All of you are well aware of, among other things, the speeches of State Duma Deputy Fedorov Yevgeny Alekseevich (http://poznavatelnoe.tv, http://efedorov.ru) that all the legislation of the Russian Federation after the dismemberment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was written under the guidance of American instructors with the connivance of the drunkard Yeltsin BN, that with 1991, the Russian Federation lives in an occupation regime, that Russia lost in the Cold War and pays to this day indemnity of the United States and Western Europe, it is time to break free from this dependence and gain sovereignty.
But, what's wrong is laid down by American advisers in our basic law, very few people can formulate outright, for even lawyer DA A. Medvedev in his speech on the 15 anniversary of the Constitution, said (http://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=232533):
"Constitution was the result of a social contract - in fact, a real social contract on the ways of the long-term development of the country, despite the fact that it was taken in a very difficult situation and its adoption was accompanied by very complex political processes. Nevertheless, it has become a value platform for decades to come, and brought new strength and state, and thus created a space for the free development of every person and society as a whole. And in this, by the way, its cardinal difference from the constitutions of the previous period."
Let's see whether this is true. Velichko, Mikhail Viktorovich analyzed the current Constitution of the Russian Federation (http://www.constitution.ru/index.htm), comparing it with the Stalin Constitution (http://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3989135), and the result was reported at the 5 workshop on December 2012 (http://www.kpe.ru/video-foto-materialy/rekomenduem-k-prosmotru/3570-stalins-konstitusion).
The following is a brief summary of this workshop in view of the importance of the issue raised.
The US still lives on the 1787 constitution, and on the 1792 Bill of Rights, in Russia, the adoption of the 1905 constitution led to the collapse of the Russian Empire, then the Constitution of the Russian Federation 1918, the USSR Constitution 1924, Stalin Constitution 1936, the Brezhnev Constitution of 1977 and the current 1993, as amended by 2008. What is the reason for such a difference? In the US, a fair share of the population is fighting for compliance with the Constitution. In Russia, life goes on its own, and legislation is a legal rationale for the arbitrariness of those who have one or another powerful status: the law that dies, where it turned, went there. The reasons for this attitude to the legislation are generally different in different eras and stem from non-legal issues.
Benjamin Franklin (English BenjaminFranklin; January 17, 1706 - April 17, 1790) - politician, diplomat, scientist, inventor, journalist, publisher, freemason) said: those who are ready to give up freedom in order to acquire short-lived protection from danger do not deserve either freedom or security. If you look at history countries: the tsar-father is not angry, the father of the master is not angry, in most cases do not argue with the authorities. That is, a fair share of the population fits into what Franklin said. “Only he is worthy of happiness and freedom, who every day goes to fight for them” - I.V. Goethe ("Faust").
When the socialist experiment had not yet begun, Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky described the prospects with the phrase: "A society of a righteous community, made up of villains."
But a righteous society cannot be made up of scoundrels. If the rascal component is of great importance, neither the best constitutional rules nor the laws will be observed. Life will flow differently despite the most righteous legislation.
Where does the legislation come from? If you take the position of Enough General Management Theory, analyze how the Full Function of Management is implemented in the life of society, then legislation stems from the concept of management. In 2008, Barack Obama recalls Senator Robert Carlyle Bert (1918-2010), who was born in a simple family, lived and worked, as we have said without working in production, in the book “Insolence of Hope”. , during the war he worked as a welder, from 1952 in Congress, and from 1958 in the US Senate, he began his political activities in the Ku Klux Klan. Once Bert said that almost no one knows the Constitution now, but I have always said that I need only this book and also the Bible. Bert pointed out directly to the connection of legislation with the concept. Obama himself says the same thing, describing US law, he states: our legislation is, by definition, the codification of moral norms, and much of it is based on Judeo-Christian tradition. What do our lawyers say? Nothing. For many lawyers who do not understand what a Enough General Management Theory is, who do not know what the Full Function of the Office is, how it is implemented in the life of a society, it’s a revelation that the purpose of the legislation is to describe the standard control algorithms according to the chosen concept, in addition, to resolve private conflicts within this concept, to protect the management of this concept from attempts to implement alternative concepts in the same society, the provisions of which are not compatible with the dominant concept.
In this connection, they often recall Art. 58 of the Criminal Code of the USSR, according to which many became victims of “Stalinist” repressions, but few people remember that in Germany there were also prohibitions on professions according to which the bearers of certain convictions could not serve in the army, be in the public service .
