Maaseutuyhteisön kriisi : 1930-luvun pula ja pakkohuutokaupat paikallisena ilmiönä Kalajokilaaksossa

Abstract

Maijala on väitöskirjassaan tutkinut 1930-luvun talouspulan vaikutusta suomalaiseen maaseutuyhteisöön sekä yhteisön selviytymistä kohtaamastaan taloudellisesta kriisistä. Kriisin syntyyn vaikutti vanhakantaisen maaseutuyhteisön perinteisten toimintamallien yhteentörmäys modernisoituvan yhteiskunnan kanssa. Murros johti talonpoikasen väestön monimuotoiseen vastarintaan, ja kriisistä selviytyminen vaati ennen kaikkea kykyä sopeutua muutokseen. Vaikka Maijalan tutkimuksen kohteena on Kalajokilaakso ja siellä erityisesti Reisjärvi, väitöskirjan tarkoituksena ei ole tutkia yksittäistä kohdetta. Tutkimuksen kohteena on prosessi, jonka tutkiminen Kalajokilaaksossa oli mahdollista.

This study describes the effects of the 1930s economic recession on the Finnish agricultural society, and how it survived the economic crisis it confronted.The study includes the compulsory sales in the Reisjärvi parish and elsewhere in the basin of the Kalajoki-river during the depression of the 1930s. Between 1929 and 1936, 504 farms were put up for compulsory sale in the Kalajoki-river basin. This was 10 per cent of all the farms. Although compulsory sales took place in all the parishes of the area, there were notable differences between the districts. The overall picture of a farm in financial difficulties is unravelled by analyzing the material. In addition to crisis in community, the effects of the depression on an individual are shown with a few examples. Despite the local nature of the examples, they can be seen as a general picture of an individual’s distress caused by the depression. In the basin of Kalajoki-river the compulsory sales were a problem for the middle-sized and relatively large commercialised farms. The compulsory sales clearly focused on the farms, which had over 15 hectares of arable land. Farms with over 25 hectares were relatively sold the most.The bitterness of the small farmers, who were not able to pay their debts, was shown in many ways. The most visible form of the bitterness was a stir, which received nation-wide attention. Both individual and communal – passive and active – resistance existed in local terms as well, even though they did not receive as much attention. The most effective way to help the farmers in financial difficulties was to redeem a sold farm to the state and return it back to its former owner. In the basin of the Kalajoki-river 43 per cent of the sold farms were redeemed by the state. As a general rule, this system could be seen as a certain state loan, since nine out of ten farms were returned back either to the former owner or to his/her relatives. In the basin of the Kalajoki-river the owners of rather large farms had better chances to survive than the small farmers. While 20-30 per cent of the farms with less than 10 hectares of arable land were admitted to redemption, the ratio of the larger farms was two or even three times more.