20世纪上半期山东乡村互助研究

发布时间：2018-04-20 01:25

本文选题：互助 + 山东　；参考：《山东大学》2012年博士论文

【摘要】：20世纪上半叶,中国农民互助合作的形态处于新旧交替的时期,它既保留着旧式互助的基本特征,又受到新型合作形式的冲击和影响,可以说这一时期是新中国成立后我国农业合作化运动的一个重要的准备阶段。基于“历史是一个不断的过程”的治史观念,我们要深入研究农业合作化问题,就不应该淡忘这段历史。因此,本文以20世纪上半叶山东农民的互助合作为切入点,试图从中观察到近代农民在互助合作过程中的基本性格特征,并对农民合作形式的演变过程进行梳理和理论上的反思,以揭示出影响农民走向集体化的制约因素。近代山东农村的“封闭性”影响着农民在互助合作过程中的“结合力”。农民在在日常生产生活中结成了分散的互助组合,在这种互助组合的内部,农户之间的“结合力”较强；而在对外时互助组合则表现出较强的排他性,为获取村内的公共资源,互助组合内的农户会团结一致与组合外的村民展开争夺。从村落的层面来看,近代山东大多数村落都具有悠久的历史和适宜农业发展的生态环境,在此基础上,村落中的人际关系能够长久地保持和谐稳定的状态。而自然灾害的侵袭则激发了村民的集体防御意识,如山东大部分村落的分布、村民居住的格局以及围墙等公共设施的建立,都与村落的集体安全有着密切的联系。这种集体防御意识的增强在一定程度上有利于村民“村落共同体”意识构建。传统村落并不是绝对封闭的,农民还需通过村外的交往获得自己需要的资源,但大多数农民都走不出狭隘的地域界限,他们的对外交往一般不会超过基层市场的范围。总体而言,山东农村社会的封闭性特征,有助于农民之间建立稳固的人际关系；同时在相对封闭的社会环境下,农民获得社会资源的范围相当有限,为在有限的范围内获得较多的社会资源,与他人展开互助合作便成为许多农民的选择。在互助过程中,农户之间“结合力”的大小也受到社会关系的制约。20世纪上半叶,在山东农村中,宗族对农民旧式互助合作的规定最具明确性和约束力,很多地方都有“同族在土地买卖中具有优先权”、“遇有婚丧仪式,同族之人必须参加”等等规定。不过,近代山东大部分村落的家族势力不强,宗族组织松散,亲缘认同观念有淡化的趋势,这就在一定程度上限制了建立在亲缘关系对农民互助活动的影响,而地域关系在农民互助中的重要性却逐渐凸现出来。除此之外,在农民互助合作中,因业缘而生的各种后天性私人关系也是十分重要关系资源。从互助的主体来看,吸引农民进行互助合作的“结合力”主要是农民现实的需要或利益。20世纪上半叶,山东农民的互助合作是在乡村社会的动荡和贫困中开展的。除了耕地不足、农业生产力水平低下、天灾人祸、婚丧陋俗等村落内的制约因素之外,政府对农村的掠夺、土匪对乡村社会的劫掠式破坏以及商业资本和城市对乡村的掠夺都加重了农民的贫困。在缺少基本的公共设施和社会保障机制的情况下,作为一种在乡村社会关系网络中推进的小规模社会保障,农民之间开展的互助合作就显得尤为必要了。对互助中“结合力”探讨,在逻辑上衍生了本文对农民互助自主性的关注。山东农村旧有的互助形式主要包括婚丧礼仪性互助、农业生产性互助、资金融通性互助、安全防御性互助等。这些互助都是农民“生态理性”的产物,反映了传统农村社会人际关系的“差序格局”,同时其中也普遍存在着“按阶层划分的纵向界限”。在互助过程中,在民间惩罚机制的威慑下,农民须遵守“互惠原则”以及其它与互助相关的传统规定,同时其互助行为受经济理性和道德情感的共同支配。在考察农民旧式互助合作的“交流”时,本文的兴趣集中在互助的主体、互助的程序、互助中特殊的讯号和途径等问题上。近代山东大部分地区土地占有相对分散,村落社区社会分化程度不高,这种情况制约了农民阶级觉悟的萌发,即使在土地占有相对集中的地区,“农民日常道德观也与阶级话语有着巨大的差别”,因而,农民更倾向于以日常生活的逻辑或经验为基础来开展互助活动。关于农民每一次具体互助的流程,我们可以以农业生产性互助为例进行说明。