Democracy and Class Struggle publishes this document of the MEPR for a deeper understanding of the Land Struggle in Brazil
The revolution is an objective process, built by daily practice and not a spontaneous event.
Building it means solving the real problems that the class struggle has, to see the revolution within the current state of the world and the correlation of forces. In preparing for a process that will inevitably be long and full of adventures, because due to the size and economic importance and Brazil's policy, it is certain that US imperialism directly intervene to try to stop our liberation process.
We must also think of the revolution as a living process, which occurs in practice, not in our heads, in books, or in the proposed models. Lenin, quoting Goethe, said that "the theory is gray, green is the tree of life."
You must find which path of socialism in our country, and just have "eyes to see" and a scientific spirit to complete the revolution in Brazil is impossible without the participation of this powerful force that it is the poor peasants.
A historical error of the revolutionary vanguard was not to have understood the true role and weight of the peasants in our revolutionary process.
In a country of continental dimensions, with a late bureaucratic capitalism, dominated by imperialism and one of the largest land concentrations in the world, the agrarian question and peasant are not a mere detail.
What historical experience has proven, and recent years confirms, is that it is precisely in the field the sharpest contradiction of our society.
The numbers are indisputable: the last 20 years in 1500 peasants were killed in clashes over land, last year alone 73 peasants were killed, hundreds of leaders were arrested and many remain in detention to this day, hundreds of thousands of masses have mobilized to take the land of latifundia, is constantly growing armed clashes between peasants and the forces of the landlords, the struggle for land becomes ever more massive and radicalized, there are over 190,000 families camped and more than 4 million waiting for a piece of earth.
What we live in Brazil is a real war for land, are 40 million poor peasants and landless peasants against the landed oligarchy of just over 20,000 owners, holding more than 50% of arable land. And this war has a name: it is called Agrarian Revolution, a revolution that is already under way and think only is not more developed because it has prevailed in the direction reformist peasant movement. It is for real revolutionaries understand the contradictions that drive these millions of peasants to fight, even in finding a time of decline of the mass movement in general and the height of the counter-revolutionary offensive of imperialism. To study this process to interfere with it and develop it, fulfilling the urgent task of boosting the Agrarian Revolution in our country.
1) Brief history of economic and social formation of Brazil
Since the first struggles in the territory, where today is whether Brazil, the land problem was present. The Portuguese invasion started in 1500 with the arrival of the caravels of Pedro Alvares Cabral, transported to our land the feudal ruling system in Portugal. The feudalism was expressed in hereditary captaincies, long territorial extensions which were in force the model of suzerainty and European vassalage. So our land was soon divided into 15 major "fiefdoms". The Indians were initially used as a labor force in the extraction of natural resources, particularly Brazil wood, thus the relationship of the invaders with the natives atritou increasingly. Great connoisseur of the territory they were not to be enslaved and took refuge in the jungles and hinterlands of our land. With the expansion of Portuguese rule the conflicts have become more acute and bloody. The Indians realized, before the fury of the invaders, only with an open struggle for territory, for their land, could survive. The attack of the natives was strong and brave. But due to the delay of the development of its productive forces, and therefore of their weapons, and also to the high dispersion of the local population, it was impossible to stop the attacker Indians. The most organized resistance, and therefore the most important, was the Confederation of Tamoios, led by Aimberê who achieved the feat of unifying most Indian nations against the Portuguese invaders.
With the inability to rely on the Indian workforce, who resisted the invasion and took refuge in the hinterlands, the Portuguese enslaved Africans and brought them here. With the black labor force, it was possible the kingdom of Portugal colonize our territory. The Brazil was no longer a supplier of spices, to provide agricultural products to the metropolis. This agricultural production was based on slave labor, in large rural expanses and monoculture. As our production was geared to meet the needs of cities the local economy teetered short periods of prosperity with long periods of crisis. We had the cycles of cane sugar, and its decay; gold, and its decay; rubber, and its decay; cocoa, and its decay; coffee, and its decay; etc. What was constant in all these cycles were: 1) the colonial character of their production, our country belonged to the kingdom of Portugal; and 2) the brutal exploitation of slave labor of black.
