| Abstract | Food sovereignty has generated heated discussions and controversies in critical agrarian studies. This article challenges recent skeptical accounts on food sovereignty pertaining to the problems of sporadicity of peasant movements (Agarwal, 2014), their social heterogeneity that are believed to preclude class mobilization (Bernstein, 2010; 2014), and peasants' self-interested approach that neglects the urban sector (Beuchelt & Virchow 2012). My main argument is that, not only is Bernstein's claim to the triviality of peasantry untenable, but also peasantry itself qualifies as a potential class formation outcome through pedagogical mobilization. In the case of the MOCASE-VC (Peasant Movement of Santiago del Estero-Vía Campesina), social homogenization and subsequent agrarian class formation as "indigenous peasantry" greatly owe to the existence of a broad infrastructure of autonomous peasant education and militant training. My portrayal of food sovereignty as a class formation outcome also seems to invalidate Agarwal's claim that agrarian collective action tends to assume a mere "sporadic" and "agitational" existence. Contrary to the portrayal of food sovereignty as negligent of the urban poor, the MOCASE-VC's pedagogical mobilization is built on urban-rural class alliances. As such, the present article deciphers the role of the MOCASE-VC's philosophy of popular education in agrarian class formation. It explores how popular education is practiced through a myriad of pedagogical vehicles including the School of Agroecology, Peasant Schools, the Peasant University Project, Schools of Political Training and Historical Memory and international youth camps.
|
