The historical tapestry of Kashmir is woven with threads of profound struggle and intricate socio-political dynamics. Two pivotal facets emerging from the crucible of 1931 demand nuanced reflection through the lense of political theory, social philosophy, and democratic ideals.
July 13,1931, is the seminal catalyst for popular sovereignty.
The Dogra Governor, Raizada Tartilok Chand, ordered the firing on the civilians in Srinagar. This incident, which resulted in the deaths of 22 Kashmiris, occurred during a protest outside the central jail where Abdul Qadeer was being tried. As the call for Zuhr prayer was being delivered.
The events outside Srinagar Central Jail on that fateful July day transcend mere historical records; they represent a pivotal inflection point in the region's collective consciousness.
A peaceful assembly, embodying the very essence of civic engagement and popular protest against perceived autocratic overreach and systemic disenfranchisement, was met with disproportionate state violence.
The resulting loss of unarmed lives instantly crystallised into potent symbols of resistance against oppression. These individuals, rightly enshrined as martyrs for the cause, sacrificed themselves upon the altar of fundamental freedoms and democratic aspirations.
Their deaths became an inescapable historical imperative, a fulcrum moment galvanising the body politic. It ignited a grassroots movement demanding inalienable rights, political agency, and human dignity for the Kashmiri people.
This tragedy served as a crucible of political awakening, profoundly shaping the evolving socio-political landscape and fueling the long arc of struggle towards political awakening and meaningful participation within the prevailing power structures.
Commemorating this day is not merely an act of remembrance; it is an affirmation of democratic values, a solemn recognition of sacrifice in the face of hegemonic power, and an acknowledgement of a critical chapter in the ongoing quest for justice, popular sovereignty and democratic rights.
The malicious discourse surrounding historical "streak incidents" (communal violence in 1931) and famine causation requires rigorous deconstruction to avoid pernicious oversimplification.
Similarly, understanding labour agitations demands moving beyond attributing events solely to the communal identity of individual officials or managers. Attributing collective guilt for communal strife to an entire ethno-religious majority, or blaming a specific minority elite (like Kashmiri Pandit officials or factory managers) as the sole architects of state violence or economic exploitation, constitutes a reductionist fallacy that dangerously essentialises communities.
Kashmir had several people’s and labour agitations that precede 1931, highlighting acute exploitation and state violence.
The Shawl Weavers Agitation (29 April 1865)
This pivotal protest arose from unbearable economic burdens – oppressive taxation, plummeting wages, and brutal working conditions imposed by the Dogra state and its monopoly system (Taaq).
Kripa Ram, the Dogra-appointed Tehsildar (Revenue Official) in Srinagar, embodied the state's coercive apparatus. Faced with peaceful weavers demanding relief, he ordered Dogra troops to open fire, resulting in multiple fatalities and mass arrests. While Kripa Ram (a Pandit) took the operational lead, his actions reflected the policy of an extractive Dogra state determined to crush dissent and protect its revenue streams, not the will of a community.
The primary causality lies with the state's exploitative economic model and its readiness for lethal repression.
The Silk Factory Workers Agitation (21 July 1924)
Workers at the state-owned Silk Factory in Srinagar protested exploitative practices by managers (including Pandits holding key positions) – drastically reduced wages, withheld bonuses, and brutal working conditions.
The protest culminated at Shergarhi Police Station, where Dogra police fired upon the unarmed workers, killing several. While the immediate managerial exploitation stemmed from specific individuals (some Pandits), the lethal violence was enacted by the Dogra state police.
The incident underscores the intersection of class exploitation (by managers aligned with state interests) and state violence (by Dogra authorities), operating within a system designed for extraction with little regard for worker welfare or rights.
Framing this as "Pandit managers killing workers" ignores the structural role of the Dogra state as the ultimate enforcer and beneficiary.
Communal Tension vs. Universal Principles:
While periods of social tension and sporadic communal friction undeniably occurred, justificatory narratives for violence targeting civilians based solely on ascribed identity stand in stark contradiction to universal tenets of human rights and natural justice. Such narratives are morally untenable.
Famine Causality: A Multifactorial Tragedy:
The catastrophic famines (1831[Sikh era], 1877-79, 1893, 1901, 1923) were multifactorial, triggered by exploitative feudal structures including an oppressive land revenue system burdened the peasantry, and other State policy failures. The Dogra state prioritised fiscal extraction over welfare, mitigation, or development.
The famines were also a by-product of environmental vulnerability with natural disasters acting as critical triggers, and colonial macro-economics (these policies exacerbated local vulnerabilities.)
While privileged elites (mainly Pandits and some selective Muslims) participated in the exploitative status quo, the famines resulted from Dogra state policy and structure, compounded by environment and colonial economics, not a community "weaponising starvation."
The Structural Imperative
The martyrdom of 1931, the labour massacres of 1865 and 1924, and the recurring famines are interconnected manifestations of the Dogra state's core nature. They reveal:
* Extractive Political Economy: Prioritising revenue over human welfare, whether through land taxes, monopoly systems (Shawl Taaq), or factory exploitation.
* Authoritarian Governance: Relying on coercion and violence (Dogra troops, police) to suppress dissent and maintain control, whether against political protesters, starving peasants, or aggrieved workers.
* Systemic Injustice: Operating with a profound democratic deficit, denying political agency, economic justice, and basic rights to the vast majority of Kashmiris.
* Co-option & Intersectionality: Utilising segments of the local population (including Pandit officials and managers) within its administrative and economic machinery to enforce its rule, creating complex layers of privilege and complicity that *intersected* with but were not determined by communal identity.
Understanding oppression
Reducing the complex causality of historical tragedies – whether state violence against protesters (1931, 1865, 1924), famines, or labour exploitation – to communal scapegoating is historically inaccurate and profoundly damaging.
It obscures the primary locus of responsibility: the autocratic, extractive Dogra state structure and its devastating policy choices. While individual actors (like Kripa Ram or exploitative factory managers) played roles within this system, their actions were enabled by and served the interests of the ruling power.
Understanding this structural imperative, the intersectionality of oppression (class, state, occasional communal friction), and the universality of the demand for rights and justice across these diverse struggles (political, economic, survival) is vital for genuine historical understanding, reconciliation, and building a future grounded in democratic pluralism and accountable governance.
Commemorating events like July 13th must encompass this broader struggle against systemic oppression in all its forms.
Have you liked the news article?