Unlike the Indians, black Africans did not know the territory, that facilitated the beginning their enslavement by the Portuguese. But as it was adapting, that black generations already born in Brazil to their struggle gained great force. The classic form of black resistance was similar to the Indians, they also huddled indoors and in the mountains, and there built fortifications which developed its culture and ensured their freedom. Were the Quilombo. The most famous was the Quilombo dos Palmares Quilombo, built in the early sixteenth century and had as main leaders Ganga Zumba and Zombie. This Quilombo resisted over a hundred years and stood where today is the city of União dos Palmares, in Alagoas. The lives of the Maroons, as they were known, was not isolation, and resist the bush captains of the attacks sent by landlords, black raided the farms to release other companions and Justicar slave.
Underneath the slave exploitation of black labor force, growing a mass of peasants violently exploited by the feudal latifundia. It was their work that supported the domestic economy with the beef and the supplies needed to put the monoculture and the mining operation. This servile exploitation, the largest pool of private masses of the law of the land, is not counted by the official history. But they were millions cowboys and small producers who produce for were forced to work in the landed estates and leave them, who did nothing, more than half of its production. This feudal oppression is brilliantly reported by Euclides da Cunha, on "The Barrens". He relates the behavior of a cowboy when he met a cow lost in the bush, first tried to find the owner; not succeeding took care of the animal as well as his own, but not used for any traction or work led him to be sold at the fair; when the cow gave the first creates the peasant repeated this with the same treatment, as well as the second creates; only the third creates the peasant took possession, it was the third. What Euclides da Cunha describes as honesty and dignity of the peasant, is more deeply existing feudal relations, which were reproduced spontaneously by Cowboy with an invisible landlord.
The struggle of the people was the struggle for land and the consequent destruction of these servile relations. It was against this mass of peasants and also against the Indians and blacks, that the monarchy in 1850, decreed the first Land Law of Brazil, it was established that the land in the country could only be acquired through the purchase. But how could buy a piece of land that mass of starving peasants, of blacks who had only the clothes on, or caught up Indians in the woods? It was clear the purpose of this law: to ensure the monopoly of land in the hands ruling classes. Note that this law was enacted 33 years before the abolition of slavery in Brazil. Thus, denied by law the right to land to former slaves 'liberation' represented: wage exploitation in the city, or the semi-feudal oppression in the field.
Capitalism in Brazil was implemented in a completely different way, both economically and politically, the countries of Europe and North America. In these countries the bourgeoisie came to power carrying the bourgeois revolution, defeating feudalism, beheading kings, promoting bloody wars of unification and national liberation. Economically these bourgeoisies, have enjoyed a long period of primitive accumulation for the formation of their capital, were the times of the great voyages of commercialism and colonial exploitation. In Brazil, the revolutionary processes of national liberation and the establishment of a bourgeois republic were all defeated, leaving mere rearrangements and restructuring of the ruling classes, as in our "independence", declared by Dom Pedro I, the son of the king of Portugal. Capitalism will emerge in Brazil, then, not as a result of the political struggle of the local bourgeoisie in training but need imperialism
The capitalist economy will emerge more strongly in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth with a timid industrialization in the Southeast. Who funded this industrialization? what was the primitive accumulation for this? It was England, the same as in the early nineteenth century prohibited the formation of a national industry. This turn in your policy is due to the profound economic changes occurring in capitalist countries between the years 1899 and 1903. It is the establishment of a new phase of capitalism, ie, imperialism. Imperialism is capitalism in its monopoly and parasitic phase, where the center of the economy of the imperialist powers is no longer solely the export of goods to be the export of capital to the semi colonial countries. The English capital abroad, this was the original capital of capitalist development in Brazil. Therefore capitalism in our country is a bureaucratic capitalism, as born dependent and tied to the imperialist powers. The bureaucratic capitalism does not destroy the feudal relations in the countryside, as occurred in all revolutionary processes led by the bourgeoisie until the nineteenth century, by contrast, is based on large estates to consolidate.
2) History of struggle for land and the peasant movement in Brazil
It will therefore, the mass fusion blacks, Indians and peasants within these European immigrants, which will form the Brazilian people. These quotas will form the working class and peasantry in modern Brazil. In the late nineteenth century until today, the main event in the field shall be clearly the struggle for land. The Straws War represented epic way this conflict. The village of Belo Monte, a city founded by Antonio Advisor in 1893, had over 30 thousand people. To destroy it the army organized four major expeditions, and the fourth had two huge columns. The peasants led by Pajeú and John Abbot fought heroically that terrible war machine. Killed with a shot in the belly the infamous Colonel Moreira Cesar, who became known as "cut heads" in the Paraguayan war. What drove that mass to fight so vigorously? The Director of religion could be the ideological expression, but the economic base that moved those people was the desire to have a piece of land to live free from the semi-feudal exploitation of large estates. Belo Monte was attacked so viciously by the genocidal state because the number of bodies attracted by Councillor proposal was so great that endangered the archaic structure of the field in Brazil.
