right through high school, a wide range of economic opportunity, my three story brick home, my own room with my own pictures, and books, my cycle, the bath room with flushed latrine, hot and cold running water, a beautiful enamelled tub, electric lights, steam heat, my father's interesting library and music, the big grand piano, our big lawn, our public parks, our theater, our church. I had honestly to say: 'No.' No, in spite of my enthusiasm for the Indian village, I would again want to be born in the same kind of home as that in which I was born, and in an American town rather than in an average Indian village home.

This matter of changing people's environments is a matter that should give every sincere rural reconstructionist cause to pause. The introduction of a bore hole latrine, a ventilator, an improved plough, better seed or the changing of certain amenities of life is not a very serious matter. But to set about upsetting the existing social and economic order is a matter with endless implications. The other day I saw two sewing machines in a chamar (leather-worker's) house in a village and I found a chamar woman sewing for some patrons. This transfer of the seamster's duties to a leather-worker is a matter of more significance to the existing social and economic order than if I had found good cattle, good food, a well-ventilated house, a fodder cutter and many other things which our rural reconstructionists are introducing in village homes. In another village I find leather-workers selling ghi (clarified butter) in the village. This has been the pre-rogative of the milkmen caste and no leather worker would dare to leave his leather work or field work for such a business. Mamu very wisely said that all would be confusion if men left their established duties. Do we as rural reconstructionists want to bring confusion into the village when by training and tradition they are accustomed to order?

None of us are keen about bringing confusion into the village, but scientific education has revealed to us that a small insanitary mud hut may afford shelter to a man and his family but it tends to reduce the chances of that man and his family's enjoying a full span of life; it has revealed to us that a few morsels of food may keep a man and his family alive for some time but it prevents them from attaining the health and energy to which they are entitled as human beings; it has revealed that a few bits of clothing may for some time protect him from the rigours of the climate, but that unnecessary exposure due to improper weight and possible changes, when the clothes are drenched or soiled, tends to expose one to the risk of disease and death; it has revealed that although the villager may need but a little fuel, yet by denuding trees and taking materials which should go back into the soil, the villager is hindering man from getting the most from vegetation and the soil; it has revealed that the few herbs used as household remedies do have value but are not adequate to counteract many of the more complicated or even simple diseases; it has revealed that although the villager borrows only occasionally for ceremonial demands, yet he borrows in such large amounts to maintain extravagant social customs that he puts himself and his descendants under impossible obligations of debt; it has revealed that although he uses very little tobacco, yet the expenditure on tobacco is out of proportion to that which he spends for the essentials of life for his family; it has revealed that although his wife can prepare his food with a very few simple utensils, yet by so doing he has increased the burdens of her work; it has revealed that although a large number of people can share a few cots and one or two bed coverings, yet the health of all is jeopardized by inadequate sleeping facilities; it has revealed that although one can manage with a few tools owned or borrowed, yet in so doing a villager wastes much of his own and his friends' time; it has revealed that although one takes pleasure in spending his leisure time in talking to friends, that for his own and his friends' good he could gain more physically, mentally, socially and spiritually if he participated in games, read daily papers and books, and listened to the radio; it has revealed that although he may get some primary satisfactions out of his association with his wife and children, yet neither he nor they are getting as much out of their associations as they would if they shared in mutual development physically, mentally, socially and spiritually; it has revealed that although he may get satisfaction out of doing his work as his forefathers did, yet his satisfaction would be much greater if he could constantly improve his art and skill in creative workmanship; it has revealed also that although he may consider that there will always be sufficient waste land in the village to supply his wants as in the past, yet waste land is an economic loss to the village. Science has above all revealed that life and human relationships are not static but changing and that men have to change with life or perish.

With the improvement of education, the increase of communications and the industrial activities of cities in extending their markets into furthermost villages, not to speak of the foreign countries that are

P. Under the fair use provision of the copyright law of the U.S. (17 USC 106), this page was reproduced for reference use only from material held at the Presbyterian Historical Society, 425 Lombard St., Phila., PA 19147. Unauthorized permission is granted, neither this copy nor its content may be reproduced or in any way used by unauthorized persons or placed in collections of any institution or individual. The copyright notice from the work from which this copy was made is attached.

M.S. 71

- 5 -

likewise extending their markets, men's desire and wants are increasing. The demand for sewing machines, lanterns, metal boxes, knives, matches, bicycles, books, newspapers, and for a hundred and one things which are now found in villages increases the demand for money with which to buy these things.

