El Movimiento de los Trabajadores Rurales Sin Tierra de Brasil: independencia y autonomía
Palabras clave:
agroecología, mística, movimientos campesinos, democracia socialista, Estado, MSTResumen
En este artículo analizamos el dilema de si los movimientos deben implicarse con el Estado y ser cooptados o evitar hacerlo y quedar marginados. Argumentamos que el Movimiento de los Trabajadores Sin Tierra (MST) de Brasil abordó con éxito este dilema y se convirtió en uno de los movimientos sociales más antiguos, grandes e influyentes de América Latina. Este éxito se debe en buena parte al haberse enganchado con el Estado a la vez que lograba mantener su independencia del mismo. Además, también ha establecido alianzas con otras organizaciones políticas como el Partido de los Trabajadores (PT), conservando su autonomía para centrarse en su propia lucha crucial por la tierra. Su política cultural en torno a la mística, una política educativa y métodos agroecológicos de producción han ayudado al MST a convertirse en un movimiento cohesionado internamente, a desarrollar una dirigencia fuerte y rotativa, y a plantear un paradigma productivo alternativo al de la agricultura moderna, intensiva en el uso de insumos y energía. Estas prácticas culturales y productivas mantienen al movimiento vitalmente comprometido en su lucha anticapitalista por un socialismo popular-democrático.
Citas
Aguiar, J. M. (2019). Brazil’s Landless Rural Workers Movement (MST) in the Digital Front: mystique as performative practice and insurgent form of political struggle. Revista Brasileira de Estudos da Presença, 9, 01-30.
Azar, Z. S. (2018). O MST e a luta pela terra: uma luta para além das reformas. Revista de Políticas Públicas. 22, 1195-1212.
Branford, S. & Rocha, J. (2002). Cutting the Wire: The Story of the Landless Movement in Brazil, London: Latin American Bureau and Kumarian Press.
Carter, M. (2010). The Landless Rural Workers Movement and Democracy in Brazil. Latin American Research Review. (45), 186-217.
Delgado, G. (2015). “The Agrarian Question and Agribusiness in Brazil”. En Carter. M. (43-67).
De Melo, J.G. (2023). The Rise of LGBT Representation in the Landless Workers’ Movement in Brazil. Gender, Place & Culture. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2023.2201399
Fernandes, B. M.(2000). A formação do MST no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro:Vozes.
Fernandes, B. M.(2005). Movimentos socioterritoriais e movimentos socioespaciais: contribuição teórica para uma leitura geográfica dos movimentos sociais. Revista NERA. 8(4):14-34.
Fernandes, B. M.(2009). The MST and Agrarian Reform in Brazil. Socialism and Democracy, 23(3):90-9.
Freire, P. (1973). Education for Critical Consciousness.New York: Seabury Press.
Fonseca, C. (2023). Lula se alia à China pela reforma agrária contra o agronegócio e fortalece o MST. 10 de mayo. https://mst.org.br/2023/05/10/lula-se-alia-a-china-pela-reforma-agraria-contra-o-agronegocio-e-fortalece-o-mst/.
Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks. Edited and translated by Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell Smith. New York: International Publishers.
Hammond, J. (2014). “Mística, meaning and popular education in the Brazilian Landless Workers Movement,” 372–91.
Hendlin, Y.H. (2019). Environmental Justice as a (Potentially) Hegemonic Concept: A Historical Look at Competing Interests between the MST and Indigenous People in Brazil. Local Environment, 24(2), 113–28.
Hernandez, A. (2020). The emergence of agroecology as a political tool in the Brazilian Landless Movement. Local Environment, 20(3), 205–27.
Horn, C. (2021). In Northern Brazil, Landless Families Resist to Persist. NACLA: Report on the Americas 53(4), 344-348.
Karriem, A. (2009). The rise and transformation of the Brazilian landless movement into a counter-hegemonic political actor: A Gramscian analysis. Geoforum 40(3), 316-325.
Kröger, M. (2011). Promotion of contentious agency as a rewarding movement strategy: evidence from the MST-paper industry conflicts in Brazil. The Journal of Peasant Studies 38(2),435-458.
