O Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra no Brasil: independência e autonomia
Palavras-chave:
agroecologia, mistica, movimentos camponeses, democracia socialista, Estado, MSTResumo
Neste artigo, analisamos o dilema de saber se os movimentos devem se envolver com o Estado e ser cooptados ou evitar fazê-lo e ser marginalizados. Argumentamos que o Movimento dos Trabalhadores Sem Terra (MST) do Brasil enfrentou com sucesso esse dilema e se tornou um dos movimentos sociais mais antigos, maiores e mais influentes da América Latina. Esse sucesso se deve, em grande parte, ao fato de que ele se envolveu com o Estado e, ao mesmo tempo, manteve sua independência dele. Além disso, também estabeleceu alianças com outras organizações políticas, como o Partido dos Trabalhadores (PT), mantendo sua autonomia para se concentrar em sua própria luta crucial pela terra. Sua política cultural em torno do misticismo, uma política educacional e métodos agroecológicos de produção ajudaram o MST a se tornar um movimento internamente coeso, a desenvolver uma liderança forte e rotativa e a apresentar um paradigma produtivo alternativo à agricultura moderna, com uso intensivo de insumos e energia. Essas práticas culturais e produtivas mantêm o movimento vitalmente engajado em sua luta anticapitalista pelo socialismo democrático e popular.
Referências
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.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
ARK
Licença
Copyright (c) 2023 Gerardo Otero
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
