The landless rural movement and the settlements in the West of Paraná: agreements and disagreements over the struggle for land

Eliane Brenneisen,Enrique J Romera

doi:10.1590/s1413-05802005000100002

Abstract

This paper examines three case studies of rural settlements in the west of Parana, which were settled in different periods, and are representative of the changes in the Movement of Landless Rural Workers (MST) over the years, particularly as regards the organizational forms assumed by the rural settlements. These were based on the collective organization of production, which, when implemented, provoked conflicts revealing the inadequacies of such model. This paper also highlights the tensions between the leadership of the MST and its base, directly related to the existence of two projects in clear opposition: the ideological political project of the MST leadership and the project for organizing daily life and production by the social base of the movement.

Highlights

This paper examines three case studies of rural settlements in the west of Paraná, which were settled in different periods, and are representative of the changes in the Movement of Landless Rural Workers (MST) over the years, as regards the organizational forms assumed by the rural settlements
The formation of the MST or Landless Rural Movement occurred in 1984, in the city of Cascavel, in the west of Paraná State, when regional movements fighting for land joined together under a single acronym, completing 20 years of formal existence in the month of January 2004
This article aims at analyzing the organizational processes implemented in three settlements established at different times in western Paraná between 1991 and 2001

Summary

Collective organization experiments

In October 1985, the MST was already a nationwide movement. forty-one families, which remained from a regional movement named Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra do Oeste do Paraná (Mastro)- Western Paraná Landless Workers Movement, founded in 1981, settled in a part of the Mineira farm, an area later dispossessed for agrarian reform. 2 The settlement was named Sávio-Dois Vizinhos. The MST leadership, aiming to equate the difficulties they faced, opted for developing more consistent organizational models as in the case of the Verdum settlement It is necessary, to highlight that there is a substantial difference between the comunitarianism initially proposed, which was based on a totality founding communitarian practice as Jose de Souza Martins observes (2003: 105), and the collectivism defined later. Acknowledging the fact that the proposed format is an extremely rational organization, not unique, and that architecture is a basic component of power relations (cf Foucault, 1987), we suppose that some other veiled reasons explain the obstinate attitude on the part of the MST leadership, for example, greater control over the base of the movement and easier surveillance through the organization of space, so as to meet the movement’s political goals Another remarkable aspect outlined in the three case studies is the role of the State and its agents in this process. They show, above all, how difficult the task of building democratic social relations can be, even among those who act on behalf of a just and legitimate cause, such as the struggle for land

Notes:

Findings

Bibliographical references