Military Review

40 years of the Brezhnev Constitution

92
40 years of the Brezhnev Constitution

40 years ago, 7 October 1977, the last Constitution of the USSR - “Brezhnev” - was adopted. October 8 new USSR Constitution was published in all newspapers of the country.


The first Constitution in Russia was adopted in 1918 in connection with the formation of the RSFSR (Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic). After the establishment of the Soviet system, the control functions, in accordance with the principle “All power to the Soviets!”, Were concentrated in the highest organ of the Soviet power. The Constitution of the RSFSR 1918 of the year established that the All-Russian Congress of Soviets is the supreme authority in the country, and the All-Russian Central Executive Committee (All-Russian Central Executive Committee) in the period between the congresses. It differed in that by giving civil liberties to the working class and the peasantry, it deprived the freedoms of all those who had unearned incomes or used wage labor. In fact, the dictatorship of the proletariat was consolidated by the basic law of the state, strengthening the position of the Bolshevik party in the class struggle.

The second Constitution (the first in the USSR) was adopted in the final version by the II Congress of the Soviets of the USSR 31 on January 1924, in connection with the formation of the Soviet Union. The Congress of the Soviets of the USSR became the supreme body of state power, in the period between congresses the Central Executive Committee (CEC) of the USSR, and between the sessions of the CEC of the USSR - the Presidium of the CEC of the USSR. The CEC of the USSR had the right to cancel and suspend the acts of any government bodies on the territory of the USSR (with the exception of the higher level - the Congress of Soviets). The Presidium of the CEC had the right to suspend and repeal the decisions of the CPC and individual people's commissariats of the USSR, the CEC and the CPC of the Union republics.

December 5 1936 in the USSR adopted the second Constitution of the USSR, which was included in history under the name "Stalin". As in the USSR Constitution of 1924, it was said here that the existence of the state is a merit of the working class and the result of the achievements of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The document pointed to the domination of state property, and also recognized the existence of cooperative-collective-farm property. However, this did not mean, however, that the state denies the existence of private property. The existence of a small private farm in the countryside and handicraft activities was allowed, but without the use of hired labor. The right of citizens to personal property, as well as its inheritance, was protected by the state. In contrast to the previous basic law, now rights and freedoms became equal for all citizens of the country, regardless of belonging to a particular social class, and also regardless of what rights and freedoms we are talking about. The period of sharp struggle was over.

At the XXII Congress of the CPSU in 1961, it was noted that the Soviet state from the state of the dictatorship of the proletariat grew into the whole people, and proletarian democracy became the whole people. The congress recognized the need to consolidate the new qualitative state of Soviet society and the state in the Basic Law. 7 October 1977 The USSR Supreme Soviet unanimously approved the USSR Constitution. She was divided into a preamble, 21 chapter, 9 sections and contained 174 articles.

For the first time in Soviet constitutional history, the preamble became an integral part of the Basic Law. It traced the historical path of Soviet society, as a result of which the construction of a developed socialist state was considered. The preamble gave a description of the main features of this society. In Art. 1 talked about the Soviet state as a socialist and nation-wide, expressing the will and interests of the workers, peasants and intellectuals; working people of all nations and nationalities of the country. As a political basis, the Soviets of People’s Deputies were consolidated.

The economic basis was socialist ownership of the means of production in the form of state (nationwide) and collective-farm-cooperative ownership. The constitution provided for the personal property of citizens, which could contain household items, personal consumption, convenience, and ancillary households, a dwelling house, and labor savings. In the use of citizens could be plots of land provided for the conduct of subsidiary farming, gardening and horticulture, as well as for individual housing construction.

The Constitution details the political system of the Soviet Union. The supreme legislative body was the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, which consisted of two chambers: the Council of the Union and the Council of Nationalities. The chambers were equal (Art. 109), consisted of an equal number of deputies. The Council of the Union was elected in constituencies, the Council of Nationalities was elected according to the norm: 32 deputy from each union republic, 11 - autonomous, 5 - autonomous region and one deputy - autonomous region (Art. 110). Sessions of the Supreme Council were convened twice a year. The law was considered adopted if in each of the chambers a majority of the total number of deputies of the chamber voted for it (Art. 114). The highest executive and administrative body was the Council of Ministers of the USSR, which was formed by the Supreme Council. The highest judicial power belonged to the Supreme Court, he was also elected by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR.

The strength of the Brezhnev Constitution was the protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens. Indeed, the time of L. I. Brezhnev in some respects was the “golden age” of the Soviet Union. This is a time of breakthroughs in space and military affairs, respect for the Soviet superpower in the international arena, stable development of the national economy, security felt by all Soviet citizens, consistent improvement in the lives of the majority of the population, etc. However, most of the inhabitants of the Soviet Union understood this only after the collapse THE USSR. When they felt all the charms of “early capitalism” on themselves, and in some places neo-feudalism and other archaic people (especially in the republics of Central Asia).

The Constitution of 1977 of the year significantly expanded the rights and freedoms of citizens. To the previously established rights were now added the right to health protection, housing, the use of cultural wealth, the right to participate in managing state and public affairs, to make proposals to state bodies, to criticize shortcomings in their work. For the first time, the right of citizens to appeal against the actions of any officials in court (Art. 58) was provided for. True, the mechanism for exercising this right was not established, which could not but reflect on the reality of its exercise. The constitution enshrines the new forms of direct democracy: a nationwide discussion and a referendum (Art. 5).

A detailed interpretation was given to the following duties of citizens: to observe the Constitution and the laws; respect the rules of socialist dormitory; with dignity to carry the high rank of a citizen of the USSR; conscientiously work and observe labor discipline; protect and strengthen socialist property; protect the interests of the Soviet state and help strengthen its power, take care of the socialist Fatherland; combat waste and promote policing.

