In general, it already comes to outright stupidity, and in many criticisms there is a lot of reason. The Constitution is a fundamental document that governs the basic provisions of the state of life of any citizen of any country.
In our country, as always, everything falls into farce. And wherever you look. When you soberly evaluate everything that you are going to shove into the Constitution, you just shrug your hands. But the show has just begun. School breakfasts, god, signs only in Russian ... It remains only to come up with something completely to make it completely ridiculous.
For example, so that the Constitution guarantees the switching of red and green traffic signals.
In general, we can make a flood show out of any serious matter. And they do.
Therefore, I am absolutely sure that the show “We are changing the Constitution” will succeed. Change. We have complete order with this, and there is no doubt that, according to the data already leaked to the Network, about 65% will come to the polls and the majority will vote “for”.
However, there are a lot of questions on the topic “Why is this so?” Indeed, everything was so calm, the country was moving so confidently forward, towards a brighter future, to fear of enemies and the envy of “partners” - and here you are.
“The situation in the country since the adoption of the Constitution has changed dramatically. In fact, we have another country. Amendments are in demand. ”
This is not me, this is Putin said.
Honestly, I can’t understand what has changed so much in the system-forming role of the state that it is necessary to radically change the main law of the country. And urgently.
Of course, if we take into account the fact that Putin is ending his fourth and (seemingly not sure) last term, and the ratings of United Russia, the government, and Putin himself resemble the ruble against the euro and the dollar, then there are less questions.
And frankly risking, trying to put on a throne a temporary worker, today is not worth it. The risk is really great. And, apparently, there is no desire to leave.
I was finally convinced of this by a thoughtful viewing of the “meeting with the people” in Ivanovo. He looked, was touched. But some things did not make me think - I really jumped in surprise that Vladimir Vladimirovich even voiced this.
The first thing that raised my eyebrows up and puzzled my brain was the promise of Vladimir Vladimirovich not to head the State Council. And why, then, did the garden get settled at all? Medvedev there?
On the other hand, Vladimir Vladimirovich promised to leave the Constitution inviolable (not so long ago the last time it was when he puzzled the Federal Assembly) four times in my memory, and promised not to touch the retirement age ... Oh, yes, he promised not the seventh retirement age President of the Russian Federation, and some other. The third, fourth, sixth ... I don’t remember which, to be honest, it’s not important at all.
It doesn’t matter in principle, because the retirement gift contrary to Putin’s promises was rolled up, and that’s all.
So, the promises not to head the State Council, so carefully modified, can be treated about the same way, I am sure. Because, alas, far from all Putin’s promises today can be trusted with eyes closed. Not for everyone.
The second passage, which simply killed, is about arranging for a change of power after Russia “grows fat”. This can already be regarded as something that Putin will never leave power. Well, or in the best traditions of the general secretaries of the CPSU Central Committee, it will leave her with the last heartbeat.
It’s familiar, yes?
If for 20 years Putin has not been able to help all of Russia “grow fat” ... I do not mean Timchenko, Rotenberg, Sechin, Gref, Miller and other “childhood friends”, although it would probably be worth it. These have already swam not even with fat, fat, unlike the whole of Russia.
If we talk about the same part of the population of Russia, which is not Rotenberg, then for her not everything is so rosy. On the highest level.
In general, the last time with Vladimir Vladimirovich with the fulfillment of promises is somehow sad. It is understandable to make so many promises for 20 years of rule that today in the apparatus of worries on the topic of how to dissuade from what was said earlier, is above the head.
And all because 20 years is 20 years.
Therefore, very close to 2024, you can again put the same phonogram on the topic "the situation has changed, we must act in the spirit of the times." Perhaps that will do.
But in general, it is very necessary that in April the choice was the right one. Therefore, by the way, and voting will not be point by point, but a list. And school breakfasts will go along with a system of change of power. Wholesale, so to speak.
But I really care about the very moment when serious questions, in theory, by all people, are bombarded with all sorts of nonsense, very mildly speaking, incompetent people.
For example, the passage that excited everyone about the transfer of faith in God to us by our ancestors. Specially carefully read what the people wrote on different resources. It’s not a good idea, because they said something, but they didn’t specify what kind of god they were talking about. Neither the head of the State Duma Volodin, nor Peskov.
The text of the amendment is known only from the words of the Speaker of the State Duma Vyacheslav Volodin:
"The Russian Federation, united by a millennium history"preserving the memory of the ancestors who transmitted to us ideals and faith in God, as well as the continuity of the development of the Russian state, recognizes the historically established state unity."
Well, the ministers of the church, seemingly still separate from the state, but rather deeply seated in a political pool, repeatedly spoke out for the fact that God had a place in the Constitution.
I understand perfectly why.
Interferes with Article No. 14 of the Constitution, which states that we have a secular state. I apologize to what extent the concept of “God” can be a legal concept? And how can we fix the law that is inside a person, that is, faith?
No, of course it is possible, and even then in cases where "There is no god but ..." and further in the text. But excuse me, how can one fix in the Basic Law of the state that which is not physically present, or that which is, in general, inside a person? And separately taken?