The Jajmani system furnished an excellent set-up for an Indian village that lived on its own produce but for one that has contacted the outside world, the system has become obsolete. Modern education has created in the minds of students new dreams, new desires and new ideals. The desire for economic development requires new economic opportunities. No matter how much we desire to preserve the old, it is impossible unless we cut the villages entirely off from the cities and the outside world.

Whether the rural reconstructionist likes it or not changes have occurred and are occurring more rapidly every day. And we are making the confusion worse confused every day. We are sowing seeds of disorder and the old order must change. But how? The rural reconstructionist among others has helped to break down the old order. What new order has he got to offer in its stead? Where is the Manu who is going to compile new laws for living in a village that will be able to survive in the new order? It was a simple matter for Europeans to marry Indians and give rise to an Anglo-Indian community, but it is not such a simple matter to make the Anglo-Indian community an indigenous community in India. Just as it was inevitable that Europeans would marry Indians, so is it inevitable that Indian villages are going to marry Western ideas of industrialization, capitalism, competition and laissez-faire. One need only take a hurried glimpse at the offspring of these ideas in the West to know that all is not going to be well in India when we have unemployment, ruthless competition, and unbridled captains of industry in search of profit stalking the countryside of India.

The time has come when we must readjust the economic organization of the village. We must study anew the old system to see wherein lies its strength and wherein lies its weakness. We can take these facts and see what the West has to offer us. They have been seeking to make these adjustments for a long time. The Russians are trying to accomplish the same results as the Hindus achieved centuries ago, but on the basis of higher standards of living. Where the Indian villager was limited to the production and distribution of what could be produced from the soil surrounding the village, or obtained from the surrounding waste land, Russia is attempting through industrialization and science to supplement the production of the soil so that there may be more to distribute among its people, so that they in turn may enjoy a higher standard of living than they had before, and than India has today.

India has a much finer foundation on which to build than the Russian. And in making the changes necessary, rural reconstructionists must beware lest they destroy that which is found in the village today which is invaluable for the building of a new order. Russia has to build what we already have available. Let us look for a moment at those foundation stones which must not be moved.

1st.—That the general contentment and peace of the old system should be retained. This is more easily stated than attained. I attribute this peace and contentment to the spirit of cooperation. Countries of the West and the Far East are recognizing as never before the need of cooperation in all walks of life. The rural reconstructionist must beware of every element of conflict which he introduces into the village. The spirit of conflict is incompatible with cooperation. Just as in the past the village as a whole sought contentment and peace through cooperation, so also in the new order must the village seek as its goal—contentment and peace through cooperation.

2nd.—That the readiness of the average villager to subordinate his interests to those of the larger group or community should be continued as a basis for the development of a more symmetrical relationship. People in the West have come to realize that freedom for development does not mean unlimited license but has its complementary need of responsibility to others. Russia is unrelenting in its effort to teach its people this lesson. The old system except where it was abused by individuals who were 'out-of-step,' produced this readiness. In giving each individual a larger scope for economic development there must be an increasing sense of responsibility to others and a willingness to subordinate oneself on occasions where the best interests of the whole are at variance with him.

3rd.—That the Panchayat should be given back some of its old powers and have the whole-hearted support of the Central Government. When the rural reconstructionist has provided the set-up for the full development of each individual in the village, there must be in that village an umpire to prevent anyone from abusing his privileges. The old system had for its umpire the Panchayat. Wherever the Panchayat has had the right kind of men it has always been successful in its work of arbitration. Panchayats with the new ideals before them can as effectively work in a new order as in an old. Old customary laws will have to be replaced by new ones. A Panchayat that seeks to maintain the old traditional common laws in the new order will fail. A Panchayat with new laws and new ideals should succeed. I admit that this will not be easily attained, but I consider it essential.

4th.—That the social and economic advantages made possible through farmers' living in a village center rather than in scattered homes, should be cherished. The village is located in the country because the farmer is situated near his fields. That is most economical. The modern factory seeks to be located as close as possible to its raw material. The custom of the village farmers' living in one center rather than on scattered holdings has distinct advantages. We find in the West that when farmers can retire they prefer to live in a center where they can have ready access to amenities which are not possible when they are scattered all about the countryside. Rural schools also which were formerly scattered here and there are now being consolidated, and the children brought long distances so that they might have the advantages of a large school set-up. Indian farmers have the custom of living together. Socially, I am convinced that this is as it should be.

Under the fair use provision of the copyright law of the U.S. (17 USC 108), this page was reproduced for reference use only from material held at the Pennsylvania Historical Society, 425 Bombard St., Phila., Pa. 19147. Unless permission is granted, neither this copy nor any part of it may be reproduced or in any way used by unauthorized persons or placed in collections of any institution or individual. The copyright notice from the work, from which this copy was made, is attached.

