Topic 12. The development of capitalism in the post-reform period (60-90s of the XIX century).

1. Completion of the industrial revolution in Russia. The emergence of new industries in the industry.

2. The development of agriculture after the abolition of serfdom.

3. The development of market relations in the 2nd half of the XIX century. Domestic and foreign trade.

4. Finance, credit, money circulation. Monetary reform S.Yu. Witte.

Completion of the industrial revolution in Russia. The emergence of new industries in the industry.

After the abolition of serfdom in 1861, the second stage of the industrial revolution began in Russia.. Capitalism began to develop rapidly. This was facilitated by a significant expansion domestic market and providing industry with cheap labor force. There are much more opportunities for the initial accumulation of capital. In Russia, its sources are:

Higher than in other countries of developed capitalism, the rate of profit of Russian industrialists;

Redemption payments of peasants, together with interest on land;

Increasing the role of public debt in initial accumulation;

Trade - as a sphere of formation of large capitals;

Increased exploitation of inland colonies;

Creation joint-stock companies(From 1861 to 1873, 325 joint-stock companies with a capital of 796 million rubles were created in the country).

back side accumulation of capital was the stratification of the peasantry, which strengthened the formation of the labor market. In the 20 years after the reform, almost 50 million passports were issued to peasants so that they could work in the cities.

Manufactories and handicrafts were gradually replaced by the capitalist factory. For 9 years (1864-1872), the number of factories and factories in the country increased 2.4 times, the cost of manufactured products - 2.75 times, the number of workers 2.5 times. By the 80s of the XIX century, the industrial revolution is completed in the most important industries Russian industry: metallurgical, mining, coal. From 1875 to 1892 number steam engines in Russia increased by 2 times, and their capacity by 3 times.

Along with the development of traditional industries in Russia, several new industries have emerged, such as oil production, oil refining, the chemical industry, and mechanical engineering has risen to a new level.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the Russian economy developed cyclically through several crises. In the early 1990s, after a long depression in Russia, a period of industrial growth began, which was due to the railway construction that had begun in the country. In addition, at the end of the 19th century, significant capital was invested by foreign investors in the Russian economy. In conclusion, it is necessary to say about one more specific feature of the industrial revolution in Russia. This is its significant delay in time by 100-150 years compared, for example, with industrial revolution in England, as well as the extreme uneven flow in different industries.

The development of agriculture after the abolition of serfdom.

After the abolition of serfdom, the rise of agriculture was slow and with great difficulty. This can be explained by the surviving remnants of serfdom and the oppression of the rural community, which hampered the development of market relations in the countryside.

The commune froze agriculture at a primitive traditional level and held back the stratification of the peasantry. In a community, both the richest and the poorest peasant had the same amount of land if they had the same families. The poor were those peasants who had no horses or had only one horse. For a full-fledged peasant economy, at least two horses were required.

Poor peasants could not sell their allotment and go to the city to earn money and permanent residence for two reasons: 1) the land was not their property; 2) the community did not release the peasants who did not pay their share of taxes and redemption payments for the land.

And yet, in the 80s and 90s of the 19th century, market relations began to play a more significant role in agriculture. This was manifested in the intensification of the stratification of the peasantry, the separation of the rural bourgeoisie and the rural proletariat from its midst. In the early 1990s, the rural bourgeoisie owned in different provinces from 34 to 50% of all peasant land, from 38 to 62% of working livestock. The rural poor (about 50% of all peasant households) owned only 18 to 32% of the land and 10 to 30% of working livestock. By the end of the 19th century, the number of horseless and one-horse households accounted for almost 60% of all farms.

The most important instrument of labor in peasant farms continued to be a plow, which in 1910 in Russia accounted for 43% of all plowing implements. Over the last decade of the 19th century in Russia there were 2 crop failures and 4 famine years. By the end of the 19th century, 5-6 million bankrupt peasants annually left the village and went to work in the city.

