Obshchina

Mir (Russian: мир ) or obshchina ( община ) is the name for the Russian village community. Among its members were all peasants of a village. The used by them land was redistributed among them periodically. Thus, the I differed fundamentally from rural authorities Western and Central Europe.

History

The village community comes from Old Slavonic time and was included in the Feudalisierungsprozess of Russian society since the 10th century. In this system, the village of the feudal lords collectively for all duties and work performance ( Fron ) was liable.

Essentially, it was in this field to the management of community agricultural land. Every farmer should get as much land for the use that he could get himself and meet his obligations towards the state and landowners. The arable land was divided according to soil quality and other criteria in land. Each household was equal to the number of its adult members take one or more of land, with a redistribution took place at regular intervals.

With the under Tsar Alexander II in 1861 carried out reform, which included the abolition of serfdom, which I received is even more important: together with the administrative function, he became the owner of the assigned to the farmers farming land, but stuck in return collectively for financial services to the State. In this way, the problem of state resource extraction could be achieved on lean way for the construction of a sufficiently large tax administration would have overwhelmed the Tsarist state apparatus in the vast empire.

From an economic point of view was opposed by the Mir a rational mode of operation. The periodic redistribution joined a rural interests, the soil through fertilization, amelioration or similar measures to improve largely. Since the farmers had always expected, after the next redistribution to lose them improved land again, they generally shied away before long-term measures back. In addition favored the constant redistricting soil fragmentation, which is an efficient management detrimental. Because it was so extreme mixed situations, which made necessary the maintenance of the corridor constraint and the old three-field system.

Through numerous concessions to the aristocratic landowners gaped text and reality in 1861 carried out reform far apart: the "free" become farmers was a hand made ​​not enough acreage for their own management available, on the other hand, congested farmers high taxes and depending also interest owed to the State of. This fact, coupled with a growing peasant population under constant cultivation, led to a deep crisis in agriculture in the second half of the 19th century.

The rural community has been significantly weakened by the Stolypin's reforms from 1906, because now the farmers had the option to withdraw from one and to cultivate the land as private property. This led to an increase in agricultural production, but also accelerated the social differentiation in the village.

An Analog to the collective farms ( kolkhozes ), which were introduced 1928/32 by the Soviet government, was the joint tax liability. The big difference was that the collective farm was the owner of the harvest and the sale proceeds (at government-regulated prices) paid farmers for their work. The farmer was living in I owners of the product of his work and had to do his share of the duties of the village from his harvest or their sale proceeds.

Slavophile thinkers saw the existence of village Mir the proof that the Russian people allegedly did not seek for the " bourgeois " acquisitiveness, but is this choice to solve the social problems of mankind. For this reason, I was also often idealized. The village community has played an important role in discussions between the Populists and the Russian Marxists.