As of my last knowledge update in January 2022, there isn't a specific and widely recognized movement explicitly called the "New Farmer's Movement." It's essential to note that social and political movements can emerge or gain prominence after the last update. If the New Farmer's Movement is a recent development or has gained significance post-2022, I may not have information about it.

However, historically, there have been various farmer's movements globally, particularly in India, where farmers have mobilized to address issues related to agricultural policies, land rights, fair pricing, and other concerns affecting their livelihoods. These movements often seek to draw attention to the challenges faced by farmers and advocate for policy changes that better support their interests.

If the New Farmer's Movement refers to a specific movement that has arisen since my last update, I recommend checking recent and reliable news sources, official statements, or academic analyses for the latest information on its objectives, leadership, and impact. Additionally, social media platforms and websites of relevant farmer's organizations can provide insights into the goals and activities of any recent farmer's movement.

Please ensure you refer to the latest sources for the most accurate and current information on the New Farmer's Movement or any other developments related to farmers' movements.

The apartheid system was a state-sanctioned system of racial segregation and discrimination that took place in South Africa from 1948 to the early 1990s. The term "apartheid" is derived from the Afrikaans word for "apartness," and the policies enforced by the apartheid regime were designed to institutionalize and perpetuate racial divisions between the country's different population groups.

Under apartheid, South Africa's diverse population was classified into four racial categories: white, black, colored (mixed-race), and Indian/Asian. The government implemented a series of laws and policies that systematically marginalized and oppressed the majority black population, while granting privileges and preferential treatment to the white minority.

Key features of the apartheid system included:

1. Racial Segregation: Apartheid enforced strict separation of racial groups in all aspects of life, including residential areas, public facilities, education, and employment. This segregation was enforced through the establishment of racially designated areas, schools, and public spaces.

2. Pass Laws: Non-white individuals were required to carry passbooks that detailed their racial classification and permitted their presence in specific areas. Failure to produce the passbook upon demand by authorities could result in arrest and punishment.

3. Limited Political Rights: The black majority was systematically denied political representation and participation. Non-white individuals were excluded from voting in general elections, and a series of discriminatory laws restricted their involvement in political activities.

4. Separate Development: Apartheid policies aimed at justifying racial segregation by advocating for the idea of "separate but equal" development for different racial groups. In reality, the resources and opportunities allocated to non-white communities were vastly inferior to those provided for the white population.

5. Bantu Education Act: The government implemented an education system that segregated schools based on race and provided inferior education to non-white students. The goal was to perpetuate economic and social disparities between racial groups.

6. Forced Removals: Non-white communities were forcibly relocated from areas designated for white development through a series of forced removals. This policy displaced millions of people, leading to the destruction of vibrant communities and cultural ties.

7. Suppression of Dissent: The apartheid government used censorship, imprisonment, and brutality to suppress any opposition to its discriminatory policies. Activists and leaders who spoke out against apartheid were often arrested, tortured, or killed.

The apartheid system faced international condemnation for its flagrant violations of human rights and racial equality. The global anti-apartheid movement, along with internal resistance led by figures like Nelson Mandela, played a crucial role in bringing about the dismantling of apartheid. The end of apartheid marked a significant turning point in South African history, leading to the establishment of a more inclusive and democratic political system. Nelson Mandela, who had been imprisoned for 27 years, was released in 1990, and in 1994, South Africa held its first multiracial democratic elections, with Mandela becoming the country's first black president.

The J.P. (Jayaprakash Narayan) Movement, also known as the Total Revolution Movement, was a significant socio-political movement in India during the 1970s. Led by social activist and political leader Jayaprakash Narayan, the movement aimed at addressing issues of corruption, social injustice, and the perceived erosion of democratic values. The movement emerged as a response to the widespread discontent with the state of Indian politics and governance during that period.

Background:
In the early 1970s, India was facing a tumultuous political climate marked by corruption scandals, inflation, and a perceived decline in democratic values. The ruling government, led by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, faced criticism for its centralization of power, erosion of democratic institutions, and the imposition of a state of emergency in 1975. Against this backdrop, Jayaprakash Narayan, a respected freedom fighter and social reformer, emerged as a unifying figure to lead a movement for systemic change.

Key Objectives:

1. Removal of Corruption: A central objective of the J.P. Movement was to eliminate corruption from all levels of government and public life. Narayan emphasized the need for a clean and accountable political system to restore faith in democratic principles.

2. Restoration of Democracy: The movement sought the restoration of democratic norms and values that were perceived to be under threat. Narayan advocated for the protection of civil liberties, the independence of the judiciary, and the decentralization of political power to local bodies.

3. Social Justice: The J.P. Movement also addressed issues of social injustice, economic inequality, and the plight of marginalized communities. Narayan advocated for policies that would uplift the economically disadvantaged and promote social harmony.

