186 1 Russia mentioned this concept in its declaration of February 9. In my opinion, the so-called "temporary compulsory farmers" have got rid of their personal attachment to the landlord in legal status, but because they still depend on the landlord in life and production, that is, the houses and land used by farmers still belong to the landlord in law, so farmers still have obligations to the landlord, so the declaration also mentions: "Farmers in this transitional state are called temporary compulsory farmers." Of course, the law also stipulates that farmers have the right to buy land and houses. When farmers buy and own these private properties, "because they buy land, they get rid of their obligations to landlords and become completely free farmers with private property."

Therefore, through this document, I think the emancipation of serfs in the manifesto can be understood as two levels: the absolute emancipation of serfs and the conditional emancipation of temporary forced farmers. It is absolute to liberate serfs as "temporary compulsory farmers", which are protected by law ("let them use a certain amount of land and other affiliated land stipulated by law for a long time"); However, it is conditional to "temporarily force farmers to be completely free farmers", that is, to redeem them. In fact, even if they become so-called "completely free farmers", they will be bound by "rural cooperatives". Therefore, I think the so-called Russian serfdom reform is feudal rather than bourgeois, because from the declaration, its expression is more about feudal relations of production (personal attachment to relations of production) Of course, it is undeniable that this reform is also beneficial to Russian capitalism objectively. Because as far as the Declaration is concerned, he stipulated the obligation of these people to stay in the countryside and engage in agriculture after the liberation of serfs, but did not mention what would happen if farmers moved to cities as workers. The declaration liberated serfs from their legal status. After liberation, penniless serfs may flow into cities, which is objectively beneficial to the formation of free labor and becomes one of the elements of capitalist production relations. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to think that this reform is capitalist. But relatively speaking, I think this role is objective and limited, so let's say that this reform has opened the way for the development of Russian capitalism and avoided directly talking about the nature of the reform.