Thus, the Constitution of the USSR 1977 g. Secured the victory of developed socialism and significantly expanded the rights of citizens. Many of its foundations would be useful in modern Russia, in need of restoring social justice.
Author:
92 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Amurets
    Amurets 7 October 2017 07: 25
    +9
    Thus, the Constitution of the USSR 1977 g. Secured the victory of developed socialism and significantly expanded the rights of citizens. Many of its foundations would be useful in modern Russia, in need of restoring social justice.
    I agree with the author in many ways, but not in everything.
    This article allowed party bodies to intervene in the economic activities of the state and not be responsible for anything
    Article 6. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union is the guiding and guiding force of Soviet society, the core of its political system, state and public organizations. The CPSU exists for the people and serves the people.
    Armed with Marxist-Leninist teachings, the Communist Party determines the general outlook for the development of society, the line of internal and foreign policy of the USSR, directs the great creative activity of the Soviet people, and gives a systematic, scientifically substantiated character to its struggle for the victory of communism.
    All party organizations operate within the framework of the Constitution of the USSR.
    1. verner1967
      verner1967 7 October 2017 07: 32
      +7
      Quote: Amurets
      But this article allowed party bodies to intervene in the economic activities of statehood and not be responsible for anything

      Yes, all these constitutions were written to please the ruling party.
      Expressing the will of the Soviet people and fulfilling his instructions ...
      Pharisaism. For such a short period, under the same power, four constitutions. This is normal? In the USA for 200 years alone, as amended.
      1. venaya
        venaya 7 October 2017 07: 54
        +14
        Quote: verner1967
        For such a short period .. four constitutions. .. In the USA for 200 years alone, as amended.

        "for 200 years alone, as amended"- and that is not fulfilled. In England, there is still not one and never was, and nothing, they do not suffer from this at all. Maybe the constitution is not at all the matter?
        1. verner1967
          verner1967 7 October 2017 08: 21
          +3
          Quote: venaya
          "for 200 years alone, as amended" - and that is not fulfilled.

          why do you think so?
          Quote: venaya
          In England, there’s still not one, and never was,

          here you are wrong, it is, just not in the same form as ours, but it is.
          Quote: venaya
          Maybe it’s not the constitution at all?

          The Constitution is the basic law of the country, how could it be without it?
          1. venaya
            venaya 7 October 2017 08: 52
            +8
            Quote: verner1967
            “In England, there’s still not one (constitution), and there wasn’t,” - here you are wrong, it is, it’s just not in the same form as ours ..

            That's interesting, please share your discovery, otherwise nobody has yet seen it (probably hidden). By the way, it seems to me that the first constitution was written by the Poles in England, by order of their elites interested in this. And to be more attentive, in addition to our "Stalinist" 36th year, the others also seem to be written under the dictation of external customers. Con-stitu-tion - as I understand it, that the form of restriction is basic "konov", and naturally the restriction of the field of possibilities for subsequenthorsedonors, well, like some kind of primary religious setting. The British, in principle, never needed this, they themselves set similar (Protestant) restrictions, and in other countries. Now the situation in the world has changed somewhat, but not significantly.
            1. verner1967
              verner1967 7 October 2017 10: 46
              0
              Quote: venaya
              That's interesting, please share your discovery, otherwise nobody has yet seen it (probably hidden).

              yeah, in your concept, the constitution is such a book, but it (your concept) cannot be the only and correct one. Type in the search engine "Constitution of Great Britain" and find.
              Quote: venaya
              By the way, it seems to me that the first constitution was written by the Poles in England

              what difference does it make to anyone, what and where they wrote, the constitution is either there or not.
              1. venaya
                venaya 7 October 2017 11: 43
                +9
                Quote: verner1967
                ..the constitution is either there or not.

                For a better understanding of what you just wrote, I recall the parable: "Gathered the tyrant of his sages and said to them: I will do, and you must explain what I do"In England, from time immemorial, just such a situation exists. All English legal legislation is based on the concept of PRECEDENT LAW. Never in the entire history of England have they had a written constitution, that is, established by anyone horses. What you read from sites on the Internet is best characterized by the not very common concept of "hutspa", try to figure out what it is - usually this is an outrageous violation of any logic, try to realize it. By the way, they often write to me without thinking, referring to the Internet I’m giving up on this, I just don’t even understand how to respond in these cases. When people learned to use the Internet, it seems they stopped using their own brains, this is a very bad thing. Try to think: is all the information from the Internet worth quoting, because before 99% The information in it is simply misinformation. Please do not be led on it.
                1. verner1967
                  verner1967 7 October 2017 13: 36
                  +1
                  Quote: venaya
                  Never in the history of England have they had a written constitution

                  And I immediately told you that their constitution is not what you imagine. And then, you wrote a lot, but all this blah blah blah, the political system of Great Britain is a constitutional monarchy, whatever you imagine
                  1. badens1111
                    badens1111 7 October 2017 14: 45
                    +5
                    Quote: verner1967
                    the state system of Great Britain is a constitutional monarchy

                    Yes? But is there a constitution in Little Britain or not? If not, then what kind of "constitutional monarchy" are you talking about?
                    Everywhere in the world, it is believed that Britain is a constitutional monarchy, limited. Whatever the case ...

