Max Weber: Selections in Translation

What lies at the root of the Liberal Democrats' reservations about agrarian reform is this: there is no doubt that the great mass of the peasants themselves could never be won over to an agrarian programme which was ‘individualistic’ in the West European sense. However true it may be that decisions about the allocation of land can be the product of an extremely bitter class struggle, it is certainly not only economic class interests which influence the administration of the commune but also deeply-rooted conceptions of ‘natural justice’. For it is as obvious as it could be that the necessary decision to reapportion land is not reached only with the votes either of those who hope to better their positions by it or of those who have been intimidated by violence or boycott. On the other hand, it has to be admitted that it is equally certain that this very re-allocation of land, which seems from the outside to be the most important element of agricultural democracy in this form of social organisation, very often exists, insofar as it can be thought of as a piece of effective ‘social policy’, only on paper. The rich peasants lease, alienate or bequeath their lands (naturally, only within the commune), relying on there being no decisions about re-allocation; or, alternatively, they are in a position to control other members of the commune who are in their debt, and the re-allocation serves in practice to increase their power.