The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 298)

غرض

عنوان

The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 298)

المحتوى

282
major role in the differentiation of the peasantry.
Finally, there was Carmi and Rosenfeld’s argument that “proletarianization
not the outcome of village socioeconomic change or, primarily of the expropriation
of the peasantry [but] as a process dependent on wage opportunities external to the
Arab village.” In addition, they do recognize the high concentration of holdings
and the landlessness of 30 percent among the peasantry. However, they attribute
landlessness and differentiation solely to the pre-Mandate period.
The process of transformation of peasant holders into tenants and
sharecroppers and total expropriation was speeded up during the last
decade and first decades of the present century, with the
capitalization of the land market and resultant land sales by absentee
holders-merchants-usurers.*°
There was no mention of the major role played by European settlement in the
commoditization of land and the expropriation of peasants during these decades.
However, more peculiar was having recognized a process of differentiation and
expropriation that started in pre-Mandate times, the exclusion of these processes in
the Mandate period when conditions became more intensively conducive for them
with the development of capitalism.
As for their contention that there was no expropriation of the peasantry
during the Mandate, it seems that what Carmi and Rosenfeld had in mind was
complete and total expropriation. However, as history has shown and as evident in
today’s underdeveloped countries, the pace of expropriation could be a very slow
one depending on different factors. Nonetheless, Lenin’s remarks on the subject
Carmi and Rosenfeld, 475.
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