The Farmington times. (Farmington, St. Francois County, Mo.) 1905-1926, 1920-07-23
Shall Chaos or Reconstruction In
Europe Follow the Great
World War;
CLASH or FACT AND THEORY
soeialistie Idea Of Conditions In World
Where All Men Are on an Equality
Takes No Thought, overIooks
Basic Fact In Nature.
Article XIV.
BY FRANK coMERFoRp.

1911, INe DUlSneNik SONeihihchl opo'-
ished private ownership Of land, de-
claring all real estate the property OF
the state. On February 10. 1918 they
issued decree declaring all state
loans, internal and foreign, null and
void confiscating all maritime enter
prises and all private banks to the
state, and Matchmaking foreign trade.
The constitution established the
communism OF land in the following
words:
"For the purpose of attaining the So
cialization of lqnd, all private prop
erty in land is abolished and the en-
tire land is declared to be national
property, and Is to be npportioned
among agricuturists without any CON-
pensation to the former owners, In the
measure of each ones ability to till
It."
The peasants of Russia seized the
land. They willingly followed this
command of the new order. but they
did not take the land as community
Their experience with communal land
owning had never satisfied them. Un-
der the old regime the peasants were
allotted land by the communal Mir
The Mir held title to the land and d.
vfded It by lot. The tenancy Of farm
er on the land was uncertain under
the Mir system. The average length Of
the lease was about thirteen years.
Then came a new distribution Of the
Mir land, new drawing. The peasant
was compelled to move to the new
strip of land allotted to him from the
drawing. This plan took from the
peasant all inducement to put his best
into the land. He had no motive for
improving the land: It was not his.
At the next drawing II would probably
90 to another. and he in turn be shift
ed on a piece Of land which had been
neglected and allowed to deteriorate
Experience fired the peasant with one
thought, one ambition, to own his own
land, to have permanent home.
something to work on and work for.
So at the outset of the program TO
socialize the land we find the b0Ishe-
vik government attempting a c0mmun.
istic program completely antagonistlc
to the wishes Of the peasants.
Led to General Disorder.
Between the villages In Russia are
the great landed estates, the propri.
etary land. These lands were the hest
lands in the vicinity and were well
cared or. When the order to seize
the land was given, the peasants turn
ed toward the proprietary lands. The
villages fought with each other for the
possession and division Of these
tempting estates. This was the begin
ming of general disorder. small civil
war.
The bolshevik government attempt
ed to force its program abolishing all
private ownership Of land. They jus
tilted the confscation Of land, the
plan of land communism. ny saying
that the earth belonged to the people.
that private title to land was immoral
and corrupt, that every man should
have all the land he could actually
work. and not an acre more. They ar
gued that II man had more land
than he could work. one of two things
would happen: either he would allow
the land to remain Idle. which would
be a waste. or he would hire someone
to work II for him. They said the hired
man would-be either a farm laborer
or tenant: whichever relation he
bore to the owner of the land. he
would be compelled TO turn over mart
Of his labor to the landowner. In one
case II would be called rent. while II
he receives wages, the wages would
represent something less than tie
value of the hired mans crop. This
would be the profit taken by the land
owner. They called this exploiting the
worker. Instead Of this condition. they
reasoned that the farm hand should
work this land and keep the full prod
net for the state. In the plan of dis.
frlbutlop the state. the owner Of every.
thing. promised an equal distribution.
The boisheviks argued that their plan
would make a better citizen out 81
the hired man and give him an induce
rnenf to work. He was not to work
for himself. but for the good Of all.
II was fine bit Of ldealism. hut en-
tirely contrary to human nature. II
had to he worked ont by human be-
ings. Two things happened. One class
Of peasants worked the. land only
enough to produce what they and their
families needed. They reasoned. "Why
should we work after our needs are
suppliedi" This natural attitude Of
mind reduced production. The theory
which promised increased production,
In practice decreased production.
Refused to Share With State. !,
Another class Of peasants went anto
the land and worked hard and pro.
duced much. but they refused to give
NJ me product At their iahar b The
seste. They reasoned mat The result