                    - The Queen of England has the right to declare war without legislative restrictions and without giving reasons and without agreeing with anyone and not requiring permission;
                    - The Queen of England has the right to dismiss the government (similarly);
                    - The Queen of England has the right to dissolve Parliament;
                    - Once a year she speaks to parliament and voices her demands in the near future (that is, in fact, forms the state’s policy);
                    - appoint a prime minister (and the one he wants, and not necessarily the head of the party who won the election);
                    - leads the armed forces, etc.
                    IT IS POSSIBLE TO SAY EXACTLY ONE:
                    THE "CONSTITUTIONALITY" OF THE BRITISH MONARCHY IS ONLY ONE THE FORMALIST TREATMENT OF PEOPLE'S ANGER FROM THE CROWN TO THE CONTROL OF THE ROYAL PARLIAMENT. AND BRITAIN - BY THE FORMER EMPIRE, ONLY IN VARIABLE FORMAT.
                    1. verner1967
                      verner1967 7 October 2017 20: 15
                      0
                      Quote: badens1111
                      Everywhere in the world, it is believed that Britain is a constitutional monarchy, limited. Whatever the case ...
                      - The Queen of England has the right to declare war without legislative restrictions and without giving reasons and without agreeing with anyone and not requiring permission;
                      - The Queen of England has the right to dismiss the government (similarly);
                      - The Queen of England has the right to dissolve Parliament;
                      - Once a year she speaks to parliament and voices her demands in the near future (that is, in fact, forms the state’s policy);
                      - appoint a prime minister (and the one he wants, and not necessarily the head of the party who won the election);
                      - leads the armed forces, etc.

                      and where is it written?
                  2. Kenxnumx
                    Kenxnumx 7 October 2017 17: 53
                    +2
                    You have already cleanly dug enough to disgrace.
                    1. verner1967
                      verner1967 7 October 2017 20: 16
                      0
                      Quote: Ken71
                      stop shaming.

                      in front of whom? laughing The allegations? laughing
                      1. badens1111
                        badens1111 7 October 2017 20: 37
                        +4
                        Quote: verner1967
                        in front of whom?

                        In front of the VO user community.
                2. mar4047083
                  mar4047083 7 October 2017 23: 43
                  +2
                  Reading your comments, most people came to the conclusion that even before the advent of the Internet, you did not use your own brain, this is a very bad phenomenon. Are you by any chance not A. Samsonov? If you think well, then 99% "information" in the articles of a respected author and in your comments is not even "just misinformation", but complete X. Materials under the stamp of X.
          2. rumatam
            rumatam 7 October 2017 20: 54
            +1
            and the number of corrections do not say how many? Maybe it’s easier to rewrite or is there not enough mind for a new one?
            1. verner1967
              verner1967 8 October 2017 07: 41
              0
              Quote: rumatam
              Maybe it’s easier to rewrite or is there not enough mind for a new one?

              The Constitution is the basic law of the country, on what the state rests, if this support is constantly changing, the state will collapse, which was demonstrated to us in 91
      2. EvgNik
        EvgNik 7 October 2017 08: 08
        +8
        And whose present is written in favor? And to which people is it intended? And under whose dictation is written?
        1. verner1967
          verner1967 7 October 2017 08: 22
          0
          Quote: EvgNik
          And whose present is written in favor?

          and what is it written for? By the principle, "I feel bad, but my neighbor is even worse"?
      3. Alexander Greene
        Alexander Greene 7 October 2017 10: 20
        +12
        Quote: verner1967
        Arisey. For such a short period, under the same power, four constitutions. This is normal? In the USA for 200 years alone, as amended.

        In the USA, capitalism is 200 years old and it does not change. In the USSR, socialism was built, the superstructure and the basis were constantly developing these new transformations and were reflected in the new versions of the Constitution.
        And why, for example, do you dislike the Stalin Constitution, which, as I understand it, your ancestors offended by the Soviet power, returned to their ancestors all the rights that were limited by the Constitutions of 1918 and 1924.
        1. verner1967
          verner1967 7 October 2017 10: 48
          0
          Quote: Alexander Green
          In the USSR, socialism was built, the superstructure and the basis were constantly developing these new transformations and were reflected in the new versions of the Constitution.

          and what, each time there was a new socialism? Or do you want to say that it was built and finished?
          1. Alexander Greene
            Alexander Greene 7 October 2017 12: 01
            +7
            Quote: verner1967
            and what, each time there was a new socialism? Or do you want to say that it was built and finished?

            Do not you understand? Constitutions reflected the development of the base and superstructure. The first Constitution of 1924 was the Constitution of the transitional period, it provided for the restriction of the rights of bourgeois and petty-bourgeois elements. The Stalin Constitution These rights were given to all citizens of the USSR. The 1977 Constitution secured the victory of socialist relations.
            1. verner1967
              verner1967 7 October 2017 13: 39
              0
              Quote: Alexander Green
              Constitutions reflected the development of the base and superstructure.

              So I say, it was written for the sake of power. The rights of citizens should be the same regardless of the political system
              1. SERGUS
                SERGUS 7 October 2017 16: 20
                +1
                Quote: verner1967
                The rights of citizens should be the same regardless of the political system

                And where according to the 1977 constitution did citizens have different rights? Just in chapter 6 it was said about the equal rights of citizens in all areas, regardless of gender, race, religion, etc.
                1. verner1967
                  verner1967 7 October 2017 20: 18
                  0
                  Quote: SERGUS
                  And where according to the 1977 constitution did citizens have different rights?

                  and if you compare the evolution of constitutions from 1924 to 1977, I’m talking about this, read all the posts, and do not pull out of context
              2. SERGUS
                SERGUS 7 October 2017 16: 43
                +4
                Quote: verner1967
                So I say, it was written for the sake of power. The rights of citizens should be the same regardless of the political system

                Well, if you look like that, then all the constitutions of the whole world are written for the sake of the authorities, it can also be said that the criminal code (for example) is written for the sake of the police and try to prove the opposite.
                And where does the 1977 constitution say that citizens have different rights? It is precisely in chapter 6 that citizens in all spheres have the same rights regardless of race, religion, origin, etc.
                1. verner1967
                  verner1967 7 October 2017 20: 19
                  0
                  Quote: SERGUS
                  And where does the 1977 constitution say that citizens have different rights?

                  see above
              3. Alexander Greene
                Alexander Greene 7 October 2017 22: 27
                +2
                [quote = verner1967] Rights of citizens should be the same regardless of the political system [/ quote]
                must be the same regardless of the political system [/ quote]

