The broad peasant movement during the first Russian revolution forced tsarism to take urgent measures to resolve the agrarian question. In Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, two ways of solving the agrarian question were objectively possible, which corresponded to two various types agrarian evolution along the bourgeois path. The first way to solve "from above" - ​​"by preserving the landowners' landownership and the final destruction of the community, plundering it with the fists", and the second way "from below" - "by destroying the landlords' landownership and nationalizing all the land" (T. 17, -S. 124). The landlords, supported by the bourgeoisie, already in the course of the revolution, decisively spoke in favor of the first method, and the congress of the united nobility decided on the need to allow the free exit of peasants from the community and free resettlement to the outskirts. The peasantry opposed this measure and continued to fight for the abolition of landownership, for the transfer of all land to them. This desire of the peasant masses was reflected in the agrarian platform of the Trudoviks in the first two Dumas. The second method was more progressive, because it eliminated all the main remnants of feudalism in Russia and cleared the way for the American path of bourgeois agrarian evolution, which was reflected in the development of kulak farms according to the farm type. The Stolypin method was also objectively progressive, since it gave impetus to the development of capitalism along the Prussian path, but to an immeasurably lesser extent ensured the "free development of the productive forces" (T. 17. - P. 252).

The main content of the decree of November 9, 1906, approved by the Duma as law on June 13, 1910, was an attempt to direct capitalist development along the Prussian path. Seeing the inevitability of breaking the forms of landownership, the autocracy outlined the radical destruction of peasant allotment landownership, while completely preserving the landowner's. The Stolypin reform was by no means limited to the defeat peasant community as often presented. The reform included a large complex of transformations, the main of which was the introduction of freedom of exit from the community and resettlement to the outskirts. But simultaneously with the decree of November 9, 1906, several more important bills were put into effect. Under the pressure of the revolution, tsarism took an extremely important measure, without which it was unthinkable to carry out all the others: on November 3, 1905, a year before the Stolypin law, the tsar's manifesto was published on the abolition of redemption payments for allotment lands. Thus, the form of land ownership changed, since allotment lands were only conditionally considered peasant property, since until they were completely redeemed, individual peasants (with household use) or the community (with communal use) could not sell these lands. Now the ransom was considered complete and the land was to become the full property of households or communities. Therefore, the question arose of the defeat of the communities. At the same time, the law on resettlement of 1904 was changed: the Regulation of the Council of Ministers of March 10, 1906 was adopted, which radically changed this law, although it was called the Rules for the Application of the Law of 1904. By decree of October 5, 1906, freedom of movement of peasants was introduced, abolished "restrictive rules on passports", introduced "freedom to choose a place of residence" for peasants and promised complete equation nx with other estates. At the same time, decrees were adopted on the allotment of part of the cabinet and appanage lands for the resettlement of peasants, on new benefits for resettlement and on obtaining loans from the Peasants' Bank for the purchase of land. Thus, appropriate preparations were made to ensure the exit from the community and the resettlement of natives (or rather, the majority of natives from the number of poor and middle peasants) to the outskirts.

The meaning of the decree of November 9, 1906, as well as the law of June 14, 1910, was to replace communal property with household ownership and household land use (in communityless areas) with the private property of the head of the court, that is, personal private property. By 1906, there were 14.7 million peasant households in villages and villages in Russia. Of these, 2.4 million households were already landless, and 12.3 million had allotment lands, including 9.5 million on communal law and 2.8 million on household law. There were no communities at all in the Baltic States Western Ukraine and Western Belarus, partly there were no communities in Left-bank Ukraine, in Eastern Belarus and in Siberia. In these areas there was household use of land, and the decree introduced private land ownership here immediately (except for Siberia). Whereas before 1906 there were only 752,000 private owners of land in Russia, now, in one fell swoop, 2.8 million owners from among the housekeepers were added to them. The rest of the territory was dominated by the community, but to a large extent already decomposed. Lenin noted that the decree of November 9, 1906 could not even have appeared, let alone carried out for several years, if the community itself had not decomposed, had not singled out elements of the prosperous peasantry, which was interested in being singled out. The most decomposed were those communities in which either there were no land redistributions at all, or they stopped in recent decades. That's why The State Duma in the law of June 14, 1910, she singled out boundless communities.

