LECTURE V. PRODUCTION AND SOCIETY

§ 1. Production as the main feature of a person

There are many differences between humans on the one hand and animals on the other. But at the heart of all of them is one main thing. All animals, without a single exception, only appropriate what nature gives, they only adapt to the environment. People create things that do not exist in nature, they transform the environment. The fundamental difference between people and animals lies in the fact that they produce, are engaged in production. Production is a necessary condition for the existence of people. It is necessary to stop production - and people will die. Only production activity could give rise to reason, thinking. Only production could give rise to society, without which it could not develop. By giving birth to society, production thus turned the animal into a social being, i.e. into a person. An animal is only an organism, only a biological being. A person is an inseparable unity of the body (organism) and spirit, in which the leading role belongs to the spirit, which is a social and only social phenomenon, is a person. Therefore, the impossibility of understanding the essence of society and man, without considering more or less details of production.

§ 2. Labor and production

Material production is always the unity of two sides: the relationship of people to nature and the relationship of people to each other. If we ignore the relationship of people to each other, then production will appear simply as labor. The simplest definition of labor is human activity with the aim of creating objects that satisfy one or another of his needs, i.e. creation of new consumer values ​​(goods). Labor is the unity of three things.

The first of these is the subject of labor. This is a thing that, in the course of labor activity, undergoes a predetermined change, with the goal of turning it into a use value that a person needs. If a person saws a log, then the log is an object of labor. The subject of labor is also a metal blank, which the turner processes on the machine.

The means of labor (the second moment of labor) is a thing or a complex of things that a person places between himself and the object of labor and with the help of which he produces a predetermined change in the object of labor. If we take the same examples, then in the first of them the means of labor is a saw, in the second - a lathe. Simple means of labor are often also referred to as tools of labor.

There are things that do not themselves affect the object of labor, but without which its transformation would be impossible. Such are the buildings of workshops or factories, lamps, vehicles, etc. They, too, are usually characterized as means of labor. Thus, the means of labor are divided into active and passive. The latter could also be called working conditions. But the distinction between active and passive means of labor is important only in a purely technical sense. In the socio-economic sense, they are one whole, which justifies the use of one single term for their designation.

The difference between objects and means of labor is not absolute, but relative. When the land is plowed and harrowed, then it is the object of labor. But when it was sown, it is already a means of labor. Now it is a thing that a person has placed between himself and the grain, and with the help of which he acts on the grain so that this grain gives rise to a new plant and new grains.

The third moment of labor is labor itself as a conscious, purposeful activity of a person in using the means of labor to make a predetermined change in the object of labor.

Labor is human activity. But as a result of labor things change in the objective world: the object of labor is transformed into a product of labor distinct from this object. Considered from the point of view of its results, labor appears as productive labor, as production in the narrowest sense of the word, and the object of labor and means of labor (including working conditions) as means of production.

The means of production are one of the factors of production; its other factor is labor force. For the process of production to take place, it is necessary to combine the means of labor with labor power.

§3. Social production as a unity of production proper, distribution, exchange and consumption

The products of labor are created for consumption. Production is impossible without consumption, just as consumption is impossible without production. Production and consumption constitute an inseparable unity, in which the leading role belongs to production. Production and consumption are not only related to each other, but in a certain respect they are even identical.

On the one hand, production is at the same time consumption: the consumption of labor power, the object of labor and the means of labor. On the other hand, consumption is at the same time production, namely, the production of labor power. But this identity does not exclude difference. It is always necessary to distinguish between actual production as the creation of material goods and actual consumption as a process other than the creation of material goods. Proper consumption is a process subordinate to production itself, that is, the moment of production, understood in a broad sense.

All things created in the process of production are sooner or later consumed, i.e. disappear. Therefore, they must be produced again and again. The process of production is always a process of reproduction. And this allows you to look at it from a new angle. Each specific individual act of labor may or may not take place, but the production process as a whole cannot fail. If it stops, people will disappear, human society will disappear.

In the process of production, understood in a broad sense, things created in the process of actual production go into consumption. But this transition from proper production to proper consumption never takes place directly. Distribution is always wedged between the first and the second, and in many societies also exchange. Distribution and exchange are also moments of production in the broad sense of the word. Production in the broadest sense is the unity of production proper, distribution, exchange and consumption.

There is an important difference between actual production and consumption on the one hand, and distribution and exchange on the other. Actually production - at least from the outside - is the relationship of man to things. A person with the help of one thing changes another. The same can be said about consumption: it is also a person's attitude to things. A person uses one or another use value to satisfy one or another of his needs.

It is a completely different matter - distribution and exchange. They always represent not only actions with things, but also relationships between people. These relations are called economic, or socio-economic. Another name introduced by K. Marx and F. Engels is production relations.

The use of the adjective "production" in Marxist literature to designate socio-economic relations and the definition of "relations of production" that is often encountered in it as relations in the production process sometimes resulted in a misunderstanding of this term.

People often, and now most often, work together. Workers cooperate their efforts: jointly change the object of labor, or the latter alternately passes from one hand to another, each time being subjected to more and more processing. There is a certain organization of labor and people who organize and coordinate labor activities, etc. All of the above and other connections undoubtedly represent relations in the process of production, are production in the literal sense of the word. But they are not socio-economic and thus productive in the sense of the word that was put into it by K. Marx and F. Engels. These relations do not exist on the scale of the sociohistorical organism as a whole, but only within the economic cells existing in it. They can be changed without changing the type of society. It would be best to call them organizational and labor relations.

Thus, on the one hand, production relations in the literal, everyday sense are not production relations in the Marxian sense. And on the other hand, no one who has not studied political economy can classify production relations in the latter sense as production relations. After all, these are relations of distribution in exchange, which, as it seems to the ordinary person, clearly belong to a different sphere than production. Nevertheless, these relations are certainly productive.

In addition to such a familiar everyday meaning of the word "production" - the direct process of creating things - there is another meaning - production in the broad sense, production as a unity of production, distribution and consumption proper. It is the relations of distribution and exchange, or, what is the same, the socio-economic relations of property, that form the internal structure of the production process in the broad sense of the word. Without production in the broad sense of the word, there is not and cannot be production in the narrow sense, production proper. And the relations of distribution and exchange are the only economic relations. There are no other economic relations besides them.

§ 4. Property and socio-economic (production) relations

To understand the essence of socio-economic relations, it is necessary to pose the question: in what case can a person, and in what case, cannot consume this or that thing? Leaving aside for the moment the details that will be discussed later, we can say in the most general terms that it depends on who owns the thing. If the thing belongs to a given person, then he can consume it, if to another, then he cannot consume it without obtaining the consent of the owner. Before us, therefore, appears the concept of property. Without it, it is impossible to understand either distribution or exchange.

Turning to property relations, it should first of all be emphasized that there are two types of such relations. Their first type, which catches the eye and is widely known, is volitional property relations. In a class society where the state exists, they take on the appearance of legal, legal relations. These relationships are often referred to as property relationships. The second type of property relations is economic property relations. These relations are not volitional, but material. They really exist only in relations of distribution and exchange. Economic property relations are not some special type of socio-economic relations that exist along with other types of socio-economic relations. The concepts of economic relations of property, socio-economic relations, production relations completely coincide.

Property is not a thing and not a relation of a person to a thing, taken by itself. Property is a relation between people, but one that is manifested in their relation to things. Or - in other words - property is the relation of people to things, but one in which their relations to each other are manifested.

Property is such an attitude of people about things that endows both people and things with special social qualities: makes people owners, and things - their property. Every thing in human society always has this social quality. It is always not only a use value, but necessarily at the same time someone's property (of an individual, a group of individuals, or even society as a whole).

The most important category of the general theory of economics is the concept of a cell of property (co-cell), or an owner cell (owner cell). Such a cell is formed by the owner together with the things belonging to him. Each such cell is separated from others by a boundary - of course, a social one. Things can cross this border, move from one property cell to another. This movement of things is purely social, although, of course, it can be accompanied by their physical movement.

For understanding the socio-economic structure of society, the concepts of use and disposal are of great importance. Economists generally do not use them. These concepts are usually found in the arsenal of lawyers who reveal the concept of property rights through the concepts of the right of possession, the right of use and the right of disposal. Of course, in this formulation, all this applies only to volitional property relations.