在农民旧式的农业生产互助中,财富、诚信、声望、现实需求以及社会关系(主要是血缘、地缘关系)是互助关系建立前农民需要考虑的几大要素,互助关系建立之后,互助的发展分为两个路径,一是以富人为主导的异质互助,互助的过程存在着一定的剥削性,如换工；一是建立在经济条件相当基础上的同质互助,如搭套、合具等。在山东地区,这两种类型的互助都普遍地存在着,各阶层农户按照自己的需求会理性地选择不同的互助方式。而需求的满足、关系的破裂或是交易时不公平的程度超过了一定的范围都会引发互助关系的终结。 20世纪二三十年代,在战争、灾荒和经济危机的交迫下,山东农业经济破败不堪,农村的牲畜、农具、人口大幅度减少,租税、高利贷等封建剥削却更加沉重。互助是农民解决生产、生活困难的手段之一,但农民之间自发的互助效力有限,不能从根本上改变农村经济的状况。为拯救农村危机,国民政府和一些民间团体发起了一场农村合作运动。山东国统区的农村合作运动基本上属于一种由政府主导的强制性的制度安排,国民政府通过自上而下的合作法规的制定、合作指导机构的设置以及对合作组织在经济政策上的扶植,将西方的合作社组织引入到了山东农村,在一定程度上转变了农民互助合作的模式,提高了他们互助合作的经济效益,有利于他们合作意识的形成。但在推动农民从个体经营向集体生产转变的过程中,这种强制性的制度安排存在的弱点也是显而易见的。首先,在推行新型合作组织的过程中,国民政府没有从根本上解决农民的土地问题,彻底地变革农村的生产关系,因而其领导的农村合作运动无法从根本上改变小农农业经营的分散状态,促进农业生产力的发展。其次,合作运动是国民政府单纯用政治力量来推动的,这就使合作社的建立更多地考虑了政府的意愿和制度偏好,容易忽视农民对新型合作互助组织的接受程度和切身利益,从而大大降低了合作社在农村的普及程度和影响程度。再次,合作组织的发展,过分依赖于政府的扶植,缺乏自我发展的能力,再加上受战争和社会经济衰退的影响,国民政府扶植合作社的能力有限,这就极大限制了山东农村合作社的发展。 20世纪40年代,中共在山东领导的农民互助合作运动具有解放生产力和改造社会关系的双重意义,从这一点来看,减租减息、反奸清算、土地改革与农民的互助合作实践有着割不断的历史联系,它们共同组成了山东农村集体化初级阶段的历史。在这个历史阶段中,中共一边用革命手段开辟农村社会平均化的局面,一边用互助合作来维系革命的成果。中共对农民合作组织改造的思路是以诱致性制度变迁方式为主,即尊重农民的互助习惯和自愿结合,尽量避免对互助组织内部事务的过多干涉,从而使农民能够充分地发挥自己的能动性和想象力,对旧式互助组织进行改造。在这一过程中,新型的互助组织也不可避免的要受到村落社会地方性制度和社会关系的制约。随着互助组织的发展,农村的社会风气也为之一变,互助互济的社会氛围越来越浓,农民的集体主义思想开始树立。在当时山东的互助合作运动中,中共有意引导农民走长期互助的道路,因而采取了扶植贫农、中农的策略,使贫农、中农树立起了他们在互助组织中的领导地位；同时,中共的政策和宣传、教育手段都向互助组织和社会经济的平均化倾斜,这在无形之中给农民的心理造成了一定压力,使他们在加入互助组织时不得不考虑自己在政治上的得失。在这一过程中个体经济和集体经济之间存在的张力以及行政力量的参与,导致一些农村的互助合作运动出现了偏差。
[Abstract]:In the first half of the 20th century , the form of mutual aid cooperation between Chinese farmers is in the new and old period . It retains the basic characteristics of old - fashioned mutual aid and the impact and influence of new cooperative forms . It can be said that this period is an important preparatory stage in China ' s agricultural cooperative movement after the founding of New China .

