A redemption transaction is a concept in the history of our country related to the abolition of serfdom. In the middle of the XIX century, Russia lost the Crimean War. One of the reasons for this defeat, as the new emperor Alexander II thought, was a low socio-economic and technical development.
The main problem that had to be solved was the abolition of serfdom.
The growth of social tension in society
Long before the reform, which introduced the concept of “redemption transaction,” social tension grew in the country. The country was actively developing according to the capitalist scenario, many merchants and industrialists began to grow rich. The landowners, who still lived on peasant dues, began to descend the hierarchical ladder. Land with peasants no longer provided income and high social status as before. Some landowners of non-chernozem lands often released peasants for money rent. The landowners of the black earth lands were also deprived of this: the peasants refused to leave for work and preferred to work off corvee. Naturally, during the crisis of subsistence traditional economy during the development of factory capitalism, this did not bring profit. Many landowners unilaterally began to demand money in arrears, and the peasants simply did not know where to get the necessary amounts.
Emperor Alexander II understood all these problems. He owns the phrase that has become winged: "It is better to begin the destruction of serfdom from above, rather than wait for the time when it begins to itself be destroyed from below." She beat in the heart of the landlords: many at a subconscious level sat the fear of "Pugachevschiny." The nobles are an educated people; they always remembered the lessons of history well.
Reform goal
An editorial commission was created to prepare for future reform. The future manifesto on the abolition of serfdom was not supposed to cause revolutions and peasant riots. Therefore, he must carry out several tasks at once: to give freedom to the peasants, not to harm the landowners, not to be costly for the state. In other words, perform the impossible. For this, a redemption deal was invented, which, rather, robbed the peasants rather than gave them real freedom.
The famous catch phrase of V. Chernomyrdin “We wanted the best, but it turned out as always” would be best suited to describe this reform.
Abolition of serfdom and redemption payments
The manifesto on February 19, 1861 freed the peasants. Although the concept of "liberated" here is conditional. The peasants were given personal freedom, but they had to compensate for the losses of the landowners associated with the loss of rent.
Before the reform, each peasant had to pay about 10 rubles a year. The numbers fluctuated depending on the location. Bank deposit interest at the time of the adoption of the Manifesto was 6% per annum. The peasants had to pay such an amount which, when placed in the bank, was supposed to give 10 rubles a year as interest. Of course, inflation and other complex macroeconomic indicators were not taken into account. Thus, the abolition of serfdom only improved the situation of the landowners: now they received a quitrent with real money in a bank, which greatly simplified their lives. We come to what a buyback deal is.
The first mortgages in Russia
The peasants actually redeemed their freedom. Amounts were huge for former slaves. For this purpose, the state issued a loan.They came up with what is called a mortgage today: the peasants had to repay a huge debt to the state for 49 years at 6% per year. In fact, the overpayment was about 300%. Those. the state not only simplified the life of the landlords, but also made a profit.
State "temporarily liable"
The above enslaving conditions are not all the surprises that the state has prepared: a loan issued for 49 years went to the landlords in the amount of 80% of the necessary. The remaining 20% should have been returned by the debtors themselves. The peasant, who remained with the landowner until the foreclosure transaction, was called "temporarily liable." A paradoxical situation happened: the lackeys became obliged to both the landowner and the state. Their situation worsened significantly: earlier they belonged to the landowner, and they were responsible for them, now they have received "freedom" and had to survive in the predatory conditions in which the state threw them. Before the reform, the landowner, although he called the serfs "talking tools," but considered them his own, took care of them. Now the “temporarily liable” became “free”, so it is necessary to “squeeze” as much money as possible from it.
Summary
The redemption transaction of the peasants in the course of the reform to abolish serfdom is a grandiose scam that the state turned with its own people. The landlords received amounts for the loss of land allotments, which were several times higher than their real market value. And this provided that it was almost impossible to sell the plots. The peasants themselves had to work out their freedom all their lives, their situation only worsened. However, there were no mass protests: many lived for the freedom of future generations, realizing that they themselves would not see it.