In fact, as far as the clergymen who met on the way explained to me, God first of all is love and the absence of coercion. And here? And here we have something new and different.
I perfectly understand Cyril, who became the shooter of the proposal. The church needs more money, more influence, more flock. Patriarch believes:
“Most Russian citizens believe in God. I’m not only talking about the Orthodox - I’m also talking about Muslims and many others. ”
Good. The Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia proposes, starting from this, to add to the Constitution a mention of God. Precisely because there are many believers in Russia. Well, maybe even the majority, but what does it matter when the 21st century is in the yard?
“A man, his rights and freedoms are the highest value” - Article 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
But what about atheists who do not believe in God? What about people who have not yet decided? What about people who believe in "higher powers"? Believers of other faiths, which the ROC will not give in to?
The army, yes, our army is the clearest example of this. Today, almost every part has a church. Naturally, Orthodox. And you have every right to send your religious demands, if you are Orthodox.
And if you are a Muslim, Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist, these are your problems.
Something somehow not so, right? Although, on the other hand, should a secular state really care about what individual citizens believe in? And yes, nevertheless, WHAT god is it, if it is included in the Constitution?
The Constitution was not, is not and should not be anything divine. First of all, the Constitution is a legal act.
In principle, the Qur'an and the Bible can also be called that. These are also collections of normative religious acts. The Quran is a particularly successful creation in this regard (from my point of view).
But in fact, I agree with Pavel Krasheninnikov, who is the head of the Duma committee on state building and legislation:
“God, if he is in the soul, then he is, regardless of whether he will be spelled out in the text of the law or not ...”
But in fact, since Putin himself introduced the amendments, I have absolute confidence that now everything that I spoke about will be written in the Constitution.
On the one hand, it seems like it's okay. But not in this country. Well, if something begins, good usually does not happen from epoch-making changes. Anything can be set as an example. Reforms are all a matter of choice: health care has been reformed so that Putin himself says it’s time to reanimate, culture, education, retirement ... It's all like a carbon copy. And everywhere it just gets worse.
You will say that if there is faith in the soul, then no reform can be touched upon. I agree. But I'm not talking about the soul, I'm talking about something else. If God, that is, the church, will have a place in the Constitution, then on the basis of this our miracle guardians deputies will be able to pass the law. Which one? I do not know. But they can. Yes, at least about tithing.
Well, I do not believe that Cyril and Vladimir are just muddied. It’s just that in our country only the State Council is being made a superorgan, and even then it seems to me that this is not just. And everything else is a well-known affair.
He said more than once that we have a lot of problems in our heads (especially growing ones) because there is no state ideology. But this point is not entirely clear, and I’ll try to explain why.
If a person does not believe in God, who is he? Lawbreaker? Criminal? Very strange. But the main thing is that this will not add spirituality. Not a bit. I think that all or almost all will now agree with me. He who did not believe will not believe further. Whoever believes - it doesn’t matter whether his faith is lawfully or not. For if a person believes, I'm sorry, he does not care about the laws. It is proved by Soviet times.
I will not offend anyone here, because the faith itself protects the feelings of believers, and not the constitution or the criminal code.
By the way, the truth is what to do with atheists and communists? How about those who didn’t fit into the constitution? Forcibly baptized or in correctional camps? Or just a loss of rights?
So, these strange attempts are just a confirmation that the current government has no ideology. And God is absolutely no helper here. On the contrary, where a cultural worker does nothing, there is a field untoward for a religious worker.
And it turns out that all these suddenly urgent attempts to amend the Constitution of the Russian Federation play on anything, but not on improvement. The main number of amendments is absolutely pointless, their task is simply to veil the main changes.
It is clear that a normal person will vote for school breakfasts and against lawlessness in the country, for God against gays and so on. But he really will vote for nothing.
Proven reception already. The calculation that when voting in bulk, for the incomprehensible to many the contents of the package of amendments, and not for the amendments themselves individually, will be voted on. Wholesale. And many of those who are “sure” today that everything is right and in the name of the people will habitually vote, as always.
Well, there are no more options. Or for God, or for gays. It's always like that with us. The choice without a choice, such as Putin or Sobchak. Vote, or ... However, the latest presidential elections have shown that, in general, already without an "or".
Lose even when we are against. Remember, about renaming the police to the police with the subsequent reform? 90% were against it. But they renamed it, billions were destroyed, bribes were taken from those who wanted to stay in the hundreds of thousands, and as a result they got the police. In fact - nothing.
Against pension reform, how many were against? Also, I think, not less than 90%. Nothing, Putin had no other choice, as he himself said. It is necessary. Accepted.
Well, somehow the words about "respecting the opinions of people" and "democratization of public life" are not very looked and heard.
Wait, of course. We will see. There is not the slightest doubt that they will correctly calculate and accept the amendments. And then we'll see, maybe, to the joy of the monarchists, the good old empire will return. With all the consequences. While we will "grow fat".
The main thing is not to stretch our legs while we grow. And tithe doesn’t really want to pay.