The decree of November 9, 1906 began to be prepared from May of this year, when the first congress of noble societies recommended that the government allow peasants to freely move to the outskirts, for which they should also allow free exit from the community. The draft decree was submitted by Stolypin to the Council of Ministers on October 1, 1906. When discussing it, some of the ministers expressed serious concerns that the adoption of the decree in accordance with Article 87 of the Fundamental Laws Russian Empire, that is, before the convocation of the Second Duma, will cause a decisive rebuff from many parties and the discontent of the peasants. But Stolypin and most of the ministers insisted on the adoption of the decree, and it was signed by the tsar on November 9 and was immediately printed and began to be implemented. According to existing legislation, the decree was submitted for approval by the Second Duma, but there it met with strong resistance from the majority of the members of the commission on the agrarian issue and criticism in the Duma itself, which became one of the main reasons for its dispersal. III Duma decree. on the contrary, it was supported by the majority of deputies and was detained for a different reason. Many deputies in agrarian commission insisted on Solea a radical solution to the issue of liquidating the community. After a lengthy debate, criticism of the draft law both from the left (Social Democrats, Trudoviks, non-party peasants) and from the right, it was approved. The law of June 14, 1910, as can be seen from comparing it with the text of the decree, facilitated the exit from the community and actually introduced the clear liquidation of unrestricted communities.

Stolypinskaya agrarian reform was progressive. It gave impetus to the development of prosperous kulak farms, which were able to buy up the plots of the poor who had left the community (the number of plots to be bought was limited, but this was easily managed by buying plots for relatives and figureheads). The kulaks received significant benefits for the purchase of cuts and farms through the Peasant Bank, they were allocated funds for agronomic assistance, etc. In the countryside, the class of the prosperous peasantry strengthened and expanded, which was distinguished by a higher agricultural culture, and higher yields, the use of machines, fertilizers . Due to these farms, the overall average grain yield increased (from 39 to 43 poods per dess.), the harvest of marketable grain, the number of machines (in value) in agriculture tripled. A cooperative boom began in the countryside, the growth of cooperatives of all kinds: credit, consumer, butter, flax-growing, agricultural artels, etc.

At the same time, the prospects for a second way of resolving the agrarian question continued to be real, and the struggle of the peasants for all the land, for the seizure of the landowners' latifundia, grew. If a Stolypin reform It was calculated on the victory of the Prussian path through the development of capitalist Junker farms and the attachment of the prosperous peasantry to them, turning them into Grossbauers. then the peasant struggle against Stolypinism was a struggle for a more progressive way of developing prosperous farms of the farm type, free from the guardianship of the landowners. That is why, in the end, the Stolypin reform had deep reactionary features. The reactionary nature of the Black-Hundred program, Lenin wrote, “consists ... in the development of capitalism according to the Junker type to strengthen the power and income of the landowner, to lay a new, more solid foundation for the building of autocracy” (T. 16. - P. 351).