The " closed " of the rural areas in modern Shandong influences the " binding force " of farmers in the course of mutual aid cooperation , and farmers form dispersed mutual aid groups in daily production and life , and the " binding force " among farmers is stronger within the combination of mutual aid .
In the view of the village level , most of the villages in the modern Shandong province have a long history and an ecological environment suitable for the development of agriculture .
At the same time , in a relatively closed social environment , the scope of farmers ' access to social resources is rather limited , so that more social resources can be obtained within a limited range , and cooperation with others has become a choice for many farmers .

In the process of mutual assistance , the size of " binding force " between farmers is restricted by social relations . In the first half of the 20th century , the clan has the most explicit and binding provisions on the old - fashioned mutual aid cooperation among peasants .

From the main body of mutual aid , the " binding force " that attracts farmers to cooperate is mainly the needs or interests of the peasants ' reality . In the first half of the 20th century , mutual cooperation among farmers in Shandong is carried out in the unrest and poverty of the rural society . In addition to the shortage of cultivated land , the low level of agricultural productivity , the natural disaster and the looting of the countryside , the government has aggravated the poverty of the peasants . In the absence of basic public facilities and social security mechanisms , the cooperation among farmers is particularly necessary as a small - scale social security propelled in the network of rural social relations .

In the process of mutual aid , farmers must abide by the " reciprocity principle " and other traditional regulations related to mutual aid . At the same time , the mutual aid behavior is governed by economic reason and moral emotion .

In this paper , we can take agricultural productive mutual assistance as an example to illustrate the relationship between farmers ' daily morality and class discourse . In the old agricultural productive mutual aid , the development of mutual aid is divided into two paths : one is the heterogeneous mutual aid that the rich man dominates , and the mutual assistance process has certain exploitation , such as changing labor ;
One is the establishment of homogeneous mutual assistance on the basis of economic conditions , such as matching and fitting , etc . In the Shandong region , the mutual assistance of these two types is common , and the farmers in all walks of life can rationally choose different ways of mutual aid according to their own needs . The satisfaction of demand , the rupture of the relationship or the degree of unfair competition in the transaction exceed a certain range , which will lead to the end of the mutual aid relationship .

In order to save the rural crisis , the government and some folk groups have made a rural cooperative movement . In order to save the rural crisis , the government and some folk groups have made a rural cooperative movement . In order to save the rural crisis , the Kuomintang government and some folk groups have made a rural cooperative movement . In order to save the rural crisis , the Kuomintang government and some folk groups have made a rural cooperative movement .

In the 1940s , the Communist Party of China ( CPC ) , led by the Communist Party of China ( CPC ) in Shandong , has the dual meaning of liberating the productive forces and transforming the social relations . From this point of view , the Communist Party of China ( CPC ) has made continuous historical ties with the practice of mutual aid cooperation between the peasants and the peasants . In this historical stage , the Communist Party of China ( CPC ) has formed the history of the primary stage of rural collectivization in Shandong .

In the campaign of mutual aid cooperation at that time , the Communist Party of China intentionally guided the farmers to take long - term mutual assistance , and thus adopted strategies to foster the poor peasants and middle peasants , and set up the leading position of the poor peasants and the middle peasants in the mutual aid organizations ;
At the same time , the Communist Party ' s policies and propaganda , the educational means have been inclined to the average of the mutual aid organizations and the social economy , which has caused a certain pressure to the peasants ' psychology in the intangible , so that they have to take into account their political gains in joining the mutual aid organizations . In this process , the tension between the individual economy and the collective economy and the participation of administrative power have led to a deviation in the cooperative movement of some rural areas .

【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：K26;F321.2

【参考文献】