All the struggles that followed in the field have, ultimately, this same content. So it was in Cauldron in Ceará, of Blessed Laurence, who came to be bombed by airplanes at the behest of the government of Getulio. The same happened in Pau-de-spoon in the city of Casa Nova in Bahia; Contested in Santa Catarina, fight directed by the monk John Mary; and all other farmers riots. Thus, the struggle for land has been developing and taking ever greater proportions. When the peasants joined the working class their struggle became even stronger and then became definitely revolutionary. The first major peasant struggle led by the Communist Party of Brazil happened in the cities of Trunks and Formoso (north of Brazil) and was led by the historic communist leader Jose Porfirio. Guerrilla Porphyry, as it became known, took place in the 50s and had great support of the peasants, who even managed to organize embryos of a popular government. But due to the opportunism of the leadership of the Party, which took effect from 55 resulting in a policy of alliances with Juscelino, the fight was stopped. Yet the mass was organized and was only decommissioned in 1964 after the coup the military. In 1957, the Communist Party leads the struggle of Porecatu of peasants in the state of Paraná.
The more massive experience and combative of the peasant struggle in our history happened in the 60s in the Northeast, with the Peasant Leagues. Leagues began to be organized in the Zona da Mata, initially in the city of Vitória de Santo Antão, where peasants waged a struggle for possession of Galilee ingenuity. The fight had great national impact and had the support of a lawyer and deputy Francisco Julian. With the victory the movement takes great strength and various alloys are based around the northeast, especially in Pernambuco and Paraíba. Had great role in organizing the leagues the peasant leader Pedro Teixeira, who was murdered in 1961 by large landowners. Even without a communist direction, the leagues have adopted a revolutionary program, which proposed the armed struggle for the realization of a radical agrarian reform. In the first Peasant Congress, held in Belo Horizonte, organized by the reformists of the PCB and the organizations of the Catholic Church, the revolutionary position of the leagues was victorious, showing that there is a large identity of all the peasant masses of Brazil with the revolutionary program. With the military coup the Peasant Leagues were disorganized.
Another peasant struggle led by the Communist Party was the historic Araguaia guerrilla movement, organized in the early 70s in the South region of Pará. This guerrilla was part of the strategy to start a people's war in Brazil to defeat the military dictatorship and imperialism. It was attended by dozens of communist militants, most of them young people from the student movement. The reactionary army discovered the guerrilla movement and set up an operating that got the surprise of fighters because they were still in the initial period of preparation. Even so the fight was very hard, the milicos organized three campaigns, mobilizing more than 20,000 effective to face 69 guerrillas and some peasants who had joined the fight. The guerrillas resisted until 1974, when the last fighters were arrested and killed by the army. Despite his heroism, there were strategic character of errors in the definition and direction of the guerrilla. The site itself chosen to unleash it was not set because the southern Pará was then quite depopulated and with a mass of peasants with little experience of struggle, the opposite of northeastern Brazil.
During the military regime greatly increased land concentration in Brazil. The expansion of the agricultural frontier promoted in the 70s by the government, with the colonization of the Amazon, not democratized access to land. Hundreds of thousands of peasants from all regions of the country, moved mainly in the states of Rondônia, Pará and Mato Grosso in search of a better life. Contracted malaria, faced animals, tamed the bush, only to lose their small lumps to the large estates. Peasants and Indians who lived for years in their sites and villages were expelled by landowners linked to the military, which presented false deeds counting on the full connivance of the "authorities". This will result in several squatter clashes with the large estates in the 60s, 70s and early 80s, as it was in Cachoeirinha (MG), Maraba and Sao Geraldo do Araguaia (PA) and in many other regions.