                I explain why it is impossible after the victory of the socialist revolution to give equal rights to all citizens of the country, i.e. why it is necessary to restrict the rights of counter-revolutionary and other bourgeois elements. I show this with the example of Nicaragua.
                In 1979, the Sandinista Revolution of a democratic orientation defeated Nicaragua. The authorities took control of the Sandinista National Liberation Front, which declared itself a Marxist organization. Its leader, Daniel Ortega, began the restructuring of the political regime on the model of Cuba and the USSR, began to carry out the nationalization of industry and agrarian collectivization. However, the political opposition and private enterprise were not completely destroyed, both were allowed to a limited extent (as during the NEP in the USSR).
                But the counter-revolution with the support of the United States unleashed a civil war, the active phase of the war lasted 6 years. The people are tired, therefore, despite the fact that the success of the contra was limited, the Ortega government nevertheless agreed to engage in political dialogue, and in 1988 enters into an agreement with the contra, according to which the civil war ceases, the opposition is legalized, free elections for the president and parliament are called .
                As a result of the 1990 elections, the Sandinists are defeated. A pro-American government comes to power, led by large-scale capitalist Violetta Barrios de Chamorro. Her government immediately began to implement a set of liberal reforms in the political and economic system, i.e., began the restoration of capitalism.

                If the Bolsheviks had abandoned the dictatorship of the proletariat in the 20s and had not restricted the rights of the counter-revolution and other bourgeois elements, then we would have had the restoration of capitalism in the 20s.
                But still in the USSR, as a result of the global betrayal of the Khrushchev leadership and the political shortsightedness of most communists and Soviet people who did not even understand what happened, in 1961 at the 22nd Congress of the CPSU a new Party Program was adopted, in which it was written that the dictatorships of the proletariat It has exhausted itself that the Soviet state is now nation-wide, and the CPSU is the party of the whole people. This refusal was enshrined in the 1977 Constitution. The result is known - the restoration of capitalism and the collapse of the USSR.

                It was impossible to retreat from the dictatorship of the proletariat, it was a departure from Marxism, which teaches that the dictatorship of the proletariat must survive the entire transitional period from capitalism to communism, and this is the entire first phase of communism (socialism) during which we lived.
                1. verner1967
                  verner1967 7 October 2017 23: 25
                  0
                  Quote: Alexander Green
                  I explain why after the victory of the socialist revolution it is impossible to give equal rights to all citizens of the country,

                  Well, so I said that the constitution was written by the authorities for their beloved
                  1. Alexander Greene
                    Alexander Greene 8 October 2017 02: 35
                    +2
                    Quote: verner1967
                    Quote: Alexander Green
                    I explain why after the victory of the socialist revolution it is impossible to give equal rights to all citizens of the country,

                    Well, so I said that the constitution was written by the authorities for their beloved

                    Respected,. you still need to read a textbook on historical materialism. And then you remind a warrant officer from a joke.
                    An ensign at a Kalashnikov assault rifle class explains: "This is a stock, it is made of wood. This is a fore-end, it is made of the same material."
                    After these words, he picks up Private Ivanov: "Private Ivanov, from what material is the fore-end made?"
                    Ivanov jumps up and clearly answers: "From a tree, comrade ensign!"
                    To which the ensign answers: "The answer is incorrect. From the same material"

                    I explain again. After the socialist revolution, the exploiting classes, from which the threat of the restoration of capitalism comes, are amazed at the rights. It's done workers and peasants in the interests of the majority of the people, namely the working class and the working peasantry
                    1. verner1967
                      verner1967 8 October 2017 07: 44
                      0
                      Quote: Alexander Green
                      in the interests of the majority of the people,

                      that’s because they acted in the interest of “the majority of the people” and received civil war, devastation and famine. But was it not better to take into account the opinion of the whole people? Well, yes, this is such stupidity, then the Soviets would not last a month. Resting on the ideological dogmas of
                      Quote: Alexander Green
                      worker-peasant power,
                      Quote: Alexander Green
                      the majority of the people, namely the working class and the working peasantry
                      you remind the very ensign who knows nothing besides these cliches.
          2. SERGUS
            SERGUS 7 October 2017 16: 34
            +1
            Quote: verner1967
            and what, each time there was a new socialism? Or do you want to say that it was built and finished?

            The construction was completed by the honorary builder Mikhail Gorbachev! There is a difference in approaches: each time a new constitution was written in the USSR, in S.S.A.
            1. verner1967
              verner1967 7 October 2017 20: 20
              0
              Quote: SERGUS
              only amendments can be applied; as a result, only amendments are practically valid at the moment.

              amendments are not a change in the constitution as a whole
              1. SERGUS
                SERGUS 9 October 2017 14: 32
                +1
                Quote: verner1967
                amendments are not a change in the constitution as a whole

                There are simply so many of them that the constitution "which has not changed for 200 years" is just a formality, you can draw up a new constitution from the amendments and not boast that we say what kind of democracy we have and have one constitution for all centuries.
    2. EvgNik
      EvgNik 7 October 2017 07: 49
      +5
      Quote: Amurets
      allowed party organs to intervene in the economic activities of the state and not be responsible for anything

      I agree, Kolya, observed from the inside, the bureau cells were engaged only in production, nothing else interested them.
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 7 October 2017 08: 01
        +3
        Quote: EvgNik
        The bureau cells were engaged only in production, nothing else interested them.

        Yes, most importantly, they did not answer for anything.
        1. EvgNik
          EvgNik 7 October 2017 08: 15
          +4
          And why answer for something? They accepted the alcoholic into the party, I alone voted against, although I myself am not a saint. They say: We will educate, after 2 years he died, he drank a solvent instead of vodka.
    3. Sotskiy
      Sotskiy 7 October 2017 09: 20
      +5
      Quote: Amurets
      All party organizations operate within the framework of the Constitution of the USSR.