But just as, in addition to the right to property, there is property itself, and not only as a volitional, but also as an economic relation, in the same way, in addition to the rights of use and disposal, there are real use and real disposal, and again, not only as volitional but also economic phenomena. But since these concepts are introduced by jurists, it will be necessary to begin consideration with their legal aspect.

The right to use a thing is the right to use it for one's needs, to satisfy one's own needs and interests. And the use itself is the realization of this right. So far, all this does not go beyond volitional relations, moreover, relations to things. But the very concept of law already speaks of what is meant here as a matter of course and the relationship between people. The presence of a person's right to something implies the recognition of this right by the people around him. Use is not a relation only to a thing. It is the attitude of people towards things. Therefore, it must be clearly distinguished from the relationship of a person only to a thing - the consumption of a thing, its use, use.

When a slave, for example, is given a tool, he does not receive it for use. He has no right to it. He receives this tool in order to use it to meet the needs of the slave owner. But if a slave is given a piece of land and the necessary means of labor so that after harvesting he gives part of it to the owner, and keeps the rest for himself, then in this case we are faced not only with use, but also with use. In the latter case, a special cell of use arises with certain boundaries - of course, social ones. And this cell is primarily economic.

In purely theoretical terms, the distinction between the use, use of things and the use of them is valid in relation to all things, including commodities. But although the use of consumer goods and the use of them are in principle not the same thing, for in the first case we are dealing only with a relation to things, and in the second - with a relation not only to things, but with a relation between people - in reality they are inseparable from each other. The consumption of consumer goods is always their use for one's own needs, i.e. and use them at the same time. On the other hand, the use of consumer goods can manifest itself only in their use, use.

The right of disposal is first of all the right to alienate a thing, the right to transfer it from one cell of ownership to another. In addition to the exchange, the order is also manifested in the distribution. And distribution and exchange are primarily economic phenomena, although not only. Each act of exchange in a class society also always acts as a legal act - a transaction.

In general, economic property relations do not exist without volitional property relations, just as volitional ones do not exist without economic ones. Property as an economic relation and property as a volitional relation are impossible without each other. Property as an economic relation is always embodied in property relations.

The property relations normally include the relations of disposal and use as their moments. But under certain conditions, a splitting of property is possible, and thus a separate existence of relations of ownership, disposal and use. One person can be the owner of a thing, and another only its manager and user, but not the owner. Another option is that a person is only a user of a thing, but not its owner and not even a manager. And there may be several such options.

We encounter property in the fullest and most precise sense of the word when the owner, manager, and user completely coincide. When a person is only a manager and user, but not an owner, we have before us a peculiar form of people's relations about things, which can be characterized as sub-property. If a person is only a user, but not a manager and, moreover, not an owner, we are dealing with a sub-ownership.

Thus, along with the cells of ownership, there can be cells of disposal and use and cells of only use. An example of a use cell that is not a property cell has already been given: a slave can be a user of the means of production, including land, but the slave owner remains the manager and owner.

Cells of ownership, disposal and use are peculiar nodes not only in the system of volitional (in a class society - legal) property relations, but above all in the system of economic relations. It is within these cells and between these cells that distribution and exchange take place. Only the introduction of the concepts of disposal and use make it possible to understand the essence of the relations of distribution and exchange.

Distribution is the leaving of a social product in the ownership, disposal or use of certain people or/and its transfer to the ownership, disposal or use of other people, the result of which (i.e. abandonment and/or transfer) is the receipt by each member of society of a certain share of this product. Exchange is the transfer of things from the property of some persons to the property of others (from one cell of property to another), compensated by the counter movement of material values ​​or their signs (paper money, for example).

As already noted, every product of labor is always a use value and property. Any things are created simultaneously as a use value and someone's property. Therefore, the process of actually producing things is always at the same time the process of things coming into someone's property, i.e. distribution process.

Thus, property relations are manifested not only in the processes of actual distribution and exchange, but also in the process of actual production. Being present in the actual process of production, property relations make production in the narrowest sense of the word a relation of people not only to nature, but also to each other, i.e. public attitude.

The distribution considered above is the primary distribution. This is the distribution of everything created in the production process - both the means of production and consumer goods. When the entire social product, or at least part of it, is created by workers as someone else's property, the actual production process is at the same time the process of exploitation of man by man. Production, socio-economic relations are at the same time antagonistic.

After the primary distribution, in most cases, the actual distribution takes place as a special process, different from the actual production process. The slave receives maintenance - food, clothing, the slave owner - income. The capitalist receives a profit, the worker - wages. This is a secondary distribution.

In those societies where, as a result of secondary distribution, only a part of the members of society receives a share of the social product (in societies without private property - workers, in societies with private property - owners of the means of production and workers), there is also a tertiary distribution. This distribution, in contrast to the primary and secondary ones, occurs not within the boundaries of the entire sociohistorical organism, but within the framework of special cells existing within the socior. Most of the time, these are families. The relations of tertiary distribution are relations, although economic, but not socio-economic, not production. Therefore, they are not studied by political economy. These are private-economic relations.

The tertiary distribution always takes place according to need, according to need. Such was the secondary distribution in early primitive society. In late primitive society, distribution according to work arose. It was replaced by property distribution, so characteristic of a class society.

In class societies, the primary distribution of the created product is based on the distribution of the means of production, which already existed at the beginning of the production cycle. The distribution of the means of production used determines the distribution of the newly created means of production. Thus, production itself is the reproduction not only of things, but also of the socio-economic relations within which such reproduction is carried out. In the same societies, the property relations for both factors of production, i.e. on the means of production and labor power, determine the secondary distribution.

Therefore, in all class societies, relations in the distribution of the means of production, or, what is the same, relations of ownership of the means of production, formed a special subsystem within the system of production relations, which played the role of a determinant in relation to all other socio-economic ties. It is these and only these relations that very often in Marxist literature were defined as relations in the process of production - production and contrasted them with distribution and exchange relations. Such a contrast is completely erroneous: relations of production and relations of distribution and exchange are one and the same.

Another mistake was that such a structure of the system of socio-economic relations was considered as universal, inherent in all societies without exception. In reality, for example, in early primitive society, the ownership of the means of production did not form a special subsystem and did not determine the nature of other socio-economic relations.

Ideally, after the distribution, as a result of which each member of society receives the ownership, disposal or use of the share of the social product due to him, there should come the consumption of this product. Since the product is disappearing, it must be reproduced. The process of production, as we remember, is a process of constant reproduction. In some societies, indeed, production, distribution, and consumption proper exhaust all actions with the social product. In such societies, no other socio-economic relations, except for distribution relations, which are at the same time economic relations of property, do not exist.

However, in most societies, these activities are supplemented by exchange and, accordingly, exchange relations, which can take on a variety of forms. Contrary to the opinion of a significant number of economists, barter is just one of many forms of exchange. In addition to the exchange of goods, there was an exchange of gifts (gift exchange), help (help exchange), etc. Relations of exchange can exist side by side with relations of distribution, forming a special sphere distinct from the sphere of distribution. But under capitalism, for example, distribution takes place in the form of exchange. The receipt of wages by the worker is an act of distribution. But it also represents the final moment of the act of exchange between the capitalist and the worker.

In many societies, along with distribution and exchange, there is also redistribution, which takes on a variety of forms. The relations of redistribution included in the system of socio-economic relations of a particular society include certain forms and methods of exploitation, payment for various kinds of personal services, and so on. As for taxes, they play a different role in different societies: in sociohistorical organisms of the same type, they belong to the number of distribution relations (an example is rent-tax in societies with an Asian mode of production), in others - to redistribution relations (for example, taxes under classical capitalism).

§ 5. Type of socio-economic relations, socio-economic structure, mode of production, basis and superstructure, socio-economic formations and paraformations

As is clear from what has been said above, there are several qualitatively different types of socio-economic relations. Some of them have already been mentioned: early primitive, late primitive, slaveholding, capitalist. Ideally, socio-economic relations of one type or another form an integral system - a socio-economic (socio-economic) structure.

Each system of socio-economic relations of one specific type (socio-economic structure) is an internal structure of the production process, a special social form in which the process of creating material wealth is carried out. The production of material goods always takes place in a certain social form.

