\

Building a new apariment house on Gorky Sireet in Moscow,
one of 1500 constructed in the Russian capital last year.

’

Personal property

in the USSR

By G. AMFITEA TROV

s | HOSE who live in capitalist society, where everything i is based on the capitalist concept of private
property and subordinated to the laws of its development, often have difficulty in understanding

the character and forms of property relations in the Soviet Union.

People reason. thus: if private

property in the USSR has been abolished, and the instruments and means of production have become

public property, then Soviet citi-
zens are either completely de-
prived of personal property, or
the scope of the latter is so re-
stricted that it is completely
insufficient for the purpose of
assuring human existence.
other words, people think public
“property excludes private prop-
erty.

This concept, thriving on ignor-
ance, is fostered by the organs
of anti-Soviet propaganda abroad,
the idea being to represent’ the
Soviet people as living under a
regime of bondage and serfdom,
deprived of property and doomed
to poverty.

In reality, hea are quite dif-
ferent..

Aside from state property —
such as land, its mineral wealth,
waters, forests, mill§, factories,
mechanized transport, mines,
state farms, machine and tractor
stations, ete—which belongs to
the people as a. whole, there
exists cooperative and collective
property—such as the common
enterprises of collective farms
and cooperative organizations,
with their livestock and imple-
ments, their products and com-
mon buildings—which is formed
by the voluntary act of a group
of people pooling their individual
resources for joint exploitation
on a cooperative basis. The
land occupied by collective farms
is secured to them for use free
of charge and in perpetuity.

State property, the leading
form of public property, can be
disposed of only by the people
as a whole acting through pei
elected government.

Cooperative or collective farm
property can be disposed of only
by the members as a whole.
Neither government bodies, nor
the higher organs of cooperative
unions or organizations, can
terfere with the disposal of the

means of production and other -

property of a cooperative.

é % .
These forms of public socialist

ownership of the instruments and

In >

in--

means of production themselves
predetermine the character of in-
dividual property. ;

Thé latter exists in the USSR
in the form of personal property.
It is a new institution within
socialist property relationships,
and differs in principle from pri-
vate property, being possible only
under the conditions of socialism.

Soviet personal property is the
property of those whom the vic-
tory of socialism transformed
from exploited workers into free
workers, from individual peas-
ants into collective farmers, and
from down-trodden white-collar
workers
people and with the pedple. Such
property is the personal property
of members of the socialist so-,
ciety.

Personal property in the USSR
means the ownership of articles

‘of consumption—things that do

not include means of producton,
which have become socialist
property. The owner of personal
property can own everything he
and his family need for the sat-
isfaction of their material or cul-
tural needs. .

This right is established by
Article 10 or the USSR Consti-
tution, Which says:

“The personal property rights
of citizens in their incomes
and savings from work, in
their dwelling houses and sub-
sidiary home enterprises, in ar-
ticles of domestic economy and
use and articles of personal use
and convenience, as well as
the right of citizens to inherit
personal property, is protect-
ed by law.”

This provision makes .it clear
that personal property in the
Soviet concept is property for
use,

@ :
Personal property in the USSR

is -the product of the part the,

working people take in the com-
mon, socialist slabor. In other
words, it represents the remun-

eration the people get in accord-

,

into members of the.

ance with the quantity and qual-
ity of their work. Hence, per-
sonal property is the consequence
of the individual taking part in
socialist production and is the
result of socialist distribution of
the product according to work
performed.

That is why we call personal
property an institution, derived
from public property, and con-
sider it an inalienable part of
socialist property relationships.

A steel worker, an engineer or
a bookkeeper gets paid for his
work, and with that money ac-
quires things—a suit, a car, a
house, a radio. He uses these
things himself or for his. fam-
ily. They are his without any
limitations or encumbrances, ©
' The collective farmer works in
the fields, produces for the good
of society, and gets paid for his
work in kind and in cash. The
grain, vegetables, fruit or other
produce he gets are his, and he
can dispose of them in the open
market at will, just as he can
spend his cash as he wishes.
‘Besides, the collective farmer

“has a personal plot of land at

his disposal, which he can use
as he wishes. He also can have
dis personal livestock, poulti;-
ind small domestic animaisz.
They are also his in the fullest
sense of the word.

One of the extraordinary char-
acteristics of Soviet personal

property is that its growth in the -

hands of the citizen favorably af-
fects society as a whole, for the
accumulation of personal prop-
erty in the hands of the work-
ing people is a direct indication
of the. success of the common,
socialist ~ effort. The more and
the better the individual works,
the greater his share in the so-
cial product, the richer and full-
er his personal life. /
All this means personal prop-
erty is not only
public property, but depends in
its growth on the growth and
consolidation. of the latter.
And now, let us see the extent

ompatible with~

. socialist,

'.which it stands.

of the private citizen’s right to
dispose of ‘hig personal prop-
erty.
@

The law guarantees the citi-
zen the right freely to use, own
and dispose of his personal prop-
erty. He can buy, sell, mortgage,
loan, lease and otherwise dis-
pose of his property apr pcae any
hindrance,

He can put his money in the
savings bank.: He can buy or
build a house ‘with it. Naturally,
he can buy arty object which is
for sale, such as a car, boat, ra-
dio, washing machine, ‘clothes,
food. He can buy objects of art,
unless they have been national-
ized, or luxuries. This is entirely
his own business.

