Collectivization

[Comrade_Scott]

Collective farming is an organizational unit in agriculture in which peasants are not paid wages, but rather receive a share of the farm's net output.... sounds good to me and think it could work. what are your oppinions on collective farming?

[Joby]

Must be done and will be done.

However, it should be done over years, preferably over 5-year periods like Stalins Plans. I personally believe that the state should, at first, control the corporations that currently are in agriculture, while smoothly give more power to a collectivized group of farmers in a land reform program (probably over 5 years) in order to make the system as efficient and productive as possible.

I differ from many socialists in the fact that I believe individual farmers should control a piece of land, with workers/fertilizers/farm equipment/labor given to him. The "owner" wouldn't own it, but would manage it. I believe this would produce more than having giant, fully collectivized farms. At least in the begining.

[Vargha Poralli]

The peasants and farmers should not be forced any way. It may fail if their resentment is too much. They must be persuaded to do it voluntarily. This can be done by educating them the benefits of collectivization.

[Okocim]

There were two types of collective farms in the soviet union. One where the peasants owned it collectively and didn't get paid a wage, but there were also state owned ones where wages were paid.

I think the first type can work successfully and should be encouraged.

[BobKKKindle$]

The Peasants as a class are profoundly reactionary, or at least petty bourgeois, because they are not exploited through wage labour in the same way as the industrial proletariat, and their only revolutionary concern is ownership of the land that was owned by landowners (members of the Capitalist class) in the past. THis is often intensified by the fact that peasants are most exposed to reactionary ideology, most notably religion, which makes them hesitant to support any form of radical social change. This makes collectitivzation a very difficult task.

With this in mind, Agriculture should, if possible, be combined with industrial labour, possibly through a system of communal farming plots that are integrated with socially-owned enterprises. Agriculture should utilise the most modern technical, chemical, and mechanical inputs in order to maximise output and minimize labour as a factor input.

[chimx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2006 02:47 am
The Peasants as a class are profoundly reactionary, or at least petty bourgeois, because they are not exploited through wage labour in the same way as the industrial proletariat, and their only revolutionary concern is ownership of the land that was owned by landowners (members of the Capitalist class) in the past. THis is often intensified by the fact that peasants are most exposed to reactionary ideology, most notably religion, which makes them hesitant to support any form of radical social change. This makes collectitivzation a very difficult task.

With this in mind, Agriculture should, if possible, be combined with industrial labour, possibly through a system of communal farming plots that are integrated with socially-owned enterprises. Agriculture should utilise the most modern technical, chemical, and mechanical inputs in order to maximise output and minimize labour as a factor input.
Are you done trying to lecture us about 21st century agricultural culture and practices from books written by 19th century thinkers? Who calls them peasants anymore anyway? have you ever even been on a farm, or are you just talking out of your ass?

[BobKKKindle$]

What I am describing is based upon modern historical experience. The 'modern' practises of agriculture that you describe are in reality limited to a small number of developed economies, the majority of the worlds population still survives through marginal or semi-marginal agricultre. For your benefit, Marginal agriculture is cultivation that lies on the division between agribuisness (farming for profit and commericial purposes) and subsistence (farming in order to survive, whereby the farmer directly consumes his own produce) and so the class interests I describd are still very much a reality.

One only needs to look at the difference in output and the attitude towards the central government that occurred in the PRC following the instituion of the household responsibility system (whereby communal plots were divided up amongst households) to see that the Peasantry (which, in response to your question is a Maoist term. Hardly anyone outside of Leftism uses term 'proletariat' either, so your revulsion at me using the term peasant merely shows your resistance to Class Analaysis) maintains the same class interests now, as they did during the Russian revolution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_Responsibility_System

Admittedly I have never been on a farm, but I highly doubt that most leftists have ever stepped foot in a capitalist enterprise or seized the means of production. That does not mean we are unable to understand the class divisions that exist under Capitalism.