Suramya Thekke Kalathil

Bio: Suramya Thekke Kalathil is an academic researcher from Indian Institute of Technology Madras. The author has contributed to research in topics: Decentralization & Productivity. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 1 publications receiving 2 citations.

Regulation and resistance: defactorisation in the beedi industry of colonial Malabar, 1937–1941

Abstract: This article presents a case study of defactorisation of production in a traditional industry – beedi rolling – in colonial South India. It examines the implementation of the Indian Factories Act a...

State Regulation and Class Struggle in the Beedi Industry of Post-Colonial Malabar, 1947–1970

Abstract: In post-independence India, as in many developing post-colonial nations, the capitalist class was dependent on the state to discipline the laborforce, and the rapid uptake of capitalist production methods prompted the new government to intervene aggressively in industrial labor relations. The main goal of postcolonial labor policy was to maintain peaceful labor relations at any cost in order to foster economic development. The newly elected government failed to help capitalists increase their profits through productivity growth, so the way forward was to impose restrictions on labor. Pro-capital labor legislation initially enabled capitalists to curb the mobility and resistance of workers. In due course, however, irrespective of how consistently or effectively labor regulations and repressive measures were enforced, the reaction of the working class heightened its political consciousness, and thus aggravated frictions between capital and labor. When the state resorted to labor welfare laws as a new strategy to reduce these conflicts, employers often fragmented production among smaller units (such as workshops and households) in order to dodge labor regulations. As a reaction to this production decentralization, the working-class movement created impediments to the process of continual capital accumulation.

State Regulation and Class Struggle in the Beedi Industry of Post-Colonial Malabar, 1947–1970

Abstract: In post-independence India, as in many developing post-colonial nations, the capitalist class was dependent on the state to discipline the laborforce, and the rapid uptake of capitalist production methods prompted the new government to intervene aggressively in industrial labor relations. The main goal of postcolonial labor policy was to maintain peaceful labor relations at any cost in order to foster economic development. The newly elected government failed to help capitalists increase their profits through productivity growth, so the way forward was to impose restrictions on labor. Pro-capital labor legislation initially enabled capitalists to curb the mobility and resistance of workers. In due course, however, irrespective of how consistently or effectively labor regulations and repressive measures were enforced, the reaction of the working class heightened its political consciousness, and thus aggravated frictions between capital and labor. When the state resorted to labor welfare laws as a new strategy to reduce these conflicts, employers often fragmented production among smaller units (such as workshops and households) in order to dodge labor regulations. As a reaction to this production decentralization, the working-class movement created impediments to the process of continual capital accumulation.