Suchergebnisse

U prvome dijelu rada istražuje se odnos između grkokatoličke crkve i provođenja agrarne reforme u sjevernoj Hrvatskoj. Istaknuta je uloga pojedinih crkvenih dostojanstvenika kao političara u provođenju agrarne reforme, te su navedeni njihovi stavovi. U drugom dijelu rada prikazuje se na koji se način agrarna reforma provodila na posjedima Šid, Pribić, Tkalec, Preseka i Glogovnica, koje su posjedovali grkokatolička Križevačka biskupija i Kaptol. Autori su na temelju izvorne arhivske građe pratili promjene koje su se događale na tim posjedima te kako su na odluke centralnih državnih institucija za provođenje agrarne reforme reagirali zainteresirani, s jedne strane kupci i općinska poglavarstva na kojima se provodila agrarna reforma, a s druge strane veleposjednik Grkokatolička biskupija u Križevcima. Autori su u radu nastojali dokazati da je Grkokatolička biskupija tijekom agrarne reforme izgubila posjede što je utjecalo na njezino daljnje djelovanje. ; In this article the authors investigate the connection between the agrarian reform and the Greek Catholic Church between 1918 and 1941. The first part of the article deals with the role of some of the most important Uniates as political leaders in the conduction of the agrarian reform. In the second part the authors present how the agrarian reform was carried out on estates Šid, Pribić, Tkalec, Preseka and Glogovnica, owned by the Diocese of Križevci and the Diocesan Chapter. This paper is based on original archival material pertaining to these estates. The same material allows us to follow the decisions of central state institutions related to the implementation of the agrarian reform and the reactions of interested purchasers on the one hand and the landowning Diocese of Križevci on the other. The authors of this article claim that the Diocese lost possessions during the land reform, which impacted its functioning and prosperity.

A policy of agrarian reform, an essential element in the success of the Chinese Revolution, has been followed from 1927 to 1953. This reform has marked the end of feudalism, & has won over to the Revolution the huge mass of Chinese peasants. But despite endeavors to always take into account the needs of the econ, the problem of agri'al productivity has not yet been resolved. It was also necessary to resort to collectivization. But this still was not sufficient to establish socialism in the village. Furthermore, the rapidity with which agrarian collectivization is being put into effect at present involves certain dangers of which many Chinese leaders are aware. Nevertheless, the Communist Party is showing great realism in its agrarian policy & is trying to implement collectivization in such a way that it will not have a negative effect on the level of agri'al production. To this end they are keeping the methods of collectivization flexible & are guarding against putting too much confidence in the admin've structures which have been set up. (Translated by Z. Dana from IPSA).

The ownership structure is one of the determining factors in the development of all agricultures; Croatia's is not an exception to this rule. In the long run, the ownership structure is undoubtedly going to determine the direction of the development of the market-oriented Croatian agriculture. The process of building the ownership structure appropriate to the market economy is neither simple not fast, let alone cheap. An overnight change in the ownership structure is neither possible nor prudent. The existing ownership structure of Croatian agriculture is the result of a century & a half long historical development. Socioeconomic & political factors exerted a strong influence on the process of the ownership structure's formation. Today Croatia has an "atomized" estate of only 2.9 hectares. A century ago the average size of estates was 8 hectares. This fragmentation is a direct result of the agrarian reform & colonization in the second Yugoslavia when the land maximum was reduced to 10 hectares. The existing -- very unfavorable structure -- should be in the transitional period gradually adapted to the family economy as the basis of future development, which will be market-oriented, cost-effective, & profitable. 3 Tables, 23 References. Adapted from the source document.

The author is of the opinion that Serbian expansionism is the result of Serbia's geopolitical & economic disadvantages: its continental isolation, peripheral agrarian economy, & scattered population in relatively undeveloped regions outside Serbia proper. The Serbian state has tried in the last century to make up for these shortcomings by territorial expansion. Yugoslavia was the realization of that objective, since in it, Serbia arrogated significant resources by means of centralist redistribution. When the Yugoslav state met with a crisis, Serbian leadership did not agree to confederation reform, but instead opted for using their superior military might. The economic consequences of this show of force were tremendous: direct damage, due to destruction & occupation, & indirect damage through misappropriation of federal assets. Serbia is today faced with the failure of its venture, so its priority is the lifting of economic sanctions. The Croatian state in this historic moment must, above all, secure its territorial integrity & prevent the division of Bosnia & Herzegovina. Adapted from the source document.