We arrived in the late 80's with a higher penetration of capitalism in the field and the even more aggravated contradictions. With the defeat of the armed resistance and the disorganization of the communist movement, the peasant movement will be without proletarian leadership throughout the 80s and early 90s Thus, the direction that prevailed in the peasant movement in this period was the direction small- bourgeois linked to the Catholic Church: CPT and MST. This greatly limited the peasant struggle because their opportunist leadership tried at all costs lead it to pacifism and electioneering. Even so, the peasant movement, pushed by the oppressive poverty, maintained a great massiveness and radicalism. The struggles of larger peasant movement in the last decade were the Corumbiara-RO (1995) and Eldorado dos Carajás, PA (1996). The Battle of Santa Elina, as it became known to fight Corumbiará, was an armed confrontation than 600 peasant families against the gunmen and the repressive apparatus of the rotten state, despite the savagery of landlordism there were more deaths on the side of the landlords than the peasants . This battle will mark the beginning of a turn in the peasant movement, because it established in practice the revolutionary line of struggle for land.
Opportunism and the peasant movement in revisionismo¹
Due to the predominance of the revisionist and opportunist conceptions of right in the direction of the Communist Party of Brazil, throughout its history, the participation of the Communists in the peasant struggles was very small. The contempt for the peasantry and the misunderstanding of its important role in the Brazilian revolution represented mistakes that hurt, by far, the revolutionary process in our country. This gap allowed the rise of petty bourgeois leaderships. The Communists took very little to intervene in massive and militant struggles as the Peasant Leagues in the Northeast. Who saw more precisely the role of the peasantry in the Brazilian revolution was the great communist Alagoas Manoel Lisboa, founder of the Revolutionary Communist Party. Manoel in his "Letter of 12 points" defined very precisely the character of the Brazilian revolution, as a democratic revolution, and the way this as the protracted people's war through the siege of the city by the field.
Over the last 20 years as well as in the mass movement in general, has predominated one electioneering opportunist leadership in the peasant movement. The direction of the MST, despite expressing a mouth radicalism, always had a behavior to stop the radicalization of the peasant struggle and lead it to the electoral strategy. In the period of FHC management, maintaining a line of "bites and blows", oscillating a seemingly combative practice that actually served as a bargain for audiences with the president and ministers. The MST direction of the line of action is to make land reform within the law, do not organize resistance and mass feeding on the illusion that the Incra will resolve the issue. This practice results in numerous camps in the roadside, where the masses are for years waiting for the decision of government agencies. By the radical discourse is being abandoned when they resort this talk is the concern not to lose the mass of peasants from their bases, that aims increasingly a revolutionary leadership. With its ruling position, the direction of the MST has increasingly lost influence in the direction of the peasant movement, which has provided clear evidence of the emergence of a huge number of peasant organizations, many vents at the bottom of this organization. The trend is that this process of cracks continue for a while yet, until the triumph of the revolutionary position in the peasant movement.
3) The concentration of land and the landowner system
Brazil has one of the largest land concentration in the world. The approximately 25,000 existing landowners (owners of 55,000 properties), hold nearly 50% of agricultural land (almost 200 million acres), which means almost 25% of the entire national territory in the estate in the claws. Small farmers, a mass of 5.2 million workers, have only 21% of arable land. The industrialization of the country and the advance of capitalism in the countryside not solved the problem of concentration of land, on the contrary, it has increased over the last decades. So much so that only the last ten years, as were settled about 400 thousand families, disappeared 1 million small farms, increasing the concentration of land and strengthening the landowner system.
It is a great illusion find that the predominant relations in the Brazilian countryside are capitalists. Our interior is not that appear on the network world, soybeans for export and the country party. The interior of Brazil is the semi-feudal exploitation, oppression horrendous Laird system on a huge mass of poor peasants. And this exploitation has enormous economic weight, virtually all the internal market is supplied by the poor and middle peasants. Are the properties up to 100 acres leaving rice, beans, onion, tomato, corn and cassava consumed in the city. And has anyone ever heard of the use of high technology for the production of corn or rice in our country? Obviously not, because the small and medium producers continue pulling a hoe for land wealth. The mechanization and technology in the field are only for export agriculture, for soybeans and orange for juice, plus a little large middle agrarian bourgeoisie.