Under the fair use provision of the copyright law of the U.S. (17 USC 106), this page was reproduced for reference use only from material held at the Pennsylvania Historical Society, 425 Lombard St., Phila., PA 19147. Unless permission is granted, reissue this copy once in
content may be reproduced or in any way used by unauthorized persons or placed in collections of any institution or individual. The copyright notice from the work from which this copy was made in stashed.

M.S. 71

- 4 -

5th.—That the solidarity of the community establishes units which should be utilized in relation to a central government. In this matter I am in hearty accord with Professor Radhakumal Mukerji who contends that the rural community should be a unit of administration and representation. The city as it develops tends to get into its hands increasing power in matters of government. The village has its peculiar problems and the villagers should have their own representatives to present these interests.

6th.—That the two important forces, education and religion, which were instrumental in establishing this system should be utilized to the full to guide and direct its members in future action. The rural reconstructionist who puts his faith in engineers, physicists, chemists, biologists, economists and sociologists or, as the Russians call it, science, must not forget the priest and the teacher. As the result of teaching and the guidance of priests we may have a pre-war Russia or a post-war Russia, a Germany with a Kaiser or a Hitler, an Italy with a king or dictator. Force undoubtedly plays a prominent part but one need but see what is being taught in the schools of Russia, Germany and Italy today to know what they plan for tomorrow. The priest has continually reminded men of their duties to others. One need but see my references to the Laws of Manu to see how the priest emphasized responsibilities to others. In spite of the contrary opinions of Russia and Jawahir Lal, the priest has a most useful service to perform. A rural reconstruction program that leaves the teacher and priest out loses its most valuable allies.

These are some of the foundation stones of the old social economic order upon which one can build much. The first two are in the realm of social attitudes--contentment and peace through the spirit of cooperation, and willingness to subordinate personal interests. The last four have to do with social organization, the Panchayat, the village as a habitation for farmers, the village as a political unit, and educational and religious institutions as social forces.

But in building an economic and social order based on the maximum for human life rather than on the minimum, there are some foundation stones of the old order that have to be blasted out and replaced by stones that can bear the weight of the new structure. The foremost of these is the lack of equality of opportunity in the village. The idea that one man by birth is entitled to privileges of learning or occupation or social standing which are denied to another is intolerable in developing a society based on maximums. Psychologists have demonstrated that such a position is untenable. If society is to get the best from its members, it must look upon the sweeper child as well as the Brahman child as a potential contributor of the most worth while things in society. If, given the same opportunity, the sweeper child shows lack of intellect of skill, a sweeper he must remain. If on the other hand he shows both intellect and skill he can make a more valuable contribution to society than by forever wielding a broom.

Another stone that must go is the idea that the status of man or organization is fixed forever for this life. Science has revealed that life is constantly changing, that the individual is constantly changing, hence the economic and social set-up must not be so mummified as to be incapable of change. It is much easier to establish a system for all time than to constantly alter systems. The industrialist would like to continue to use his old machinery. It is less expensive and less intricate than the new, but to maintain production on new levels he is forced to change. The Indian village can no longer be isolated. It is now in competition with the world. Old machinery must give way to new, not only today, but tomorrow and the next day. To manage this kind of social machinery, the Panchayat will have to have in it men who are capable of interpreting changes and of making the necessary adjustments. For this, Panchayat members will need constant training in what is new in science and in life.

This leads us to the last stone that must be changed—the inelasticity of the present economic order. If the leather worker has the skill and ability today to do the work of a seamster, or the work of a milkman, and if tomorrow he has the skill to be an engineer, and the day after tomorrow he has the skill of an administrator, he must be given the opportunity. The economic order must be elastic enough to permit these changes when men show the aptitude in knowledge, skills and attitudes.

With the reader's permission I will quote a paragraph in full from the HINDU JAJMANI SYSTEM. "The weaknesses of the system should be strengthened and the strength of the system retained. In seeking to do this one must recognize that the Hindu Jajmani system emphasizes solidarity, but does not represent symmetrical inter-relationship for all members. It is communalistic-conservative, built on inequality rather than equality. It is static. It represents a high degree of social and economic organization and control. It is socialistic rather than capitalistic. Its strength is in its solidarity, its altruistic emphasis, its communalistic-conservative nature, its concreteness, and its high degree of economic and social organization and control. Its weakness lies in its lack of individual freedom, its limited altruism, its inequality of membership, its static nature and economic inelasticity."