After the reform of 1861, there was also a stratification among the landowners' households. The basis for the existence of half of the landowners' farms was the work of the peasants. The peasants worked for debts on the land of the landowner with their draft animals and implements. Only peasants took part in working off - the middle peasants, who had their own working cattle and necessary inventory. The kulaks did not need this, since they, if necessary, paid the landowners with money. The poor could not participate in working off, since they did not have draft animals. The labor of the peasants in working off was ineffective, so the landowners' farms fell into decay and went bankrupt. In the 1990s, about 2,000 landowners' estates were sold annually. The kulaks bought estates. By 1905, about half of the former landowners' lands had passed into their hands. At the same time, 50% of the landlord farms successfully rebuilt their farms into large capitalist farms. Using wage labor and advanced technologies for their time, these farms increased agricultural production. products and increased the marketability of agriculture.

At the end of the 19th century, grain harvests in Russia increased 1.7 times, potato production - 2.5 times, beet sugar production - 20 times. But, despite such achievements, the agrarian issue in Russia was not fully resolved, since the reform of 1861 was not brought to its logical end.

1. State of agriculture after the Civil War

In the conditions of a predominantly agrarian country, the restoration of the national economy after the Civil War, it was decided to start with agriculture and light industry. This made it possible to create the basis for the rise of heavy industry. However, the growth of agricultural production did not start immediately. By the end of 1922, the village had not recovered from the drought of 1921. And only from the fruitful year of 1923 did agriculture begin to rise. In 1925, the sown area in the country amounted to 99.3% of the 1913 level, and the gross agricultural output exceeded this level by 12%. The harvest of grain crops reached almost 4.5 billion poods and was 11% higher than the average annual harvest of the five pre-war years.

Large livestock cattle, sheep and pigs exceeded the figures of 1916 - the highest in the pre-revolutionary history of Russia. By 1927, there were 30 million cows in the country (15.1% more than in 1916), 126.8 million sheep (12.2% more), 23.2 million pigs (12.2% more). 11.1%). The number of horses remained smaller than before the war. In 1916, there were 35.8 million of them in the country, by 1920 - 30.5 million, by the spring of 1927 - 31.5 million (88.2% of the 1916 level).

1925 was the last year in the history of Russia, when there was an increase in the use of sokh in the peasant economy. By the spring of 1926, the number of sokhs, roe deer (a kind of plow that rolls the earth in one direction) and sabans decreased by 100.3 thousand compared to the spring of 1925, and by the spring of 1927 - by another 253.3 thousand. At the same time, the number of plows and bookers increased by 614.1 thousand and 924 thousand, respectively. In the spring of 1927, only 17.3 million arable implements were used in the USSR, including 11.6 million (72. ) plows and 5.7 million (32.9%) dry. Replacing the plow with a plow provided improved tillage and a noticeable (by 15-20/o) increase in yield.

According to data for 1927, when the number of peasant farms reached its maximum, the average allotment of a peasant farm in the European part of the RSFSR was 13.2 hectares (before the revolution it was 10.1 hectares). At the same time, only 15.2% of peasant farms had one or another machine (average data for the USSR). One seeder accounted for 37 farms, a reaper for 24 farms, a hay mower for 56 farms, a threshing machine for 47 farms, a winnower or sorting machine for 25 farms. This means that manual sowing prevailed everywhere; scythe and sickle, wooden flail and threshing roller continued to be the main tools for harvesting and threshing crops.

The situation was comparatively better in Ukraine, where specific gravity farms with cars accounted for 20.8%, and in the Steppe Territory - 35%. In the North Caucasus, 22.9% of peasant households had cars, in Siberia - 26.1%, in the Lower Volga region - 19.3%. In the peasant farms of the RSFSR, Belorussia and Transcaucasia, which consume the strip, there were 2-4 times fewer machines; in the republics of the Soviet East - 10-11 times less than in the RSFSR. At the end of the 20s. the production of agricultural machinery and tools increased significantly: from 1926/27 to 1928/29. the production of plows increased from 953.2 to 1677.3 thousand pieces; bookers - from 22.3 to 36.6; seeders - from 57.2 to 105.3; cultivators - from 60.7 to 91.5; loboheat - from 89.0 to 166.3; grain cleaning machines - from 99.7 to 233.2 thousand pieces. The output of tractors at domestic enterprises over the years increased from 732 to 3267. In 1929, the first combines were produced in the country.

The harvest of grain per hectare in the USSR during the years of the NEP ranged from 6.2 centners (1924) to 8.3 centners (1925). The average grain yield in Russia in 1922-1928 was 7.6 centners per hectare (in 1909-1913 it was 6.9 centners). The average annual grain harvest for the five years 1925-1929. amounted to over 733.3 million centners, which exceeded the pre-war level by 12.5%. Gross agricultural output, which in 1921 reached 60% of the pre-war level, already in 1926 exceeded it by 18%.

