What is the community like? Dictionary of forgotten and difficult words of the 18th-19th centuries

Community A community is a naturally formed supra-family association of people connected by common interests, sometimes a common origin, emotional or cultural unity, etc. (for example, fellow countrymen, emigrants, religious communities). IN in the narrow sense community - a self-governing and self-reproducing social unit at the supra-family level, which is characterized by personal relationships between the people included in it. Communities based on kinship ties play a leading role in organizing communal land use, access to other resources, and joint labor and spiritual activities. Another type of community is based on territorial neighborhood ties between individual households.

Historical Dictionary. 2000 .

Synonyms:

See what “Community” is in other dictionaries:

COMMUNITY, form social organization. Primitive (generic) O. is characterized collective work and consumption, the later form is neighborly (territorial, rural) O. combines individual and communal ownership, characteristic of ... ... Russian history

The word community is Old Church Slavonicism in the Russian language. It was very common in ancient Russian literature and expressed different meanings. We can distinguish four main meanings in it: 1) communication or the presence of something in common; unity,... ... History of words

- (community) Social group people connected by a specific place. However, the nature of social ties and the location of the community give rise to ideological disputes. Traditional Conservatives emphasize that community is at the heart of... ... Political science. Dictionary.

The primary form of social organization that arose on the basis of natural, consanguineous relationships. connections. In the process of formation of class society and the state, primitive consanguinity. O. is being transformed into a neighboring (territorial) organization of villages... ... Philosophical Encyclopedia

COMMUNITY, a form of social organization. The primitive (tribal) community is characterized by common ownership of the means of production, collective labor and consumption; the later form of the neighboring (territorial, rural) community combines... ... Modern encyclopedia

Form of social organization. The primitive (tribal) community is characterized by collective labor and consumption, the later form of the neighboring (territorial, rural) community combines individual and communal ownership, characteristic of... ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

community- and the community. In meaning "the lower house of the English Parliament" community. House of Commons. In meaning "organization, society" usually a community. Student community. Religious community... Dictionary of difficulties of pronunciation and stress in modern Russian language

And (ed.) COMMUNITY, communities, women. (book). 1. A self-governing organization of residents of a territorial unit (village, city; legal entity). Medieval urban communities (communes). A clan is a community bound by blood and property. 2.… … Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary

I general ina. 1. The oldest form of social organization, characterized by collective ownership of the means of production, joint labor and equal distribution, as well as full or partial self-government (preserved in a number of ... ... Modern Dictionary Russian language Efremova

Cm … Synonym dictionary

Books

Community, . "Community" is a book of the Teaching of Living Ethics, compiled by Elena Ivanovna Roerich...

a municipality consisting of one, or less often, several settlements. The population of O. is considered a single territorial collective that owns municipal property and decides for itself individual issues life of the O. at meetings or through local referendums, and also elects bodies local government. The size of the settlement is not of fundamental importance: O. can be a small village or a city. (S.A.)

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

COMMUNITY

the name of various social groups based on the common ownership of all or the main (for example, land) means of production. O. is a ubiquitous institution and is characteristic of all peoples who are in the stage of a primitive communal system. It remains as a relic in class society, persisting in many countries even in the era of capitalism.

In the process of development of the primitive communal system, clothing changed its forms and content. The most ancient form of O. is clan O. - a consanguineous union based on the common ownership of primitive means of production and the general appropriation of the products of labor. With the development of productive forces, the improvement of agriculture and the development of cattle breeding, the ancestral O. breaks up into large-family O. (“zadruga”, “zhupa”). The production unit becomes not the clan, but the large patriarchal family. The beginning of the systematic use of livestock as draft power and the use of the plow lead to the separation of the individual family as an economic unit and to the disintegration of clan ties. On this basis, a territorial, or neighborly, community is formed. Neighborhood community is a transition from a society based on common property to a society based on private property. Her education marks the transition from a primitive communal system to a class society. There are two types of neighboring property: the first, when all the land is considered property of the property and is systematically redistributed between individual families (Russia); and the second, when arable land has already become the private property of individual householders, while forests, pastures, wastelands, etc. still remain the property of O. (German mark).

During the period of feudalism, O. is completely subordinate to the feudal lords, who seized communal lands into their hands and became monopoly owners of the land. As commodity circulation develops, the economy decomposes. Within it, along with a handful of rich people taking over communal lands, the poor stand out, exploited by them. Community ownership of land is gradually being replaced by private ownership.

