宋圭武观点88：如何看待人民公社事关乡村振兴大问题

对人民公社，要辩证看。62年以前的大公社时期，是很不好的，犯了很大错误。62年以后的小公社时期，是有可取之处的。若公社低效率，何来支援国家工业化问题？产生贫困有两种原因。一种是自身生产效率低所导致；一种是自身生产效率还可以，但所生产成果大部分被别人或被其它部门占有所导致。人民公社若不支援国家的工业化，自身还是可以很好养活自身的。在人民公社时期，广大农民是对国家有巨大贡献的，是以自身的贫困全力支援了国家的工业化。

对待人民公社，应像对待科举制度一样，对其合理的部分，我们可以借用，不要全盘否定。若抛开其它因素，仅从经济组织形式看，小公社时期的队为基础、三级所有的组织形式，还是有借鉴意义的。

还有，政社合一的体制，有弊端，也有优点。弊端是若政治行为不合理，必然导致经济行为不合理。但优点是能确保政治落到实处，政策落实成本小。而政社分离，虽然经济自由度提高了，但也导致了政治空转问题，政策落实成本很大。同时，也产生了大量的靠吃财政饭的非生产富余人员问题。

还有户籍制度，也要辩证看。虽然户籍制度所体现的不平等我们要反对，但对人口的盲目流动，我们还是要加强管理的。不然对乡村和城市两方面都没有好处。因为大量乡村人口盲目流入城市，必然导致，一面是乡村空壳化，一面是城市过度拥挤化，产生大量城市贫困人口，最终两头都受害。

目前，乡村振兴，如何留住人，客观需要适度控制乡村人口盲目流入城市的问题。另外，还需要把农民组织起来。另外，还需要减少政策落实成本，让政策落实下去。另外，还需要减少非生产性财政供养人口问题。

对此，对过去小公社时期一些有益的做法，在推进乡村振兴的过程中，我们应积极借鉴。

搞不清楚，为什么我们在工业层面，提倡大企业、集团化发展，为什么在农业方面，却让一家一户小农去经营？在农业方面，这种家庭小作坊式的生产方式，面对大工业大市场的竞争，是没有任何效率可言的，只能导致大面积贫困问题。

社会总是发展的。发展是一个否定之否定的过程。乡村如何振兴，需要把改革开放前的一些好做法和改革开放后的一些好做法有机结合起来。

另外，任何制度的选择不可能存在十全十美的情况，选取的法则只能是：两害相权取其轻，两利相权取其大。

目前，乡村如何振兴，需要我们在制度层面实现全面创新，制度创新是根本。具体：在农业宏观管理体制方面，我们应探索实行半计划半市场模式；在农产品流通方面，我们应探索半统购半统销模式；在农业微观生产组织方面，我们应探索建立半自治半行政模式。另外，中国人多地少，同时，农民善分不善合，所以，中国乡村的生产合作组织建设，应体现政府主导和劳动密集型特点。

好，谢谢，谢谢。

Song Guiwu's Viewpoint 88: How to Treat People's Communes Is a Big Issue of Rural Revitalization

To treat the people's communes, we should look at them dialectically.The large commune period before 1962 was very bad and made a big mistake.The small commune period after 1962 had some redeeming points.If the communes are inefficient, how can they support the national industrialization?There are two reasons for poverty.One is that their own production efficiency is low;the other is that their own production efficiency is OK, but most of the production results are occupied by others or other departments.If the people's communes do not support the national industrialization, they can still feed themselves well.In the period of the people's communes, the farmers made great contributions to the country, and they fully supported the national industrialization with their own poverty.We should treat the people's communes like the imperial examination system. We can borrow the reasonable part of it, not reject it outright.If we put aside other factors and just look at the economic organization form, the team-based, three-level ownership organization form of the small communes is still of reference significance.Also, the system of integrating politics and communes has disadvantages and advantages.The disadvantages are that if the political behavior is unreasonable, it will inevitably lead to unreasonable economic behavior.But the advantage is that it can ensure that politics is put into practice and the cost of implementing policies is small. Although the separation of politics and society has improved the degree of economic freedom, it has also led to political idling and a high cost of policy implementation.At the same time, it has also generated a large number of non-productive surplus personnel who depend on the financial rice.There is also the household registration system, which should be viewed dialectically.Although we oppose the inequality embodied in the household registration system, we still need to strengthen the management of the blind flow of population.Otherwise, it will not be beneficial to both rural and urban areas.Because a large number of rural population blindly flowing into cities will inevitably lead to the empty shell of the countryside on the one hand, and the overcrowding of the city on the other hand, resulting in a large number of urban poor, and eventually both ends will suffer.At present, in the process of rural revitalization, how to retain people, it is necessary to moderately control the problem of rural population blindly flowing into cities.In addition, it is necessary to organize farmers.In addition, it is necessary to reduce the cost of policy implementation, so that the policy can be implemented.In addition, it is necessary to reduce the problem of non-productive financial support for the population.In this regard, we should actively learn from some beneficial practices in the past small commune period in the process of promoting rural revitalization.I don't understand why we advocate the development of large enterprises and groups in industry, but why we let each small farmer run it in agriculture? In agriculture, this kind of family workshop production mode, in the face of big industry and big market competition, is no efficiency at all, can only lead to large area of poverty.Society is always developing.Development is a process of negation of negation.How to revitalize the countryside, we need to combine some good practices before the reform and opening up and some good practices after the reform and opening up.In addition, there is no perfect situation for any system choice, the selection principle can only be: the lesser of two evils, the greater of two benefits.At present, how to revitalize the countryside, we need to achieve comprehensive innovation at the institutional level, and institutional innovation is fundamental.In terms of agricultural macro management system, we should explore the implementation of a semi-planned and semi-market model;in terms of agricultural product circulation, we should explore a semi-monopolized purchase and distribution model;in terms of agricultural micro production organization, we should explore the establishment of a semi-autonomous and semi-administrative model.In addition, Chinese people are more than land, at the same time, farmers are not good at separation and integration, so the construction of production cooperatives in China's countryside should reflect the government-led and labor-intensive characteristics.OK, thank you, thank you.