The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 169)

غرض

عنوان

The Dispossession of the Peasantry (ص 169)

المحتوى

153
minimize and marginalize that role.
As for Stein’s statement that “farm servants, field laborers, crop watchers,
manure carriers, ploughmen, threshers, herdsmen, and shepherds sometimes
worked on land without possessing either formal title to it or formal written
tenancy agreements with a landlord,” that too is a curious and confusing choice of
words. These people never worked on land while possessing title or tenancy
agreements. They were paid in kind or money for their services. However, the fact
that they provided those services does not, in any way, mean they were landless.
As discussed above, these people provided these services to supplement their
income from their own lands.
It is ironic that Stein questions Hope-Simpson’s motivations and position
concerning Jewish settlement given that one of the major recommendations of
Hope-Simpson’s report was the intensification of Arab agriculture in order to
release more land for Jewish settlement,” a recommendation that Stein points to
as the same as that of the Jewish Agency.”
Given the above analysis, and lacking any explicit figure for landlessness
during the Ottoman and Mandate periods, it may be said that the 29.4 percent
figure from the Johnson-Crosbie survey, while not precise, is an acceptable
approximation of landlessness. Again, it may be that included in the figure were
some families who owned land but did not cultivate it, but the number of such
**Hope-Simpson Report, 142, 153.
7Stein, 108-9.
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