In Russia, the interests of the tsarist government and landowners dictated to them a policy of artificial support for agriculture in order to bind the peasants with mutual responsibility for collecting taxes and quitrents. After the first Russian revolution of 1905–07. Tsarism, seeing in the face of the peasantry a formidable force that had risen under the leadership of the proletariat in a revolutionary struggle against the remnants of serfdom, relied on the kulak and began, in his interests, the destruction of peasant agriculture, allowing access to farmsteads and cuttings and the consolidation of communal lands into personal ownership (see. Stolypin agrarian reform). “If during the “liberation” of the peasants the landowners robbed the peasants’ land, now the kulaks began to rob the communal land, obtaining the best plots, buying up plots from the poor at a cheap price” (History of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks). Short course, p. 94). Russian revolutionary democrats viewed O. as the embryo of the socialist system (Herzen) or as an organization facilitating the transition to socialism (Chernyshevsky).This erroneous assessment of O., due to the weak degree of development of capitalism in Russia in the 60s of the 19th century, was inflated by the populists already under more mature conditions of capitalist development and served theoretical basis so-called "peasant socialism" of the populists. Lenin and Stalin exposed the populist idealization of O. and showed that O. was not and could not be either the base or the embryo of socialism, since it was dominated by kulaks, “world eaters” who exploited the poor, farm laborers, and weak middle peasants. Peasant taxation was in fact a convenient form for covering up kulak dominance and a means in the hands of tsarism for collecting taxes from peasants on the principle of mutual responsibility. Only Great October socialist revolution opened up the possibility for the peasantry to transition to the path of socialist collective farming.

Excellent definition

Incomplete definition ↓

Communities are groups of people who live in the same locality(city, village, town, settlement) and are connected by common spiritual, political and economic interests. One of their main features is the following: each member realizes that he belongs to a group that is different from the others. The community is a form of self-organization of society. We invite you to get to know her in more detail.

Community in the broadest sense

IN in a broad sense communities are any communities of people connected to each other that have developed historically. This connection is determined by the place of residence (urban or rural community), the membership of its members in a particular denomination (confessional), and the similarity of occupations (professional). In addition, communities are associations whose members can be related commonplace birth or belonging to a certain ethnic group. This applies to people who live outside their historical homeland (community).

Community in the narrow sense

In a narrow sense, communities are forms of social organization of the population, which are considered one of the most ancient. They are characteristic of the early stage of development of all civilizations. One person, or a group consisting of several people in the primitive era, as a rule, could not survive. It was very difficult for her to provide herself with at least a minimum of resources and necessary products. Therefore, people had to form large communities in order to farm together. At the same time, they were united by blood relationship - the most natural characteristic. This is how it appeared. Its definition is as follows: relatives who run a joint household. On early stages development of the tribal community it was hunting, then gathering and, finally, cattle breeding and/or farming.

Functions of the community before the emergence of the state

In conditions when the state did not yet exist, all relations associated with religious beliefs, farming, relatives and family relationships concentrated at the community level. It provided its members with everything they needed and was a self-sufficient organism. The community included individual families, the nature and size of which depended on the characteristics of the development of this civilization. At the first stages of its existence, the community often coincided with the clan. The tribe was an association of several communities. This is how society was structured in ancient times.

House or family community

Brownie, or family community is considered a special type of generic. What are its features? The characteristics of a clan community of this type are as follows. It consists of big family, including from three to five generations of immediate relatives. After cattle breeding or agriculture began to form the basis of the community's economy, the role of its most experienced members increased. They were called elders. They became organizers of collective labor, religious leaders, and leaders of military militia. These people had well-deserved authority in the eyes of other community members. In the institute of military leaders and elders, scientists today see the embryo of future property and social inequality.

Community territorial

The awareness of blood ties between community members weakened with the increase in the number of relatives. More and more distant representatives of the clan settled next to each other. Some began to start families outside the community. Thus, in the unification of people, not all the signs of a tribal community were observed. In the course of social evolution, it was replaced by territorial, or neighborly. The unification of people took place in in this case based on the proximity of their residence.

The role of the community after the emergence of the state

The community consisted of separate families who ran their own households. It had partial or complete self-government. Most often it united free farmers. In relation to the state, she occupied a subordinate position.

