Sovietmetis Lietuvos kaime suformavo atitinkamą supratimą ne tik apie ekonomiką apskritai, jos valdymo principus bei racionalios elgsenos įgūdžius, bet ir gana griežtą socialinę diferenciaciją. Ūkio valdymas suvokiamas kaip aukštesnių valdžios struktūrų direktyvų vykdymas, planinių užduočių paskirstymas ir jų veiklos kontrolė. Geras savo funkcijų atlikimas tapatintas su didesniu materialinių išteklių išsikovojimu ir mažesnių užduočių gavimu. Tai buvo pasiekiama tik turint gerų ryšių valdžios struktūrose.

Pagal priėjimą prie išteklių skirstymo susiformavo ir atitinkamos privilegijuotos visuomenės grupės. Kaime tokią grupę sudarė įeinantys į kolūkio ar tarybinio ūkio valdantįjį sluoksnį.

Nors kolūkių ir valstybinių ūkių valdantysis sluoksnis kaime turėjo laikytis sovietinės valdžios direktyvų bei kontroliuoti padėtį, jis taip pat vertėsi aktyvia privačia ūkininkavimo veikla. Turimas statusas ir to sąlygotos privilegijos faktiškai garantavo valdančiojo sluoksnio neliečiamumą.

MODEL OF PROPERTY RELATIONS IN THE SOVIET LITHUANIA VILLAGE
(Case of Stungiai village)

Žilvinas Kačiuška

Summary

After a collapse of the Soviet Union, Lithuania (as well as most of Central and East European countries) is sometimes entitled as "the second echelon", agrarian region or the periphery of Western civilisation. The cultural and economical lag of Lithuania is often said to be caused by a metal gap, which was constructed by a model of collectivism and planned economy. Herewith, slowly changing categories in cognition impact reflections on market economy model and its mode of functioning.

The ideological and physical installation of collectivism and disruption of private sector during Sovietism contradicted the centenary traditions of private farming in Lithuania. With the recovery of independence, speedy land economy, property and social reforms in the village met the expressions of collectivism practice and shadow private farming tradition that were implanted during Sovietism. This evoked the feeling of uncertainty and social strain in the village, and often results in a form of mass protest of farmers.

The purpose of this study is to determine the status of property relations in the rural community during Sovietism by using a private sector concept. The research comprises of three chapters:

1. Soviet economic and social policy in Lithuanian village.

2. Property relations in Lithuanian Soviet village.

3. The relationship between differentiation of rural society and property sectors in Sovietism.

During Sovietism private sector was being eliminated from the market contrary to state sector, because it was treated as a rudiment of commercial activities and therefore contradicted the society model that was constructed by the official Communist ideology. Legally, a person was enabled to possess private property only for uncommercial purposes. All personal and real estates as well as their output were controlled by the state. The Soviet power structures were unsuccessful in totally eliminating private sector and practically, private sector, producing surplus production for commercial purposes, remained a half legal, informal and shadow structure in village. For the rural society it was one of the main sources of incomes, resources for which were rendered from the state sector.