      And the current "party members" from the ruling party are responsible for something? At the same time, this does not prevent the liberal course of this party to destroy the remnants of the country's industrial base.
      One "entry" into the WTO is worth it.
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 7 October 2017 09: 30
        +2
        Quote: Sovetskiy
        All party organizations operate within the framework of the Constitution of the USSR.

        Well, let's say this quote from the 6-th chapter of the constitution, not mine. And the rest? So nothing has changed except the name of the party
        1. Sotskiy
          Sotskiy 7 October 2017 22: 53
          +1
          Quote: Amurets
          Quote: Sovetskiy
          All party organizations operate within the framework of the Constitution of the USSR.

          Well, let's say this quote from the 6-th chapter of the constitution, not mine. And the rest? So nothing has changed except the name of the party

          The question arises: "And the hell was this circus with" democracy "and" freedom "(though, why did you need" freedom "? If you were present in the 1977 Constitution, the phrase is Socialist democracy"), if in essence there is nothing at the top Has it changed?) For the sake of dividing (robbery) of socialist property, which created the benefits of society due to (without scrupulousness) the exploits of the working people, it was necessary to break up the state in order to get "nonsense" for individual persons? So for this, there is a Criminal Code with an article of the same name, but we have a State Duma that saves from the Criminal Code and, therefore, the government is not under jurisdiction because it won! But the question is: "How long?"
      2. verner1967
        verner1967 7 October 2017 10: 49
        +1
        Quote: Sovetskiy
        And the current "party members" from the ruling party are responsible for something?

        Of course, for no reason, they are the direct heirs of "those" party members, and those who survived have remained in power, why be surprised?
        1. Sotskiy
          Sotskiy 7 October 2017 22: 58
          +2
          Quote: verner1967
          Quote: Sovetskiy
          And the current "party members" from the ruling party are responsible for something?

          Of course, for no reason, they are the direct heirs of "those" party members, and those who survived have remained in power, why be surprised?

          If you judge by the actions that took place in 90, then this is similar to the current Communist Party, which is not the heir to the CPSU (a substitution of terms for "Suckers") but does not apply to true communists. Got it?
          1. verner1967
            verner1967 7 October 2017 23: 28
            0
            Quote: Sovetskiy
            but as it does not apply to true communists.

            you look at the names of these leaders, and then read their biographies, everything from the Communist Party or the Komsomol functionaries or their children
            Quote: Sovetskiy
            Got it?
    4. tezey
      tezey 7 October 2017 13: 45
      +4
      I want to say about the interference of party organs in the economic activity of the state. At the level of the state plan, ministries and union departments, there was certainly control over the implementation of the decisions taken. And how without it. At the enterprise level, intervention was only if the enterprise ceased to function normally. In this case, the party authorities of the highest instance, for their part, dealt with cadres and problems. I found all this and I know from my experience and from observing the work of my father and his colleagues in the higher instances of the Soviet state. In fact, economic activity was still more controlled by ministries and departments, and party control over economic activity was not large and rather came down to monitoring the appointment of leading cadres. And as I understand it today, this control was not very objective. Otherwise, how can you understand the fact that the former directors of the communists in the 90s overnight turned into quite a capitalist. Wow control over personnel and activities. By and large it was not a damn thing.
    5. 210ox
      210ox 7 October 2017 14: 37
      +4
      There’s no answer about anything, I won’t make it public. There was a Party Control Committee for economic shoals and the like was demanding and tough. Another thing is that the party bodies often removed themselves from the leadership (and often were the initiators of that mess in the republics) by the end of 80 s.
      Quote: Amurets
      Thus, the Constitution of the USSR 1977 g. Secured the victory of developed socialism and significantly expanded the rights of citizens. Many of its foundations would be useful in modern Russia, in need of restoring social justice.
      I agree with the author in many ways, but not in everything.
      This article allowed party bodies to intervene in the economic activities of the state and not be responsible for anything
      Article 6. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union is the guiding and guiding force of Soviet society, the core of its political system, state and public organizations. The CPSU exists for the people and serves the people.
      Armed with Marxist-Leninist teachings, the Communist Party determines the general outlook for the development of society, the line of internal and foreign policy of the USSR, directs the great creative activity of the Soviet people, and gives a systematic, scientifically substantiated character to its struggle for the victory of communism.
      All party organizations operate within the framework of the Constitution of the USSR.
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 7 October 2017 15: 14
        +2
        Quote: 210ox
        Another thing is that party bodies often removed themselves from the leadership (and often were the initiators of that mess in the republics) by the end of the 80s.

        This was what we had to start with. At the local level, very often, whether for career reasons or for other reasons, sometimes such decisions were made, you are still horrified, and business executives were responsible for this, fulfilling the decisions of the plenums of the city and district committees, and not the district and city party committees of the CPSU that made these decisions.
    6. Gardamir
      Gardamir 7 October 2017 22: 01
      +1
      Article 6
      all live in perestroika myths. Now it seems there is no such clause in the constitution. But ... first, Our Home Russia, now United Russia, still guiding and guiding
  2. moskowit
    moskowit 7 October 2017 07: 28
    +3
    Indeed, the time of Leonid Brezhnev in some respects was the "golden age" of the Soviet Union. This is a time of breakthroughs in space and military affairs, respect for the Soviet superpower in the international arena, the stable development of the national economy, the security that all Soviet citizens felt, the consistent improvement of the lives of the majority of the population, etc.

    ... work in good faith and observe the discipline of labor; protect and strengthen socialist property; protect the interests of the Soviet state and help strengthen its power, protect the socialist Fatherland; fight wastefulness and promote policing ....