Production, taken not in general, but in a specific social form, is nothing but a specific mode of production. Thus, a mode of production is a type of production, singled out on the basis of its social form. There are as many modes of production as there are socio-economic structures. Socio-economic structures and, accordingly, methods of production are divided into basic and non-basic. The basic modes of production are those socio-economic types of production which are at the same time stages in the world-historical development of social production.

The peculiarity of socio-economic relations lies in the fact that, unlike all other social relations, they do not depend on the consciousness and will of people. Existing independently of the consciousness and will of people, they determine their will and consciousness. Socio-economic ties are objective relations and, in this sense, material.

Therefore, the system of these relations, being the social form in which production takes place, is at the same time the foundation of any sociohistorical organism. It determines the social consciousness and the will of the people living in it, and thus all other social relations existing in it. Unlike socio-economic ties, which are material in nature, all other social ties are volitional relations. Public consciousness, together with strong-willed social relations, is a superstructure over the socio-economic basis.

Since socio-economic relations constitute the basis, the foundation of any society, it is quite natural to base the classification of sociohistorical organisms on the type of production relations that dominate them. The type of society identified on this basis is usually called a socio-economic formation. But not every socio-economic type of society can be called a socio-economic formation, but only one that is at the same time a stage of world-historical development. There are as many socio-economic formations as there are basic socio-economic structures and, accordingly, the main methods of production.

In addition to socio-economic formations, there are also such socio-economic types of society that do not represent stages in the development of human society as a whole. If they turn out to be stages of development, then only those or other individual societies. These types of society, which are peculiar additions to socio-economic formations, can be called socio-economic paraformations (from the Greek para - near, at).

§ 6. Socio-economic structure of society, socio-economic structures and sub-structures, single and multi-structure societies

In principle, such sociohistorical organisms are quite possible and actually existed in which all socioeconomic relations belonged to the same type. This was the case in the early stages of the development of human society. But in later epochs, in sociohistorical organisms, socioeconomic ties often existed simultaneously, belonging not to one, but to several different types. And this makes it necessary to introduce a new concept - the socio-economic structure of society. The socio-economic structure of a socio-historical organism is a system of all socio-economic (production) relations existing in it.

In the literature, the system of socio-economic relations that exists in a sociohistorical organism is most often called the economy of society or simply the economy. But along with this meaning, the word "economy" has another. They can designate social production in the unity of all its aspects, including productive forces, etc. However, in this broader sense, the term "economy" is more often used.

When in a socio-historical organism all socio-economic relations belong to the same type, the concept of its socio-economic structure of society coincides with the concept of a certain socio-economic structure. (production) relations. But when socio-economic relations in a sociohistorical organism belong to different types, there is no such coincidence.

Different socio-economic relations can exist in a sociohistorical organism in different ways. Relations of a particular type can form an integral system in society - a socio-economic structure, or they can exist in it as an appendage to existing structures - a socio-economic sub-structure. When production is carried out in the shell not of a mode, but of a socio-economic sub-structure, we have before us not a method, but only one or another mode of production. It is very important to distinguish the structured existence of socio-economic relations from their unsettled existence.

As you know, wage labor was characteristic of capitalism. But wage labor occurs in the most diverse epochs of world history: in pre-class societies, in the Ancient East, in the ancient world, which gave grounds to some historians and economists to talk about the existence of capitalism there. In fact, there was no capitalism in any of these societies. Nowhere did wage labor relations form a system. Everywhere they existed in the form of a subclade, i.e. in an awkward form.

When socio-economic relations of only one type exist in a socio-historical organism, then society is one-way. They are one-way even when in it, along with the only way, there is one or even several sub-lines. But in a sociohistorical organism, several socio-economic structures can simultaneously exist, not to mention sub-structures. Such a society is multifaceted.

Usually in such a society, one of the structures existing in it is dominant, dominant, while the rest are subordinate. The dominant way of life determines the nature of the socio-economic structure of society as a whole, and thus the type of society, its formation or paraformation affiliation. The distinction between dominant and subordinate orders is in many cases relative. In the process of historical development, one or another dominant way of life can become subordinate, and the subordinate can become dominant.

However, not every subordinate order can become dominant. And here we are faced with a different classification of ways. They are divided into those that, in principle, can be dominant, and those that can never become dominant. The first ways can be called core, the second - additional. Core structures can be the only ones in society or dominant in it and, accordingly, determine the type of society, its belonging to one or another socio-economic formation or paraformation.

As an example of an additional socio-economic structure, one can cite the farms that exist under capitalism, the owners of which combine the owner of the means of production and the direct producer. This way of life is usually called petty-bourgeois. Various ways of small-scale independent production also existed in pre-capitalist class societies, in particular in ancient ones.

§ 7. The structure of the socio-economic structure

The socio-economic structure of a society either coincides (completely or mainly) with any socio-economic structure, or consists of several structures. This makes it necessary to more or less analyze the structure of the socio-economic structure. To do this, it is necessary to refer to the concept of a property cell already introduced above.

When the property cell includes the means of production, it is a production unit: a social product is created in it. Such a cell of ownership can be called an economic, or economic, cell (owner's cell, or economy cell). An economy cell may coincide with a sociohistorical organism. In this case, it is also an economic (economic) organism (economic organism, or economic organism), i.e. such an economic entity that, in principle, can exist and function independently of other similar entities. If, at the same time, all the members of the sociohistorical organism taken together are the owners of the means of production and consumer goods, we have before us public property in its purest form.

When an economic cell does not coincide with a sociohistorical organism, this means that the given socior includes not one, but several economic cells. In this case, the economic organism is an association of economic cells, which may or may not coincide with the sociohistorical organism. If in the economic cell, which, along with several other such units, is included in the socior, there is no exploitation of man by man, it can be called a cell of isolated (special) property. Separate (special) property can be personal, when the owner is one person, and group, when several people jointly own the means of production. If in the economic cell the process of production is at the same time the process of exploitation, we have before us the cell of private property.

Another option: the property cell includes only consumer goods, but not the means of production. Social production cannot take place in such a cell: tertiary distribution and consumption take place in it. If the economy is kept in it, then only at home (cooking food for the personal needs of its members, etc.). These cells usually include not only the owners of consumer goods, but also people who are dependent on them. These ownership cells can be called dependent or dependent-consumer. The property associated with them is often called personal, which is not very accurate, because it can be not only personal, but also group. The best name for it is a separate property.

A frequent case is the coincidence of an economic cell with a dependent-consumer cell. Especially often they coincide with dependent-consumer cells of separate property. There is no separate property. There is only separate ownership both of the means of production and of consumer goods.

The difference between the socio-economic sub-structure and the structure is that the sub-structure does not have its own host cells; economic relations specific to him exist within the framework of foreign economic cells. Each socio-economic structure, whether core or additional, has its own economic cells. Each core socio-economic order is also characterized by the existence of its own economic organism. As for the additional structures, they do not have their own economic organisms. Their economic cells are interspersed in the composition of the economic organism of one of the core structures that exist along with it, most often the dominant one. Thus, for example, under capitalism cells of small-scale independent production enter the system of the national capitalist market.

§ 8. The productive forces of society

As already mentioned, socio-economic, or production relations, are objective relations and, in this sense, material. They not only do not depend on the consciousness and will of people, but, on the contrary, determine their consciousness and will. And naturally the question arises of what they depend on, what is the factor that determines the nature of these relations? Why in one epoch or another there exists exactly one and not another socio-economic structure, and why some systems of socio-economic relations, and thus also modes of production, are replaced in world history by others.

As has already been pointed out, the relations of distribution and exchange, which in their essence are relations of property, form the internal structure of production, the social form in which the process of production proper takes place. Proper production is the process of creating a social product by certain forces, which are customarily called the productive forces of society. These forces are people armed with the means of labor and able to set them in motion. Social production is the functioning of the productive forces of society, always taking place in a historically determined social form. The functioning of the productive forces is the content of social production, the system of socio-economic relations is the form in which this content is clothed. And, as everywhere in the world, the content determines the form.

The productive forces of society may be greater or lesser. They may grow or they may shrink. This gives grounds to introduce the concept of the level of development of the productive forces of society. It is the level of development of the productive forces of society that is the main factor determining the type of social and economic relations existing in society. Another factor is the internal structure of the productive forces. The level of development of the productive forces of a particular sociohistorical organism is measured by the volume of the social product created in it per capita of its population. This indicator can be designated as the productivity of social production.