The social image of the rural population has changed significantly. In 1924/25, 61.1% of the economically active population of the village were middle peasants, 25.9% were poor, 9.3% were agricultural workers (labor laborers), and 0.4% were employees. Fists, according to this year, were 3.3% of the rural population. By 1927/28, the proportion of poor households had fallen to 22.1%; middle peasants - increased to 62.7%, kulak - up to 3.9%, proletarian - up to 11.3%.

Big role marketing, consumer, machine cooperatives, which united relatively prosperous peasants who produced marketable products, played in the establishment of agricultural production. The poor, who did not produce products for sale, more often created collective farms - communes, artels and partnerships for the joint cultivation of the land (TOZs). In artels, the main means of production were socialized, and in TOZs they were kept in private ownership with joint work. In 1925, more than a quarter, and in 1928, 55% of all peasants were in cooperatives. In areas of specialized production (flax-growing, beet-sugar, vegetable-growing, dairy farms), the cooperatives covered the vast majority of peasants. In 1925 cooperative trade accounted for 44.5% of the country's retail trade. In the RSFSR, in 1926/27, cooperatives accounted for 65% of the supply of peasants with tools and machines.

Collective and state farms, which enjoyed great support from the state, were very few in number. By the middle of 1927, there were 14,832 collective farms in the USSR, in which 194.7 thousand peasant families united (0.8% of their total number in the country).

A year later, the collective farms already united 416.7 thousand peasant farms - 1.7% of their total number. State farms were even smaller (4398 at the beginning of 1927). Although they were served by approximately 40% of the tractors available in the entire agriculture of the country, they accounted for an insignificant share (1.5%) of grain production (in 1929 - 1.8%).

In 1927, the idea of ​​organizing state enterprises to service the village with machinery. At first, these were tractor columns (the first was formed in September 1928 in the Azov district of the Don district from 18 tractors to serve two collective farms and one land society). In November 1928, at the base of the column at the state farm. Shevchenko (Odessa region), a machine and tractor station was created. In the future, the MTS played a crucial role in the collectivization of peasant farms and the development of agricultural production in the country.

Main economic indicators agriculture in 1926-1928. also surpassed the indicators of pre-revolutionary Russia. Gross agricultural output in the country was 18-20% more than in 1913. However, three-quarters of the sowing work in the country was carried out by hand; up to half of the grain was harvested with a scythe and a sickle, threshed with a flail and other primitive tools. Low yields and frequent crop failures, harsh natural conditions exacerbated the situation. Marketable bread (for the city) the village produced 30% less than before the revolution. The number of peasant farms reached its maximum in 1927 - 25 million against 21 million in 1916. The bulk of them were poor-middle peasant farms, which produced grain mainly for their own consumption. Against the background of the growth of industry, the unprofitability of small-scale peasant production became more and more pronounced. Hopes for improvement were associated with the transfer of small farms to large-scale production.

The situation in agriculture in the Soviet Republic in the early 1920s was critical. The size of sown areas has decreased: in central Russia, the decrease in sown areas was 20-25%, in Ukraine - about 20%, in Belarus - 30%...

agricultural policy USSR in 1920-1930s

The most important reserve of industrialization was the country's agriculture, or rather the human and material resources that the village had at its disposal. Gordiev narrowed down the problems of the countryside: poverty, lack of culture, wretchedness, agrarian overpopulation, etc....

The agricultural sector of Transnistria in the post-war period

During the Great Patriotic War the occupiers, having thoroughly plundered Transnistria, greatly undermined its economy, and, first of all, the material and technical base of the agrarian sector...

BSSR in the mid 50s - 80s.

During the period of 50-80s the situation of agriculture remained difficult. And not only because of the huge losses during the war years. The post-war industrialization of the BSSR was carried out largely due to agriculture ...

Collectivization in the USSR

The Land Code of the RSFSR was adopted in September 1922. Its integral part the Law "On Labor Land Use" became the Code "forever abolished the right of private ownership of land", subsoil, water and forests within the RSFSR ...