Lapegna, P. (2019). La Argentina transgénica: de la resistencia a la adaptación, una etnografía de las poblaciones campesinas. Siglo XXI Editores: Buenos Aires.
Mariano, A.; Hilário, E. & Tarlau, R. (2016). Pedagogies of struggle and collective organization: the educational practices of the Brazilian Landless Workers Movement, 8.
Nicas, J.(30 de abril 2023). Brazilian Group Occupies Land Unused by Rich. New York Times.
Ondetti, G. (2007). An Ambivalent Legacy: Cardoso and Land Reform. Latin American Perspectives. 34(5), 9-25.
Ondetti, G.; Wambergue, E. & Afonso, J.G. (2015). “From Posseiro to Sem Terra: The Impact of MST Land Struggles in the State of Pará”. En Carter (202-226).
Otero, G. (1989). The New Agrarian Movement: Toward Self-Management and Democratic Production. Latin American Perspectives. 16(4), 29-59.
Otero, G. (1999). Farewell to the Peasantry? Political Class Formation in Rural Mexico. Boulder: Westview Press.
Otero, G. (ed.) (2008). Food for the Few: Neoliberal Globalism and Biotechnology in Latin America. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Otero, G. (2018). The Neoliberal Diet: Healthy Profits, Unhealthy People. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Otero, G. (6 de febrero 2022). “Lula vuelve a la presidencia: Desafíos y oportunidades para el MST.” Un panel moderado por Gerardo Otero, con la participación de Joao Pedro Stédile y Ana Moraes del MST https://lasaweb.org/en/news/lula-vuelve-presidencia-brasil-desafios-oportunidades-mst/.
Otero, G. & Gürcan, E.C. (En prensa). Collective Empowerment in Latin America: Indigenous Peasant Movements and Political Transformation. London and New York: Routledge.
Pahnke, A. (2015). Institutionalizing economies of opposition: explaining and evaluating the success of the MST’s cooperatives and agroecological repeasantization. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 42 (6).
Pahnke, A. (2017). The Changing Terrain of Rural Contention in Brazil: Institutionalization and Identity Development in the Landless Movement’s Educational Project. Latin American Politics and Society, 59(3), 3–26.
Petras, J. (1998). The political and social basis of regional variation in land occupations in Brazil. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 25(4), 124–33.
Robles, W. (2001). The landless rural workers movement (MST) in Brazil. The Journal of Peasant Studies. 28(2), 46–61.
Sauer, S. (2020). Covid-19, right-wing populism and agrarian struggles in Brazil: entrevista con João Pedro Stédile, líder nacional del MST. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 47(5), 927–43.
Scott, J. (1976). The Moral Economy of the Peasant Rebellion and Subsistence in South East Asia. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Tarlau, R. (2013). The Social(ist) Pedagogies of the MST: Towards New Relations of Production in the Brazilian Countryside. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21.
Tarlau, R. (2018). Review essay on two books: Land and freedom: the MST, the Zapatistas and peasant alternatives to neoliberalism and The making of resistance: Brazil’s landless movement and narrative enactment. The Journal of Peasant Studies. 427-433.
Tarlau, R. (2015). Not-So-Public Contention: Movement Strategies, Regimes, and the Transformation of Public Institutions in Brazil. Mobilization: An International Quarterly. 20(1), 101-121.
Tarlau, R. (2019). Occupying Schools, Occupying Land: How the Landless Workers’ Movement Transformed Brazilian Education. New York: Oxford University Press.
Vergara-Camus, L. (2009). The Politics of the MST: Autonomous Rural Communities, the State, and Electoral Politics. Latin American Perspectives, 36(4), 178–91.
Welch, C. (2006). Movement Histories: A Preliminary Historiography of the Brazil’s Landless Laborers’ Movement (MST). Latin American Research Review, 41(1), 198–210.
Wolford, W. (2010). This Land is Ours Now: Social Mobilization and the Meaning of Land in Brazil. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
ARK
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2023 Gerardo Otero
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