    Everything is right! I remember that day well. It was Friday ... And upon hearing the announcement of the adoption of the new Constitution, the people immediately realized that they (had) taken away the day off on December 5 (Constitution Day), and the next day off on the adoption of the new one would be only in three years ... And the transfer of holidays that fall on the weekend didn’t occur to anyone .... This is how the work schedule was condensed ....
    And now .... Take a walk, I don’t want to ....
  3. parusnik
    parusnik 7 October 2017 07: 29
    +3
    One cant was st. 6 .. And so .. you can’t say bad about her ...
    1. verner1967
      verner1967 7 October 2017 07: 45
      +1
      Quote: parusnik
      One cant was st. 6 .. And so .. you can’t say bad about her ...

      this jamb crosses out a lot, but to promise and fulfill is not the same thing
  4. venaya
    venaya 7 October 2017 07: 32
    +11
    The strength of the "Brezhnev" Constitution was the protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens. .. This is a time of breakthroughs in space and military affairs, respect for the Soviet superpower in the international arena, the stable development of the national economy, the security that all Soviet citizens felt, the consistent improvement of the lives of the majority of the population, etc. True, most residents of the Soviet Union understood this only after the collapse of the USSR ..

    “We didn’t store what we lost, we all got so used to all forms of guarantees of all kinds of stability in our lives that we thought with a fool that this would certainly not leave us. Gone, and still gone - lost tens of millions of lives, industry losses exceeded losses in WWII by an order of magnitude in the complete absence of any guarantees for future prospects, but you can’t list everything.
  5. andrewkor
    andrewkor 7 October 2017 07: 53
    +6
    Oh, there was a little time, reinforced concrete confidence in the future, stagnation, however!
    1. SERGE ANT
      SERGE ANT 7 October 2017 08: 22
      +13
      Yes, nostalgia is not about the party now, but about that confidence in the future, about peace for the future of children ... It was a good time, do not say ...
  6. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 7 October 2017 08: 29
    +7
    The constitution of society, the law of life of which is the concern of all for the good of everyone.

    Something now, I point blank do not notice Chubais’s concern for my personal welfare. sad
    1. Komsomol
      Komsomol 7 October 2017 11: 32
      +10
      I join and subscribe to every word !!!
    2. verner1967
      verner1967 7 October 2017 13: 42
      0
      Quote: Gormengast
      Something now, I point blank do not notice Chubais’s concern for my personal welfare.

      And why should someone care about your welfare? We also criticize the consumer society when they themselves come from there
      1. badens1111
        badens1111 7 October 2017 13: 51
        +7
        Quote: verner1967
        And why should someone care about your welfare?

        And who will take care of the student? A lonely pensioner? A young mother? A large family?
        You look passionate about social Darwinism, and it’s not far from Nazism to slide .. same to me, the representative of the “higher race” from among those who have enriched themselves sharply ..
        A lot of you divorced with such views, and among the people your reasoning is already encountering a corresponding reaction, but I won’t guess what will happen next, but the fact, with your views, it’s only on the Internet that you can consider your reality differently claims ..
        1. verner1967
          verner1967 7 October 2017 20: 25
          0
          Quote: badens1111
          representative of the "higher race" from among the sharply enriched ..

          Well, yes, I raised my pension, and I got rich laughing
          Quote: badens1111
          And who will take care of the student? A lonely pensioner? A young mother? A large family?

          one needs to take care of oneself at an able-bodied age, and if a misfortune happened, and just throw your life to the sidelines, then, for example, in the USA (and someone here said that the constitution does not work there) decent benefits for such people. The state must provide one thing, the opportunity to work and have a decent reward for it.
          1. Mordvin 3
            Mordvin 3 8 October 2017 14: 16
            +5
            Quote: verner1967
            The state must provide one thing, the opportunity to work and have a decent reward for it.

            So this state does not provide. Unlike the USSR.
      2. SERGUS
        SERGUS 7 October 2017 17: 17
        +3
        Quote: verner1967
        And why should someone care about your welfare?

        Well, yes, yes, teachers have a small salary? So you can do business after school. With such an attitude, it will soon be like sending old men to the forest as in ancient Japan, so as not to feed. It seems to me that we are losing a human face, we are only thinking about how to grab a bigger piece.
        1. verner1967
          verner1967 7 October 2017 20: 26
          0
          Quote: SERGUS
          Well, yes, yes, teachers have a small salary?

          really? My wife, a nurse, receives half the amount of a teacher and nothing, we live and don’t)))
          1. moskowit
            moskowit 8 October 2017 14: 10
            0
            My wife, a nurse, receives half the amount of a teacher and nothing, we live and don’t

            And yourself, dear, earn what? Not by rank ....
          2. SERGUS
            SERGUS 9 October 2017 14: 23
            0
            Quote: verner1967
            My wife, a nurse, receives half the amount of a teacher and nothing, we live and don’t)))

            I also know a nurse who works in rural areas, so to speak, and her salary is just a penny. And she also lives and does not ache, only A - this does not mean that it should be so, and B - does not make our teachers a prosperous population. If you think that a modest apartment in a mortgage for 15 years and a cheap car on credit is the pinnacle of our country’s development, then you can live and enjoy, but only I, and as I see it, many people are not happy with this state of affairs. Russia, with its natural and mental resources, deserves something else. And do not shout, let it be better this way, but how the civil war will be in Ukraine, as history shows, stomping in one place does not lead to anything good. I do not urge you to run outside and block roads, I would like our government to think about it, but it has your position:
            Quote: verner1967
            And why should someone care about your welfare?

            and this “Well, yes, yes, teachers have a small salary? So you can do business after school” (the essence of the conversation at one of our Prime Minister’s meetings with teachers) I gave as evidence of this.
  7. Rostislav
    Rostislav 7 October 2017 09: 07
    +4
    Thus, the Constitution of the USSR 1977 g. Secured the victory of developed socialism and significantly expanded the rights of citizens. Many of its foundations would be useful in modern Russia, in need of restoring social justice.

