Owners usually consider land as a pride of a possession rather than a burden. Farmers owning land, having to work it, builds deep attachments that are emotional, cultural, and also historical when land comes as a family lineage and heritage. Cultivation brings its own deep attachments, literarily seeing the fruits of one’s labour. This research explores why farmers do not fiercely resist land acquisition aimed for industrial and developmental projects. This question has been researched in Sriperumbudur, one of India’s major special economic zones (SEZ) for auto majors and electronics, and touted as India’s Shenzhen. It builds on the argument by Vijayabaskar and Menon’s (2016) concept of “dispossession by neglect”: as an idea set in the context of agrarian crisis, it emphasizes the conditions that coerce farmers into selling land for non-agricultural uses, mainly real estate. Here, it denaturalizes Chakravorty’s (2013) “price of land” emphasizing inadequate information and compromised price that has been used to explain the huge and visible conflicts in land acquisition in the rest of India. Instead, my thesis reveals the destruction of social conditions and physical environment necessary for continuing agriculture. I argue that “willingness” is a social construct. The willingness to give up land thus happens in a socially constructed and embedded political space, and agricultural land, despite it’s deep roots, becomes a burden to small farmers. They find themselves in circumstances shaping their agency, with an assumption that accumulating more land will relieve them of their poverty. Thus “rational” decisions to give up their land for industrial or development projects or sell for real estate development actually stems out of desperation from economic coercion. My research contributes to the literature on agricultural land on the cusp of becoming urban in the “peri-urban” areas. My insights espouse the theoretical attention to contemporary discussions of primitive accumulation (PA) through economic coercion. This research nuances this argument that primitive accumulation is not just a historical event but continues even in the times of mature capitalism. Following the work of De Angelis (2001) and Bonefeld (2001, 2011), my research asserts that PA acquires the character of “continuity”: the continuing process of dispossession, repossession, and dispossession. Such processes are reflected in the title of this work: Nuancing Primitive Accumulation: Economic Coercion as the Land Question.