The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 67)

غرض

عنوان

The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 67)

المحتوى

51
policies, and its undertaking of building the infrastructure necessary for settler
capitalist growth and development. Equally important was that the government
provided a protective shield for the settler project by undertaking to suppress the
resistance of the Palestinian Arabs throughout the Mandate period but especially
during the 1936-1939 Revolt. This shield allowed the Zionist movement to
concentrate on pursuing its military and economic buildup.
In summary and conclusion, we can point out the following main
shortcomings and problematic nature of the dual-economy approach. First, there is
the selective nature, in some versions of the dual-economy approach, of the time
frame chosen to illustrate their case. Reference is to those who chose 1936 or the
brief period of the Arab Revolt of 1936-1939 and generalized this to the whole
Mandate period. Thus, their empirical focus leads them to underestimate or
altogether ignore the ongoing Arab-Jewish economic interdependency.
Second, there is the tautological nature of the basis of their argument. In
essence, the dual-economy approach tells us that the two economies developed
differently because of their differences in “socioeconomic attributes” and in “their
markets for land, labor, and capital.” Thus, the dual approach, in general, has only
limited explanatory power.
Another problem with this approach is its assumption of surplus labor in
agriculture, which is either not explained or attributed primarily to population
growth and its consequent pressure on the land. This ignores the more important
process by which peasants are alienated from their land. The concept of surplus
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

هو جزء من

The Dispossession of the Peasantry

تاريخ

٢٠٠٦

المنشئ

Riyad Mousa

مجموعات العناصر

Generated Pages Set

Theses رسائل ماجستير ودكتوراه