    I hope that the GDP will find the strength to correct the constitution written for us by penguins. The people will certainly support the abolition of odious articles on the supremacy of international law (no one has this), on the independence of the central bank, and on the lack of ideology.
    1. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 11 October 2017 20: 51
      0
      Quote: Rostislav

      I hope that the GDP will find the strength to correct the constitution written for us by penguins. The people will certainly support the abolition of odious articles on the supremacy of international law (no one has this), on the independence of the central bank, and on the lack of ideology.
      I hope so too. I want to add that still not everyone knows about it until now. Perhaps the mind rejects such savagery that the great USSR became controlled by the states. Colony.
  8. groks
    groks 7 October 2017 09: 44
    +4
    Actually, the “guiding and guiding" concerned more politics, as can be seen from the text. Totally normal. Otherwise, it should have been a duplicate management system, which is also not bad at all. What fools got into high positions and started to cut - I’m not quite somehow sure, I myself did not observe such. Their comrades-in-arms, either deprived the morons of the ability to steer, or pushed back from sin.
    Numerous stories about screeching party-nomenclature workers who were forced to sow almost in the snow just to be accountable are artistic exaggerations from the time of preparation for the destruction of the USSR. Since then we would simply die out from starvation.
    1. verner1967
      verner1967 7 October 2017 10: 54
      0
      Quote: groks
      Actually, the “guiding and guiding" concerned more politics, as can be seen from the text.

      Now let’s be engaged in politics, and not climbed into the economy
      Quote: groks
      Totally normal.

      nothing normal, where is the competition, why did they consider themselves the only right and infallible? The result in 1991 is logical.
      Quote: groks
      Otherwise, it should have been a duplicate management system, which is also not bad at all.

      yeah, feed not one official, but two, moreover, "the seven nannies have a child without an eye"
      Quote: groks
      Their comrades-in-arms, either deprived the morons of the ability to steer, or pushed back from sin.

      Well, yes, and when a boarding house of decrepit senility drives the country, then who will move whom?
      1. groks
        groks 7 October 2017 11: 53
        +6
        And they certainly climbed, these are not the tales of those who slammed our country to us? Now, when serious production stopped at our Far East, the first secretary arrived quite quickly. And never even yelled. He asked how he could help.
        They changed the secretary general to a younger one - he ruined the country for us. Fine?
        Here LI said (I respect it very much!) Indistinctly, for what there were reasons, actually, he was not interested in speaking, but everything seemed to be pretty good in the country. Since then they have been saying better and better, and the result is negative. So can find someone with a damaged jaw? wink
        And in general, if I need to sweep in the apartment, then I do not tear down the walls and do not bite off the balcony. Now we also feed many officials, the State Duma, in which they are now deciding the most important issue - to pray before or after meetings. Are we all the time then? We feed EdRu - indirectly, but we feed. What they do is incomprehensible to the mind. For such cases, at any level, the official would be sentenced to the Navy.
        1. verner1967
          verner1967 7 October 2017 22: 14
          0
          Quote: groks
          Now, when serious production stopped at our Far East, the first secretary arrived quite quickly.

          do you notice strangeness in your proposal?
          Quote: groks
          serious production stopped

          What is it like? Why? If this is a serious production, then it should not stop.
          Quote: groks
          the first secretary arrived quite quickly

          from what to do with it? In a normal country, the management of the corporation will throw out the director of non-travel production and will recruit a team of professionals who will not allow the company to stop. For forced simple workers only part of the salary is paid, so think about who cares more about them. Watch the Soviet film "Prize", with Leonov in the title role. It seems like an ordinary Soviet film on a production topic, and what problems does it raise at that time.
          1. groks
            groks 8 October 2017 08: 20
            0
            Baby babble. All pieces of iron tend to break. And in production 24/7/365, in fact, the repair is ongoing. Well, there’s nothing to discuss here with those who haven’t worked on this. So the director can only be removed with the wording "I could not cancel the laws of the universe."
            And the first could, for example, ask at another enterprise, a few assistants. If it was really hard.
        2. verner1967
          verner1967 7 October 2017 22: 16
          0
          Quote: groks
          Changed the Secretary General to a younger one - he ruined our country

          like this, he came alone and ruined ... and the men from lunch came and everything was in ruins .... what kind of country is this that collapsed with a finger?
          1. groks
            groks 8 October 2017 08: 21
            0
            All this has been discussed many times and there is no point in repeating it.
      2. serriy
        serriy 7 October 2017 12: 53
        +2
        when the country is driven by a boarding house of decrepit senility, then who will move whom

        Well, is it better now? fool
        young, and not very, arrogant, timid, thievish, very thievish. negative decades of rampant hopeless unpunished robbery in Russia is better ?! negative
        BECAME A COUNTRY WITH A DEVELOPING ECONOMY !!! negative
        1. badens1111
          badens1111 7 October 2017 13: 57
          +5
          Quote: serriy
          BECAME A COUNTRY WITH A DEVELOPING ECONOMY !!!

          While the ball is ruled by carriers of the views of the likes of verner1967, we will continue to trail in the wagon train.
          Even if, in a way, we demonstrate something .. the truth is all from the reserves of the USSR, which the writer curses ..
          1. verner1967
            verner1967 7 October 2017 20: 28
            0
            Quote: badens1111
            though all of the reserves of the USSR,

            and what is left in our reserves?
          2. verner1967
            verner1967 7 October 2017 20: 50
            0
            Quote: badens1111
            While the ball is ruled by carriers of the views of the likes of verner1967, we will continue to trail in the wagon train.

            in the wagon train of what? The leading countries of the world, because they don’t have the Constitution of the USSR, so that’s not the point. When you stop whining about handouts from the state, then you will be a locomotive.
            Do not ask what your homeland can do for you - ask what you can do for your homeland.
            D.F. Kennedy. hi
  9. Karen
    Karen 7 October 2017 10: 20
    +1
    The most “communist" constitution was in Portugal, after the pre-hurt of Salazar. Did not help :)
  10. Kenxnumx
    Kenxnumx 7 October 2017 10: 32
    0
    In principle, the constitution is not bad. If you comply with it.
  11. Tatar 174
    Tatar 174 7 October 2017 17: 14
    0
    Wounds only fumble. What now to talk about what is lost and no longer return crying Great was our country ...
  12. Petrol cutter
    Petrol cutter 7 October 2017 19: 38
    +3
    And I agree with the position of Comrade Brezhnev! I personally have no complaints against this comrade. Apparently this was the happiness that flashed.
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack 7 October 2017 19: 51
      +8
      Quote: Benzorez
      I personally have no complaints against this comrade. Apparently this was the happiness that flashed