The production of soybeans and other agrobusines force the capitalist relations of production (wage) for the production of food for domestic market dominated by semi-feudal relations half, Tuesday and the peasant economy "family farms", where the patriarch plays with her children the same relationships that hangs with the latifundia. Even the penetration of rural capitalism has reduced the number of employees, not only for the use of high technology, but by the adoption, in agricultural industry and pre-capitalist relations. The peasant who does not have land and want to work, can not simply grow on parade ground in front of his house, because that land has an owner. To plant there, the farmer will have to deliver half or one third of its production to the owner without it contributed nothing like planting. This relationship is very similar to servitude of feudalism, differing only in the fact that the ties that bind the peasant to the landowner are not as strong as before. The half relations and Tuesday are not capitalist relations, are semi-feudal relations. The poor peasants with little land and the middle peasants also hinder this type of relationship with the landowner, to increase its production are required to lease the land stops landlordism and it does not pay a fixed rent, but an income that is half or one third of the produced, which differs from the capitalist land rent.
The poor peasants, landless peasants and middle peasants are oppressed in a thousand ways by the landowner semi-feudal system. This system is not only the monopoly of land, but also on the credit monopoly, trade and technology. The farmers can not freely flow production to the consumer markets, first because usually lack the means, ie, transportation and warehouse for this. And secondly the supply centers of the cities are true mafias controlled by big capitalists, who set the price of each product. This trade monopoly imposes very low prices for products of the peasants, the so-called middlemen even pay only 2 reais at the box 20 kg of silver banana in North Mine and 6 by real bag of 20 kg of onion in the Northeast.
The credit monopoly makes up a key part of the semi-feudal system. There are almost no resources for small production and are released when the interest paid by farmers is generally very high. In addition, from the credit standardization of production is made, since the money is only released by the bank through the presentation of projects. This results in the creation of centers of agricultural crops in Rondônia rice, inside the northeast corn, in the center of Bahia beans, around the city of São Paulo vegetables, etc. This control of what is produced by the peasants, made from banks, it is essential to reduce prices, since there is just too much of a product located offering. Moreover, by giving the credit the bank requires the farmer to buy the inputs, tools, etc. in specific vendors, thus closing the monopolistic control over their production.
Since they have no equity and your credit is small, the mechanization of small and average production is very low. In addition to result in lower productivity, lack of technology impose serious damage to farmers. In Rondônia, for example, to polish their rice the farmer has to give half to the owner of the machine, in Ceará to grind their cane sugar farmers deliver half the brown sugar produced by the mill owner. All this monopoly system about the poor and middle peasants everywhere and does not allow its economy to develop, since the result from the sale of production is almost the same amount invested. Thus the semi-feudal relations have played over the years and it is untrue to say that agribusiness is destroying these relations, unlike it feeds them to develop. The agribusiness, as well as the platantion, is still compatible with parallel peasant economy.
The great Brazilian bourgeoisie developed based on large estates, expanded capitalist relations keeping underlying semi-feudal relations. And this, because the landowner system is extremely profitable for the capitalists. Even with the much less productive peasant work than mechanized agriculture, thanks to oppression monopolies system, it has a lower cost. Being small and average production for the Internal food supply system landowner allows cheapening the price of these products. This ratio favors the big bourgeoisie, to the extent that allows the reduction of the amount of wages in the cities, since the salary corresponds to the replacement of the workforce, which is basically the cost of food. Not coincidentally, the minimum wage in Brazil is one of the lowest in Latin America, because the food here, due to the high concentration of land and the landowner system is comparatively cheaper than in neighboring countries.
The detailed analysis of the reality of the field in our country shows that the Brazilian agrarian structure has remained largely intact in these 500 years, and particularly in the last century. Despite significant changes in the economy and higher population density in urban centers, the economic relations that predominate in the field are pretty much the same from the late nineteenth century. The rural population in Brazil revolves around the home of 40 million, and mostly consists of small and medium producers and poor peasants with no or little land. These people, as we saw earlier, has fought bravely for land rights. This war that even more acute because the peasant population has a high rate of growth, is another proof of semifeudalidade in our field. It is patent proof that the agrarian problem was never resolved. If there was a predominance of capitalism in the battlefield within our country would be the fight for better wages and better working conditions. But this does not exist. What there are five million families struggling to have a piece of land and it is up to the revolutionaries to show off the revolutionary path no revolution to the field and the nation.
4) Land reform and agrarian revolution?
