If modernity refers to a phase of human society or a particular context, the modernity we can sense in various cultures at different phases is meaningless. It needs to be examined across cultures; needless to say, it requires new ideas and tools. Hence, as the sole centre of production of modernity, the city fails to withstand the fundamental philosophical underpinnings of modernity. As Simmel rightly argues, “The deepest problems of modern life derive from the claim of the individual to preserve the autonomy and individuality of his existence in the face of overwhelming social forces, of historical heritage, of external culture, and of the technique of life (1903:11).” It reveals the significance of the collective. In this context, it is essential to re-examine modernity and its relation to individual autonomy and the collective. One way of doing it is by placing actors in networks to examine how relations operate in the production of modernity in contexts that are ‘not modern.’ Latour’s significant work We Have Never Been Modern (1991) is apt to explain and expand the horizons of our thinking on humans and modernity in ‘traditional’ contexts. The debate must take into account the engagement of tribal communities with nature. Nevertheless, the political environment the tribal communities enliven magnifies the debate on the modernity of tribal communities as it follows a model of ‘colonizing the mind’ at the cost of ignoring indigenous modernity/modernities. An effort to decolonize the political life ‘decolonizes modernity’ of tribes of India. Despite the ambiguities and contestations, the current paper examines the nuances of modernity with empirical evidence of select communities from Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, and Odisha states of India.
