scholarly journals Scheffler’s autopsy of poverty in the biblical text: Critiquing land expropriation as an elitist project

2019 ◽  
Vol 75 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Temba T. Rugwiji

The theme of poverty has recently dominated various scholarly platforms, including academic presentations and public debates. Nevertheless, it has emerged that the rhetoric about poverty reduction seems to be the project of the elite who apparently write and speak on behalf of the poor. The plight of the majority of the poor is problematised so that transformation is superficially democratised with the ultimate aim of benefitting the elite. The present study reflects on Eben Scheffler’s contributions on poverty and the poor in the Old Testament books of the Pentateuch, the Psalms and the Proverbs. Although this study refers to Scheffler’s other works on poverty from time to time, particular attention is paid to four of them, namely, (1) ‘The poor in the Psalms: A variety of views’; (2) ‘Of poverty prevention in the Pentateuch as a continuing contemporary challenge’; (3) ‘Poverty in the Book of Proverbs: Looking from above’; (4) ‘Pleading poverty (or identifying with the poor for selfish reasons): On the ideology of Psalm 109’. Scheffler points out that it was the ancient Israelite elite who played the role of writing and speaking on behalf of the poor. It is essential to note that Scheffler’s thrust is not an appropriation exercise, although in some places he makes reference to the ‘contemporary world’. Thus, the present study attempts to explore the land debate in our contemporary world, with a special focus on South Africa’s (SA) land expropriation without compensation (LEWIC) debate and the foiled fast-track land reform programme in Zimbabwe, as elitist projects. The Zimbabwean Fast-Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP) was a prototype of LEWIC in SA. It is argued that the poor rural communities in Zimbabwe continue to languish in poverty in a country endowed with abundant natural resources, including land. The study argues that land allocation in Zimbabwe benefitted the elite.

2021 ◽  
pp. 002190962110588
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Ndhlovu

The socio-economic characterisation of resettled small-holder farmers under the Fast Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP) in Zimbabwe has blind spots in relation to the emergent transformative social policy features such as ‘social cohesion’, ‘cooperation’, ‘protection’ and ‘accumulation’ which are equally important among land beneficiaries. Using the Sangwe farm, this article departs from the conventional use of the political economy, sustainable livelihoods, human rights-based and neo-patrimonial approaches to experiment with the transformative social policy approach. Using both quantitative and qualitative data in an exploratory research design, the article shows that viewed from the transformative social policy approach, the FTLRP was neither a resounding success nor a complete disaster. The programme actually produced mixed results. The article thus, recommends the use of in-depth, ideologically free and neutral approaches in its analysis so as to reveal its detailed outcomes. Additional studies in which existing land reform policies can be considered in the collective efforts of improving the transformative agenda of the FTLRP across the country are needed.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lovemore Chipungu ◽  
Hangwelani Hope Magidimisha

2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.S. Mlambo

This study seeks to trace the role of race in the evolution of the land question in Zimbabwe from Occupation to the ‘fast-track land reform programme’ of 2000 and beyond to explore the extent to which the era of colonial domination made the racialization of the land issue in the post-colonial period almost unavoidable. It contends that Mugabe’s use of race to justify the campaign to drive whites from the land from 2000 onwards was facilitated (in part) by the fact that race had always been used by the colonial authorities as a decisive factor in land acquisition and allocation throughout the colonial period and that using the alleged superiority of the white race, colonial authorities alienated African land for themselves without either negotiating with the indigenous authorities or paying for the land. Consequently, Mugabe’s charge that the land had been stolen and needed to be retaken clearly resonated with some segments of the Zimbabwean population enough to get them to actively participate in the land invasions of the time.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document