In addition, in any legislation there is what can be called legal noise. Legal noises - these are laws ambiguously connected with life, the laws of which are internally contradictory, the law enforcement practice of which is based on the fact that competent lawyers know how to apply them. Legal noises are a kind of manna from heaven for many and many lawyers.
The end of the preamble.
If we talk about the constitution, it is necessary to read the articles of the constitution. If we return to the role of the Constitution in the legislative system, then in the legislative system, the Constitution is a kind of core operating system. Other laws that serve the work of this core are subsequently attached to it. The constitution, either explicitly or by default, as well as the entire legal system as a whole, is oriented towards the achievement of some goals that are well defined in the concept that it serves. The Constitution of 1993 begins with a preamble. The 1936 Constitution does not contain a preamble. If we talk about the preamble of the Constitution of 1993, then this is pure demagogy and a declaration of good intentions. And then the Constitution itself begins, which declares the rights of citizens, the principles of government, the reproduction of the state and its functioning. 1936 Constitution,
Article 1. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is a socialist state of workers and peasants.
Article 2. The political basis of the USSR is the Soviets of Workers' Deputies, which grew and strengthened as a result of the overthrow of the power of landowners and capitalists and the conquest of the dictatorship of the proletariat..
(Note - workers)
Article 3. All power in the USSR belongs to the working people of the city and village represented by the Soviets of Working People's Deputies.
Constitution of the Russian Federation 1993 g:
1. The Russian Federation - Russia is a democratic federal state with a republican form of government.
2. The names of the Russian Federation and Russia are equivalent.
Man, his rights and freedoms are the highest value. Recognition, observance and protection of human and citizen's rights and freedoms is the duty of the state.
1. The bearer of sovereignty and the only source of power in the Russian Federation is its multinational people.
2. The people exercise their power directly, as well as through government bodies and local governments.
3. The highest direct expression of the power of the people is a referendum and free elections.
4. No one can appropriate power in the Russian Federation. The seizure of power or the appropriation of power is prosecuted under federal law.
1. The sovereignty of the Russian Federation extends over its entire territory.
2. The Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal laws are supremacy throughout the territory of the Russian Federation.
3. The Russian Federation ensures the integrity and inviolability of its territory.
1. The Russian Federation recognizes ideological diversity.
2. No ideology can be established as a state or mandatory.
3. The Russian Federation recognizes political diversity, multi-party system.
4. Public associations are equal before the law.
5. The creation and activity of public associations whose goals or actions are aimed at changing the foundations of the constitutional system and violating the integrity of the Russian Federation, undermining the security of the state, creating armed groups, inciting social, racial, national and religious hatred are prohibited.
A lot of words. If you now make a squeeze, then we come to the following. Constitution of the USSR 1936 right aimed at building and maintaining the stability of intra-social relations, eliminating the exploitation of man by man, that is, the parasitism of singles and those or other social minorities in the work and life of the majority. According to the current Constitution, the statement of such a policy goal is a statement of state ideology, which is prohibited, the moment of incitement of social and other discord. Those who are parasitic will not be satisfied when they are aware of this, and even more so if they are aware of the mechanism for the implementation of parasitism in their work and life. According to the current Constitution, the crime is to be dissatisfied that you are sheared, sheared without anesthesia and rummaged in your pockets. But the current Constitution does not describe how they rummage through their pockets. And in order to understand how they rummage through their pockets, we turn to what is called the economic basis of society.
Constitution 1936 g:
Article 4. The economic basis of the USSR is the socialist economic system and socialist ownership of the tools and means of production, established as a result of the elimination of the capitalist economic system, the abolition of private ownership of the tools and means of production, and the abolition of human exploitation..
(Note: this is socialist property. on tools and means of production)
Constitution 1993, Art. 8:
1. In the Russian Federation, the unity of the economic space, the free movement of goods, services and financial resources, support for competition, freedom of economic activity are guaranteed.
2. In the Russian Federation, private, state, municipal and other forms of property are also recognized and protected.
Economic activity also includes organization of the exploitation of people by others. In other words, Constitution of the Russian Federation 1993 it guarantees.
Constitution 1936 g:
Article 5. Socialist property in the USSR has either a form of state ownership (national property) or a form of cooperative collective-farm property (property of individual collective farms, property of cooperative associations).
We are again talking about the means of production and labor tools)
Article 6. Land, its subsoil, water, forests, factories, factories, mines, mines, railway, water and air transport, banks, communications, state-owned large agricultural enterprises (state farms, machine and tractor stations, etc.), as well as utilities and the main housing stock in cities and industrial centers are state property, that is, the national property.