Community in countries ancient world played the role of the primary link of the social system, its indivisible cell. It was she who was the entity that paid taxes (taxes) and supplied soldiers for the army. The community often turned into a political-territorial unit of the state. Within its framework, relations were regulated by unwritten, customary law, and after some time they were consolidated with the help state laws. As long as the community fulfilled its duties to the state, it usually did not interfere in its affairs. This was facilitated by the so-called mutual responsibility, which operated within the community. It meant that all its members were responsible for the others.

Nomadic community

The species depended on the people neighboring community. The nomadic people, for example, distributed pastures and organized mutual assistance during natural disasters or loss of livestock. Nomadic communities had to guard their herds at all times, so they had a permanent military organization.

Agricultural community

The agricultural community was somewhat different. Its main task was to regulate economic and land relations arising between its members. Let us note an important feature of a community: common use of water resources, forest lands and pastures. In each civilization, it had its own characteristics, depending on the form of government and the strength of the state, and the availability of land suitable for cultivation. For example, among the peoples of medieval Asia and in communities ancient East each family received its own allotment for the agricultural season. This plot was the property of the community, and the state acted as the supreme owner of the land. IN Ancient Rome And Ancient Greece a community member had rights to his plot. But leaving it led to their loss. Members of the early medieval German community (the so-called mark) had unconditional rights to allotments. At the same time, the functions of the community were limited to judicial matters and issues of use of common lands.

The process of loss of functions by the community

Why did this one fall apart? Let's look at the main reasons. As the community's population increased significantly, there was a shortage of cultivable land. Then restrictions on the size of the plot began to be introduced. As feudal land tenure developed, peasant plots became the property of the feudal lord. began to spread various shapes their land and personal dependence on the lord. At this time, the community began to monitor the timely payment of rent by the peasants to the feudal lord. It gradually lost its judicial functions, and its self-government became very limited. However, neither the procedure for using land owned by the community nor the methods of cultivating the land underwent virtually any changes at this time. Professional differences among members of a caste community (India, Ancient Egypt, tropical Africa, medieval Japan, Oceania) were secured by a rigid division into castes.

Some general signs of a community

Urgent agricultural work that required a lot of effort (harvesting, mowing, etc.) in most civilizations was carried out jointly by community members. The most important decisions, including questions about the distribution of various duties and state taxes, were made by men at general meetings. Current affairs were led by the head of the community. He also represented her before government officials.

What signs of a tribal community have we forgotten to note? It, like the territorial one, has a tendency to equalize the social and property status of farmers. Its rich members bore more. The strength of the community depended on the number of farmers who were part of it. Therefore, she tried to prevent a situation in which her members would be ruined.

How did the community die?

Community in most civilizations is a mandatory feature of a pre-industrial, or agrarian, society. She died in a number of countries Western Europe as a result of the fact that the feudal lords completely seized the lands that belonged to her. Thus the life of the communities was destroyed. However, this process most often occurred as a result of the industrial revolution, the formation of the capitalist system, and development in society commodity-money relations, and also due to urbanization, that is, the rapid growth of the urban population. Peasants went to work in cities where large industrial enterprises existed. This gradually weakened the community. The burden of duties assigned to each of its members grew. At the same time, the gap between the poor and the rich in it increased. The latter were burdened by the restrictions imposed by the community on the use of land and tried to leave it. As a result of this, it lost its wealthiest members. Left without them, the community became unable to fulfill the obligations imposed on it by the state. Therefore, the state authorized its dissolution. People stopped living as a community, and the division of its property began. Note that varieties of the neighborhood community still exist in a number of countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

Ushakov's Dictionary

Community

common to And ( rare) community, communities, wives (books).

1. A self-governing organization of residents of a territorial unit (village, city; legal). Medieval urban communities (communes). A clan is a community bound by blood and property.

2. An administrative-estate organization that actually carried out the fiscal interests of the state, a land peasant organization in Russia, whose members bore mutual responsibility and owned the land jointly without ownership of the cultivated plots ( ist.). “...The abolition of mutual responsibility..., the abolition of class divisions, freedom of movement and freedom of disposal of land for each individual peasant will lead to the inevitable and rapid destruction of that fiscal-serf burden, which is, three-quarters, the modern land community.” Lenin (1902 G., "Agrarian program of Russian social democracy").