The productivity of social production, of course, depends on the technology used in production and on other factors that have arisen in the process of social development. But not only from them. It also depends on the natural conditions in which the process of social production takes place. When people are engaged in gathering, hunting and fishing, the amount of the product they extract is determined not only by the technique and time spent on work, but also by how rich the natural resources are. With the same level of technology, but in different natural conditions, the productivity of social production can be different.

Natural resources can be used not only as objects of labor. Land, for example, in agriculture acts not only as an object of labor, but also as a means of labor. Thus, it becomes an element of the productive forces. The transformation of land into a means of labor and its incorporation into the productive forces was the result of historical development. The use of land as a means of labor is undoubtedly an indicator of the development of the productive forces.

But the natural fertility of the earth is a gift of nature. And the productivity of agricultural production largely depends on this gift. With the same agricultural technique, the same farming systems, with the same amount of time spent on labor, the productivity of social production in a society with fertile soil can be much higher than in a society where natural conditions are worse. But it's not just about the natural fertility of the land. In some regions, the soil is easily cultivated, in others it requires more effort and much more time. The productivity of social production also depends on the climate. There are regions (tropics and subtropics) in which agricultural work is possible all year round, where two or even three crops are collected during this period of time. In other regions (temperate zone), agricultural activity is limited to a certain season: there it is impossible to get more than one crop per year.

Therefore, it is imperative to distinguish two main components in the productivity of social production. One of them is the result of social, historical development. The other is a gift of nature. The first I will call social (or social) productivity, the second - natural productivity, and their inseparable unity - the total productivity of social production. Accordingly, it is necessary to distinguish between the social level of development of the productive forces and the total level, or state, of the productive forces.

Pre-capitalist societies are characterized by a larger or smaller gap between the social level of development of the productive forces and their total level (state). With the transition to an industrial society, this gap is narrowing and may even disappear altogether. In this case, one can simply speak about the level of development of the productive forces without any clarifications.

The founders of historical materialism have statements that give reason to believe that they were approaching a distinction between the natural and social levels of development of the productive forces, but we do not find any clear formulations in them. And this is understandable - the classics of Marxism primarily proceeded from data relating to capitalist society.

When one speaks of the progress of the productive forces of society, one is talking, of course, about the growth of the social productivity of production. It is striking that the social productivity of social production can be increased by increasing labor productivity. In turn, the growth of labor productivity can be ensured by acquiring more experience and qualifications by workers, increasing the intensity of their work, introducing more advanced methods of using technology, and improving the organization of labor. But all these methods sooner or later exhaust their possibilities.

The only way that can ensure an unlimited growth of labor productivity is the progress of technology. It is precisely in this direction that the development of production has been going on since the birth of capitalism. For a long time this method of increasing the productivity of social production was regarded as the only possible one. Connected with this is the identification of the evolution of the productive forces of society with the progress of technology and, accordingly, the level of development of productive forces with the degree of development of technology.

We find such an identification among the founders of the materialistic understanding of history. “By acquiring new productive forces,” K. Marx wrote, “people change their mode of production, and with a change in the mode of production, the way they provide for their life, they change all their social relations. A hand mill gives us a society with an overlord at the head, a steam mill - a society with an industrial capitalist. "The tools of the savage," F. Engels echoed him, "determine his society to exactly the same extent as the newest tools - capitalist society."

Undoubtedly, the quality of a person as a productive force depends to a large extent on the technology he uses. But not only from her. The social level of development of the productive forces is never reduced to a technical one. There are other, besides technology, social factors on which the degree of a person's ability to create a social product depends.

And the most important among them is the existing system of socio-economic relations. With the same technical equipment, but with different socio-economic relations, people can create far from the same amount of social product. Not only the productive forces influence the relations of production, but the relations of production influence the productive forces. This and other non-technical factors can be combined under the general name of the social and humanitarian factor. Thus, in the social productivity of social production, it is also necessary to distinguish between two components: technical and socio-humanitarian.

By the way, there is often a simplified view of the production technique. It is often reduced to tools and machines. But technology in a broader sense also includes farming systems, and horse harness, etc. The technical level of development of the productive forces is characterized not only by gun (gun-machine) technology, but also by non-gun technology. One can give an example of the enormous importance of non-gun technology. In ancient Rome, a pair of horses could pull a load that did not exceed 500 kg; in medieval Europe, the same pair pulled a load of 2500 kg, i.e. 5 times more. This was a consequence of the introduction in the VIII century. AD new horse harness borrowed from the nomads of the Eurasian steppes. As a result, it became possible to use horses instead of bulls in agriculture, which contributed to a significant rise in this branch of the social economy.

Due to the fact that the quality of a person as a productive force depends not only on technology, but also on other social factors, in addition to the technical (technological) method of increasing the productivity of social production, there are others. One of them is to increase the productivity of social production by increasing the length of working time. This is a temporal (from lat. tempus - time) way to increase the productivity of social production .. The other is demographic. It consists in increasing the proportion of workers in the composition of people who form a sociohistorical organism. And without taking them into account, it is absolutely impossible to understand the change in the modes of production in world history.

The progress of the productive forces underlies the development of production, and thus of society. Therefore, one of the most important problems is the question of the source of development of the productive forces. Sometimes it is sought outside of production - in the characteristics of the geographical environment, in population growth, and so on. In reality, the source of the development of the productive forces lies in production itself. The stimulus for the development of productive enterprises lies in the existing socio-economic (production) relations.

This is especially evident in the example of the capitalist mode of production. Here the source of the development of the productive forces is quite clear: the desire of the capitalist to extract the maximum possible profit. Capitalist production is production for the sake of profit. And the desire to cure surplus value does not stem from any kind of eternal human nature. It is generated by the existing system of economic relations. Essentially, this was shown by economists even before Marx. The latter only deeply developed and substantiated this view. When theories of economies other than capitalist were created, it became clear that socio-economic relations are the source of the development of productive forces at all stages of the historical evolution of mankind.

Thus, at all stages of the development of human society, there was one and at the same time different sources of development of productive forces. One source, because for all modes of production, socio-economic relations were the stimulus for the development of productive forces, and different sources, because qualitatively different systems of socio-economic relations were inherent in different modes of production. At all stages of the development of the human economy, the only incentives for the development of productive forces were relations of production, but since these relations were different at different stages, then, accordingly, the incentives for the development of productive forces were not the same.

But at all stages of development, excluding, as some researchers argue, the capitalist stage, socio-economic relations sooner or later ceased to stimulate the development of productive forces, moreover, they became an obstacle to their further progress or even led to their degradation and destruction. Then there was an urgent need to replace the old socio-economic relations that had exhausted their possibility with new ones. The emergence of new socio-economic relations made possible a further breakthrough in the development of the productive forces of mankind.

Introduction

In the conditions of a modern developed market economy, both the topic of ownership and the analysis of the main forms of entrepreneurial activity in Russia are very relevant.

The system of economic relations of property covers - from beginning to end - the entire economic process. It permeates and forms the core of all relations between people in the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of goods and services.

Behind the category of "property" is an extremely complex and multi-layered system of social relations, both economic and legal, which are so intertwined that it is difficult to separate them from each other.

Organizational and legal forms of entrepreneurial activity are extremely diverse: this category includes both giant corporations and local specialized stores or family grocery stores with one or two employees and a small daily sales volume. This diversity makes it necessary to classify firms according to some criteria, such as legal status, industry, products, or size.

When deciding on the choice of legal form, the entrepreneur determines the required level and scope of possible rights and obligations, which depends on the profile and content of future activities, the possible circle of partners, and the legislation existing in the country.

The market environment forces the enterprise to operate profitably if it does not want to leave the field of activity. The profitability regime assumes that the purpose of functioning and the main result of the enterprise's activity in market conditions is profit. It is necessary to produce only those goods and services that satisfy the basic needs of people.

Knowledge of these problems, rational methods for solving them is necessary for both beginners and working entrepreneurs, heads of enterprises and economic services, etc.

The purpose of this work will be to review the existing forms of business organization in Russia and other countries, to identify the advantages and disadvantages of certain forms of entrepreneurship. Property is considered from various points of view (economic and legal), an analysis of various forms, types of property, its transformation is given. Separately, the paper considers the phenomenon of privatization, the transformation of property in countries with economies in transition.

