The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 310)

غرض

عنوان

The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 310)

المحتوى

294
intensified commoditization of land and the spread of market relations.
The government’s taxation policy had a differential impact on urban and
rural areas. The rural areas paid proportionally more taxes than did the urban
areas. The latter did not have an income tax instituted until 1940-1941. In the rural
areas, Arab peasants paid a higher proportion of their net income in taxes than did
the Jewish farmers.
Indebtedness during the pre-Mandate period did not necessarily mean loss
of land or access to the use of land because market relations were very limited as
was the commoditization of land. During the Mandate, the increase in debt
ultimately led to the loss of land or parts of it by many peasants. The loss of land
by and the pauperization of peasantry offer the main explanations, in addition to
nationalist reasons, for the participation of peasants in the 1936-1939 Revoit. It
was the landless and poor peasants who were the major force behind and the ones
who sustained the revolt.
However, in spite of the pauperization of most of the Arab peasantry,
agricultural production grew substantially for the country as a whole and in terms
of Arab production with the exception in the number of animals. However, the rate
of growth varied between and within the two communities. It also varied within
crops, with cash crops becoming dominant in value terms. The increase in cash
crops reflected the increase in wage labor and intensive cultivation. Within cash
crops, citrus production was predominant whether measured in value, exports, or
the use of wage labor. It also received preferential treatment by the government
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