Article 7. Public enterprises on collective farms and cooperative organizations with their live and dead implements, products produced by collective farms and cooperative organizations, as well as their public buildings constitute the public, socialist property of collective farms and cooperative organizations.
Each collective farm yard, in addition to the basic income from the public collective farm, has in its personal use a small personal plot of land and personal property subsidiary farming on the personal plot, a dwelling house, productive livestock, poultry and small agricultural equipment - according to the charter of the agricultural artel.
Article 8. The land occupied by collective farms is assigned to them for free and indefinite use, that is, forever.
The current Constitution provides for the right of private property and the corresponding right of sale. The right to private property is maintained by law. Note: the distinction between ownership of the means of production and property in general is not made, but as you know, ownership of the means of production is one factor that creates the preconditions for the exploitation of man by man.
How did the 1936 Constitution treat property rights? Besides the fact that there was socialist property, it was still
Article 9. Along with the socialist economic system, which is the dominant form of economy in the USSR, the law allows a small private economy of individual peasants and handicraftsmen, based on personal labor and precluding the exploitation of other people's labor..
That is, if you cannot cope alone, then you can organize an artel with your colleagues and work on the basis of this artel. If you look at the history of the cooperative and artel movement, then in 30-ies the first Soviet radio line, mass-produced, was produced by the artel. The first Soviet television, mass-produced, was also produced by the artel. During the war years, the production artels supplied the front, including artillery ammunition. That is, it was a fairly advanced production, which existed on the basis of advanced technology and organization for its time. All this was buried Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev.
In the USSR, the right of personal property was protected by law:
Article 10. The right of personal property of citizens to their labor income and savings, to a dwelling house and ancillary household, to household items and household goods, to personal consumption and convenience items, as well as the right to inherit citizens ’personal property is protected by law.
The division of ownership of the means of production and the fact that within the family’s property it is necessary for it to conduct life, was clearly and unequivocally stated. Do not think that the creators of the current Constitution did not understand the differences in the terms of that Constitution and this one. But Article 37 of the Constitution of 1993 states:
1. Labor is free. Everyone has the right to freely dispose of his abilities to work, to choose the kind of activity and profession.
2. Forced labor is prohibited.
3. Everyone has the right to work in conditions meeting the requirements of safety and hygiene, to remuneration for work without any discrimination and not below the minimum wage established by federal law, and the right to protection against unemployment.
4. The right to individual and collective labor disputes is recognized with the use of the methods established by federal law for their resolution, including the right to strike.
5. Everyone has the right to rest. Workers under the employment contract are guaranteed the length of working hours, days off and holidays, paid annual leave established by the federal law.
FINDINGS. The USSR Constitution 1936 allowed state administration to be implemented in accordance with an objectively necessary cyclical formulation and solution of social development tasks in harmony with nature and to ensure the military-economic security of the state, that is, the government control algorithm necessary for the development of society. The 1936 constitution expressly proclaimed the planned management and competence of the Supreme Council and the Government in the organization of this planned economy. And there is no direct ban on the market. JV Stalin writes that the goods and monetary relations are preserved. Moreover, they are useful because the law of value is an incentive to improve the organization of production and technology.
Constitution 1993 and legislation developed on its basis in the 90s cannot be correlated with this cycle. The reason is that the Constitution and all legislation on financial and economic activity is written under the liberal market modelwhich ideally implies the complete absence of the public sector of the economy and minimizing the regulatory role of the state in economic matters. But liberal market model where it is actually realized, where it has existed for sometimes many centuries, Provides only one thing - reproduction of mass poverty and lack of culture in the continuity of generationsagainst which the ruling "elite" is frantic with fat and complains about the bitterness and wildness of the people and not wanting to work. The reasons are in the algorithms of market pricing. Firstly, the activities of many market subjects are subordinated to maximizing their incomes and reducing the costs of them by any means, including at the expense of the rest of society and nature. If a private entrepreneur is allowed to spend money the way he wants, then there will be no labor protection, no protection of the natural environment, nothing. There will be only the pursuit of profit. But besides this, the multitude of private interests regulated by the market is not equivalent to the interests of the public at large in general, and is largely antagonistic. The question of how these interests are regulated, and the Constitution of 1993, and the legislation on financial and economic activities are not clearly explained. In addition, the market is a certain system of self-regulation of production and distribution, which lives by its own laws. She does not have the ability to goal setting. It is to the goal setting of social development. Besides, the market as such does not contain mechanisms of self-adjustment for any goals that politicians proclaimputs the state. The market is not regulated is not able to. But besides this, it is no secret to anyone that there are activities in society that, under the current law of value, the current price list, are not capable of self-sufficiency either or not themselves, if the production volumes of these activities are such that they cover segments of the population. And when prices fall, the profitability of the respective activities falls. In addition, there are areas of activity that, in principle, will never be capable of self-sufficiency, for example, basic science. This is one of the costs. Projects are sometimes designed for decades, and payback is carried out only indirectly, when the achievements of basic science are included in the education system and in the mentality of those people who are engaged in real activity in the real sector of the economy. Then, through some kind of production, what is called self-sufficiency arises.
