The Land Occupation Movement and Democratisation in Zimbabwe: Contradictions of Neoliberalism

In the citing paper

“The result has been a stark bifurcation of the national question. On the one hand indigenous capital has confronted settler and foreign capital, transforming the meaning of 'national liberation' in its own terms and hijacking land reform, while on the other hand the historical realities of class and race persist, characterised by functional dualism within a white supremacist framework, including”

In the citing paper

“Rural operations of civil society in Africa within a neo-liberal framework have been characterised by demands for funds for small-project 'development' aimed at a few selected beneficiaries (Moyo 2002), leaving a political and social vacuum in the leadership of the land reform agenda (Moyo 2001).”

In the citing paper

“Land occupation movements such as those in rural and urban Zimbabwe before and after the country's independence represent an unofficial or underground social pressure used to force land redistribution onto the policy agenda (Moyo 2001).”

In the citing paper

“Hence, segregated legislation, namely the Land Apportionment Act of 1930, was adopted in order to impose racially segregated spatial planning on the country. The segregated spatial planning model was maintained into the post-independence phase (Moyo, 2001: 7).”

In the citing paper

“In 1930, special designated areas were first established for emergent Black farmers; in this instance, successful 'master' farmers were granted portions of land up to 100 hectares with the intent of developing a Black yeoman class (Moyo, 2001: 17).”

In the citing paper

“The markets were mainly affected because of the ESAP that was adopted; this included the reduced trade tariffs that resulted in the sharp decline in food and export crop production, massive inflation, unemployment, food shortages, and a collapsing health and educational system (Moyo, 2001: 19).”

In the citing paper

“According to Moyo (2001: 24), one of the reasons why land was expropriated from White commercial farmers was to encourage and increase funding from Britain and other donor nations.”