One old elite has been replaced by a new one; both equally arrogant and selfish, though in different ways
The bhatkar is dead. Long live the bhatkar. That's a statement you're unlikely to hear in today's Goa. But, with little exaggeration, it's true; thanks to the controversial land reforms brought into this state in the 1960s and 1970s. Reforms which benefited many (quite a few who didn't deserve), stole from a middle class Peter to benefit some Pauls, and largely didn't cut into the interests of the big landholders who owned half a taluka or more.
More importantly, the tenancy and mundkar laws impoverished the comunidades, and made them into sitting ducks (to influential whoevers who wanted to grab their land assets). Truth be told, much of the village level work the comunidades did are hardly being fulfilled by the panchayats of today. If the comunidades were an elite-dominated institution, they were hardly corruption-prone or votebank-driven like their panchayat successors of sorts.
Even more seriously, the promise that the faulty land reforms of the past would bring about fresh vibrancy in agriculture has not at all been fulfilled. This is there for all to see. Field after field is left fallow. Dams, which were built at the costs of scores or hundreds of rupees in costs, are today unable to cope with extreme weather events, and are flooding our villages.
To be frank, in the 1960s and thereabouts, the bhatkar was a much disliked class (if not also a hated and despised lot). In parts of Goa, they were seen as heartless, exploitative and uncaring. Arrogant too. In a way, this was only to be expected. Because the land-relations were such, the relations between the bhatkar and the rest were antagonistic. The visible wealth of the bhatkar often came in from the labour of the landless.
Not only that, they also then dominated the social, cultural and political life. This smallish group of often inter-connected families, in part Catholic and in other parts Hindu, shaped the language and literature, the food and tastes, the image of Goa and its perception. Naturally, it was seen as controversial and disliked.
By some adept twists of logic, all the blame of the past was placed squarely on this section. Their role was exaggerated. A new ruling class was taking over Goa, and they needed someone to blame, someone to finger-point to. The bhatkar came in convenient use here.
Blaming the bhatkar for everything killed many birds with one stone. It placed the blame on a small, identifiable group. It helped to placate a larger sections of the masses. The dis-empowered were impatient for the promises of post-colonialism, and they suddenly had a more important role to play in vote-bank driven politics. Blaming the bhatkar allowed the new, upcoming elite to justify their own role by repeatedly pointing out to the 'big bad wolf'.
There was also the issue of caste. Many from the bhatkar section traced their roots to the so-called 'upper' castes. In the new dynamic, it was even easier to beat them down. Once the bhatkar lost political clout, it was easy to further stigmatise this class. This class found themselves suddenly orphaned at home. Pushed out culturally and metaphorically (not to mention economically), many left Goan shores.
By the 1990s, it was a kind of a stalemate, with the old bhatkar being unwilling to sell out for a pittance, and the class of tenants feeling empowered enough to demand more. Sometimes going beyond what was their due, and claiming even homes of the small landholder as their own, in a situation they were truly not meant to be mundkars.
The post-CHOGM, post-charter flights, post-Liberalisation tourism boom saw Goa witness real estate speculation touch new heights. This changed the equation altogether.
It was scholars like the late professor Alito Siqueira who discerned a new trend, where both tenant and landlord were simply denying that they were tenant and landlord. Instead, they were arriving at a deal, on the side. A builder would act as the go-between, offer to buy out the disputed land, and build on it. Builders could do what those with less political clout could not.
On paper, the land would change hands for a token amount. There was huge black money involved. Tenants got paid off, or otherwise compensated. Landlords also got their part. Sometimes in foreign exchange, through the hawala route, which only suited them fine. Everyone was happy....
One old elite has been replaced by a new one; both equally arrogant and selfish, though in different ways. Agricultural productivity has come crashing down; so many fields are fallow and wasted despite Goa's inability to feed itself.
Political corruption based on the new gold, land, has fitted in neatly to fill in the vacuum. Those who were politically connected have adeptly built themselves into political land brokers. The skyline keeps changing for the worse. Panchayats are unable to fulfil duties in long-term sustainability and village drainage or riverine bunds that the comunidades took on at a fraction of the cost.
Goa can claim to have worked out these amazing set of land reforms, even without ensuring justice to all. This is especially true in the case of the small landowner, fighting for decades to regain their only home. Likewise, note too that this State has completely overlooked or forgotten the issue of land ceilings.
Dignity of labour is dead. For, while the bhatkar class is more or less extinct, everyone would like to believe they can act as one. Those who managed to get some land on their names (through either bhatkar or mundkar connects) are only keen to sell and run-with-the-money.
Today, we are at a situation where we are mostly not even willing to talk honestly about a topic like this. So what we do is to just pretend that it never existed.
In such a context, some free and frank discussion, without getting caught up in self-serving polemics, could surely go some way in setting the record straight. We need more of it.