In studying the history of the struggle for land in our country, we saw that it came radicalized over the years, and that the conflicts in field grown, not diminished. This reality expressed, that all these years the reigning State was unable to even soften the agrarian problem, let alone fix it. The large estate was the main ruling class until the nineteenth century, then became the main ally of the great bourgeoisie lackey of imperialism. There was not a moment in our history that the large estates have been left out of state power. Even in the coup given by Vargas in 30, which contradicted the interests of the coffee barons and Northeast colonels, the large estates did not leave the power. Soon after consolidating his government, Getulio reconciled with the coffee barons and the colonels, for the first bought all the coffee harvest and played at sea to ensure the price, and others followed with the systematic policy of mass repression in struggle.
The military regime the power of large estates increased, figures such as José Sarney, ACM and Marco Maciel had great role in sustaining the regime. In the "democratization" Sarney was president of the republic, elected as vice Tancredo in the Electoral College; his successor was Collor de Melo, a member of one of the most archaic and corrupt oligarchies of sugar mills in the state of Alagoas. The FHC mandate was, almost all, supported by the alliance with ACM. Even today, the call caucus has a third of the seats of the House, and as many in the Senate. The Minister of Agriculture of the Lula government, Roberto Rodrigues, is a large landowner in São Paulo and therefore representative of landlordism. All these facts show that the latifundia actively participates in state power and that is the main political base of the big bourgeoisie power and, consequently, of imperialist domination over our country. Surely no interest in anything, a state sustained by large landowners, do any kind of democratization of access to land.
The "new" land law of the 1988 Constitution provides that only the unproductive lands are intended for land reform, and yet, these lands are purchased landlordism and must be paid by the peasants. What this land reform process has represented is a capitalization of landlordism, which is strengthened by the towering received government compensation. The advocates of land reform not propose the destruction of landlordism argue that the country is so large that it can contain different "models" of land ownership. What are defending is the possibility of peaceful coexistence of large farms with small production of small and medium farmers. João Pedro Stedile, MST leader, recently stated that "most of the landlords are good people." Ensuring that the peasant stay with their land is the destruction of large estates, destruction of all its monopoly system. The sale of unproductive land to the peasants, without the destruction of the landlord system, it's just bullshit.
The agrarian revolution is the destruction of the landlord system and the release of large productive forces in our country. This is the only way capable of leading the peasants to the release of the semi-feudal oppression. But the destruction of landlordism is also the destruction of the power of the big bourgeoisie and the imperialist domination, because as we have seen the large estates is the basis on which it is based, politically and economically, the power of the old state. The struggle for land is therefore the fight against these state and will not be with a renovation but with revolution that will overthrow him.
5) The Agrarian Program and Defence of People's Rights
The Brazilian revolution is a democratic revolution of a new type, uninterrupted socialism. Your task is the destruction of the three big mountains looming over our people and on our nation: imperialism, the landlord system and bureaucratic capitalism. The most acute contradiction in our country and, therefore, the main is now opposing landowner system versus poor peasants, and can only be resolved through an agrarian revolution, the first stage of the democratic revolution. The Agrarian Program and Defence of People's Rights, is the agrarian revolution program. Its result is the destruction of landlordism, your semi-feudal system of oppression and meet the most pressing demands of the masses of the city. This program can only be achieved through the practice of a revolutionary popular movement. There along with the Agrarian programs a Defense Program of People's Rights, to weld the strategic working and peasant alliance, the basis of United Front of interested classes in the democratic revolution, and that includes most of the population. Only the struggle of the people can achieve it, it means that through elections we will never reach it, because your application is already the very destruction of the bourgeois-landlord State and the construction of the State of workers and peasants.
The agrarian revolution is the immediate implementation of its program, is destruction, step by step, landlordism. The PADDP has three pillars, which are being implemented as the fight develops, they are: 1) take all the lands of large estates and immediately deliver them to the poor peasants; 2) release of the productive forces in the field developing new relations of production starting from the self-help groups for cooperative and collective forms of production, combining the use of more developed means and instruments of production; 3) expel the forces of the state and establish the political power of organized masses, organizing all his political and social life, building public schools, popular health service, transport system and broadcast media and strengthening the culture of our people.
This program is already being applied by the revolutionary peasant movement, which is strengthened throughout the country. Its application is the mass organization for decision-ground, preparing the resistance and not accepting the ado of government agencies, as Incra, Funai and Ibama. Because what guarantees the ownership of land is the fight. After winning the first moment of landlordism enclosure is immediate transfer of the land to the peasants in struggle. The immediate cut of the earth, independent of government authorization, permits faster, that the mass to stand on their own work.