New Economic Policy (NEP)

NEP: essence, experience, lessons

The country broke out economic crisis. Only “... at the end of the war,” Lenin admitted, “we saw the entire degree of ruin and poverty that for a long time condemns us to a simple healing of wounds” Lenin V.I. Full coll. cit., vol. 42, p. 200....

Formation of the USSR

The end of the Civil War on the territory of the former Russian Empire marked not only the victory of the radical party, which adhered to communist views. The war ended with a huge devastation in the economy ...

Transnistria after the civil war

The replacement of the surplus appropriation, which was almost halved, with a tax in kind, which, in fact, was the beginning of the transition to a new economic policy, gave the peasant the opportunity to expand and improve his farm, created an incentive ...

Five-year plan for 1928/29-1932/33

Voluntary production cooperation of small and medium-sized peasant farms, which received in the 20s. the name "collectivization" ...

The role of World War I in Russia's national catastrophe

First World War was a severe test for all sectors of the Russian economy, including agriculture. The war had a strong influence on the landowners' farms, and its influence was not the same on different types of them ...

Soviet Union in 1945-1953

The war turned out to be huge human and material losses for the USSR. It claimed almost 27 million human lives. 1710 cities and urban-type settlements were destroyed, 70 thousand villages and villages were destroyed ...

Socio-economic development of the USSR in the 1950s - 1960s Khrushchev reformation

After Stalin's death, it was quite obvious to his successors that economic system needed to develop a new economic strategy. Already in August 1953 G.M...

USSR on the eve of the Great Patriotic War

By the end of the 1930s, significant changes had taken place in the countryside as well. Despite some negative consequences of collectivization, it should be noted that it had the character of a real revolution in socio-economic relations...

Economic development Belarus in the 20s of the XX century

After the end of the civil war, the priority task for the authorities was to restore the national economy and build new economic and production relations. The situation in Belarus was rather deplorable...

The role of agriculture in the Russian economy. By the mid-1850s, the population of Russia was about 70 million people, of which only 10% lived in cities. By the mid-1890s, the population of the empire had grown to 130 million people, of which 13% lived in cities.

In terms of population growth, Russia in the second half of the 19th century overtook all European countries.

Artist M. K. Klodt

During this period, the country was the world's largest supplier of agricultural products. Agriculture Russia had more than 25 million horses, 31 million head of cattle, 12 million pigs, 63 million sheep.

When talking about agriculture Russia XIX century, they mean mainly European Russia, the most developed agricultural region. In other places of the empire (Central Asia, Siberia and Transcaucasia), due to the small population, agricultural production served only local needs and had no national significance. In European Russia, there were the main lands (arable land, pastures) of the country, the vast majority of livestock (more than 80%). The bulk of grain, meat, poultry and other products were produced here both to meet the country's domestic needs and for export abroad. Agricultural and livestock products were the main items of Russian export throughout the 19th century.

Artist K. E. Makovsky

reformed village. The abolition of the serfdom of the peasants greatly changed the conditions economic activity in the village. Changes gradually began to bring positive results. The productivity of agricultural production grew: if in the early 1860s the average grain harvest was about 25 pounds per tithe (slightly more than one hectare), then after 20 years it rose to 40 pounds. The peasant economy was increasingly involved in commodity-money relations: the surplus was sold on the market.

The abolition of serfdom made the peasant legally independent of the landlord, but the landowners still retained important economic levers in their hands. In accordance with the provisions of the reform of 1861, the size of the peasant allotment and the nature of duties (working off) were to be determined by agreement between the peasants and the landowners. This agreement was called the Charter. It was made up of peace mediators - persons appointed by the government from among the local noble landlords. Naturally, these letters-contracts defended the rights of the nobles, which caused discontent among the peasants.

This situation was especially noticeable in the black earth provinces, where the rural population was very numerous and where extremely fertile land was incomparably more expensive than in the northern, western and eastern regions of the empire. It was in the black earth provinces (Oryol, Kursk, Voronezh, Tambov, Penza, Kiev, Poltava, Chernigov, Kharkov, etc.) that the size of the land that passed to the peasants (allotment) turned out to be especially small, and the contradictions of land relations were felt most acutely.

It often happened that the land plot, the size of which was 3-4 acres, did not provide for the food needs of the peasant family. As a rule, families were large (8-10 children per family was common). Over the years, the family grew, but the size of the land holdings remained the same.