The statement that the state leaders of scientific and technological progress live according to the laws of market liberalism is also not true. Since all developed countries: USA, Canada, Western Europe - have a system of state planning and regulation of markets. But we must understand that all these systems are built on the principles of what is called creeping empiricism. In other words, when faced with a problem outside of any theories based on common sense, as they understood it, they took some legislative and enforcement measures. If measures proved effective, they were left in the system. If it turned out to be ineffective, then the system rejected them. But all this is not described in the theory of state and law, or in economic theories.
If we talk about economic theories, then Roosevelt adviser, and then Kennedy on economic issues, John Kenneth Galbraith (John Kenneth Galbraith) wrote two interesting books. In the book "Economic Theories and Goals of Society", published by 1973, he shows that the real economy of the United States does not correspond to the nonsense that is being taught in US universities under the guise of economic theories, that there are serious systemic problems in the United States caused by the lack of government planning and regulation the economy as a whole. These problems include ecology, the quality of education available to the masses of the population, medical care. It is interesting that Galbraith attributed to the real sector of the art sector, painting, sculpture - all that creates aesthetics of the environment in which we live. From the point of view of Galbraith, this is part of the real economy. He noted that the longer the society refuses to introduce this new ineptual socialism (because it is caused not by ideological predilections, but by the problems that society faces and by objective ways that solve these problems), the greater the cost to society will have to pay for their unwillingness to think and act.
In the last book, The Economics of an Innocent Deception, Galbraith once again returns to the idea that economic theories that are taught in universities have nothing in common with the real economy, they themselves are the product of the errors of those who wrote texts and mislead those who studies these theories in universities, and then, on the basis of these theories, tries to conduct practical activities in the financial or real sector of the economy.
This is the ratio of the Constitution of 1936 and the Constitution of 1993 in the aspect of the economic provision of society. Moreover, the Constitution of the USSR determined the planned nature of housekeeping for the following reasons:
1. Elimination of economic crises in case of market failures;
2. The need to meet the cultural and material needs of the entire population, and not just some of its social groups at the expense of the rest of society;
3. Ensuring the defense capability and scientific and economic independence of the country from the outside world.
In recent years, the myth has been cultivated that there is no fundamental difference between Stalinism and Hitlerism and that the USSR, especially in the Stalin era, was a totalitarian state in which human rights were suppressed. The difference between Hitlerism and socialism back in those years was rather briefly explained by Lion Feuchtwanger (German Lion Feuchtwanger, July 7, 1884, Munich - December 21, 1958, Los Angeles - a German writer of Jewish origin. One of the most widely read German-speaking authors in the world. He worked in the genre of historical novel). From his point of view, fascism prohibits proving and convincing people that 2x2 = 4, and socialism in the USSR prohibits proving and convincing people that twice two is five. This is a really fundamental difference. Nevertheless, this myth exists, and if the USSR, as it is believed, was a totalitarian state, then the question arises, are these problems reflected in the constitution of the era of developed totalitarianism or not?
In the Constitution of 1936, Chapter 10 Basic rights and obligations of citizens. Pay attention to the difference in formulations - RIGHTS and OBLIGATIONS. In the Constitution of 1993, in Chapter 2 "Rights and Freedoms of Man and Citizen" not a word about duties. Moreover, freedom in this case is understood in the sense of liberalism, although in Russian the grammar and morphology of the word "freedom" is such that FREEDOM is an abbreviation: Conscience Guidance by God This. That is, it is a dictatorship of conscience, which in most cases, if we begin to follow it, is a dictatorship more abruptly and worse than any dictatorship in any totalitarian state. Because if there is a conscience, you will not be fooled by it, and if someone has achieved that she has put her to sleep, then anything can happen.
Art. 118 Constitution 1936 G.:
Article 118. Citizens of the USSR have the right to work, that is, the right to receive a guaranteed job with payment for their labor in accordance with its quantity and quality.