Political Science: Dictionary-Reference Book

Community

form of social organization - a primitive (tribal) community is characterized by collective labor and consumption, a later form - a neighboring (territorial, rural) community combines individual and communal ownership, characteristic of a pre-capitalist society. The community has full or partial self-government. IN pre-revolutionary Russia the community was a closed class unit used as an apparatus for collecting taxes (after the Peasant Reform of 1861 - the owner of the land. During the Stolypin agrarian reform, communal land ownership was replaced by private peasant ownership. The ancients are also called a community historical communities: urban commune, religious, professional, community community.

Modern economic dictionary. 1999

COMMUNITY

Ethnographic Dictionary

Community

self-governing economic and social - everyday collective, the primary form of social - territorial organization of the pre-class (primitive), capitalist period human history(peasant) or human culture as a whole (religious community).

Dictionary of forgotten and difficult words of the 18th-19th centuries

Community

, s , and.

Association of peasants of several villages, volosts with forced common land use.

* - I will present you with millions of such decisions, - exclaimed Pavel Petrovich, millions! Yes, at least the community, for example... [Bazarov:] - Well, better talk to your brother about the community. Now, it seems, he has experienced in practice what a community is, mutual responsibility. // Turgenev. Fathers and Sons // *

COMMUNITY, COMMUNITY, COMMUNITY, ◘ COMMUNITY PEASANTRY.

Encyclopedia of Judaism

Community

Society

(Kagal)

In a particular case, a gathering of people for prayer and worship, at least ten Jews over thirteen years of age. The Chazal* demanded strong unity in the Jewish O., and Hillel said: “Do not separate yourself from the O.” When the people are in distress and one of Israel has distanced himself from O., two angels come to accompany him, lay their hands on his head and say: “This one has renounced O., may he not be worthy to see O’s consolation.” Those who renounce O. go to hell. To the same extent that the Chazal cared that O. would not lose her sons and would not become weak, they also cared that O.’s wicked leaders would not take possession of her and oppress her. And the sages warned: not to impose laws and regulations on O., which most of O. are not able to fulfill.

The name "Kahal" or "Kgila" was also used to call the administrative body of O. The roots of this institution were laid in the Jewish communal organization in Babylon. The Jews of Babylon had the right to organize their social life as they saw fit. In creating such an internal strong organization that provided its members with the opportunity to live a separate life even in an alien environment, the Babylonian community set an example for all communities of the dispersion. This example was borrowed by Jews from other countries, of course, with certain nuances suitable for the living conditions of a given community. O. and court are the two pillars of Jewish self-government from the time of the fall of the Second Temple and almost to the present day.

Jewish O. in Babylon were the oldest in the Diaspora. They were founded, without a doubt, during the Babylonian captivity (after the destruction of the First Temple). From the period of the Second Temple, only very meager information has reached us about the way of life of the Babylonian O., but the era of the Talmud* gives us extensive material, mainly in the Talmud itself.

O. were engaged in collecting government taxes. This function was assigned later, in the Middle Ages, to most O. Europe. Thus, the governments gave O. power over its members. The central and city authorities did not recognize the Jew legal entity and did not contact him directly. The poll tax was also collected from O.; Each organization was assigned a certain amount, which the leaders of the organization divided among all its members. In addition to this, O. was involved in organizing self-defense: repairing the walls of the Jewish quarter, maintaining security, and purchasing weapons. O. was responsible for the supply of water to members of the O., monitored compliance with sanitary rules, etc. O. had guardianship over the markets; O. made sure that prices for goods were not inflated or underestimated. O. took care that its members did not oppress each other. O. granted special privileges to Torah students*, including easing their tax burden. The heads of the organization were intermediaries between workers and employers. It goes without saying that O. took care of synagogues and Houses of Study (Beit Midrash), raising children and maintaining teachers.

O. was headed by seven people from the most respected people in the city. They were authorized to handle all the affairs of the O. But the most important matters were decided by these seven in the presence of members of the O. These seven people could make decisions only with the consent and approval of the chakham (sage) of the city, and then the rabbi. Such consent was necessary especially for the adoption of new regulations. To organize public charity, gabaim (elders) were appointed: one for collecting alms, the second for the daily distribution of food and funds to the poor, the third was responsible for issuing money to the poor on the eve of the Sabbath. The “alms tax” was imposed on all members of the organization, even orphans.

In addition to the persons in charge of collecting money, mention should be made of the ministers of synagogues and Houses of Teaching. At the head of all Jewish O. Babylon was Rosh Ha-Gola* (head of the Diaspora).

