We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Elisabeth Jelin, in an important recent work, has criticized the overconcern in studies of the Latin American working class with the structural determinants of class relations and class activity. As she pointed out, this has tended to lead to a deterministic approach on the part of the social sciences, emphasizing the lack of autonomy of the working class in terms of its failure to construct a comprehensive, radical challenge to the dominant system on the political level and its domination by, and acceptance of, demobilizing, bureaucratic leaderships on the trade union level.
In the 1940s Bolivia's mineworkers achieved a major impact in national elections. The electoral system was favourable to them (far more so than after the 1952 National Revolution); they acquired a unified and effective national leadership, with extensive back-up organization in all the main mining camps; they, therefore, began casting their votes as a single block, an expression of mineworkers' exceptional degree of solidarity in various parts of the world; and the political parties that courted their votes were constrained by the demands of their electorate, not only to adopt intransigent language but actually to become more radical in their programmes, recruitment and commitments.
The crisis of 1889 has long been seen as a turning point in Brazilian history. Because historians have often examined the Second Empire to defend or attack its successor, they have neglected certain aspects of the crisis. Their explanations have stressed that leaders of the minuscule and divided Republican Party took advantage of long standing grievances between senior officers and civilian politicians when they urged an ailing general to depose the monarchy on the 15th of November. They have, therefore, emphasized the role of the army in creating the conditions for a coup d'etat, and its preeminence in the Republic until 1889. In doing so, they have underestimated the powerful economic forces which underpinned the Imperial government. They have also overestimated those which supported the republican leaders of São Paulo, the self-confessed beneficiaries of the coup. Since they have also understated the fluidity of political allegiances in this period, its history has become too narrow and too deterministic, with the army depicted as the engine of ‘a change from Ancien Régime to a bourgeois society’.
Founded in 1922, the Partido Comunista de Chile (PCCh) had a somewhat chequered career before the mid-1930s.1 Although the prestige of its founder, Luis Emilio Recabarren, and its close ties with organized labour gave the party an early significance, its progress towards becoming an important force in Chilean politics halted abruptly when General Carlos Ibáñez came to power in 1927. Forced into clandestinity by Ibáñez, the party emerged on his downfall in 1931 with its membership vastly reduced, its trade union arm, the Federación Obrera de Chile (FOCH), moribund, and its remaining activists deeply divided by ideological, tactical and personal differences.
Frontier expansion was interpreted in the last chapter as a process of integration into the national economy. This integration was seen to proceed through interrelated changes in both production and market relations: the integration which occurs through the progressive change to commercial production in response to the national market is simultaneously a transition from non-capitalist to capitalist production. This interpretation illuminates the process itself, but does not yet pose the question of the relationship between frontier and national economy; in effect, it suggests what occurs in frontier expansion but not why it occurs. Nevertheless, in proceeding to answer this latter question, it is apparent that the prior investigation of the process has revealed the principal dimensions of the determining structure – at least in the economic realm. Thus the question of the relationship between frontier and national economy is made two-fold: on the one hand, what are the production and property relations which determine frontier expansion and accumulation; on the other, what are the market relations which determine the transfer of value from frontier to national economy? In no sense are either or both sets of relations, which in the reality are not easily separated, to be taken as uniquely ‘determining’: their separate investigation here is simply intended as one step in the presentation of the political economy of the frontier.
This step aims to establish the structural conditions of frontier expansion, and so rejects any idea of ‘natural or ideal determination’ of the process.
The aim of this book is to reach an understanding of the pioneer frontier in Brazil. The object of study is conceived as the particular process of frontier expansion occurring in the country over the last half century. This concept of frontier in no way corresponds to the so-called cyclical character of economic growth and occupation of land in Brazil. There is, therefore, no intention here of following precedent (Normano 1935; Castro 1969) and presenting the entire economic history of the country in terms of its ‘frontier’ experiences. These growth cycles have been observed to follow the economic booms in different products for export to the world market – such as sugar, gold, coffee and rubber – and have depended on new demands arising within that expanding market over the centuries (Prado 1962a; Furtado 1963). The pioneer frontier, on the contrary, has expanded in response to the demands of the national market and in function of economic accumulation within the national economy since 1930.
It is to be expected that as the concept of frontier gains currency it will lose content. There is already an account which assimilates most of Latin American history to the idea of ‘frontier’ (Hennessey 1978). So it must be clear at the outset that the pioneer frontier is a process of occupation of new lands which is historically specific.
Traditionally in Brazil land is titled long before it is occupied. Unexplored regions in the interior are likely to have complex legal histories and many areas within these regions will be titled more than once. For a long time settlement of the continent was confined to the coast and the colonisers seemed to baulk at the prospect of conquering the vast and unknown interior. During the colonial administration the territory was conceded in law even before its extent could be judged with any measure of accuracy. This initial legal division of the land (into sesmarias) spawned a series of minor concessions. Since that time, for different economic and political motives in different periods, titles have proliferated and as occupation proper has continued to meet with delays and difficulties up till today, few constraints have acted to stem the issue of titles. This titling has created the conditions for conflict over the right to land in nearly all frontier regions.
It is interesting to observe that of the folk figures of the Brazilians the bandeirante looms largest in their history because these explorers broke the cultural and geographical boundaries and carried their forays deep into the heartland. But the bandeirantes did not occupy the land but merely claimed it for the crown; or for the nation. The actual occupation of the land had to wait for the unsung hero of Brazilian history, the posseiro, who was to claim the land by cultivating it.