After the cut is necessary to develop new relations of production, surpassing the delay of family farming, it is the second pillar of Agrarian Program. The idea of individual and family work is deeply rooted among the peasants, but this is a later viewing fruit of these little experience with cooperative and collective work. To organize mutual aid are organized groups of families who start working in a cooperative way. This form of organization also facilitates increased production with modern techniques and instruments such as purchase of tractors, processing machines, etc. In this process are organized economic plans in the areas that prioritize the planting of subsistence and the production of other items that generate foreign exchange to buy what can not be produced, thus ensuring the economic independence of the peasants. Only the cooperative production can win the siege of landlordism monopolies, only with the cooperation is possible to keep the land to the peasants. Cooperation develops from lower to higher forms, developing new relationships and boosting the productive forces, sitting basis for collectivization and socialist relations in the field.
The third pillar, the expulsion of large estates, is the most advanced step of the agrarian program. This pillar is the harassment, economic and political, landlordism, imposing these great losses so that the revolutionary areas in the field remain free of this pest. The expulsion of landlordism is to create the empty power, ie areas where the reactionary state no longer exercises its domination, this is a fundamental condition for the construction and establishment of people's power and development of the democratic revolution. The new power begins also step by step, and will of the simplest forms to the most complex. One of the first popular instruments of power are the Popular Schools, schools of new type, which broadcast the ideology and revolutionary consciousness and therefore serve the thrust of the agrarian revolution and construction of popular power embryos. These schools take care of the children initially education, adult literacy, technical training and, in their development, are helping in the development of economic plans. The Popular Schools are independent of the old state and its direction is in the hands of the masses and not in the bourgeois and bureaucratic agencies of duty governments.
With the development of the struggle and the implementation of the agrarian program will consolidate the revolutionary areas, controlled by the masses and where there is increasingly popular power. The expansion of these areas inside our country is the siege of the city in the countryside road of revolution in Brazil. With the development of the agrarian revolution inevitably Yankee imperialism will intervene to try to stop it, the invasion of foreign troops transform the contradiction imperialism versus oppressed nations in the main contradiction of our society. The solution of this contradiction will be given by the national liberation revolution that will fulfill the second phase of the democratic revolution of a new type, sweeping over this mountain that hangs over our people. Along with imperialism also defeat their local managers, the big bourgeoisie and bureaucratic capitalism.
All revolutionary fighters and students should be clear that the agrarian revolution is not an exclusive task of the peasant movement. It is the way to get to socialism. Among the three pillars that support the current system (landlordism, imperialism and big bourgeoisie) the landlords represent the weakest class, because it is the most anachronistic and backward, it is against it that we can recruit more forces in society. We students can not be content to support the agrarian revolution, we must actively participate in it, driving it with the support of the intelligentsia, but mostly moving in to the field for helping in this difficult undertaking construction of popular power embryos.
The agrarian revolution is the first step for the expulsion of imperialism and the construction of socialism. Destroying the latifundia, ended up with the main shackle that holds the development of productive forces in our country, and so release large forces for the building of a new economy. The estate in defeat is a defeat of imperialism. Ending the latifundia, we, too, with the main ally internal, political and economic, of the big bourgeoisie. The agrarian revolution is a stage of democratic revolution that will solve the agrarian question and peasant and the national question. To the extent that triumphs democratic revolution starts immediately the socialist revolution. But even before the democratic revolution already plays an important part of the socialist program, for the destruction of three mountains represent the nationalization of all foreign capital, the large local capital, the confiscation of all the lands of large estates and the nationalization of agro-industries.
The struggle for land in Brazil is a heroic trajectory of the mass of poor peasants. Its violence demonstrates how this contradiction is acute in our country; that this is a problem that must be solved by the Brazilian revolution. Without a proletarian leadership which implements the worker-peasant alliance, the struggle for land can not emerge victorious. Only a new power of workers and peasants, can ensure the land to those who work it. It is the task of all revolutionaries boost the struggle for land, because all the peasant revolt, overwhelmed by secular large estates, is a great transforming power, without which there will be no revolution in our country, without which we can not expel imperialism of our lands , defeat and confiscate the bourgeoisie and build socialism.