4. Decentralization of Power: Recognizing the importance of grassroots governance, the movement called for decentralization of power and greater autonomy for local self-governing bodies. This approach aimed at ensuring more effective and responsive governance at the local level.

Key Phases and Strategies:

1. Bihar Movement (1974): The J.P. Movement gained momentum with the Bihar Movement in 1974. Jayaprakash Narayan led a series of protests and demonstrations against the government of Bihar, which was accused of corruption and authoritarianism. The movement successfully mobilized people from various sections of society, including students, farmers, and the urban middle class.

2. Call for Total Revolution (1974): In 1974, Narayan gave a clarion call for "Total Revolution" during a massive rally in Patna. He outlined the vision for a comprehensive transformation of society, encompassing political, economic, and social spheres. The idea was to bring about a holistic revolution that would address systemic issues and bring about positive change at all levels.

3. Coordination with Opposition Parties: The J.P. Movement involved collaboration with various opposition parties, creating a united front against the ruling government. This coordination culminated in the formation of the Janata Party, a political coalition that played a crucial role in the post-emergency period.

4. Nonviolent Resistance: The J.P. Movement largely adhered to the principles of nonviolence. Narayan's commitment to peaceful protest and civil disobedience contributed to the movement's moral strength and widespread public support.

Aftermath:
The J.P. Movement reached its zenith during the period of the Emergency (1975-1977), declared by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The Emergency was marked by the suspension of civil liberties, censorship, and mass arrests of political opponents. Jayaprakash Narayan was arrested, along with several other opposition leaders.

However, the movement had a lasting impact on Indian politics. The widespread public discontent, coupled with the efforts of the J.P. Movement, contributed to the defeat of the ruling Congress Party in the 1977 general elections. The Janata Party, a coalition formed in the aftermath of the J.P. Movement, came to power, marking the end of the Emergency and the restoration of democratic governance.

While the Janata government faced internal challenges and eventually gave way to subsequent political developments, the J.P. Movement remains a pivotal chapter in India's political history. It demonstrated the power of nonviolent resistance, people's movements, and the collective will to uphold democratic values in the face of challenges. Jayaprakash Narayan's legacy as a champion of democracy and social justice continues to inspire movements and activism in India.

The Bhoodan Movement, initiated by Acharya Vinoba Bhave, was a transformative socio-economic initiative in post-independence India. Launched in 1951, the movement sought to address the issue of land reform and land redistribution by encouraging landowners to voluntarily donate a portion of their land to landless peasants. The term "Bhoodan" translates to "land gift," encapsulating the central theme of the movement.

Key Objectives and Principles:

1. Nonviolence (Ahimsa):
   Central to the Bhoodan Movement was the principle of nonviolence, reflecting Vinoba Bhave's adherence to Gandhian philosophy. The movement aimed to achieve social and economic justice through nonviolent means, fostering a spirit of cooperation and voluntary sharing.

2. Land Redistribution:
   The primary goal of the Bhoodan Movement was to address the prevailing disparities in landownership. Large landowners were urged to voluntarily give a percentage of their land to the landless, providing the latter with the means to cultivate and earn a livelihood. This voluntary act of donation aimed to create a more equitable distribution of land resources.

3. Sarvodaya (Welfare of All):
   The Bhoodan Movement was closely aligned with the principle of Sarvodaya, emphasizing the welfare of all. Vinoba Bhave envisioned a society where every individual had access to the resources necessary for a dignified life. By encouraging landowners to contribute to the welfare of the landless, the movement sought to promote a sense of community and shared responsibility.

4. Decentralization:
   Vinoba Bhave advocated for decentralized governance and local self-sufficiency. The Bhoodan Movement, by focusing on grassroots land reform, aimed to decentralize economic power and empower rural communities. This emphasis on local initiatives was in line with Gandhi's vision of a self-reliant and decentralized society.

5. Voluntary Participation:
   The success of the Bhoodan Movement relied on voluntary participation. Vinoba Bhave believed that true transformation could only occur when individuals willingly embraced the principles of sharing and selflessness. The movement appealed to the conscience of landowners, urging them to contribute to the larger goal of social justice.

6. Gramdan (Village Gift):
   As an extension of the Bhoodan Movement, Vinoba Bhave introduced the concept of Gramdan, where entire villages were encouraged to donate their land collectively. Gramdan aimed to create self-governing and self-sufficient villages where land and resources were collectively owned and managed. This approach sought to foster a sense of community and cooperative living.

Implementation and Impact:

1. Pilgrimage for Land:
   Vinoba Bhave initiated a "pilgrimage for land" wherein he walked from village to village, communicating the objectives of the Bhoodan Movement and urging landowners to contribute to the cause voluntarily. This personal and symbolic approach resonated with many, inspiring them to donate land for the greater good.