a set of interrelated measures for the restructuring of all components of the economic mechanism - organization, management, economic relations, forms of ownership and management, land relations, etc. 1990). Developed by a team of scientists from the Belarusian Research Institute of Economic Problems of the Agro-Industrial Complex, specialists from the State Committee for Agriculture and Food with the participation of employees of the State Plan and research economic institute Gosplan. It outlines the issues of the formation of a new agrarian policy in relation to the transition period and market economy. Contains sections: “Principles of the reform of relations in the agro-industrial complex. Political background and their likely consequences”, “Property. Land ownership and reform. Denationalization and privatization”, “Creation and development of farm-type peasant farms”, “Formation of the food fund”, “Price mechanism. Price parity”, “Financial and credit relations and tax policy”, “Improvement of investment policy”, “Strengthening motivation and stimulation of labor”, “Development of social infrastructure”, “Personnel training”, “Organization of management”, “ Target programs: Fertility, Grain, Potatoes, Vegetables, Fruits and berries, Sugar, Feed, Flax, Meat, Milk, Foreign economic relations. The program characterizes the pre-market state of the economy Agriculture republics. In 1991, developed and approved by the Council of Collective Farms Government program revival of the Belarusian village. It defines the priority areas for capital investments in the non-productive sector, the volume of construction and commissioning of healthcare and education, trade and household facilities, children's preschool institutions. The expediency of construction in countryside well-maintained homestead-type housing with autonomous engineering arrangement, use for domestic purposes electrical energy and gas. The task was set of transferring the public utilities to self-sufficiency, bringing in proper order the on-farm road network and streets. In 1994, scientists of the Belarusian Research Institute of Economic Problems of the Agro-Industrial Complex developed and approved at a joint meeting of the Board of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food and the Presidium of the Academy of Agrarian Sciences of the Republic of Belarus, the Concept of Agrarian Reform in the Republic of Belarus (Decree of April 25, 1994 No. 14/20). The concept contains the main provisions for improving the organizational and economic mechanism for the functioning of the agro-industrial complex in the context of its transition to a market economy system. It proposes a system of views on the following issues: denationalization and privatization, transformation of forms of management, establishment of farming, development of land relations, formation of a system of financing and pricing, taxation and lending to enterprises, activation of their investment, restructuring of the existing system of logistics and agricultural services, regulation of employment , the formation of the food fund, the development of cooperation and integration, the non-productive sphere of the village. A guideline was taken for self-sufficiency of the republic with food, agricultural raw materials, taking into account the economic feasibility of their production, which contributes to ensuring the national food security. The scientific and practical basis for reforming the agricultural sector in the republic was the State Program for Reforming the Agroindustrial Complex of the Republic of Belarus, approved by the Board of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus on August 6, 1996. entities within the legal corridor when state regulation individual aspects of activity (see the State program for reforming the agro-industrial complex). Over the past period, the main stages of agrarian reform can be distinguished: 1991-1992. - awareness of the sovereignty of Belarus, orientation of the mentality of the population and rural producers to the development of market methods, emphasis on the formation alternative forms management. 1992-1995 - drastic reduction government subsidies agriculture, the state's departure from the problems of the agrarian economy, the accelerated destruction of the production potential of large agricultural enterprises, the beginning of a wide transformation of collective farms and state farms into market-type forms on a share and share basis, and the creation of conditions for the development of farms. 1995-1998 - recognition of the diversity and diversity of agriculture, alignment public policy in a relationship various forms management, rehabilitation of the role and importance of large-scale production, the gradual restoration of the system of direct centralized management of the economy (with a sharp shortage of material and technical resources and financial resources), an increase in the debt of enterprises on loans and loans and the aggravation of insolvency problems. 1999-2000 - strengthening the state centralized financial support agriculture, an attempt to stabilize production, the creation of a mechanism for the country's food security and the use of elements of intervention regulation agro-industrial complex, adoption of the development program and forecast, priority to efficient production. In 2000, the Republican Program for Improving the Efficiency of the Agro-Industrial Complex for 2000-2005 was developed and approved by the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus. Includes the main directions of development: 1. Economy and organization of the agro-industrial complex (food security - a strategy for the development of the agro-industrial complex; improvement of the economic mechanism; reformation of agricultural enterprises). 2. Placement and zonal specialization. 3. Agriculture and plant growing (structure of sown areas; selection and seed production, grain, oilseeds, sugar beets, potatoes, flax, fodder; development of fruit growing, vegetable growing; melioration and use of reclaimed lands, etc.). 4. Development of animal husbandry (intensification of milk production, development of breeding and herd reproduction, development of poultry farming, etc.). 5. Mechanization and energy of agriculture. 6. Processing and food industry. 7. Development of the bakery industry. eight. Priority directions investment. 9. Foreign economic activity. 10. Scientific support. eleven. Information system APK. 12. agricultural education and staffing. 13. Current and Required Legislation. The program did not become the main guideline for the development of the agro-industrial complex, was not reflected in legislative acts and decisions local authorities state and economic management. In 2001, the Program for Improving the Agro-Industrial Complex of the Republic of Belarus for 2001-2005 was developed and approved by the Decree of the President of the Republic of Belarus. The main goal: to form a micro- and macroeconomic management system that ensures sustainable development and a consistent increase in the efficiency of agro-industrial production, guaranteeing the food security of the state by increasing the volume of agricultural production to a level that ensures a minimum level of food security. In 2005, by Decree of the President of the Republic of Belarus (dated September 14, 2003 No. 37), the State Program for the Revival and Development of the Village for 2005-2010 was approved. (see the State Program for the Revival and Development of the Village for 2005-2010). During the years of agrarian reforms, contradictory processes took place, but positive, qualitatively new phenomena were able to manifest themselves, in particular: conditions were created for multistructural structure and diverse forms of management were formed; legal guarantees have been created for the equal development of two forms of ownership - public and private ( absolute majority at present, these are agricultural enterprises of non-state ownership; about 17% of land is privately owned); formed the basis for the gradual formation of a new mentality of the population and producers on the laws and principles of a market economy; economic relations have been revived, providing for the earning of funds, self-employment, self-regulation and self-management; methods of economic activity are involved that cause resource saving and cost savings, rational use resources and optimization of return on investment; efforts have been made to restructure production for market consumer demand and sales; measures were taken to master the basics of agribusiness, entrepreneurship and foreign economic activity, commercial calculation and competition; mastered the methods of direct contractual economic relations between business partners and market counterparties, etc.

28. Agrarian reform P.A. Stolypin.

The Stolypin agrarian reform is a generalized name for a wide range of measures in the field of agriculture carried out by the Russian government under the leadership of P. A. Stolypin since 1906. The main directions of the reform were the transfer of allotment lands to the ownership of peasants, the gradual elimination of rural society as a collective owner of land, widespread lending to peasants, the purchase of landlord lands for resale to peasants on preferential terms, and land management, which made it possible to optimize the peasant economy by eliminating striped land.

The reform was a set of measures aimed at two goals: the short-term goal of the reform was to resolve the "agrarian question" as a source of mass discontent (primarily, the cessation of agrarian unrest), the long-term goal was the sustainable prosperity and development of agriculture and the peasantry, the integration of the peasantry into the market economy.