The land was considered the property of the community (the world) and had to be distributed according to the number of eaters. Since the composition of families changed over the years, it was necessary to regularly redistribute the land. However, it was very difficult to put them into practice. In some places, such redistributions were carried out every few decades, in others they were never carried out. As a result, the peasants were dispossessed. Family plots were divided and decreased, because. parents cut off the land to their children, those, in turn, to their children, and so on.

Capitalist relations in agriculture. However, not only the decrease in land ownership contributed to food shortages. There were other reasons as well. Chief among them is the low productivity of agricultural production. The food supply of the population became more and more scarce.

There were very few technical innovations in peasant farms, and they were approved with with great difficulty. There was no interest in modern methods conducting agricultural work. The old system of crop rotation reigned supreme; three fields: in the first year, the field was sown with winter crops (rye or wheat), in the second - with spring crops (in addition to rye and wheat - oats, barley, peas), and in the third year it remained unsown (fallow) and served as a pasture. In developed countries, they abandoned the three-field system long ago, where the productivity of the land was ensured by alternation and appropriate selection of crops, but in Russia everything was the old fashioned way.

Among the main agricultural crops, rye was in the first place: about 40% of all arable land in European Russia was allocated for it. Then came oats (20%), wheat (17%), barley (7%), buckwheat (6%), millet (3%). The now popular potato was then not very common, its plantings occupied only 2% of the land. Potatoes were grown mainly in the Baltic States and on the territory of modern Belarus.

The productivity of peasant farms was low and often twice inferior to the yields on landlord lands, where much more fertilizers, the latest agricultural implements, modern forms crop rotation.

For peasants, the purchase of plows, harrows, winnowing machines, reapers, etc. was a complex matter and often, due to material considerations, unrealistic. As of old, they used a plow and a wooden plow. The plow loosened the soil no deeper than 5-10 cm, and wooden harrows captured only the topmost layer of the earth.

The government was aware that the low productivity of peasant agriculture determines the position of the bulk of the peasantry. When zemstvo organizations arose, the authorities began to encourage them to disseminate modern agrotechnical knowledge among the peasants. Schools and courses were opened where they taught how to conduct business in order to increase productivity. The first experimental stations and demonstration farms also appeared, which aroused great interest. In 1865, the Petrovsky Agricultural and Forestry Academy was founded in Moscow, one of the tasks of which was to study the problems of agriculture and develop recommendations for farmers.

The lack of land and the communal organization of the peasantry prevented the formation of a peasant producer who worked for the needs of the market. Questions and tasks

1. Note the features of the development of the Russian economy after the abolition of serfdom.
2. Explain what was the change in economic activity in the countryside after the reform of 1861.
3. What contributed and what hindered the formation of a peasant producer?
4. Explain the role played by the community in the life of the peasants. Has this role changed after the abolition of serfdom?
5. Why was the productivity of peasant farms inferior to that of the landlords?

Agriculture in post-reform Russia was extensive an increase in gross grain harvests was achieved by plowing new lands (while intensive development, the increase in production is ensured by the improvement of agriculture and the rise in productivity). The main supplier of bread remained the landowners' farms, but the role of the peasants gradually increased. In the world export of bread, Russia occupied the first place.

After the fall of serfdom, the landlords had to rebuild the economic system on a market basis. The “segments” made during the reform forced the peasants to rent land from the landlords, but often they could only pay with their labor. Created labor system of the economy, in which the peasant cultivated the landowner's land with the help of his inventory and livestock (this is its similarity with corvée). Winter hiring, when bread ran out, allowed the landlords to hire peasants on enslaving terms - semi-serf exploitation arose.

In the post-reform 20th anniversary, two ways of development of agriculture: 1) prussian way- slow restructuring of the economy with the preservation of large landownership - spread in the Central Agricultural Region (advanced landlords bought livestock and equipment, but it was unprofitable to conduct business on large areas); 2) american way- entrepreneurial, farming - was used in the steppe regions of the Trans-Volga region and the North Caucasus, where landownership was weak or did not exist at all.

After the reform of 1861 began cre bundlegentry, a few prosperous families stood out, and completely ruined ones appeared. The middle peasants and the poor made up the bulk of the peasant population.

