Yes, it was a strange way to word what happened-a violent reaction to the peasant takeover of the large agricultural complexes.
Yes, the METTA link was very good.
I do not know the background on Portuguese law enough to know if the indigenous peoples held rights to the lands after colonization. But recent laws are changed according to the party in power during the 1990s until the present.
It does leave the rights of the indigenous peoples in the jungle at the whim of the government, and their selected groups with an anthropologist to make the decision to their protected areas. (I do think it is important to note it is singular and not plural, there may be others who dispute specific territorial lines) It says their land is protected and registered, but does not specifically say it gives them title to it. A very important point for their future security I would think.
As would land title for the peasants who took over the agriculral complexes, it is for legal security to hold the land.
Sanctions and Genocide
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Sanctions and Genocide
I'm not sure I'm following, chonsi.
The MST was created in 1985 to keep pressure on the government to speed up its land reform programme. They say occupying unproductive farms is the only way to push the government to carry out land reform in Brazil. Correspondents say land distribution in Brazil is among the most uneven in the world, with 20% of the population owning 90% of farmland and the poorest 40% owning just 1% of the land.
Is the problem that they are hurting another indigenous population? It appears that the MST is seizing farm land, not jungle. I haven't been able to find anything that says they are displacing other indigenous peoples.
Is the problem about what the law says? Because I think that is what they are protesting. They want the government to enact reforms in the law and redistribution.
Is there no problem, just concern for how they are doing with their efforts?
I did come across recent articles about an international organization that's trying to help them which marched in and destroyed tree saplings and equipment. I'm not sure how that fits in with nonviolent action. They weren't killing people. The destruction of the trees was to stop the creation of "green desert" and make sure the land is kept productive for food crops.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ ... D2A3F0.htm
The MST was created in 1985 to keep pressure on the government to speed up its land reform programme. They say occupying unproductive farms is the only way to push the government to carry out land reform in Brazil. Correspondents say land distribution in Brazil is among the most uneven in the world, with 20% of the population owning 90% of farmland and the poorest 40% owning just 1% of the land.
Is the problem that they are hurting another indigenous population? It appears that the MST is seizing farm land, not jungle. I haven't been able to find anything that says they are displacing other indigenous peoples.
Is the problem about what the law says? Because I think that is what they are protesting. They want the government to enact reforms in the law and redistribution.
Is there no problem, just concern for how they are doing with their efforts?
I did come across recent articles about an international organization that's trying to help them which marched in and destroyed tree saplings and equipment. I'm not sure how that fits in with nonviolent action. They weren't killing people. The destruction of the trees was to stop the creation of "green desert" and make sure the land is kept productive for food crops.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ ... D2A3F0.htm
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Sanctions and Genocide
It was concern for the indigenous population and what was listed as "idle land" for a definition. It is not idle land, if it is used by the people for other uses besides agriculture. (social/cultural/religious, etc. utilization of the land)
I think the legal issues that arise are: will land title remain with the peasants who took over the agricultural complexes, and the reserves for the indigenous peoples. It is one of those things that pop up historically, that if the title is not held, the next political administration can declare their land open to public settlement-or to the highest bidder, whatever their choice is.
The reserves are by "presidential decree" which can be overturned by the next adminstration.
That was an interesting example to keep the agricultural land in production, and not let them revert back to their natural state. It is a balancing act, with the growing population numbers and amount of acreage that must be needed to support them. I do not know if I would classify that as a non-violent act or not, since they destroyed the trees and equipment. But I know I digressed on a tangent, I am reading the thread as it progresses.
I think the legal issues that arise are: will land title remain with the peasants who took over the agricultural complexes, and the reserves for the indigenous peoples. It is one of those things that pop up historically, that if the title is not held, the next political administration can declare their land open to public settlement-or to the highest bidder, whatever their choice is.
The reserves are by "presidential decree" which can be overturned by the next adminstration.
That was an interesting example to keep the agricultural land in production, and not let them revert back to their natural state. It is a balancing act, with the growing population numbers and amount of acreage that must be needed to support them. I do not know if I would classify that as a non-violent act or not, since they destroyed the trees and equipment. But I know I digressed on a tangent, I am reading the thread as it progresses.
Sanctions and Genocide
I'm not sure that the peasants care what decrees are made. They seem to be taking matters into their own hands. The are trying to influence the government so it is all legal but when they feel they are being neglected they go back to taking more land without decree. Again I haven't found any mention of them taking land from other indigenous people. I would definitely like to keep following this to see how they progress.
Another one to look into:
1981 Resistance to Israeli Occupation by Golani Druze. This campaign causes Israel to end conscription of Golani Druze into the Israeli army. Israel also agrees to stop interfering with Druze civil, water, and land rights.
I've never heard of "Golani Druze".
Another one to look into:
1981 Resistance to Israeli Occupation by Golani Druze. This campaign causes Israel to end conscription of Golani Druze into the Israeli army. Israel also agrees to stop interfering with Druze civil, water, and land rights.
I've never heard of "Golani Druze".
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Sanctions and Genocide
http://www.highbeam.com/ref/doc3.asp?docid=1E1:Druze
A definition for the term. (how did that smiley get in there? I din't put it in there)
Their longevity in the region: Near Eastern Archaeology Volume 63 Number 1 March 2000
A definition for the term. (how did that smiley get in there? I din't put it in there)
Their longevity in the region: Near Eastern Archaeology Volume 63 Number 1 March 2000
Sanctions and Genocide
http://www.forusa.org/programs/ipb/dele ... port5.html
I'm reading about it now. Just at the occupation part.
amazing description about how the Israeli troops provoked gunfire that they could then react to.