1) Consider the concept of ownership in the economic and legal sense;

2) consider how these concepts differ from each other;

3) identify all types of ownership;

4) to consider the existing forms of entrepreneurial activity.

1. Property and the socio-economic structure of society

1.1 Ownership in the economic and legal sense

a) property in the economic sense, or property de facto (lat. - in fact, in fact);

b) property in the legal sense, or property de jure (lat. - Legally, by law).

How do these concepts differ from each other? We begin to clarify this issue by disclosing the economic content of property.

If we try to analyze (dissect) the economic relationship of ownership, we can find two of its elements: the subject (owner) and some kind of property. It may seem that property expresses the relation of the subject to a certain thing.

Relations of appropriation extend primarily to such property, on which economic activity directly depends.

It includes factors of production (both material goods and the fruits of intellectual labor). In some cases, the objects of property include the human factor (this was the case with slaves under the slave system).

Appropriation is an economic bond between people that establishes their relationship to things as if they were their own. This relationship has its roots in the manufacturing process. After all, any production of material goods is essentially nothing more than the appropriation of natural matter and energy by people in order to satisfy their needs. From this we can conclude: if appropriation is not possible without production, then the latter always proceeds within the framework of a certain property.

Appropriation can be combined with the opposite attitude - alienation. It arises, for example, if some part of society seizes all the means of production, while the other part is left without any sources of subsistence. Or when products created by some people are appropriated by others without any compensation. Such were, say, the relationship between feudal lords and serfs engaged in forced labor in the corvee.

Owners of the means of production are not always involved in creative activities themselves: they give other enterprising people the opportunity to use their property for economic purposes under certain conditions. Then between the owners and the entrepreneur there are relations of economic use of property. The latter gets a real opportunity to temporarily own and use the object of someone else's property.

An example of relations for the economic use of someone else's property is a lease - an agreement on the provision of the property of a person for temporary use to another person for a certain fee. Property is economically realized if it brings income to its owner. Such income represents the entire newly created product or part of it, which is obtained through the use of labor and means of production. This may be, say, profit, tax, various kinds of payments. In the case of a lease, a rent is charged, which includes an interest on the capital invested in the property by its owner, and a part of the profit (income) that is received from the use of the leased property. At the conclusion of the concession, payments are predetermined or a share of the profit is determined, which the temporary owners pay to the owner.

This means that the system of economic relations of ownership covers - from beginning to end - the entire economic process. It permeates and forms the core of all relations between people in the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of goods and services.

Driven by proprietary interests, a person may come into conflict with the interests of the whole society. In this case, the state and law prevent contradictions generated by property and regulate the behavior of agents of production.

When defining property in the legal sense, different categories of owners of their property are distinguished. So, according to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the subjects of property rights are (Article 212):

a) citizen (individual) - a person as a subject of civil (property and non-property) rights and obligations;

b) legal entity - an organization that is the subject of civil rights and obligations.

An example is a firm - an economic industrial or commercial enterprise that enjoys the rights of a legal entity;

c) the state and the municipality (local government and self-government bodies).

The legislation highlights the objects of civil rights. These include the following types of property:

Real estate (land plots, forests, buildings, structures, etc.)

Movable things (money, securities, things not related to real estate)

Intellectual property (the results of intellectual activity and equivalent means of individualization of a legal entity, individualization of products, works and services performed: company name, trademark, service mark, etc.).

After the state regulates property relations between the relevant entities in legislative acts, the latter are endowed with the right of ownership, which includes the powers of the owner to own, use and dispose of property.

Possession is the physical possession of a thing. This right of the owner is always protected by law.

Use - consists in the right to productively or personally consume a thing to satisfy one's own needs and interests, depending on its purpose.

Disposition - the right to change the ownership of property. It is carried out through various transactions. In modern conditions, in all, perhaps, developed countries, the state seeks to fix in regulatory documents economic relations that comply with legal laws. However, for this regulation, the so-called. shadow economy.

Under the shadow economy is meant a set of unrecorded, unregulated and illegal types of economic activity.

The general features of the shadow economy are: a hidden, secret nature, coverage of all phases of the circulation of social wealth, illegal enrichment through concealment of income from state taxation, gratuitous appropriation of other people's property and redistribution of social wealth. According to various estimates, in Western countries, the shadow sector produces from 5 to 20% of the gross national product.

The word "property" appeared in Russia a very long time ago. It was formed from the old Russian word "sob" - all one's own, personal property, property, wealth.

It may seem that property is the connection of a person with a thing. After all, say, for example, a young man: "This bike is mine."

However, this establishes not only the belonging of some property to a given person. At the same time, it is implied that the bicycle does not belong to anyone else.

Therefore, property is an economic relationship between people who find out which of them owns each thing.

Property is a property relationship that establishes the ownership of material and spiritual goods by some people.

All useful things are divided among themselves by the members of society, who are their owners. Therefore, acquaintance with the economy of each country involves clarifying the question: who owns the land, factories, railways, houses, shops, educational institutions and other types of wealth? A similar question arises for a young specialist who goes to get a job in an institution or enterprise. He is interested: who is the owner here, who will hire him and manage his activities?

To understand these issues, it is important to know how property relations develop between people.

Property is a complex set of economic relations. It includes three types of basic property relations, which allow us to clarify the following questions:

Who (what participants in economic activity) appropriates the factors and results of production?

How are the economic relations associated with the use of property?

Who gets the business income?

Therefore, the totality of economic relations of ownership includes the following components: a) appropriation of factors and results of production, b) economic use of property, c) receipt of income from property.

Assignment is an economic connection between participants in economic activity, which establishes their attitude to things as to their own. Namely, it determines who can and who should not claim certain property.

The opposite of appropriation is the relationship of alienation. They arise if some part of society seizes all the means of production, leaving other people without sources of livelihood, or when products created by some people are appropriated by others. Such was the relationship between slave owners and slaves in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome.

Often, the owner of the means of production does not himself engage in creative activity, but provides an opportunity for other persons to use his property on certain conditions. Then between the owner and the user there are relations of economic use of property.

An example of a relationship for the use of someone else's property is a lease - an agreement to provide the property of a person for temporary use to another person for a certain fee. A similar picture is observed with a concession - an agreement under which the state leases industrial enterprises or plots of land to private individuals, foreign firms for a certain period.

When a lot of people are involved in the work of an enterprise, a relationship arises between them related to generating income. In this case, the entire amount of income from production activities according to the established amounts goes to each person.

The situation is different if the owner of the means of production does not engage in economic work and leases out his property. The one who is a temporary user receives a certain part of the product, and gives the other, larger part to the owner.

Economic property relations develop normally and bring income to all citizens of the society under the following indispensable condition. They must be formed on the basis of a recognized binding order, which is provided for by legal laws and rules of economic conduct.

Economic ties between people are formalized legally and fixed in law.

Law is a set of obligatory rules of conduct (norms). They are established in society or approved by the state and supported by it.

When determining property in the legal sense, the subjects of the right of ownership to the objects of their civil rights are identified.

Legally, the subjects of property rights are:

a) a citizen (natural person) - a person as a subject of civil (property and non-property) rights and obligations;

b) legal entity - an organization (association of persons, enterprise, institution), which is the subject of civil rights and obligations. This social (collective) formation enters into economic relations on its own behalf as an independent integral unit. An example is a firm - an economic, industrial or commercial enterprise (association), enjoying the rights of a legal entity;

c) the state and municipalities (bodies of local government and self-government).

The legislation highlights the objects of civil rights. These include:

real estate (land plots, subsoil plots, forests, buildings, structures, etc.);

movable things (money, chain papers, etc., not related to real estate);

intellectual property (the results of intellectual activity and equivalent means of individualization of a legal entity, individualization of products, works or services performed: company name, trademark, service mark, etc.). Ownership of property does not always have a legal basis (law, contract, administrative decision - the decision of state authorities).

Use is the right to productively or personally consume a thing to satisfy one's own needs and interests, depending on its purpose (for example, to use a car to transport people and goods). The owner can transfer his property to other persons for some time and under certain conditions. The boundaries of the right to use are determined by law, contract or other legal basis (for example, a will).

Disposition -- the right to change the assignment (belonging) of property. It is carried out most often by making various transactions (purchase and sale, exchange, donation, etc.).