Peasant community, existed in Russia from time immemorial, according to the reform received the status of a rural society. The community was engaged in the distribution of land allotment; as an administrative unit performed tax and police duties. The community government was rural gathering and elected village chief, who executed the decisions of the gathering and the orders of the provincial foreman and the conciliator. According to the law, only householders were allowed to attend. In the black earth provinces this rule was strictly observed; in the non-chernozem regions, where the heads of families often went to work, women and youth occupied a strong place at gatherings.

The community had collective land use and individual farming. The peasants owned the land in strips and received the average harvest of the year. In most communities the land was cut according to the number of men; at the birth of a boy, the family received an allotment, with the death of a man, they lost their allotment. Such "private redistribution" happened constantly. On average, every 12 years "radical change" communal lands were re-divided according to the number of men. (However, in some communities there were no redistributions at all.)

IN black earth provinces in the first post-reform 20th anniversary, a radical redistribution became a rare occurrence; put on, even reduced, fed the family, and the peasant cherished him. The beginnings of inheritance and testamentary law appeared. In some provinces, allotments began to be sold, and the land became the property of new owners. The view of land as private property took root in the peasant mind.

IN non-chernozem provinces the peasants coped with the redemption payments only with the help of extraneous earnings. Those who could not go to work were exempted from allotment; redistributions were a frequent occurrence, the land was distributed among male workers. But the peasants employed at work in the city did not always have time to cultivate their allotment; there were more and more empty, abandoned lands, for which payments and taxes were collected. The peasants sought to get rid of the despoiling allotment as soon as possible. The 60-70s were a difficult period in the life of the peasants of the non-Chernozem provinces, but close contact with the city developed entrepreneurial skills; many peasants broke with the land and settled in the city.

In general, the reform significantly accelerated themove from the stagnant natural-consumerth economy to the commodity market.

The agricultural development of Russia in the post-reform period was not so successful. True, in 20 years the export of grain from Russia increased 3 times and in 1881 amounted to 202 million poods. In the world export of bread, Russia occupied the first place. Bread prices on the world market were high.

However, the growth in grain yields in Russia was not great. The increase in gross grain yields was achieved mainly through the plowing of new lands. This path of development is called extensive, in contrast to intensive, when the increase in production is ensured by improving agriculture and raising productivity. The main supplier of export grain remained the landlord economy, although the role of peasants gradually increased. What has changed and what has not changed in the landlord economy. In the hands of the landlords were vast areas of land. For every 100 acres of peasant land in the Central Chernozem region, there were 56 acres of landlords' land, and in the Central Industrial region - 30 acres. The largest landowners (the Stroganovs, Sheremetevs, Shuvalovs, and others) owned hundreds of thousands of acres in various provinces. After the abolition of serfdom, the landowners had to rebuild their economy on a market basis. They had the opportunity to organize a system of economy, transitional from corvée to capitalist. The cuts made during the reform forced the peasants to rent land from the landowner. But often they could offer him nothing but their labor as rent. This is how the labor system of the economy arose. It was similar to the corvée in that the peasant worked the landowner's land here with his working cattle and implements. In order to further enslave the peasants, the landowner resorted to winter hiring (the hiring agreement was concluded in winter, when the peasants ran out of bread and they agreed to any conditions). Such forms of exploitation were called semi-serfdom.