Throughout the Middle Ages, Jewish self-government was in the hands of the heads of the O. They were intermediaries between Jews and the state, intercessors and intercessors before the authorities, collected taxes and duties imposed on the Jews, and transferred money to the state. At the same time, Jews enjoyed the right of residence, the right of internal court and the right to practice Judaism. Thus, O. was, as it were, a state within a state. The rabbis and heads of O. established many rules aimed at strengthening religion and strengthening the position of Jews in conditions of hostility from the peoples among whom they lived.

For some time, the Jewish O. of Spain enjoyed the right to try members of the O. who committed criminal offenses, and in almost all countries the O. enjoyed the right to impose fines and confiscations by decision of the Jewish court. In Poland and Lithuania, O. maintained a kind of punishment cell in which offenders were imprisoned for a day or two. The seven leaders of the O. were called in different O. “parnas” (“breadwinners”), “good”, “chief”. In some cities, the "parnassus" was elected monthly and was called "parnassus for the month." “Parnas for a month” concentrated great power in his hands, since he could influence court cases, the work of tax commissions and the decisions of officials. He determined the O.'s budget for the duration of his tenure, approved accounts, organized loans, signed O.'s obligations and documents. There were cases when "parnas" did not correspond to its purpose (he was not honest, became excessively arrogant) and at the same time refused to leave his post at the end of his tenure, continuing to head O. for several years.

In some schools there was an “educational commission” that was in charge of educational institutions and supervised the morality of the members of the Society. This commission made sure that the clothes of the members of the Society were not too luxurious, that the musicians did not play too loudly during weddings and celebrations, and that the old and young did not make noise in the streets. There were also special commissions to encourage the study of the Talmud, etc.

Dictionary of economic terms

Community

one of historical forms economic association of a group of people, characterized by common ownership of the means of production, full or partial self-government.

Geopolitical glossary

Community

the natural form of existence of people connected by organic bonds. It opposes a society in which, instead of organic connections, the norms of a formalized agreement between individuals prevail. Society is regulated by Tradition.

