What was allowed to married women in the USSR and forbade unmarried
56 years ago, in May 1961, the USSR adopted the Decree “On strengthening the struggle against persons (idlers, parasites, parasites) evading socially useful labor and leading an antisocial parasitic lifestyle” - simply speaking, the law on parasites.
Now it is especially interesting to recall him, because the Russian authorities are openly considering options for introducing similar measures.
In the USSR in 1961 a lot of things were not there: somewhere meat, somewhere shoes, somewhere sewage. But first of all there was no unemployment. The huge country was actively developing its own territories, young people were traveling to the virgin lands, geological expeditions were studying Siberia, the plants worked in two shifts. Practically everywhere there was a shortage of workers. That is why the authorities sought at all costs - except for a high salary - to involve in the work of everyone who could only work.
Characteristic quotation from the Decree:
“To establish that adults, able-bodied citizens who do not want to fulfill the most important constitutional duty are to work honestly according to their abilities, evade socially useful labor, derive unearned income from the exploitation of land, cars, living space or perform other antisocial acts that allow them to conduct parasitic lifestyle, are subject to a district (city) people's court’s eviction to designated areas for a period of two to five years from confiscation of property acquired through unearned labor and obligatory employment at the place of settlement ”.
We are translating into modern realities: it’s impossible to rent out living space, it’s impossible to live on incomes from a personal plot, you can’t bring fellow travelers to your car for money. And not just impossible. All this is antisocial behavior, for which your property should be confiscated and evicted in “specially designated areas”.
This decree clearly shows the corporate style of Nikita Khrushchev, who did not recognize half-measures. In the freest country in the world, a person was obliged to work where they were ordered, and for the money that would be given out.Even under Stalin, the government was less sensitive to the personal initiative of citizens if it did not fall under the article on the plundering of socialist property.
Flour of creativity
According to the Decree, a citizen who did not work 4 months a year was no longer subject to administrative, as before, but to criminal prosecution. Exceptions were made for disabled people, seriously ill patients (with relevant documents from a doctor), for women giving birth (56 days before giving birth and 56 after), and another 90 days if the mother has issued additional leave without pay. And these are still excellent conditions - from 1938 to 1956, maternity leave was given only for a few days, at best, weeks.
Married women with children had the right to be housewives. Unmarried (including divorced) - no. Married without children - either.
Citizens of the “liberal professions” (writers, musicians, architects, etc.) who obviously could not give out a certain amount of work every day were obliged to be in a professional union. Those who, for whatever reason, were not accepted there or, God forbid, were expelled, were forbidden to limit themselves to creativity alone, even if it brought proven income.It was in this way that the most famous parasite of the Soviet Union, Joseph Brodsky, cracked his link - a strong, hardworking young man who earned money from his early youth. But formally, at the time of the trial, Brodsky was no longer officially listed anywhere, he was not accepted into the Writers' Union due to his youth and obscurity (although Brodsky’s translations were published, and the fees in those years were very good and allowed to live comfortably - by Soviet standards, of course, to the standards). The trial took place with a huge number of violations, attacks against Brodsky for some reason made it extremely politicized - as a result, Joseph Alexandrovich became a martyr from a victim of bureaucratic thoughtlessness.
Tsehoviki and beggars
Formally, the Soviet authorities allowed the activities of single handicraftsmen and even their cooperation, but in practice such people always took risks. They were persecuted in the regular campaigns against unearned incomes, although in fact such “tsekhoviki” very much worked - unlike the millions of Soviet specialists who sat out their pants in countless institutions.
A "free artists" solved the problem with the decree in two ways.Firstly, this is endless education: academic leave, second higher education (the right to which was very difficult to earn), deductions with restitution ... Secondly, this is work in places where there was no ideological component, control. It is the Decree of 04.05. created a “generation of janitors and watchmen”: they joked that it was difficult to find a representative of these professions in the USSR without a liberal arts education.
Also in the Decree it was mentioned the punishment for vagrancy: this needs to be said specifically, because it differs in principle from the so-called parasitism. In a market society, in principle, it is impossible to punish a person for living as he wants; moreover, one should even welcome those who do not occupy scarce jobs, thereby reducing competition in the labor market.
But vagrancy is not approved in almost any state: yes, there are honest tramps, but more often they bring with them unsanitary conditions, theft, and antisocial behavior. In modern Russia there is no criminal punishment for vagrancy, but there is - for the involvement of minors in it (Article 151 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).The punishment is up to six years of imprisonment, but there is a terrific reservation in 2003, actually legalizing child poverty, existence or lack of residence. "
The punishment for parasitism was abolished only at the end of the Soviet Union, in April 1991. The society was rapidly adjusting, shifting to capitalist rails, because of the heyday of separatism and the destruction of established economic ties, unemployment began to be felt. And in fact, the struggle against the parasites ended seven years earlier, with the death of General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, Yuri Andropov, in 1984. He was literally obsessed with labor discipline: under Andropov, they began to conduct raids along the streets of the cities, checking everyone who for some reason found himself in a store or, God forbid, a cinema. The Soviet society, relaxed under Brezhnev’s rule, felt extremely uncomfortable in the new conditions.It is very interesting how the country developed, live Andropov for another ten years, but what happened, happened.
Can we repeat?
Persecution of parasites are already driven around the fraternal Belarus. In general, if you look at the modern history of Belarusian and Russian legislation, it is easy to see that independent Minsk often acts as an experimenter for the Kremlin.
And I must say that the calm, sometimes even intimidated Belarusian population was greeted with precisely this decree: the rally at the rally rattled in a quiet country - and the authorities had to back down and take the law for revision. And the funny thing is that Belarus as a state lives largely on Russian subsidies, delicately referred to as loans and “special prices.” That is, to a certain extent is a parasite in itself.
An attempt to transfer the Soviet experience to completely different realities cannot end in anything good. Given the current political and economic situation in Russia, there can be no reason to persecute the so-called parasites. The only reason for the attempts to introduce a “tax on parasitism” is the desire to get money from the “gray economy”, in which in one way or another at least 17 million Russians are involved.These are people who either do not work at all, but live on means, for example, from renting housing, or they work on a piece-by-piece basis without a labor contract or contract; they receive money “black cash”, do not pay taxes and fees, but at the same time enjoy all social benefits. Someone from these citizens is balancing on the brink of survival, someone gets quite comfortable six-digit sums monthly. If they are forced to pay a certain tax (“a penalty for lasciviousness”), they will think: is it not cheaper to legalize and buy, for example, a patent for their activities.
So there is a certain reason in this measure. But "parasitism" is absolutely nothing to do with it, because in fact the struggle will go with tax and contribution evasion.
There are not enough jobs in Russia, so punishing unemployment would be not only a crime, but, worse, stupidity.