Sofrimento social de trabalhadores rurais assentados na contracorrente do agronegócio na bacia do rio Juruena - MT

Abstract

The agrarian dispute in Brazil is a historical and contemporary problem at the same time, and thus, the struggle for land ownership has always occurred. The lack of a good land distribution has as one of its main reflexes irregular occupations that end up turning into rural settlements. Only occupying land does not guarantee minimum conditions of survival on these settlements, since they lack a minimum infrastructure for settlers to have decent living conditions. Objective - To understand if the struggle for the land of a group of rural workers settled in the southwestern region of Mato Grosso, where the logic of landownership and agribusiness prevails, implies social suffering. Methods - Qualitative research with an exploratory design, with analytical-descriptive orientation, through semi-structured interviews, initiated with the approval of the Research Ethics Committee and free and informed consent of the interviewees. The subjects were rural workers from the rural settlement Nova Esperança, in the city of Campos de Júlio, Mato Grosso. The interpretation of the collected data followed the teachings of content analysis. Results - Land occupation implies insecurity on the settled rural workers behalf, since they are in a situation of irregular occupation. Besides, the lack of legalization does not allow access to credit, which implies a lack of minimum infrastructure for survival, also influenced by the lack of assistance from the government. It can be perceived that the chain reaction of the presented factors implies in social suffering. The struggle for land also raises disputes over the local economic configuration. In this case, settled rural workers suffer from the oppression of larger rural producers, which justifies the title of this work. Workers have reported situations of land occupation threats coming from large landowners who do not accept the quest for autonomy of these groups. However, the struggle for land generates enough unification in the group of workers to resist the external pressure to the settlement. Even when immersed in a structural environment of oppression and denial, collectivity is a mechanism where it is possible to develop strategies to resist social suffering and strengthen the group of settlers. Conclusion - In a country with a huge territorial extension and with lots of vacant and unproductive fields that serve for speculative purposes, it is contradictory that there are so many people fighting for a piece of land. This study exposed the social implications and the suffering from the struggle for land. Defending family agriculture is not being antiquated, but being fair in a society that preaches freedom and equality, though it does not give people the opportunity to live where and how they want.