Abolition is a context which figures prominently in the history of indenture: colonial indentured labour schemes were borne out of the abolition of slavery. In Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?, Radica Mahase turns attention to the abolition/anti-indenture campaigns which saw indentured labour come to an end. Moving between India, Trinidad, Guyana, Mauritius, South Africa and Fiji, Mahase’s monograph adds to a growing body of work which takes a global approach to the history of Indian indentured labour (e.g. Kumar 2017). The work demonstrates a commitment to the subaltern studies project: alongside the archives of the British colonial state, Mahase draws on sources which restore the voice of the labourers themselves including testimonials from labourers and folk songs. This is also reflected in the book’s structure, which positions labourers’ resistance at the forefront.
The introductory chapters of Mahase’s book make useful reading for students new to the subject of Indian indentured labour migration. Chapter 1 cogently details the context of indentured emigration from India. Here, Mahase focuses on the regions of origin and socio-economic backgrounds of Indian indentured labourers, examining the contexts from which labourers chose to emigrate. She divides this chapter into two sections: the first taking a ‘macro perspective’ which outlines the economic impact of British imperialism on India; the second turning to the ‘micro’ level, which examines the impact of British imperial rule in the villages and districts from which Indian labourers emigrated.
In establishing this context, Mahase highlights the agency of Indian labourers in their decision to emigrate. At the same time, the chapter also astutely emphasizes the structural push and pull factors created by British imperialism. By focusing on these structural colonial factors, Mahase is able to centre the experiences and decisions of the labourers. Making a convincing case for the primacy of economic factors leading to emigration, Mahase shows that the recruiters’ ‘persuasive powers’ were less relevant in individuals’ decisions to emigrate than in circumstances faced by labourers in India. Mahase’s approach effectively demonstrates the structural and oppressive power of British imperialism, while also highlighting subaltern agency.
Chapter 2, largely another context-setting chapter, turns attention to the system of indentured labour, arguing that ‘the entire scheme was structured along imperialist lines’ (57). While Chapter 1 sets out the conditions in India created by British imperialism that led Indian labourers to emigrate to the plantation colonies, Chapter 2 reminds us that the primary purpose of the indentured labour system was to provide cheap labour to the plantation colonies. In this chapter, Mahase sketches an overview of the indenture system, from recruitment to the depots, and from the emigrant ship to the plantation. In doing so, the chapter argues that two integral ideologies of imperial capitalism were foundational in the system of colonial indentured migration: domination and control; and profit maximization (58).
In the three chapters that follow, we get to the core subject matter of the book: resistance and protest against the indenture system. Chapter 3 focuses on labourers’ resistance. Although the extent and forms of resistance varied across territories, Mahase argues there was an ‘innate need to protest against whatever [indentured labourers] perceived as unfair and iniquitous’ (88). Sitting alongside many historians who have explored indentured labourers’ agency and resistance (e.g. Birbalsingh 1989; Roopnarine 2007), Mahase offers convincing evidence of both cultural resistance and labour resistance that refutes any ideas of labourers as ‘meek and docile individuals ready to fully accept the dictates of the colonial state’ (89). Mahase also draws attention to how ‘old immigrants’ in Mauritius and repatriated Indian labourers from Natal protested the conditions of indentureship through petitions and reports to the Protector of Emigrants, demonstrating the resistance of indentured labourers continued beyond the end of their contracts, and pointing to solidarities between Indian migrant labourers.
Chapter 4 turns attention to middle-class Indians in the labour-importing colonies, whose protests through petitions, newspapers, and organizations (such as the Natal Indian Congress and the Trinidadian East Indian National Association) were ‘instrumental’ in drawing the attention of the British imperial government to issues faced by indentured and non-indentured Indians in the colonies (127). This chapter incisively demonstrates the potential of global approaches to the study of indentured labour, as Mahase begins to develop the idea of a ‘“quadrangular trade” of ideas, information, grievances and protests’ that existed between labour-importing colonies, the Government of India and British imperial government (143). As such, this chapter is of particular interest to scholars concerned with the global circulation of ideas.
Chapter 5 brings us to India, where Mahase examines subaltern agitation against the indenture system in recruitment districts and the high-politics role of the Indian nationalist movement in the abolition of indenture. Foregrounding subaltern resistance, Mahase demonstrates the significance of the organized campaign against indentured migration that had emerged in the recruitment districts by 1915. Grassroots mobilizations to dissuade emigration were particularly disruptive as they meant that ships had to leave with fewer emigrants, or were delayed while recruiters tried to make up the numbers.
The bulk of Chapter 5 is devoted to the relationship between the Indian nationalist movement and its campaign against Indian indentured labour. Going beyond pointing to the well-understood ‘pivotal role’ Indian nationalists played in abolishing indentured labour, Mahase examines how the anti-indenture cause shaped the Indian nationalist movement itself (181). By the 1910s the anti-indenture cause was clearly defined in Indian nationalist discourse: indenture exemplified the dehumanizing treatment of Indians, the economic exploitation of India, and the inferior treatment of India compared to the self-governing dominions. Nationalists also pointed to middle-class Indians’ advocacy for the indentured population to demonstrate class solidarity in the nationalist movement and attract more support from India’s labouring population. Mahase joins other scholars such as Ashutosh Kumar in arguing the anti-indenture campaign was an issue ‘conveniently used by Indian nationalists to build a case for independence’ (176; Kumar 2017).
Finally, Chapter 6 considers the relationship between the British Imperial Government and the Government of India, and their changing responses to the anti-indenture movement through the indenture period. This final, shorter chapter strongly reiterates a core assertion of the book: that throughout the indenture period, including in abolition, the colonial indentured labour scheme served imperialist interests. The colonial government’s decision to abolish indentured labour in 1920 was not motivated by any concern for the labourers themselves, but rather by the threat of agitation against indenture to ‘interrupt British colonization and threaten British imperialist policies’ (197). The other main contribution of this chapter is its convincing claim that the effectiveness of anti-indenture agitation was primarily due to its global nature. Although British colonies in the Caribbean were not fully integrated into the global anti-indenture networks which had spread across India, South Africa, Fiji and Mauritius, the colonial government feared this possibility.
Mahase’s monograph offers an important intervention in the historiography of indentured labour in its careful attention to a range of agents and factors which led to the abolition of indenture. Mahase’s approach foregrounds subaltern resistance. At the same time, the work stresses the pervasive structural power of imperialism. In its assessment of the end of indenture, Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’? ultimately points to the importance of the global interconnectedness and global travels of Indians between British plantation colonies in encouraging the development and growth of the campaign to abolish indenture. As such, Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’? demonstrates the fundamental necessity for a global approach to understanding the abolition of indentured labour.