Russian Philosophy. Encyclopedia

Community

V broad meaning a variety of social and production associations (city communes, communities, religious communities, etc.), based on the principles of self-government; in the most common meaning - a form of organization of agricultural production and peasant life, which is based on collective land use. It is in this last value O. became the subject of consideration rus. social thought XIX - early. XX century Representatives of the noble opposition, who advocated the liberation of peasants from serfdom, put forward arguments in favor of the development of free agriculture. Pestel in Russkaya Pravda proposed using agriculture in the process of the future transformation of Russia in order to avoid the harmful consequences of private land ownership. From the beginning 40s XIX century interest in O. intensified, which was associated with Slavophilism. O. was considered by the Slavophiles as the only social institution that survived in rus. stories where morality individual person was integral to public morality. Life in O, according to Kireevsky, has a beneficial effect on the development of a person’s spirituality. The history of the existence of Orthodoxy in Russia was associated by L. S. Khomyakov with the peculiarities of Orthodoxy and the “folk spirit” of the Slavs. Although some of the Slavophiles, eg Koshechev, denied O.’s stability, believing that we had passed through it. peoples, but as historical development progressed, it collapsed; nevertheless, the social ideal of Slavophilism included O. as the primary cell of the future society. Khomyakov identified two main principles in O. functions: production and administrative, which must be fully preserved in the future. At the same time, it was believed that “the industrial community is and will be the development of the agricultural community” (Khomyakov A.S. Poln. sobr. soch. M., 1914. T. 3. P. 467). Russia was considered as a “great community”, the region is the actual owner of all the land. Analyzing O.’s life, Khomyakov noted the manifestation of conciliarity in it, which was reflected, in his opinion, in the character rus. people. When making decisions at peasant meetings, all issues were adopted unanimously, since common interests always prevailed over private ones. Rus. a person, in accordance with the teachings of the Slavophiles, renouncing part of his rights and self-will, only elevates himself. The presence of any majority in the voting process means violence against etc. some people are a minority, and this is a prerequisite for the development of contradictions in society. “In the history of our Motherland,” wrote Khomyakov, “the idea of communal unity always lay as the fundamental stone of all social concepts; but for a long time there was a struggle between small communities and the idea of a great community. Finally, the idea of the unity of the great community triumphed... Then it turned out that the unity that seemed to be a consequence historical accident... was truly the affair of the Russian land" (Ibid. M., 1900. T. 1. P. 97). In 1849, Herzen turned to the consideration of O. in Art. "Russia". A significant influence on his views was exerted by the work of A. Haxthausen “Study of internal relations folk life and especially rural institutions in Russia" (1847). The German researcher of agrarian issues communicated a lot with Slavophiles, who were able to convince him of the value of this form of organization of agricultural production, which allows avoiding the spread of the proletariat and possible revolutionary upheavals. In the early 50s Messrs. Herzen creates his own concept of communal socialism, the main features of which largely repeated the social ideal of the Slavophiles. At the same time, there were serious differences between these concepts. Herzen did not connect O. with the features of Orthodoxy. In O., in his opinion , freedom and civil rights each individual should not be suppressed, otherwise this would be one of the main obstacles in achieving socialism. In the 2nd half. 50s The controversy surrounding O. was conducted on the pages of a number of magazines. So, in magazine"Russian Messenger" Chicherin claimed that rus. O. was initially no different from ancient The German mark, having gone through several stages of its development, turned from a generic mark into an owner's mark, and then into a state mark and was used by the state for fiscal purposes. I. D. Belyaev wrote in the Slavophile organ “Russian Conversation” that all peoples had ancestral O., but in rus. history at the time of the arrival of the Varangians it was negotiable. The people's spirit strengthened rus. O. so much so that all government and local authorities authorities. Chernyshevsky considered the existing architecture only as a basis for its future development. Using the example of the life of peasants in the Samara province, he concluded that it is necessary collaboration of all workers, during which it will not be the land that will be distributed, but the products of labor. Such a reorganization of O., in his opinion, is feasible only in the future. Chernyshevsky identified 3 stages in the formation of agriculture: communal ownership without communal production, communal ownership with communal production, communal ownership with communal production and communal distribution. In Art. “Criticism of Philosophical Prejudices against Communal Land Ownership” (1859) Chernyshevsky showed the possibility of using the principles of philosophy at a higher stage of human history, bypassing its certain intermediate phases. After the reform of 1861, Chernyshevsky was less optimistic about development prospects rus. O., the existence of the cut indicated the presence patriarchal relations in about. The advanced peoples were approaching socialism, according to Chernyshevsky, regardless of Russia, they had nothing to borrow from its rural O. Further development populist ideology in relation to rus. O. had its own characteristics. M.A. Bakunin and Kropotkin sought to interpret O. as a cell of a new society in the future union of self-governing O., where there will be no state. Mn. The populists believed that the disintegration of agriculture, which occurred after the agrarian reform, could have the most disastrous consequences for the future of Russia. In the 2nd half. XIX century A period of active study of the internal processes occurring in the country begins, based on the results of various economic, historical, and social studies using numerous statistical data. In 1900, the work of K. R. Kachorowski “Russian Community” (vol. 1) was published. Basic question that worried public opinion at that time, related to the possibility of preserving O., the feasibility of its further functioning and development. Populism was experiencing an increasingly greater crisis, which was also associated with the crisis rus. O. Lenin believed that O. was in the end. XIX - early XX century remained “medieval”, “archaic”, “semi-serfdom”. However, the development of capitalist relations and the stratification of the peasants increasingly undermined it. Significant changes in fate rus. O. occurred in the process of agrarian reforms carried out by P. A. Stolypin, largely aimed at its destruction. However, after the revolutionary upheavals of 1917, O. once again showed its viability. A. V. Chayanov, Kondratyev, and I. P. Makarov made a great contribution to the study of clothing, considering it as a special consumer-labor economic type. During the Soviet era, agriculture retained some of its elements (collective farming, traditions of equality, self-government, neighborly mutual assistance). At present, when agricultural production based on collective principles is experiencing a crisis, the dispute about the prospects for their preservation and development has intensified. Question about the future rus. villages, which carry the traditions of O., are still relevant.