If the first goal was supposed to be achieved immediately (the scale of agrarian unrest in the summer of 1906 was incompatible with the peaceful life of the country and the normal functioning of the economy), then the second goal - prosperity - Stolypin himself considered achievable in a twenty-year perspective.

The reform unfolded in several directions:

Improving the quality of peasants' property rights to land, which consisted primarily in replacing the collective and limited land ownership of rural communities with full-fledged private property of individual peasant householders; measures in this direction were of an administrative and legal nature.

The eradication of obsolete class civil law restrictions that impeded the effective economic activity of peasants.

Improving the efficiency of peasant agriculture; government measures consisted primarily in encouraging the allocation of plots “to one place” (cuts, farms) to peasant owners, which required the state to carry out a huge amount of complex and expensive land management work to develop striped communal lands.

Encouraging the purchase of privately owned (primarily landlord) lands by peasants, through different kind operations of the Peasant Land Bank, preferential lending was predominant.

Encouraging the buildup of working capital of peasant farms through lending in all forms (bank lending secured by land, loans to members of cooperatives and partnerships).

Expansion of direct subsidizing of the activities of the so-called "agronomic assistance" (agronomic consulting, educational activities, maintenance of experimental and exemplary farms, trade in modern equipment and fertilizers).

Support for cooperatives and peasant associations.

The reform was aimed at improving peasant allotment land use and had little effect on private land ownership. The reform was carried out in 47 provinces of European Russia (all provinces, except for the three provinces of the Ostsee region); the reform did not affect the Cossack land tenure and the land tenure of the Bashkirs.

Decrees were issued in 1906, 1910 and 1911:

each peasant could take ownership of the allotment,

could freely leave the community and choose another place of residence,

move to the Urals in order to receive land (about 15 hectares) and money from the state to improve the economy,

settlers received tax benefits and were exempted from military service.

a) The goals of the reform.

Socio-political goals of the reform.

The main goal was to win wide sections of the peasantry to the side of the regime and prevent a new agrarian war. To do this, it was supposed to contribute to the transformation of the majority of the inhabitants of their native village into a “strong, wealthy peasantry imbued with the idea of ​​property,” which, according to Stolypin, makes it the best bulwark of order and tranquility.” Carrying out the reform, the government did not seek to affect the interests of the landowners. AT post-reform period and at the beginning of the 20th century. The government was unable to protect the landownership of the nobility from reduction, but the large and small landed nobility continued to be the most reliable support for the autocracy. To push him away would be suicidal for the regime.

In addition, noble class organizations, including the council of the united nobility, had big influence on Nicholas 2 and his entourage. Members of the government, and even more so the Prime Minister, who raises the question of the alienation of landlords' lands, could not remain in his place, and even more so organize the implementation of such a reform. The reformers also took into account the fact that the landowners' farms produced a significant part of marketable grain. Another goal was the destruction of the rural community in the struggle of 1905-1907. , the reformers understood that the main thing in the peasant movement was the question of land, and did not seek to immediately destroy the administrative organization of the community.

Socio-economic goals were closely related to socio-political ones. It was planned to liquidate the land community, its economic land distribution mechanism, on the one hand, which formed the basis social unity communities, and on the other hand, restraining the development of agricultural technology. The ultimate economic goal of the reforms was to be the general rise of the country's agriculture, the transformation of the agrarian sector into the economic base of the new Russia.

b) Preparation of reform

The preparation of reform projects before the revolution actually began with the Conference on the needs of the agricultural industry under the leadership of S.Yu. Witte, in 1902-1903. In 1905-1907. The conclusions formulated by the Conference, primarily the idea of ​​the need to destroy the land and turn the peasants into land owners, were reflected in a number of projects of government officials (V.I. Gurko.). With the beginning of the revolution and the active participation of the peasants in the destruction of the landed estates, Nicholas 2, frightened by the agrarian uprisings, changed his attitude towards the landed peasant community.

The Peasant Bank was allowed to issue loans for peasant plots (November 1903), which in fact meant the possibility of alienating communal lands. P.A. Stolypin in 1906, having become prime minister, supported the landlords, who did not affect the interests. Gurko's project formed the basis of the Decree of November 9, 1906, which marked the beginning of the agrarian reform.

c) Fundamentals of the direction of the reform.

The change in the form of ownership of peasant land, the transformation of peasants into full-fledged owners of their allotments, was envisaged by the law of 1910. carried out primarily by "strengthening" allotments into private ownership. In addition, according to the law of 1911, it was allowed to carry out land management (reduction of land into farms and cuts) without “strengthening”, after which the peasants also became landowners.

The peasant could sell the allotment only to the peasant, which limited the right to land ownership.

Organization of farms and cuts. Without land management, technical improvement, economic development of agriculture was impossible in the conditions of peasant striping (23 peasants of the central regions had allotments divided into 6 or more strips in various places of the communal field) and were far away (40% of the peasants of the center should were to walk weekly from their estates to allotments of 5 and more versts). In economic terms, according to Gurko's plan, fortifications without land management did not make sense.