      For the first time, the right of citizens to appeal against the actions of any officials in court was envisaged (Article 58). True, the mechanism for the exercise of this right was not established, which could not but affect the reality of its implementation

      If this right had worked now, it would not matter for the social system ... but - this (specifically this !!) right still does not work.
      My regrets request
      1. Petrol cutter
        Petrol cutter 8 October 2017 20: 35
        +2
        May be. It may not be. I was too young in those days. One thing I know as a working person (at a defense today) is that there was confidence in the future before. Now she is gone. Such a squiggle.
  13. verner1967
    verner1967 7 October 2017 20: 48
    0
    Quote: badens1111
    In front of the VO user community.

    yes you have mania, my friend laughing
  14. mar4047083
    mar4047083 7 October 2017 23: 23
    +2
    Author, in the month of August, you wrote that the Bolsheviks are villains and we just need to return the monarchy. And now it turns out we need the "Brezhnev Constitution." Do you have a split personality? I am outraged by the fact that you did not link the constitution with the Russian matrix.
  15. ver_
    ver_ 8 October 2017 05: 46
    0
    Quote: verner1967
    Quote: venaya
    "for 200 years alone, as amended" - and that is not fulfilled.

    why do you think so?
    Quote: venaya
    In England, there’s still not one, and never was,

    here you are wrong, it is, just not in the same form as ours, but it is.
    Quote: venaya
    Maybe it’s not the constitution at all?

    The Constitution is the basic law of the country, how could it be without it?

    ... the law that draws where it turned - that’s what happened ..
  16. ver_
    ver_ 8 October 2017 05: 54
    0
    Quote: SERGUS
    Quote: verner1967
    And why should someone care about your welfare?

    Well, yes, yes, teachers have a small salary? So you can do business after school. With such an attitude, it will soon be like sending old men to the forest as in ancient Japan, so as not to feed. It seems to me that we are losing a human face, we are only thinking about how to grab a bigger piece.

    ... so it was in * enlightened Europe * - to righteous children in the forest .., - forests just didn’t remain there - you won’t get rid of * hungry mouths * thus tepericha ..
  17. Alexander Greene
    Alexander Greene 8 October 2017 12: 59
    +1
    Quote: verner1967
    that’s because they acted in the interest of “the majority of the people” and received civil war, devastation and famine. But was it not better to take into account the opinion of the whole people?

    No, not better. It is simply not possible. How can opposing interests be taken into account? The former you protected (nobles, landowners, capitalists, bankers, manufacturers, breeders, etc.) wanted to continue to parasitize the working people. And the workers, peasants did not want to hunch on them anymore, therefore the Soviet power acted in the interests of the majority of the people, which were the working people.
    1. verner1967
      verner1967 8 October 2017 19: 44
      0
      Quote: Alexander Green
      And the workers, peasants did not want to hunch on them anymore

      Do you think they wanted to be hunchbacked at the CPSU?
      1. Alexander Greene
        Alexander Greene 8 October 2017 22: 40
        0
        Quote: verner1967
        Do you think they wanted to be hunchbacked at the CPSU?

        No one was hunchbacked at the CPSU, no need to invent, even the fact that at the end of the 90s there were about 18 million people in the party. Didn’t they work? Everyone worked, for parasitism brought to justice.
        1. verner1967
          verner1967 9 October 2017 17: 58
          0
          Quote: Alexander Green
          Didn’t they work? Everyone worked

          especially "worked" numerous instructors, secretaries of the regional committees, city committees and God forgive pagandists of all stripes laughing I'm about these, not about
          Quote: Alexander Green
          there were about 18 million people in the party.
          1. Alexander Greene
            Alexander Greene 9 October 2017 18: 56
            0
            Quote: verner1967
            especially "worked" numerous instructors, secretaries of the regional committees, city committees and God forgive pagandists of all stripes

            Of course they worked, I confirm this, because I had to see their work from the inside out. In 1980, when the 26th Congress of the CPSU was held, I was in reserve and I was sent to work in the Regional Party Committee. The comrades worked until late. For example, I was sent to a site for checking workers' letters, I checked complaints and their satisfaction by local authorities.
            1. verner1967
              verner1967 9 October 2017 22: 09
              0
              Quote: Alexander Green
              The comrades worked until late. For example, I was sent to a site for checking workers' letters, I checked complaints and their satisfaction by local authorities.

              and in the stores there was meat, sausage, oil, sausage trains stopped going to Moscow, the farce all went broke, because there were high-quality and beautiful clothes and shoes, well .... laughing
              1. Alexander Greene
                Alexander Greene 10 October 2017 22: 39
                +1
                Quote: verner1967
                and in the stores meat, sausage, butter, sausage trains stopped going to Moscow, the farce went broke because high-quality and beautiful clothes and shoes appeared, well, well.

                The store had everything and meat and sausage and butter, which was not enough you could buy on the market, in cooperation stores, at that time there wasn’t tearing the skin as it is now. Refrigerators were not empty from the Soviet people. Clothing and shoes were of high quality and hygienic, whom industrial goods did not satisfy, they could sew a suit and shoes in an atelier of individual tailoring. Prices were affordable even for students, in 1969 a meter of material for a suit cost from 8 to 13 rubles, tailoring from 10 to 15 rubles.
                PS Dear friend, why are these your taunts, you are bored, but I’m already tired of answering your stupid things, don’t write them with me, I lived these years myself and saw everything with my own eyes.