However, not all persons strive to strictly observe the generally accepted rules of conduct for owners. They violate them for selfish interests by committing criminal (criminal) acts. To combat such offenses, the state approves the Criminal Code (a single set of legal norms applied in criminal acts).

Thus, the new Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, put into effect on January 1, 1997, includes several chapters: Ch. 21 "Crimes against property", Ch. 22 "Crimes in the sphere of economic activity" and Ch. 23 "Crimes against the interests of service in commercial and other organizations" and provides for punishment for crimes in the sphere of the economy, Depending on the severity of the crime and the damage caused to society, the following penalties are provided: a fine, compulsory or corrective labor, confiscation (forced and gratuitous seizure in favor of the state ) property, deprivation of liberty for a certain period and other measures.

The state and law streamline and subordinate to certain rules the behavior of the owners of goods, protect their legal rights.

Property is the basis for the entire system of relations in production, distribution, exchange and consumption.

First of all, property relations are formed in the very process of production of economic goods. After all, the creation of useful things means, in essence, the appropriation of the substance and energy of nature to increase the wealth of society.

As you know, consumer goods cannot be obtained without the expenditure of means of production. Therefore, ownership of the material conditions of creative activity determines to a decisive extent who owns the economic power in society. In turn, the social form in which the workers and the material conditions of their labor are combined depends on this power.

History knows the diversity of such forms of the socio-economic structure of society. For example, in the ancient world, slave owners were the owners of all the means of production and the slaves whom they forcibly forced to work for themselves. In the Middle Ages, the feudal lords - the owners of the land - enserfed the peasants and forced them to work on their estates for a significant part of the time.

Property has a great influence on the distribution of wealth among people. It is known that the owners of enterprises in the distribution of manufactured products receive such a part of its value that many times exceeds the earnings of workers.

Property relations directly determine the conditions of market exchange. The seller (owner of goods) and the buyer (owner of money) are materially interested in making an equivalent exchange of goods for money without losing part of their property.

It hardly needs to be proved that the well-being of households, measured primarily by the level of consumption of all life's goods, depends on property, which brings a corresponding income to the family.

Property covers the entire process of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of goods. Socio-economic relations in society depend on the appropriation of the decisive means of production.

Meanwhile, property relations tend to change under the influence of a number of reasons - the development of production, its technology and organization, as well as socio-political conditions. Therefore, throughout economic history, several types (homogeneous groups with common characteristics) and specific (diverse) types of appropriation of property corresponding to them have arisen. Further study of the economy involves the clarification of the current diversity of types and types of property.

A comprehensive study of property makes it possible to answer three main socioeconomic questions: 1. Who (which business entities) has economic power and appropriates the factors and results of production? 2. What economic ties contribute to better use of property? 3. Who gets the income from business activities?

Accordingly, the system of economic relations of ownership includes the following elements: a) appropriation of factors and results of production; b) economic use of material and other means and c) receipt of income from property

Legal relations of ownership a) citizen (individual) Man as a subject of civil (property and non-property) rights and obligations; b) legal entity organization (association of persons, enterprise, institution), which is the subject of civil rights and obligations. This social (collective) formation enters into economic relations on its own behalf as an independent integral unit. An example is a company - an economic, industrial or commercial enterprise (association), enjoying the rights of a legal entity; c) the state and municipalities (bodies of local government and self-government)

After the state legally regulates the property relations between these persons, they are vested with the right of ownership. This right includes the powers of the owner to own, use and dispose of the property.

Possession is the physical possession of a thing. This right of the owner is protected by law. Legal ownership of property has a legal basis (law, contract, administrative act). Use consists in the right to productively or personally consume a thing to satisfy one's own needs and interests, depending on its purpose (for example, to use a land plot for growing crops). The owner can transfer his property for the use of other persons for some time and on certain conditions. The boundaries of the right to use are determined by law, agreement or other legal basis (for example, a lease agreement). Disposition - the right to change the assignment (belonging) of property. It is carried out most often by making various transactions (purchase, sale, exchange of one thing for another, donation, etc.)

Private appropriation has two types, which differ significantly from each other: ownership of the means of production by a person who himself works, and ownership of the means of production by a person who uses someone else's labor.

The first type of private property is owned by individual peasants and other people who live by their labor. In this case, the worker gets all the fruits of his management and the complete freedom of the worker from any forms of oppression and enslavement is ensured. When the owner and the worker are combined in one person, there arises a deep material interest in working for personal benefit.

The second type of private property is owned by persons who create relatively large farms using the labor of many workers. If in the first type of private appropriation the material and personal factors of production are naturally combined, insofar as they belong to one person, then in the second type of economy the situation is completely different. In it, the means of production and the fruits of labor are alienated from the workers. The second type of private property is manifested in specific forms of slave-owning, feudal and individual capitalist

What is property

The word "property" appeared in Russia a very long time ago. It was formed from the old Russian word "sob" - all one's own, personal property, property, wealth.

It may seem that property is the connection of a person with a thing. After all, for example, a young man says: “This bike is mine.”

However, this establishes not only the belonging of some property to a given person. At the same time, it is implied that the bicycle does not belong to anyone else.

Therefore, property is economic relations between people who find out: which one belongs to every thing.

Own- these are property relations that establish the belonging of material and spiritual goods to some people.

All useful things are divided among themselves by the members of society, who are their owners. Therefore, acquaintance with the economy of each country involves clarifying the question: who owns land, factories, railroads, houses, stores, educational institutions and other types of wealth? A similar question arises for a young specialist who goes to get a job in an institution or enterprise. He is interested: Who here is the owner who will employ him and will dispose of his activities?

To understand these issues, it is important to know how property relations develop between people.

What are the economic relations of ownership

Own is a complex set of economic relations. It includes three types of basic property relations, which allow us to clarify the following questions:

1. Who(which participants in economic activity) assigns factors and results of production?

2. How economic relations are formed use of the property?

3. To whom get income from business activities?

That's why set of economic relations of ownership includes the following components: a) appropriation of factors and results of production, b) economic use of property, c) receipt of income from property (Fig. 2.1).

Assignment - an economic connection between participants in economic activity, which establishes their attitude to things as if they were their own. Namely, it determines who can and who should not claim certain property.

The opposite of assignment is the relationship alienation. They arise if some part of society seizes all the means of production, leaving other people without sources of livelihood, or when products created by some people are appropriated by others. Such was the relationship between slave owners and slaves in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome.

Rice. 2.1. The totality of economic relations of ownership.

Often, the owner of the means of production does not himself engage in creative activity, but provides an opportunity for other persons to use his property on certain conditions. Then between the owner and the user arise relations of economic use of property.

An example of the relationship of using someone else's property is rent- an agreement on the provision of the property of a person for temporary use to another person for a certain fee. A similar picture is also observed for concessions- an agreement under which the state leases industrial enterprises or land plots to private individuals, foreign firms for a certain period.

When many people are involved in the work of the enterprise, there are income related relationship. In this case, the entire amount of income from production activities according to the established amounts goes to each person.

The situation is different if the owner of the means of production does not engage in economic work and leases out his property. The one who is a temporary user receives a certain part of the product, and gives the other, larger part to the owner.

Economic property relations develop normally and bring income to all citizens of the society under the following indispensable condition. They must be formed on the basis of a recognized binding order, which is provided for by legal laws and rules of economic conduct.

What are the legal relations of ownership

Economic ties between people are formalized legally and fixed in law.

Right is a set of generally binding rules of conduct (norms). They are established in society or approved by the state and supported by it.

When defining property in the legal sense, the subjects of property rights and the objects of their civil rights are identified.

By law subjects property rights are:

A) citizen (individual)- a person as a subject of civil (property and non-property) rights and obligations;

b) entity- an organization (association of persons, enterprise, institution), which is the subject of civil rights and obligations. This social (collective) formation enters into economic relations on its own behalf as an independent integral unit. An example would be firm- an economic, industrial or commercial enterprise (association) enjoying the rights of a legal entity;

V) state And municipalities(bodies of local government and self-government).

The legislation highlights objects civil rights. These include:

real estate(land plots, subsoil plots, forests, buildings, structures, etc.);

movable things(money, securities, etc., not related to real estate);

intellectual property(the results of intellectual activity and equivalent means of individualization of a legal entity, individualization of products, works or services performed: company name, trademark, service mark, etc.).