Therefore, the work of state land management commissions was planned to reduce the strips peasant allotment in a single area - cut. If such a cut was far from the village, the estate was transferred there and a farm was formed.

Resettlement of peasants to free lands.

To solve the problem of peasant shortage of land and reduce agrarian overpopulation in the central regions, the resettlement policy was intensified. Funds were allocated to transport those wishing to new places, primarily to Siberia. Special ("Stolypin") passenger cars were built for the settlers. Beyond the Urals, the peasants were given lands free of charge, for raising the economy and landscaping, and loans were issued.

The sale of land to peasants in installments through a peasant bank was also necessary to reduce the lack of land. On the security of allotment land, loans were issued for the purchase of state land transferred to the Bank's fund, and land that was sold by landlords.

The development of agricultural cooperation, both commercial and credit, was given an impetus by the publication in 1908 of an exemplary charter. Credit partnerships received some benefits.

d) Progress of the reform.

1. Legal basis, stages and lessons of the reform.

The legislative basis for the reform was the decree of November 9, 1906, after the adoption of which the implementation of the reform began. The main provisions of the decree were enshrined in a 1910 law approved by the Duma and the State Council. Serious clarifications were introduced into the course of the reform by the law of 1911, which reflected the change in the emphasis of government policy and marked the beginning of the second stage of the reform.

In 1915 -1916. In connection with the war, the reform actually stopped. In June 1917 the reform was officially terminated by the Provisional Government. The reform was carried out by the efforts of the main department of land management and agriculture, headed by A.V.

Krivoshein, and Stolypin's Minister of the Interior.

2. The transformation of peasants into landowners at the first stage (1907-1910), in accordance with the decree of November 9, 1906, proceeded in several ways.

Strengthening striped plots in the property. Over the years, 2 million plots have been strengthened. When the pressure of local authorities ceased, the strengthening process was sharply reduced. In addition, most of the peasants, who only wanted to sell their allotment and not run their own household, have already done this. After 1911, only those who wanted to sell their plot applied. In total, in 1907-1915. 2.5 million people became "fortified" - 26% of the peasants of European Russia (excluding the western provinces and the Trans-Urals), but almost 40% of them sold their plots, most of them moving beyond the Urals, leaving for the city or replenishing the stratum of the rural proletariat.

Land management at the second stage (1911-1916) according to the laws of 1910 and 1911 made it possible to obtain an allotment in the property automatically - after the creation of cuts and farms, without submitting an application for strengthening the property.

In the "old-hearted" communities (communities where there had been no redistribution since 1861), according to the law of 1910, the peasants were automatically recognized as the owners of allotments. Such communities accounted for 30% of their total number. At the same time, only 600,000 of the 3.5 million members of the boundless communities requested documents certifying their property.

The peasants of the western provinces and some areas of the south, where communities did not exist, also automatically became owners. To do this, they did not need to sell special applications. The reform did not formally take place beyond the Urals, but even there the peasants did not know communal property.

3. Land management.

Organization of farms and cuts. In 1907-1910, only 1/10 of the peasants, who strengthened their allotments, formed farms and cuts.

After 1910 the government realized that a strong peasantry could not emerge on multi-lane sections. For this, it was necessary not to formally strengthen the property, but the economic transformation of allotments. The local authorities, who sometimes resorted to coercion of the community members, were no longer recommended to "artificially encourage" the strengthening process. The main direction of the reform was land management, which now in itself turned peasants into private property.

Now the process has accelerated. In total, by 1916, 1.6 million farms and cuts were formed on approximately 1/3 of the peasant allotment (communal and household) land purchased by the peasants from the bank. It was the beginning. It is important that in reality the potential scope of the movement turned out to be wider: another 20% of the peasants of European Russia filed applications for land management, but land management work was suspended by the war and interrupted by the revolution.

4. Resettlement beyond the Urals.

By decree of March 10, 1906, the right to resettle peasants was granted to everyone without restrictions. The government allocated considerable funds for the costs of settling settlers in new places, for their medical care and public needs, for laying roads.

Having received a loan from the government, 3.3 million people moved to the new lands in “Stolypin” wagons, 2/3 of which were landless or land-poor peasants. 0.5 million returned, many replenished the population of Siberian cities or became agricultural workers. Only a small part of the peasants became farmers in the new place.

The results of the resettlement campaign were as follows. First, during this period, a huge leap was made in the economic and social development of Siberia. Also population this region increased by 153% over the years of colonization. If before resettlement to Siberia there was a reduction in sown areas, then in 1906-1913 they were expanded by 80%, while in the European part of Russia by 6.2%. In terms of the rate of development of animal husbandry, Siberia also overtook the European part of Russia.