◘ L and t.: Khomyakov A. S. About the rural community // About the old and the new: Articles and essays. M., 1988. S. 159–167; Chernyshevsky N. G. Criticism of philosophical prejudices against communal land ownership // Izbr. Philosopher prod.: In 3 vols. M., 1950. T. 2. P. 449–493; Herzen A.I. Letters to the enemy // Collection. cit.: In 30 volumes. M., 1959. T. 18. P. 511–512; Ogarev N.P. Russian questions // Izbr. socio-political, and philosophical. prod. M., 1952. T. 1. P. 137–169; Kovalevsky M. M. Communal land ownership, causes, course and consequences of its decomposition. M., 1879. Part 1; It's him. Tribal life in the present, recent and distant past. St. Petersburg, 1905. Issue. 1–2; Kachorowski K.R. Russian community. St. Petersburg, 1900. T. 1; Dudzinekaya E. A. Slavophiles in the social struggle. M., 1983; Utopian socialism in Russia. M., 1985; Sukhov A.D. Centenary discussion: Westernism and originality in Russian philosophy. M., 1998; Ettopse T. The Russian Landed Gentry and the Peasant Emancipation of 1861. Cambridge, 1968; Grant S. Obschina and Mir // Slavic Review. 1976. N 4. encyclopedic Dictionary

Community

form of social organization. The primitive (tribal) community is characterized by collective labor and consumption, the later form - the neighboring (territorial, rural) community combines individual and communal ownership, is characteristic of a pre-capitalist society. The community has full or partial self-government. In pre-revolutionary Russia, the community was a closed class unit, used as an apparatus for collecting taxes (after the Peasant Reform of 1861 - the owner of the land). During the Stolypin agrarian reform, communal land ownership was replaced by private peasant ownership. Ancient historical communities are also called community: city commune, religious, professional, countryman's community.
1) populist magazine, 1870, London, 1 issue. Editors - S. G. Nechaev, V. I. Serebrennikov. 2) Populist magazine, editorial publication "Worker" and former circle members "Tchaikovsky", 1878, Geneva, 9 issues. Editors - D. A. Klements, P. B. Axelrod, Z. K. Rally, N. I. Zhukovsky.

Ozhegov's Dictionary

ABOUT COMMUNITY, s and COMMUNITY, s, and.

1. (community). Under the primitive communal system: a form of social organization characterized by collective ownership of the means of production, joint farming, and full or partial self-government. Ancestral o.

2. Self-governing organization of residents of Kakoin. territorial unit. Krestyanskaya o. (jointly owning land; obsolete).

3. (in 3 digits), organization. Zemlyachaya O. Negro o. in USA. Religious Fr. Baptist Fr.

| adj. communal, oh, oh. Community property.

Efremova's Dictionary

Community

and.
1. Self-governing organization residents of some. territorial unit.
2. A voluntary association, a community of people united on interethnic, professional, industrial, territorial, etc. basis for joint activities; brotherhood, fellowship.
3. Animal Association; flock, herd.
and.
1. A form of social organization characterized by collective ownership of the means of production, joint labor and equal distribution, as well as full or partial self-government (in a primitive communal system).
2. see also community.

Russian language dictionaries

COMMUNITY

1. A self-governing organization of residents of a territorial unit (village, city; legal entity). Medieval urban communities (communes). A clan is a community bound by blood and property.

2. An administrative-estate organization that actually carried out the fiscal interests of the state, a land peasant organization in Russia, whose members bore mutual responsibility and owned the land jointly without ownership of the cultivated plots (source). “...The abolition of mutual responsibility..., the abolition of class divisions, freedom of movement and freedom of disposal of land for each individual peasant will lead to the inevitable and rapid destruction of that fiscal-serf burden, which is, three-quarters, the modern land community.” Lenin(1902, “Agrarian program of Russian Social Democracy”).

Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary. D.N. Ushakov. 1935-1940.

Synonyms:

See what "COMMUNITY" is in other dictionaries:

COMMUNITY, a form of social organization. Primitive (tribal) agriculture is characterized by collective labor and consumption; the later form of neighborly (territorial, rural) agriculture combines individual and communal ownership, characteristic of ... ... Russian history

- (community) A social group of people connected by a specific place. However, the nature of social ties and the location of the community give rise to ideological disputes. Traditional Conservatives emphasize that community is at the heart of... ... Political science. Dictionary.

Cm … Synonym dictionary

A naturally formed supra-family association of people connected by common interests, sometimes a common origin, emotional or cultural unity, etc. (for example, fellow countrymen, emigrants, religious communities). In the narrow sense, community... ... Historical Dictionary

Books

Community, . "Community" is a book of the Teaching of Living Ethics, compiled by Elena Ivanovna Roerich...