2. Extent of Contributions:
   The Bhoodan Movement received widespread attention and participation, and the extent of contributions varied. While some landowners donated a percentage of their land, others donated entire estates. The movement gained momentum across different states in India, with thousands of acres of land being voluntarily gifted.

3. Challenges and Criticisms:
   Despite its noble intentions, the Bhoodan Movement faced challenges. Some critics argued that voluntary donations were insufficient to address the structural issues of landownership, and a more comprehensive land reform policy was needed. Additionally, issues related to the proper utilization of donated land and the sustainability of the movement were raised.

4. Legacy and Inspiration:
   The Bhoodan Movement left a lasting impact on India's land reform discourse. While its success in achieving widespread land redistribution may be debated, it contributed to raising awareness about the unequal distribution of land and the need for agrarian reforms. The movement also inspired subsequent initiatives in the realm of voluntary social service.

Vinoba Bhave's Bhoodan Movement stands as a testament to the transformative power of voluntary, nonviolent action in addressing socio-economic inequalities. While the movement faced challenges and criticisms, its emphasis on shared responsibility, Sarvodaya principles, and decentralized governance left an enduring legacy in the quest for a more just and equitable society.

Principled nonviolent movements and strategic nonviolent movements are two distinct approaches to achieving social and political change through nonviolent means. While both share the common goal of resisting oppression or injustice without resorting to violence, they differ in their underlying philosophies, motivations, and tactics.

Principled Nonviolent Movement:

A principled nonviolent movement is characterized by a commitment to nonviolence based on deeply held moral, ethical, or spiritual principles. Participants in such movements adhere to nonviolence not only as a strategic choice but as a fundamental belief in the sanctity of all life and a rejection of violence as a means of achieving justice. This approach often draws inspiration from religious or philosophical traditions that prioritize love, compassion, and the intrinsic worth of every individual.

Key Features of Principled Nonviolent Movements:

1. Moral and Ethical Foundation: Principled nonviolent movements are grounded in a strong moral or ethical foundation. Participants believe in the inherent value of nonviolence as a guiding principle for personal and societal transformation.

2. Consistency in Principles: The commitment to nonviolence remains consistent throughout the movement. Participants strive to embody nonviolent principles not only in their protests but also in their daily lives and interactions.

3. Emphasis on Personal Transformation: Principled nonviolent movements often prioritize individual and collective transformation. Participants seek to cultivate qualities such as compassion, empathy, and understanding as part of their commitment to nonviolence.

4. Resistance to Violence in All Forms: Beyond refraining from physical violence, principled nonviolent movements reject any form of violence, including verbal or psychological violence. The goal is to create a culture of nonviolence that permeates all aspects of the movement.

5. Inspired by Spiritual or Philosophical Traditions: Many principled nonviolent movements find inspiration in spiritual or philosophical traditions that advocate for nonviolence and the pursuit of justice through peaceful means.

Strategic Nonviolent Movement:

In contrast, a strategic nonviolent movement prioritizes the use of nonviolent tactics as a pragmatic and strategic choice to achieve specific political or social objectives. While participants may personally believe in the merits of nonviolence, their primary motivation is often the effectiveness of nonviolent methods in achieving tangible goals.

Key Features of Strategic Nonviolent Movements:

1. Instrumental Use of Nonviolence: In strategic nonviolent movements, nonviolence is viewed as a means to an end. Participants choose nonviolent tactics because they are perceived as more effective in achieving the movement's goals.

2. Flexibility in Tactics: Strategic nonviolent movements may employ a variety of tactics, including protests, civil disobedience, and noncooperation, based on an assessment of what is most likely to bring about change.

3. Focus on Achieving Concrete Objectives: The primary focus of strategic nonviolent movements is on achieving specific, tangible objectives, such as policy changes, legal reforms, or the removal of oppressive regimes.

4. Utilization of Power Dynamics: Strategic nonviolent movements analyze power dynamics and leverage nonviolent actions to disrupt systems of oppression, mobilize public support, and weaken the foundations of oppressive structures.

5. Pragmatism in Decision-Making: Decision-making in strategic nonviolent movements is often pragmatic and based on a cost-benefit analysis of different tactics. The effectiveness of nonviolence is assessed in relation to the movement's overarching goals.

Comparison:

While both principled and strategic nonviolent movements share the commitment to nonviolence, their primary distinctions lie in the underlying motivations and approaches. Principled nonviolent movements prioritize nonviolence as a moral imperative deeply embedded in personal and collective values. Participants in these movements view nonviolence as an end in itself, seeking not only external change but also internal transformation.

On the other hand, strategic nonviolent movements approach nonviolence as a strategic tool to achieve specific objectives. The emphasis is on the practical effectiveness of nonviolent tactics in challenging oppressive systems and achieving concrete outcomes. While both approaches contribute to the rich tapestry of nonviolent resistance, understanding the nuances between principled and strategic nonviolent movements is crucial for comprehending the diverse strategies employed in the pursuit of social and political change.