In general, after 1861 the attitude of the landowners towards the peasants changed greatly. Previously, the landowner often felt sorry for his peasants, came to their aid (after all, it was still property). Now he was ready to squeeze all the juice out of them and leave them to the mercy of fate. Only the most humane and far-sighted landowners who worked in the zemstvos tried somehow to make up for the broken relations and to get closer to the peasantry on the basis of the common interests of the local economy. Some landlords tried to introduce the capitalist system of economy. They started their own working cattle and equipment, bought agricultural machines, hired workers. But these forms of management took root with difficulty. It was not easy for them to compete with enslaving forms of exploitation, for which the reform of 1861 created favorable conditions. In addition, a purely entrepreneurial economy could not be profitable on very large areas. In that era, before tractors, the margin of profitability was usually 500 acres. Large landowners cultivated only their best lands in an entrepreneurial way, and gave other lands "for working out." And only in the steppe Trans-Volga, in the North Caucasus, where landownership was small or did not exist at all, entrepreneurial, farming began to quickly establish itself. These areas became the breadbasket of Russia and the main suppliers of bread for export. In the post-reform 20th anniversary, two paths of evolution of the agrarian system in Russia were identified. The central agricultural region embarked on a slow, protracted path of restructuring the economy with the preservation of large landed estates. This path is called Prussian. And in the steppe regions of the Trans-Volga region and the North Caucasus, another path began to emerge, a farming, entrepreneurial one, which historians call American. Peasantry in the 60≈70s 19th century In the pre-reform countryside, the groups of rich, middle and poor peasants were not constant in composition. During the life of one peasant, his family could visit all three groups. After the reform of 1861, the hereditary consolidation of peasant families in different social groups increased. Wealthy families, who no longer had to share their wealth with the landowner, began to pass it on by inheritance. On the other hand, in the post-reform village, not even poor, but completely ruined households appeared. This usually happened as a result of the bad qualities of householders (laziness, drunkenness, mismanagement, etc.). But their children, no matter how hardworking and diligent they were, had little chance of improving their household. The stratification of the peasantry began to take on an irreversible character. But there was no clear line between the middle peasants and the poor. These two social groups, closely interconnected, made up the bulk of the peasant population. Peasant community. The economic and social life of the Russian peasant proceeded within the framework of the community that existed in Russia from time immemorial. Under the reform of 1861, it received the status of a rural society.

The peasant community, a land-based neighborhood organization of small direct producers, was an economic association and the lowest administrative unit. The economic side of the community consisted of measures for the distribution and exploitation of the land allotment (redistribution of fields and meadows, the use of pastures and forests). As an administrative unit, the community was required by law to perform fiscal (tax) and police duties.

The main organs of community administration were the village assembly and the village headman. The latter had to execute the decisions of the meeting and the orders of the volost foreman and the mediator. According to the law, only householders (heads of families) were to attend the village meeting. In the provinces of the black earth belt, this rule was strictly observed. In the non-chernozem provinces, however, householders often found themselves "in retirement" (on earnings). Their wives came to the meeting. “There is more sense in a woman than in a peasant,” said the local peasants. Sometimes parents sent their sons 15-17 years old to the gathering - at that age a peasant youth was already a real worker. Peasant societies sometimes made decisions not to allow "youngsters" to attend the gathering - they "excite the gathering". And yet, women and youth have firmly taken a place at rural gatherings in the non-Chernozem provinces. In the Chernozem, the orders were more patriarchal. The community was built on a combination of collective land use and individual household management by each family. The peasants owned the land in the community in strips. Each yard was cut into strips of both good and bad lands, both near and far, both on a hillock and in a lowland. Having stripes in different places, the peasant annually received an average harvest: in a dry year, strips were rescued in low places, in a rainy year - on hillocks. The main condition for maintaining the economy and reproduction of life in the community was the labor of a plowman. The presence of healthy and strong workers, male plowmen was considered a guarantee of her well-being. Therefore, in many communities, land was distributed according to the number of men. If a man died in the family, society took away his clothes. If a boy was born, he received an allotment. Such "discounts-capes" occurred constantly and were called private redistributions. But the number of births usually exceeded the number of deaths. The resulting discrepancy could be eliminated if the communal lands were divided into a new number of souls with a reduced allotment. This was called the general (or radical) redistribution. It was repeated on average once every 12 years. But some communities did not make redistributions - neither general nor private. In such communities, the distribution of land was very uneven.

However, in the first post-reform 20th anniversary in the provinces of the black earth zone, redistributions became a rare occurrence. No matter how high the redemption payments were here, the allotment still fed the peasant family, and the peasants valued it very much. The long-term absence of redistribution led to the emergence of the beginnings of the hereditary right to land. “The spiritual testament is respected by society even more strongly thanks, perhaps, to the curses that the testator promises to violators of his will,” Zemstvo statisticians reported. Society looked at the acquired allotments as the inalienable property of the new owners. The land was gradually concentrated in the hands of wealthy families, and the concept of private ownership of land began to take root in the peasant mind. This suggests that the first post-reform 20th anniversary was a relatively favorable period in the life of the peasants of the Black Earth provinces. After all, land redistributions were not made from a good life. If there were no redistributions, then it was possible to live without them. Things were different in those years in the non-Chernozem provinces. Here the peasant allotment was taxed in excess of its profitability. Only with the help of outside earnings did the peasant cope with the redemption payments. Those who could not go to work (small children, the disabled, the elderly) did not have any clothes. The land here was distributed according to male workers (╚working souls╩). The peasant, perhaps, would have completely abandoned the allotment, but according to the law he could not leave forever the village to which he was assigned. Nevertheless, the peasant tried to "push" off his allotment at every opportunity. Repartitions of land in non-chernozem provinces were a frequent occurrence. Busy at work in the city, the peasant did not always have time to process his entire allotment.