Salman’s account brought to mind a statement by Moshe Dayan in a series of interviews conducted in 1976 and later published in Yediot Ahronot after his death in 1981. Moshe Dayan confessed that his greatest mistake as Minister of Defense was that in June 1967, he did not stick to his original opposition to storming the Golan Heights. He described how the confrontation with the Syrian evolved into war:
Never mind that [when asked whether Syrians initiated the war from the Golan Heights]. After all, I know how at least 80 percent of the clashes there started. In my opinion, more than 80 percent, but let's talk about 80 percent. It went this way: We would send a tractor to plough someplace where it wasn't possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance farther, until in the end Syrians would get annoyed and shoot.
And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was. I did that, and Laskov and Chara [Zvi Tsur, Rabin's predecessor as chief of staff] did that, Yitzhak did that, but it seems to me that the person who most enjoyed these games was Dado David Elzar, OC Northern Command, 1964-69] (quoted in Avi Shlaim, Iron Wall, p. 236-237).
After their access to the abundant water resources of the Golan Heights was restricted under Israeli occupation, the Druze developed an ingenious system of large round metal cisterns to capture the rainfall. Israel instituted a series of permits that had to be secured from five different governmental agencies before additional cisterns could be constructed. No new cisterns have been built since 1982. In addition, the Israelis imposed a tax on the water in the cisterns and a usage charge that is three times what the Jewish settlements pay for water. The Golani Druze thus pay not only for the water they use but also for the water infrastructure in the region, even though the cisterns are not part of the water grid and only collect falling rainwater.
I'm reading about it now. Just at the occupation part.
amazing description about how the Israeli troops provoked gunfire that they could then react to.
Salman’s account brought to mind a statement by Moshe Dayan in a series of interviews conducted in 1976 and later published in Yediot Ahronot after his death in 1981. Moshe Dayan confessed that his greatest mistake as Minister of Defense was that in June 1967, he did not stick to his original opposition to storming the Golan Heights. He described how the confrontation with the Syrian evolved into war:
Never mind that [when asked whether Syrians initiated the war from the Golan Heights]. After all, I know how at least 80 percent of the clashes there started. In my opinion, more than 80 percent, but let's talk about 80 percent. It went this way: We would send a tractor to plough someplace where it wasn't possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance farther, until in the end Syrians would get annoyed and shoot.
And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was. I did that, and Laskov and Chara [Zvi Tsur, Rabin's predecessor as chief of staff] did that, Yitzhak did that, but it seems to me that the person who most enjoyed these games was Dado David Elzar, OC Northern Command, 1964-69] (quoted in Avi Shlaim, Iron Wall, p. 236-237).
After their access to the abundant water resources of the Golan Heights was restricted under Israeli occupation, the Druze developed an ingenious system of large round metal cisterns to capture the rainfall. Israel instituted a series of permits that had to be secured from five different governmental agencies before additional cisterns could be constructed. No new cisterns have been built since 1982. In addition, the Israelis imposed a tax on the water in the cisterns and a usage charge that is three times what the Jewish settlements pay for water. The Golani Druze thus pay not only for the water they use but also for the water infrastructure in the region, even though the cisterns are not part of the water grid and only collect falling rainwater.
Sanctions and Genocide
This is cool 
Another instance occurred when an Israeli court attempted to try six
Syrian Druze in the Golan Heights for failure to possess and produce an
identity card. Several thousand Druze congregated outside the court to
hand themselves in, insisting that they were all guilty of the same "crime"
since they also refused to carry Israeli identity cards.
eta: the source is very interesting as well.
Another instance occurred when an Israeli court attempted to try six
Syrian Druze in the Golan Heights for failure to possess and produce an
identity card. Several thousand Druze congregated outside the court to
hand themselves in, insisting that they were all guilty of the same "crime"
since they also refused to carry Israeli identity cards.
eta: the source is very interesting as well.
Sanctions and Genocide
bump
May I add a comment on how much I miss anastrophe? I've been slacking off since then. He'd probably kick my butt in a debate right now.
May I add a comment on how much I miss anastrophe? I've been slacking off since then. He'd probably kick my butt in a debate right now.
Sanctions and Genocide
reason for bumping:
Israel’s threat to impose additional sanctions on the Gaza Strip would constitute unlawful collective punishment of Gaza’s civilian population, Human Rights Watch said today. The Israeli government has proposed further reducing supplies of fuel and electricity to the Gaza Strip and increasing its restrictions on the movement of goods and people in and out of the territory.
Human Rights Watch
Israel’s threat to impose additional sanctions on the Gaza Strip would constitute unlawful collective punishment of Gaza’s civilian population, Human Rights Watch said today. The Israeli government has proposed further reducing supplies of fuel and electricity to the Gaza Strip and increasing its restrictions on the movement of goods and people in and out of the territory.
Human Rights Watch
Sanctions and Genocide
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities
Forty-eighth session (5-30 August 1996)
Economic sanctions and blockades -- as now applied as the "weapon of choice" on a multilateral basis by the Security Council and on a unilateral basis by the United States -- are comparable in their devastating impact to a weapon of mass destruction directed at a whole people.
source
Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities
Forty-eighth session (5-30 August 1996)
Economic sanctions and blockades -- as now applied as the "weapon of choice" on a multilateral basis by the Security Council and on a unilateral basis by the United States -- are comparable in their devastating impact to a weapon of mass destruction directed at a whole people.
source