5. Destruction of the community.

To move to new economic relations was developed whole system economic - legal measures to regulate the agrarian economy. The Decree of November 9, 1906 proclaimed the predominance of the fact of sole ownership of land over the legal right to use it. The peasants could now allocate the land that was in actual use from the community, regardless of its will. The land allotment became the property not of a family, but of an individual householder. Measures were taken to ensure the strength and stability of working peasant farms. So, in order to avoid land speculation and concentration of property, the maximum size of individual land ownership was limited by law, and the sale of land to non-peasants was allowed. The law of June 5, 1912 allowed the issuance of a loan secured by any allotment land acquired by the peasants. The development of various forms of credit - mortgage, reclamation, agricultural, land management - contributed to the intensification of market relations in the countryside.

In 1907 - 1915. 25% of households announced their separation from the community, while 20% - 2008.4 thousand households actually separated. New forms of land tenure became widespread: farms and cuts. As of January 1, 1916, there were already 1221.5 thousand of them. In addition, the law of June 14, 1910 considered it unnecessary for many peasants to leave the community, who were only formally considered community members. The number of such households amounted to about one third of all communal households.

6. Purchase of land by peasants with the help of a peasant bank.

The bank sold 15 million state and landowners' land, of which 30% was bought by installments by peasants. At the same time, special benefits were provided to the owners of farms and cuts, who, unlike others, received a loan in the amount of 100% of the cost of the acquired land at 5% per annum. As a result, if until 1906 the bulk of land buyers were peasant collectives, then by 1913 .7% of buyers were individual peasants.

7. Cooperative movement.

The cooperative movement developed rapidly. In 1905-1915, the number of rural credit partnerships increased from 1680 to 15.5 thousand. The number of production and consumer cooperatives in the countryside increased from 3 thousand. (1908) to 10 thousand (1915)

Many economists came to the conclusion that it is cooperation that represents the most promising direction for the development of the Russian countryside, meeting the needs of modernizing the peasant economy. Credit relations gave a strong impetus to the development of production, consumer and marketing cooperatives. The peasants, on a cooperative basis, created dairy and butter artels, agricultural societies, consumer shops, and even peasant artel dairy factories.

e) Conclusions.

Serious progress is being made in the peasant sector of Russia. Harvest years and fluctuations in world grain prices played an important role in this, but cut-off and farm farms progressed especially, where new technologies were used to a greater extent. The yield in these areas exceeded similar indicators of communal fields by 30-50%. Even more, by 61% compared with 1901-1905, the export of agricultural products increased in the prewar years. Russia was the largest producer and exporter of bread and flax, a number of livestock products. So, in 1910, the export of Russian wheat amounted to 36.4% of the total world export.

But this does not mean that pre-war Russia should be presented as a "peasant's paradise." The problems of hunger and agrarian overpopulation were not solved. The country still suffered from technical, economic and cultural backwardness. According to calculations

I.D. Kondratiev in the United States, on average, a farm accounted for a fixed capital of 3,900 rubles, while in European Russia the fixed capital of an average peasant farm barely reached 900 rubles. The national income per capita of the agricultural population in Russia was about 52 rubles a year, and in the United States - 262 rubles.

The growth rate of labor productivity in agriculture was relatively slow. While in Russia in 1913 they received 55 poods of bread from one tithe, in the USA they received 68, in France - 89, and in Belgium - 168 poods. The economic growth took place not on the basis of the intensification of production, but by increasing the intensity of manual peasant labor. But in the period under review, socio-economic conditions were created for the transition to a new stage of agrarian transformation - to the transformation of agriculture into a capital-intensive technologically progressive sector of the economy.

But a number of external circumstances (the death of Stolypin, the beginning of the war) interrupted the Stolypin reform. Stolypin himself believed that it would take 15-20 years for the success of his undertakings. But even during the period 1906-1913 a lot was done.

1) Social results of the fate of the community.

The community as a self-governing body of the Russian village was not affected by the reform, but the socio-economic body of the community began to collapse, the number of land communities decreased from 135,000 to 110,000.

At the same time, in the central non-chernozem regions, the disintegration of the community was almost not observed, it was here that there were numerous cases of arson.

2) Socio-political results of the reform.

There was a gradual cessation of peasant uprisings. At the first stage 1907 -1909. when allotments were consolidated into property, often under pressure from zemstvo chiefs, the number of peasant uprisings began to grow, in 1910 -1000. But after the shift in the emphasis of government policy to land management, the rejection of coercion and some economic successes, peasant unrest almost stopped; to 128. The main political goal was still not achieved. As 1917 showed, the peasantry retained the ability "with the whole world" to oppose the landlords. In 1917, it became obvious that the agrarian reform was 50 years late, but the main reason for the failure was the socio-political half-heartedness of the transformations, which manifested itself in the preservation of the landed estates intact.