Rice. 2.2. The set of powers of the owner.

After the state legislates the property relations between these persons, they are vested with the right of ownership. This right includes the owner's authority to own, use and dispose of property (Fig. 2.2).

Ownership is the physical possession of a thing. This right of the owner is protected by law. Ownership of property always has a legal basis (law, contract, administrative decision - the decision of public authorities).

Use - this is the right to consume a thing productively or personally to satisfy one's own needs and interests, depending on its purpose (for example, to use a car to transport people and goods). The owner can transfer his property to other persons for some time and under certain conditions. The boundaries of the right to use are determined by law, contract or other legal basis (for example, a will).

Disposition – the right to change the assignment (belonging) of property. It is carried out most often by making various transactions (purchase and sale, exchange, donation, etc.).

However, not all persons strive to strictly observe the generally accepted rules of conduct for owners. They violate them for selfish interests by committing criminal (criminal) acts. In order to combat such offenses, the state approves Criminal Code (a single set of legal norms applied in criminal acts).

Thus, the new Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, put into effect on January 1, 1997, includes several chapters: Ch. 21 "Crimes against property", Ch. 22 "Crimes in the sphere of economic activity" and Ch. 23 "Crimes against the interests of service in commercial and other organizations" and provides for punishment for crimes in the economic sphere. Depending on the severity of the crime and the damage caused to society, the following punishments are provided: a fine, compulsory or corrective labor, confiscation (compulsory and gratuitous seizure in favor of the state) of property, imprisonment for a certain period and other measures.

State and Law streamline and subordinate to certain rules of behavior of the owners of goods, protect their legal rights.

How socio-economic relations are related to property

Property is the basis for the entire system of relations in production, distribution, exchange and consumption.

First of all, property relations are formed in the very process of production of economic goods. After all, the creation of useful things means in essence appropriation of matter and energy of nature to increase the wealth of society.

As you know, consumer goods cannot be obtained without the expenditure of means of production. Therefore, ownership of the material conditions of creative activity to a decisive extent determines who owns the economic power in society. In turn, that power depends on public form, wherein workers and the material conditions of their work are connected.

History knows the diversity of such forms of the socio-economic structure of society. For example, in the ancient world, slave owners were the owners of all the means of production and the slaves whom they forcibly forced to work for themselves. In the Middle Ages, the feudal lords - the owners of the land - enslaved the peasants and forced them to work on their estates for a significant part of the time.

In their textbook on economics, K. McConnell and S. Brew note one of the fundamental differences between economic systems: “private or state ownership of resources”.

The legendary poet of ancient Greece, Homer, wrote about the merciless treatment of slaves, who were wholly owned by slave owners:

The slave is negligent; do not force the lord with strict behavior.

To his cause, he himself will not take up the work willingly:

The painful lot of sad slavery having chosen a man,

Zeus destroys the best valor in him.

The Decembrist Pavel Ivanovich Pestel wrote in Russkaya Pravda (1824) about landlord arbitrariness: “To possess other people as one’s own property, to sell, pledge, give and inherit people like things, to use them according to one’s own arbitrariness without prior agreement with them and solely for its profit, benefit, and sometimes whim is a shameful thing, contrary to humanity, contrary to its natural laws ... ".

Ownership has a big impact on distribution of wealth between people. It is known that the owners of enterprises in the distribution of manufactured products receive such a part of its value that many times exceeds the earnings of workers. In ch. Chapters 8 and 9 of the textbook will examine in detail the impact of ownership on the distribution of income in enterprises and across the state.

Ownership relations directly determine the conditions market exchange. The seller (owner of goods) and the buyer (owner of money) are materially interested in making an equivalent exchange of goods for money without losing part of their property.

It hardly needs to be proved that the welfare of households, measured primarily by the level consumption all the blessings of life, depends on the property, which brings the family an appropriate income.

Own covers the entire process of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of goods. Socio-economic relations in society depend on the appropriation of the decisive means of production.

Meanwhile, property relations have the property change under the influence of a number of reasons - the development of production, its technology and organization, as well as socio-political conditions. Therefore, throughout economic history, there have been several types(homogeneous groups with common features) and their corresponding specific (diverse) species appropriation of property. Further study of the economy involves the clarification of the current diversity of types and types of property.

Learning theme
Property and the socio-economic structure of society

Topic 4: Ownership and socio-economic

Property is a historically defined social form of appropriation of material goods. The nature of ownership of the means of production also determines the nature of ownership of the products (result) of labor.

In any economic system, in addition to the questions: what goods to produce, how to produce these goods (for example, a bicycle can be assembled at home or at an industrial enterprise), for whom to produce this product (for a particular consumer, for a certain group of consumers, or for all consumers in general) ), - there is another important question: whose means of production will be used to manufacture these goods and to whom they will belong.

The means of production consist of means of labor (for example, raw materials, materials, semi-finished products).

Depending on who is the owner of these funds, the results of production will belong to him, i.e. goods.

When defining property, the following concepts are distinguished:

— subjects of ownership- these are those who own certain property or, in other words, the owners of any property;

— property objects- this is what is appropriated by the owner (means of production and results of production - products of labor).

Owners (subjects of ownership) can be:

1. natural persons - citizens; 2) legal entities - organizations that enter into economic relations on their own behalf as independent units; 3) states and municipalities - local authorities and self-government; 4) international organizations represented by power structures at various levels.

Right property And relationship property. Ownership —

it is the right to control the use of certain resources and to allocate the resulting costs and benefits. This determines most of the rules governing social relationships with the participation of people, delimits what belongs to whom, how property is used and ownership is changed.

The right of ownership expresses a person's relationship to a thing “as to his own” or “as to someone else's”, i.e. is built according to the formula:

Owner (subject) - Thing (object).

However, in this interpretation there is no answer to the question: where does the right of ownership come from and how is it realized? The answer lies in considering property as an economic relationship between people.

Property relations are systematically recurring, reproducible relations between people, inextricably linked with the property rights of possession, disposal, management, use and appropriation of both the means of production and the results of their use. In other words: property relations are relations between people about things (objects). These relationships are expressed by the formula:

Subject - (object) - Subject.

Relationship property is a system of relations between subjects about:

- appropriation and alienation of property (primarily the means of production, i.e. the means employed in production - the means of labor and objects of labor);

- economic use of material resources;

— economic realization of property.

1. Appropriation - an economic connection between people (groups of people), establishing their relationship to things, material means as to their own. The opposite of appropriation is the relationship of alienation (it occurs for that part of society that is left without material means, means of production, without sources of subsistence).

The strength of the connection "appropriation - alienation" can be different.

Example. You are the owner of the land and have dug a ditch on your land with your shovel or hired a worker for this, or leased the land, while the tenant either uses the land himself or hires a worker. Who is the owner of the land in each particular case? Who is the user? Who owns the result of labor?

2. The economic use of material resources (property) arises if the owner, not being engaged in production himself, grants the right to own his property to other persons on certain conditions. These other persons receive (temporarily) the legal right to own and use the object of someone else's property.

Example. Lease - a contract for the provision of property of one person (persons) for temporary use to another person (persons). Concession - handing over by the state of means of production, enterprises, land to private individuals, foreign firms for certain production activities.

3. The economic realization of property is carried out in the form of income brought to the owner of the property. Income- a newly created product obtained through the use of means of production: profit, taxes, various kinds of payments, including rent.

Ownership of the factors of production leads to ownership of the results of labor. Property relations only then begin to be effective when the property begins to generate income. Therefore, property is realized economically only when it begins to generate income.

Essence economic power, in relation to ownership of the means of production and its results.

Peculiarities relations property. The specificity of property relations lies in the fact that property embodies the inseparable unity of the economy and law, its relations function in an economic and legal form.

In the legal sense, the concept of “property” establishes property relations, which is determined in the legal norms (legal laws) of the state.

These norms show how material wealth is appropriated and distributed (primarily the means of production, since it is they that give economic power) between individual citizens, social groups, classes, and the state.

The owner owns the property specified in the law, and he receives the authority to:

Own, i.e. physically possess the thing;

- to use, i.e. productively or personally consume property to meet their own needs and interests;

- dispose, that is, change the ownership of things through the sale and purchase of the exchange of one thing for another, donation, and so on.