These are the days of planning. It is useless to believe that the village can continue as it is. There are not enough goods in the average village to give its members more than the minimum. To lead all villagers to think that they can continue developing in the confines of their village is dishonest when we know differently. To lead people to think that things will change automatically is also dishonest. Those who have will take advantage of their new knowledge and take more of the little there is. Those who have not will find that they no longer have the minimum which they have had heretofore. And unless someone shows them the way out they will die in despair and starvation or join those who will be ready to rise up against those that have and attempt to take it forcibly.

Mr. K. T. Paul years ago emphasized that a program of rural reconstruction must be comprehensive. As we study the life in the village we realize how comprehensive that change must be. Let us not be guilty of doing a bit of tinkering in the village. Let us build a new order. If we have a clear vision as to what that order can be then we can enlist the cooperation of the teacher, the priest and the scientist, and together build a new social and economic order based on the maximum and not on the minimum. Thus will the economics of poverty come to a timely death.

THE ECONOMICS OF POVERTY

W. H. WISER M.A., PH. D.*

M.S. 71

- 3 -

M.S. 71

- 4 -

5th.—That the solidarity of the community establishes units which should be utilized in relation to a central government. In this matter I am in hearty accord with Professor Radhakamal Mukerji who contends that the rural community should be a unit of administration and representation. The city as it develops tends to get into its hands increasing power in matters of government. The village has its peculiar problems and the villagers should have their own representatives to present these interests.

These are some of the foundation stones of the old social economic order upon which one can build much. The first two are in the realm of social attitudes—contentment and peace through the spirit of cooperation, and willingness to subordinate personal interests. The last four have to do with social organization, the Panchayat, the village as a habitation for farmers, the village as a political unit, and educational and religious institutions as social forces.

With the reader's permission I will quote a paragraph in full from the HINDU JAJMANI SYSTEM. "The weaknesses of the system should be strengthened and the strength of the system retained. In seeking to do this one must recognize that the Hindu Jajmani system emphasizes solidarity, but does not represent symmetrical inter-relationship for all members. It is communalistic—conservative, built on inequality rather than equality. It is static. It represents a high degree of social and economic organization and control. It is socialistic rather than capitalistic. Its strength is in its solidarity, its altruistic emphasis, its communalistic-conservative nature, its concreteness, and its high degree of economic and social organization and control. Its weakness lies in its lack of individual freedom, its limited altruism, its inequality of membership, its static nature and economic inelasticity."

# THE ECONOMICS OF POVERTY

W. H. WISER M.A., PH. D.*

H.S. 71

- 2 -

None of us are keen about bringing confusion into the village, but scientific education has revealed to us that a small insanitary mud hut may afford shelter to a man and his family but it tends to reduce the chances of that man and his family enjoying a full span of life; it has revealed to us that a few morsels of food may keep a man and his family alive for some time but it prevents them from attaining the health and energy to which they are entitled as human beings; it has revealed that a few bits of clothing may for some time protect him from the rigours of the climate, but that unnecessary exposure due to improper weight and possible changes, when the clothes are drenched or soiled, tends to expose one to the risk of disease and death; it has revealed that although the villager may need but a little fuel, yet by denuding trees and taking materials which should go back into the soil, the villager is hindering man from getting the most from vegetation and the soil; it has revealed that the few herbs used as household remedies do have value but are not adequate to counteract many of the more complicated or even simple diseases; it has revealed that although the villager borrows only occasionally for ceremonial demands, yet he borrows in such large amounts to maintain extravagant social customs that he puts himself and his descendants under impossible obligations of debt; it has revealed that although he uses very little tobacco, yet the expenditure on tobacco is out of proportion to that which he spends for the essentials of life for his family; it has revealed that although his wife can prepare his food with a very few simple utensils, yet by so doing he has increased the burdens of her work; it has revealed that although a large number of people can share a few cots and one or two bed coverings, yet the health of all is jeopardized by inadequate sleeping facilities; it has revealed that although one can manage with a few tools owned or borrowed, yet in so doing a villager wastes much of his own and his friends' time; it has revealed that although one takes pleasure in spending his leisure time in talking to friends, that for his own and his friends' good he could gain more physically, mentally, socially and spiritually if he participated in games, read daily papers and books, and listened to the radio; it has revealed that although he may get some primary satisfactions out of his association with his wife and children, yet neither he nor they are getting as much out of their associations as they would if they shared in mutual development physically, mentally, socially and spiritually; it has revealed that although he may get satisfaction out of doing his work as his forefathers did, yet his satisfaction would be much greater if he could constantly improve his art and skill in creative workmanship; it has revealed also that although he may consider that there will always be sufficient waste land in the village to supply his wants as in the past, yet waste land is an economic loss to the village. Science has above all revealed that life and human relationships are not static but changing and that men have to change with life or perish.

M.S. 71

- 3 -

N.S. 71

- 4 -