RESULTS of the reforms:

The cooperative movement developed.

The number of wealthy peasants increased.

According to the gross harvest of bread, Russia was in 1st place in the world.

The number of livestock increased by 2.5 times.

About 2.5 million people moved to new lands.

The main provisions of the agrarian reform Goals 1. Destruction of the peasant community 2. Creation of farms and cuts 3. Resettlement policy 4. Development of peasant productive cooperation 5. Provision of state aid peasant farms 6. Ensuring the legal equality of the peasantry 1. Removing social tension in the countryside 2. Forming a wide layer of small proprietors to ensure political stability 3. Distracting peasants from the idea of ​​compulsory alienation of landowners' lands 4. Preservation of all forms of private property (including landowners) Directions

Manifesto November 3, 1905 “On improving the welfare and easing the situation of the peasant population” Decree to the Governing Senate on supplementing certain provisions of the current law relating to peasant land ownership and land use (November 9, 1906) Law on amending and supplementing certain resolutions on peasant land ownership (June 14, 1910) Decree on land management commissions (May 29, 1911) The main bills regulating the agrarian reform:

The destruction of the community began agrarian reform. The government allowed free exit from the community. Allotments assigned to the peasant became his property, reduced to a single plot. A peasant could go to a cut (staying to live in a village), or to a farm. Stolypin sought to create a stratum of petty bourgeois proprietors as the backbone of the autocracy. P.A. Stolypin inspects farm gardens near Moscow in April 1910

But main task reform was the desire to divert the peasants from the struggle for the seizure of landowners' lands. But the exit suddenly went in a different direction. 60% of the peasants who left the community sold their allotments. By 1915, the number of farmers was 10%. The rest of the peasants treated them with undisguised hostility. Stolypin inspects the farm.

The most important direction reform was the resettlement policy. Struggling with overpopulation in the center of the country, Stolypin began to distribute land in Siberia for Far East and Central Asia providing immigrants with benefits (exemption for 5 years from taxes and military service). But local authorities were hostile to it. Almost 20% of the migrants returned. True population eastern regions still increased markedly. Russian settlers in the Samarkand province of the Turkestan Governor General.

Relationship reform local government and agrarian reform The electoral system was lowered to the level of volosts and villages, with the grassroots self-government bodies being given a semi-official character. “First of all, it is necessary to create a citizen, a peasant-owner, a small landowner and ... - citizenship itself will reign in Russia. Citizen first, citizenship second. Endowment of the peasant owner civil rights. The lower cell of the zemstvo representation is the county zemstvo

The first results of the reforms. Stolypin did not wait quick results. Once he said: "Give the state 20 years of peace ... and you will not recognize today's Russia." During the years of reform, the sown area increased by 10%, Russia began to export 25% of the world trade in bread, widespread use of mineral fertilizers began, peasants began to purchase and apply agricultural technique.

This again led to the beginning of an industrial boom (9% per year). The peasantry went its own way, unlike the Americans, it began to unite in cooperatives that actively worked both in the domestic and foreign markets. In 1912 the Moscow People's Bank was created, lending to peasants for the purchase of equipment, seeds, fertilizers, etc. P Stolypin visiting the kulak.

Reasons for the failure of P.A. Stolypin ExternalInternal Death of Stolypin P.A. Russo-Japanese War(gg.) The rise of the labor movement in the years. Opposition of the peasantry Lack of allocated funds for land management and resettlement Poor organization of land management work

Conclusions: The beginning of the 20th century was a time of political instability for Russia. A series of riots, war, revolution affected the entire social structure Russian society. In such difficult conditions, Russia needed both political and economic reforms that could strengthen and improve the economy. It would be most expedient to start with agrarian reforms, because even at the beginning of the 20th century Russia remained an agrarian country with a majority of the rural population. The agrarian reform became the impetus for the development of a series of projects to address a number of issues: labor, cultural and educational, financial and local government. All these issues were closely related to the new changes that were introduced as a result of the agrarian reforms. The beginning of these transformations in Russia was laid by the agrarian reform led by P.A. Stolypin, main goal which was the creation of a wealthy peasantry, imbued with the idea of ​​property and therefore not in need of a revolution, acting as a support for the government.

In Russian society critical issue has always been agricultural. The peasants, who became free in 1861, did not actually receive ownership of the land. They were stifled by lack of land, the community, the landowners, therefore, during the revolution of 1905-1907, the fate of Russia was decided in the countryside.

All the reforms of Stolypin, who in 1906 headed the government, one way or another were aimed at transforming the countryside. The most important of them is land, called "Stolypin", although its project was developed before him.

Its purpose was to strengthen the position of a “strong sole proprietor”. This was the first step of the reform, which was carried out in three main directions:

The destruction of the community and the introduction of peasant private ownership of land instead of communal property;

Assistance to the kulaks through the Peasants' Bank and through the partial sale of state and noble lands to them;

Resettlement of peasants to the outskirts of the country.