The case of owning a house
deserves special attention, be-
cause a house does not hang in
thin air. It stands on a piece
of land, and land is public, or
property.

A house, garage, or other ser-
vice building, erected by a pri-
vate citizen with his own mon-
ey or labor, is his, including the
unrestricted use of the plot on
If the’ owner
sells his house, the right to the
use of the plot on which - it
stands is thereby transferred to
the new owner. :

The owner can also dispose of
his house by wrecking, and sell-
ing the material of the dismantl-
ed house, but he can do this
only with the permission of the

>

local housing authorities, because

every dwelling is considered a
part of the “housing fund.” Af-
ter the house has been demol-
ished ahd disposed of, he loses
his right to make use of the
land.

The owner of a private house,
both in town and country, can
mortgage or lease it, in whole or
in part. He can rent rooms, but
in this case he must not exceed
the ceiling rates existing in his

‘community.
‘In the,case of a conflict aris-.

ing from doubtful rights to |
sonal property, all citizens 4
the right to appeal to the cour
In case government agencies
find it necessary to condemn
building because of public work®
or needs, the individual owneé
is entitled to compensation.

For instance, when the S*
called Moscow Sea was beings
created, a whole village was sub-
merged. The property owners 1
that village were offered eith®
cash compensation or new house?
of equivalent value in a differ:
ent place.

Socialist society not only count
enances the personal owne
of housing, but assists private
individuals with substantial hous

.ing loans, thus promoting per

sonal” home-biuldings.
@

The idea of freedom to own per
sonal property, inherent in
viet law, was expressed
maximum simplicity and clarity
by Stalin in his remark durité
the conference of combine °F
erators in 1935: “It’s your money
—it’s your business, spend it
you _wish!”

Soviet law recognizes only 0?

restriction to the right of | pel”

sonal property: the owner hi
no right to use his personal ProP
erty to extract profit or. other
income unearned by actual, per i
sonal work.

The 1917 Revolution did away
with exploitation of man by 4
and with the Soviet system 2¥
urally cannot countenance Hom
rebirth of a class of people We?
would use their property accum
ulations and savings not to sate
isfy their material and cultul
needs, or to leave them to thei
heirs, but for profit; that is, ‘a
the extraction of parasitical i i
come, which is incompatible wit
the duty, honor and conse
of the citizen of a socialist cov?
tyes) .

@ G. Amfiteatrov is a leadiné

Moscow attorney. re)

gress in Handcuffs’

whether ‘

from all over Europe?”

page of Deutschlands Stimme.

hind them comes Gus Hall. |

in a German magazine ‘
Germany!

class: movement.

response.
Socialist Unity Party.

Je Se pi
Eisler’s proposal |
By JOSEPH SLES ERG:

THINK mary pales will be interested to ike of a unigue —
proposal which Gerhart Eisler has just made public in’ “the
‘ eastern zone of Germany;.a prospect for building a new statue
of liberty .on the shores -of Europe, looking out across Wie —
Atlantic, a statue of liberty stretching out. its hands to SVE he
refuge to American progressives, N
persecuted by American capitalism.

The idea is contained in an article by Eisler,
for the leading wéekly magazine Co)
Soviet zone of Germany, Deutschlands Stimme (Voice of Ger
many). This is the spokesman for the German People’s
gress, a semi-governmental united front which includes all politica!
parties and popular organizations of eastern Germany.

Published in the July 15 issue, this article also. asks
‘it is not time to come to the aid of American frien
of peace and progress, now being persecuted by American er
action, with the ‘creation of a committee of progressive

Eisler’s article, explaining what is happening to Ameri ot
‘civil liberties for his progressive German audience, takes @ ful!
It is decorated with two fam

photos. One shows a picket line in front of Foley Square
The other depicts Henry Winston, handcuffed to John Gates —
_as they were sentenced to jail for defying Judge was :

1 S
Te is really something to ponder: photos af America®

facing the persecution of would- be American fascists, aa
a bongs America and backwat

In a recent: letter from Hilde Eisler, I, get the imprest
that Gerhart has plunged into his work with tremendous ene
His arrival home has given a great lift to the German wor i

He has been speaking at countless meetings, in ‘the f
-and shops of the new Germany, and everywhere getting enorm ft the
He has been elected to the central committee °

NEW yore

the |

egro and white, now bate

entitled iP

Con

Nath

Beal

ring
rd |

=>

f

‘
‘

sco

1?

PACIFIC TRIBUNE — AUGUST sty 1

re