There were more and more abandoned lands, for which, nevertheless, redemption payments and other taxes were collected. 60≈70s were a difficult period in the life of the village of the non-Chernozem center. Although close communication with the city quickly developed entrepreneurial skills among the local peasants.

So the reform of 1861 responded differently in different Russian lands. In general, despite the severity of redemption payments and semi-serf exploitation by the landlords, this reform significantly accelerated the transition of the peasants from a subsistence-consumer economy to a commodity-market economy.

Heavy industry recovery

By 1950, all branches of heavy industry had not only restored their pre-war production levels, but also doubled or nearly tripled their 1940 levels. At the same time, machine building and non-ferrous metallurgy were especially distinguished. But these industries, closely related to the output military equipment, and at the end of the war they produced significantly more products than at its beginning. Therefore, the doubling of output by the fuel industries, ferrous metallurgy and electric power industry during one post-war five-year plan was no less important. This made it possible to significantly increase the economic stability of the entire national economy by expanding its raw material and energy base.

Particularly noteworthy are the achievements in the development of the industry building materials, which changed the position of "Cinderella" during the war to the role of a princess in the context of a large-scale restoration of industrial, transport and social infrastructure, which was seriously damaged by fire and explosions during the hostilities.

Unfortunately, chemical industry was among the laggards. The leadership clearly underestimated its growing importance in those qualitative changes that had already begun in the middle of the 20th century.

Remark 1

Thus, in the Fourth Five-Year Plan (1946-1950), the deep decline in the production of civilian products in heavy industries, due to the peculiarities of the war economy, was not only compensated for, but significantly exceeded. This made it possible to expand and accelerate the recovery process in all structures of the national economy.

Recovery of production in light industry

Considerable difficulties due to the shortage of agricultural raw materials experienced food industry. The five-year plan provided for the restoration and new construction of 102 sugar and 106 bakeries, 77 meat processing plants, 70 dairy plants, 107 refrigerators, 1,200 butter and cheese factories, dozens and hundreds of other food production enterprises, and the complete restoration of the fishing fleet.

The light industry slowly restored the production of fabrics, knitwear, clothing and footwear, although it had a wider raw material base than the food industry. Commercial crops were purchased at prices favorable to the peasantry. Therefore, they were interested in expanding crops and increasing the yield of these crops. Weak links of light industry - high wear and tear technological equipment, insufficient supply of factories with fuel and electricity, as well as low wages for workers employed in this industry.

The share of light industry in the structure of fixed assets in 1950 decreased to 5% against 7% in the pre-war 1940. In some factories, machines with pre-revolutionary "experience" worked. From here - difficult conditions labor: dust, noise, frequent accidents, especially among textile workers. Only women agreed to work in such conditions, they had no other choice...

The fate curve of light industry in the war and the first post-war years is very similar to the history of the development of the food industry: first, a decline by two or three times, then a steep rise, which makes it possible to eliminate the resulting failure. At the same time, the assortment of fabrics, sewing and knitwear, leather shoes was significantly expanded.

Remark 2

Although the government's tasks were not fully fulfilled, most of the industries that were part of the light industry exceeded the pre-war level of output or came close to it. Undoubtedly, this was a major success in the development of the peaceful industry in the conditions cold war.

Problems in agriculture

Difficulties in rebuilding agriculture have affected both production and government food procurement.

As can be seen from the table, by the end of the five-year plan, the pre-war level of production of the main types of livestock products was even exceeded (with the exception of eggs). Moreover, this success was ensured mainly by the forces of collective farms, which in 1950 accounted for 67% of the total meat production, 75% of milk, 22% of wool and 89% of egg production.

State purchases (procurements) of almost all agricultural products by the end of the five-year plan exceeded the pre-war level by 5-30 percent (with the exception of grain and eggs). Since these products were destined for trade in cities whose population increased by almost 16 percent in ten years, the general situation in the food markets, especially in the grain trade, remained tense.