By FabianLyngdoh
In the Khasi society in the past, there was security, freedom and equality within the clans, and there was equality in political affairs and government of the political community among the founding clans, called ‘ki binong-bishon’, which means ‘aristocracy’ to some extent. And, every Khasi clan was a ‘binong-bishon’ in its own political community of origin. Hence, practically, every Khasi, man and woman, was a member of the aristocracy, and a ‘bakhraw’ (noble). Every family and individual enjoyed security of food, employment and a simple social safety net because everyone had equal right to avail opportunities in the economic production of the land freely without paying land revenue to anyone.
The Khasis honour the Syiem family which they had instituted, and respect the Syiem they had appointed, but they would never allow their clan members to be servants of the Syiem. In fact, no Khasi would submit to work as a servant of any other clan.Hence, in the past there was no servant in the Khasi society, except a man whose clan has become extinct and a woman ‘ba la sah kynthei-khynnah’ (left orphaned) because her clan members, males and females, have all passed away. For this reason, even the Syiem family had to bring non-Khasis from outside the Hima to serve as servants, called ‘shakri syiem’, in their household. As the Syiem is charged with the responsibility of arresting criminals and punishing them, he has to maintain a small non-Khasi police force called ‘shap-rashi’ probably from the Bengali word ‘chaprassi’. It is also said that when the Syiem visited the ‘Raids’ he had to take along with him, his own cook, called ‘khansama.’ In Ri Bhoi, he was called ‘u kharsama’, a combination of the concept of ‘cook’ and ‘u dkhar’. So, traditionally, according to Khasi thought, though a Khasi may honour and respect his ‘ki kha’ (father’s clan), but he serves and renders obedience to no one, except to his own kur (clan), as he feels proudly secure and honourable in the economy of his own clan.
But, with the growth of population, wholesale privatisation of land, disappearance of forests and the emergence of the modern economic system, this traditional milieu of simplistic security is no longer possible and has become now a part of history. But, the residue or remnants of this cultural attitude proves to be negative for the growth and development of the economy and the Khasis. It seems that this cultural attitude has bred insincere, adamant,disobedient and disrespectful people who are unfit for employment. That is probably why it is commonly said that Khasi contractors, traders and real estate owners would not appoint Khasis as their workers, but prefer to hire the Bodos, Boros and Garos, and other non-Khasis to work in their business enterprises, and we see this fact everywhere in the Khasi and Jaintia Hills.
One Catholic priest from Kerala who worked in a Parish in Ri Bhoi, had aptly remarked, “the Khasi workmen (mistri) I hired, come to work at ten o’clock and begin ‘ban shut kurat lajong’ (sharpening their own hand saw), followed by the session of smoking, and a round of ‘kwai’ (betel nut); and by the time they really start working it is ready eleven o’clock.” That is how we generally are, and we should admit and be ashamed of it rather than feel offended by such a remark.
The red buses and maxi cabs of the Meghalaya State Government had provided employment to many people, and it is fitting to expect that the employees should take great care of them as the source of their employment. But if we keenly observe, we would see that those which are still plying are practically all worn out, while many more seem to have been dumped into the scrap yards even before their factory’s expiry periods. When all these vehicles begin to rust and rot in the scrapyards, where would these employees engage themselves for a livelihood? If other people were given these opportunities, they would have taken care of these vehicles as their own because in them lie the security of their employment.
The modern economy is the market economy which is competitive and where we would not be able to buy anything without the ability to produce and sell something.Therefore, we must first learn to serve others with goods or services profitably, and then only we would acquire the means to buy the things we desire happily. But, the malady is that we want to buy all the modern luxuries from everybody without selling anything to anybody. What a dream! Let us realize this plain truth that we cannot survive if we do not have something to sell. If we do not have any material things to sell, then we have to sell our services and labour; and our services and labour would be valueless and unmarketable if we do not learn how to serve others satisfactorily and to be respectful towards our employers, and diligent in our duties.
It is time that we stop carrying around our superiority complex because the modern economic system pays no one who does not serve, and the kur is no longer a corporate economy that the members can safely bank upon. And I believe, that the education system among the Khasis should also include components that would change this negative traditional mindset. Our educational certificates and degrees have no value in themselves, other than that they certify our knowledge, skills and abilities. But if we have no knowledge, no skill and no ability, then they are nothing but worthless pieces of paper. A cheque is valuable because a certain sum of money payable to the holder is written on it. But there is no sum of money written on an educational certificate because it may bring in unlimited amount of money or nothing at all; it all depends on the holder. Hence, our youth need to attend to their educational programmes with a deep desire to acquire knowledge, skills and abilities. Knowledge comes first, and then skills and abilities would follow firmly on its trail. Skill and ability without knowledge is blind, and knowledge without skill and ability may be a luxury of the wealthy but it is useless for all who have to struggle for a living.
A change of mind-set is required not only among the people but also among the policy makers as I had pointed out in my article, “Bottom-up economic planning”. Dr. A. K. Nongkynrih, had rightly said in his paper, ‘Oral tradition in developmental framework and development communication’ presented in a Workshop organized by North Eastern Region Community Resources Management Project (NERCORMP), in November, 2017, that oral tradition has its own kind of contribution to the socio-economic life of the people, and has its own kind of meanings and significance to the life of tribal\indigenous societies.
It is a waste of time and money to teach the village people about the credit system and about principal and interest because they already know of them. What they need to be enlightened about is the source of the finance in the language they can understand. The village people take ‘ka ram’ from their friends and neighbours sometimes even at the rate of 5% per month or 60% per year, and yet they usually repay both principal and interest without a grudge. Why then would they not repay to the Banks at the interest of 15% per year, if they had been made to understand as ‘ka ram’, and not as ‘loan’, and if the source of finance had been projected as worthy of honour and respect?
The Khasis in the villages repay ‘ka ram’ because the very word, ‘ka ram’ carries a concept of responsibility to repay in their minds and hearts.But, they would generally default a loan because the very word ‘loan’suggests in their minds and hearts that it comes from the same source which the bureaucrats can corrupt in lakhs and crores, and the NGO officials can enjoy their elitist lifestyles. It is the same source from which Nirav Modi could embezzle11,000 crore rupees which is enough to provide one lakh rupees as capital finance or to construct decent dwelling houses to eleven lakh poor families.
Therefore, if we want the rural schemes and projects to be successful we must present them to the people in the language they can understand and in the concepts that carry a sense of responsibility, and not in a way that suggests of a ‘sorkari’or ‘sarkari ka mal’ which is a residue of the colonial mindset still active in the minds of Indians in general.
(The author teaches at Martin Luther Christian University)