The essence of the reform was that the government abandoned the previous policy of supporting the community and moved on to its violent breaking.

As you know, the community was an organizational and economic association of peasants for the use of a common forest, pasture and watering place, an alliance in relation to the authorities, a kind of social organism who gave villagers small life guarantees. Until 1906, the community was artificially preserved, as it was a convenient means of state control over the peasants. The community was responsible for the payment of taxes and various payments in the performance of state duties. But the community hindered the development of capitalism in agriculture. At the same time, communal land tenure delayed natural process stratification of the peasantry and put an obstacle in the way of the formation of a class of small proprietors. The inalienability of allotment lands made it impossible to obtain loans secured by them, and striping and periodic redistribution of land prevented the transition to more productive forms of its use, so granting peasants the right to freely leave the community was a long overdue economic necessity. A feature of the Stolypin agrarian reform was the desire to quickly destroy the community. The main reason for this attitude of the authorities to the community was revolutionary events and agrarian riots in 1905 - 1907.

Another equally important goal land reform was socio-political, since it was required to create a class of small proprietors as the main cell of the state, which is an opponent of all destructive theories, as a social support for the autocracy.

The implementation of the reform was initiated by a tsarist decree of November 9, 1906, under the modest title "On the Supplement of Certain Regulations of the Current Law Concerning Peasant Land Ownership", according to which free exit from the community was allowed.

The land plots that had been in the use of the peasants since the last redistribution were assigned to the property, regardless of the change in the number of souls in the family. There was an opportunity to sell your allotment, as well as to allocate land in one place - on a farm or a cut. At the same time, all this involved the removal of restrictions on the movement of peasants around the country, the transfer of part of the state and specific lands to the Peasant Land Bank to expand operations for the purchase and sale of land, the organization of a resettlement movement in Siberia in order to provide landless and landless peasants with allotments through the development of vast eastern expanses . But the peasants often did not have enough money to set up a farm in a new place. After 1909 there were fewer immigrants. Some of them, unable to withstand the difficult living conditions, returned.

The bank provided benefits to farmers. The Peasants' Bank also contributed to the creation of a layer of prosperous kulaks in the countryside.

From 1907 to 1916 in European Russia, only 22% of peasant households left the community. The emergence of a layer of farmers-farmers provoked resistance from the communal peasants, which was expressed in damage to livestock, crops, implements, beatings and arson of farmers. Only for 1909 - 1910. the police registered about 11,000 facts of arson farms.

Such a reform, for all its simplicity, meant a revolution in the soil structure. It was necessary to change the whole system of life and the psychology of the communal peasantry. For centuries, communal collectivism, corporatism, and equalization have been affirmed. Now it was necessary to move on to individualism, private property psychology.

Decree of November 9, 1906 was then transformed into a permanent current laws, adopted on July 14, 1910 and May 19, 1911, which provided for additional measures to speed up the withdrawal of peasants from the community. For example, in the case of land management work to eliminate striping within the community, its members could henceforth be considered the owners of the land, even if they did not ask for it.

Effects:

Accelerating the process of stratification of the peasantry,

Destruction of the peasant community

Rejection of the reform by a significant part of the peasantry.

Results:

Separation from the community by 1916 25 - 27% of peasant households,

The growth of agricultural production and the increase in the export of bread.

The Stolypin agrarian reform did not have time to give all the results expected from it. The initiator of the reform himself believed that it would take at least 20 years to gradually resolve the land issue. “Give the state 20 years of internal and external peace, and you will not recognize today's Russia,” said Stolypin. Neither Russia nor the reformer himself had these twenty years. However, over the 7 years of the actual implementation of the reform, noticeable successes were achieved: the sown areas increased by 10% in general, in the areas where peasants left the community the most - by one and a half times, grain exports increased by one third. Over the years, the amount of mineral fertilizers used has doubled and the use of agricultural machinery has expanded. By 1914, farmers overtook the community in the supply of goods to the city and accounted for 10.3% of the total number of peasant households (according to L.I. Semennikova, this was a lot short term, but few across the country). By the beginning of 1916, farmers had personal cash deposits in the amount of 2 billion rubles.

The agrarian reform accelerated the development of capitalism in Russia. The reform stimulated not only the development of agriculture, but also industry and trade: a mass of peasants rushed to the cities, increasing the labor market, and the demand for agricultural and industrial products increased sharply. Foreign observers noted that “if the majority European nations If things go the same way between 1912-1950 as they did between 1900-1912, then by the middle of this century Russia will dominate Europe, both politically and economically and financially.”

However, the majority of the peasants were still committed to the community. For the poor - she personified social protection, for the rich - easy solution their problems. Thus, it was not possible to radically reform the “soil”.