You can be a full owner - while all three rights are realized. You can remain the owner, owner, but not use it yourself, but give economic management to another person on certain conditions (for example, sell a car under a general power of attorney, which allows not only to use the car for its intended purpose, but also allows you to temporarily transfer or sell it to another person) . You can be the owner, but give your property (property) to operational management, in this case, the one who uses this property can not only work and not perform any actions (for example, allow a neighbor to grow vegetables on your land in exchange for a cash payment or a percentage of the harvest, but at the same time he does not have the right to sell or transfer this plot to another person).

In the economic sense, property represents the economic relations between people that exist in production. This attitude is about the appropriation or alienation of the means of production and the benefits of life created with their help. The type of ownership of the means of production is the basis of society's production relations - property each time appears in a certain social form (state, private, collective), and not in general.

Types of property. According to the nature of the appropriation of the means of production and the blessings of life, two main types of property with opposite qualities are distinguished: public (common) property and private.

Historically, the first type is public property. Under public or common property, persons united in collectives treat the means of production or other means, property as undivided, jointly owned by them. In this case, different levels of socialization are possible.

In this case, the equality of joint owners is established in relation to the economic conditions of their life support, i.e. this is a type of appropriation in which interests are realized on the basis of mutual agreement. (One can talk about the priority of public interest, but it does not exist outside and apart from the interests of the social communities that make up this society, as well as individuals.)

The second type is private property. It reflects the relationship of separate, economically isolated appropriation - individuals treat property (means of production) and the results of production as their own. The degree of this isolation may vary.

The interests of an individual or a social group dominate the interests of society as a whole. Firstly, this may include persons who combine in one person both the owner and the worker who lives by his own labor (according to the law of private property appropriation, he gets all the fruits of his management) - artisans, individual peasants, etc. Secondly, this includes persons (a group of persons) who own a mass of means of production and use the labor of persons alienated from these means (according to the law of private property appropriation, the fruits of the labor activity of workers fall to the owners of the means of production) - the owners of various firms, organizations, etc. , i.e. A distinction is made between private property based on the personal labor of the direct producer (labor private property) and private property based on the appropriation of someone else's unpaid labor (exploitative private property).

Varieties of unearned private appropriation - slaveholding, feudal, individual, bourgeois.

Conclusion: private property relations are built on separate appropriation of factors and results of production, public property relations are based on joint appropriation.

Forms of ownership are mobile, they pass one into another, therefore a third type of appropriation is also possible - mixed ownership when various options combine general and private appropriation (joint stock companies, cooperatives, partnerships, business associations, where property is formed at the expense of monetary and other contributions from various owners).

We are talking here about the types and organizational-legal forms of ownership in its pure form, not related to specific historical circumstances. Real property relations develop depending on the economic, national, historical, cultural, demographic and other characteristics of a given society, and the existence of transitional types of property is possible.

In countries with different market economies, it is customary to divide all types of property into state and private, i.e. individual, joint-stock, etc.

The classification of property is considered in two directions:

- collective property (joint stock company, cooperatives, partnerships, joint ventures, public and religious organizations);

- state property (feudal, municipal subjects of the Federation).

2. By ownership:

a) on personal labor;

b) with the involvement of hired labor (slave-owning, feudal, capitalist);

c) collective (joint stock company);

a) the state itself;

The emergence and development of private property corresponded to the transition of the economy to market forms of management, the beginning of entrepreneurial activity.

main.tpkelbook.com

Presentation on the topic "Property and the socio-economic structure of society"

Take advantage of up to 50% discounts on Infourok courses

Description of the presentation on individual slides:

Plan. 1. Economic system. 2. Main economic entities. 3. The essence of property as an economic category. Topic: Property and the socio-economic structure of society.

The economic system is a specially ordered system of relations between producers and consumers of tangible and intangible goods and services in the country. There are four models of economic systems: traditional system. market system. command and control system. mixed system. Economic system.

Market system (capitalism). Freedom of choice is the main motive for the behavior of producers interested in the production of goods and services that can make a profit. traditional system. In this system, relations between people are built on the basis of centuries-old and rooted traditions and customs. Command-administrative system. The main regulatory role is assigned to the state. In this system, the distribution of resources and the production of goods are centrally planned by higher authorities. mixed system. Private enterprise and individual decision-making are subject to economic control by the state.

The main economic entities are: households firms state foreigners main economic entities.

HOUSEHOLDS - Individuals or groups of individuals living under the same roof and making decisions about the consumption of goods to maintain their own existence. These goods can be produced in the household itself (subsistence farming) or purchased in the market with income received from the sale of resources. THE STATE, which includes all state institutions and institutions that produce public goods, regulate economic activity, redistribute private goods in society, form infrastructure, etc. The goal of the state is to maximize public welfare. FOREIGNERS - economic entities permanently located outside their country, as well as foreign state institutions. The impact of foreign states on the domestic economy is carried out through the mutual exchange of goods, services, capital and national currency. FIRMS are economic agents that purchase resources in order to produce goods and services, make decisions about the choice of resource suppliers, traders of their own goods and consumers. The goal of the firm is to maximize profits.

The essence of property as an economic category. Ownership is the relationship between the subject and the object regarding the appropriation or alienation on a temporary or permanent basis, for compensation or free of charge of the object of ownership by the subject of ownership. The subject of property is the active side of property relations: a person, a group of people, society. The object of ownership is the passive side of property relations: any goods and services, real estate, money, securities, jewelry, factors of production (labor, land, capital).

Subject-object: Possession Use Disposition Responsibility Subject-subject: Assignment (separation) of previously created property between subjects Assignment (separation) of property between subjects directly involved in the creation of this property Ownership relations.

Forms of ownership Individual personal private Collective Nationwide State Private Mixed Family Group

Private property Labor private property is the use of one's own labor. Unearned private property is the use of hired labor.

Control questions 1. What is the purpose of the main economic actors in the economic life of society? Explain with examples the role of households, businesses (firms) and the state. Follow their relationships. 2. Give a definition of the subject and object of ownership and explain their economic essence and inextricable relationship with examples. 3. What are the subject-subject relations of ownership (possession, use, disposal) and how can they manifest themselves? 4. What do you know about the main forms of ownership, what are their distinguishing features? Give examples of different types of ownership.

• Information library on consumer rights protection Posted: 19.12.2014 RULES OF COMMISSION TRADING No. 2300-1 “On consumer protection”, Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 06.06.1998 No. 569 “On […]
• Characteristics about the passage of undergraduate practice by a student Oleg: Please tell me how to correctly write a characterization for a student about the passage of undergraduate practice in an organization? Answer: A description of the student's internship should be written by the head of the internship, but it often happens that in […]
• Deadlines for filing reports and paying taxes for 2014 (for the 4th quarter of 2014) The deadlines for filing financial statements are established by Federal Law No. 402-FZ “On Accounting”. In order to protect yourself from mistakes of violating deadlines, it is better to charge accounting and reporting […]
• What are the deadlines for paying payroll taxes in 2018? The deadlines for paying payroll taxes in 2018 are determined based on the specific type of such taxes. Let's study their specifics in more detail. What are the payroll taxes? "Salary taxes" in a broad sense, it is legitimate to call: personal income tax withheld […]
• ABOUT INDEXATION OF INSURANCE PENSIONS FROM JANUARY 1, 2018 Subscribe to news A letter to confirm the subscription has been sent to the e-mail you specified. January 22, 2018 From January 01, 2018, in accordance with the Federal Law of December 28, 2017 No. 420-FZ, the amount of a fixed payment to the insurance […]
• Law Encyclopedia. 2005 . See what "STATUTORY COURT" is in other dictionaries: a charter court is a special court of a subject of the Russian Federation, exercising: judicial power by reviewing and verifying normative and legal acts of state authorities of the corresponding subject of the Russian Federation, local self-government, […]
• Unloading registers from 1s 83 So, let's start With the help of a salary project. According to the salary project, a printed and scanned statement of payments on personal accounts, an upload file directly from 1C, an upload file from a special program that the bank gives If we send a statement to the bank in the form of a […]
• Studiolance Blog about Studiolance! Coursework / abstracts / problem solving Affordable prices! Terms from 1 day! Registration of references in accordance with GOST As a rule, the information in manuals is completely identical to GOSTs. If for some reason there were no teaching aids at the university, use the standard. When it comes to […]