The right to work is ensured by the socialist organization of the national economy, the steady growth of the productive forces of Soviet society, the elimination of the possibility of economic crises and the elimination of unemployment.
Article 119. Citizens of the USSR have the right to rest.
The right to rest is ensured by setting a seven-hour working day for workers and employees and reducing the working day to six hours for a number of professions with difficult working conditions and up to four hours in workshops with especially difficult working conditions; the establishment of annual vacations for workers and employees with the preservation of wages; the provision of a wide network of sanatoriums, rest homes, clubs to serve the workers.
Article 120. Citizens of the USSR have the right to material security in old age, as well as in the case of illness and disability.
This right is ensured by the extensive development of social insurance for workers and employees at state expense, free medical care for workers, and the provision of a wide network of resorts for the use of workers.
Article 121. Citizens of the USSR have the right to education.
This right is ensured by eight-year general compulsory education, the broad development of secondary general polytechnic education, vocational education, specialized secondary and higher education on the basis of the link between education and life, production, full development of evening and distance education, free education of all types, and public education. scholarships, training in schools in their native language, organization at factories, state farms and collective farms of free industrial, technical and agricultural onomical training of workers.
Article 122. Women in the USSR are granted equal rights with men in all areas of economic, state, cultural, and social and political life.
The possibility of exercising these rights of women is ensured by providing women with equal rights to work, pay, rest, social insurance and education, state protection of the interests of the mother and child, state assistance to mothers of many children and single mothers, providing women with pregnancy during holidays with maintenance, a wide network maternity homes, nurseries and gardens.
Article 123. Equality of rights of citizens of the USSR, regardless of their nationality and race, in all areas of economic, state, cultural and social and political life is an immutable law.
Any direct or indirect restriction of rights or, conversely, the establishment of direct or indirect benefits of citizens depending on their race and nationality, as well as any preaching of racial or national exclusiveness, or hatred and neglect, are punishable by law.
Article 124. In order to provide citizens with freedom of conscience, the church in the USSR is separated from the state and the school from the church. Freedom of worship and freedom of anti-religious propaganda is recognized for all citizens.
Article 125. In accordance with the interests of the working people and in order to strengthen the socialist system, citizens of the USSR are guaranteed by law:
a) freedom of speech;
b) freedom of the press;
c) freedom of assembly and rallies;
d) freedom of street processions and demonstrations.
These rights of citizens are ensured by providing workers and their organizations printing houses, stocks of paper, public buildings, streets, communications and other material conditions necessary for their implementation.
If we turn to the text of the Constitution of 1936, then all the freedoms that the current Constitution of 1993 proclaims, as the Constitution proclaims, perhaps in a slightly different wording. The difference is that liberal market economic model respecting all these rights does not guarantee, and planned management based on a scientifically sound planning methodology, consistent with the laws of the biosphere, social, sociocultural patterns, and economic patterns, can guarantee the realization of all these rights and freedoms.
It is no secret that when the text of the Constitution of 1936 was submitted for national discussion and published, many cultural figures, political figures abroad described it as the most democratic Constitution. If we refer to its text, the abuse of power of 1937 and all subsequent abuses of power do not find the basis in the text of this Constitution. I.e law enforcement practice really is not from the text of the Constitution, but from mentality, morality and ethics people. And if in our country for several centuries the psychology of the overwhelming majority of the population was shaped by serfdom, then for several decades the existence of Soviet power couldn’t change. In addition, the Constitution does not reflect many of the conspiracy aspects of history and politics and, accordingly, real political practice. The reality is that I.V. Stalin was forced to defend himself against the internationalism of Marxism-Leninism and its bearers, relying on bureaucracy. He could not rely on broad popular support, because the psychology of most people at that time was either sharply negative towards both Stalin and socialist construction, or emotionally enthusiastic: Stalin is a Great Leader and Teacher, and he thinks for us. Where is your initiative? There was no initiative, either, or, when it manifested itself, its bureaucracy quite often suppressed it. Again, if you refer to the documents of that era, it turns out that the draft bulletin for electing deputies of all levels initially contained several columns. That is, the elections were supposed to be on an alternative basis. But the bureaucracy was not profitable because its power was undermined. And in general, before the elections, it produced terrorist companies, as a result of which many were killed, or turned out to be a Gulag contingent for more or less long periods. Moreover, if we analyze the source of repression, the source of repression was the Trotsky-Leninist guard in the special services of the USSR, and the victims were the most qualified professionals from the level: the best beekeeper of the area, the best mechanic of the plant, ending with really outstanding scientists and technicians. What was it for? This was necessary for the implementation of the Trotskyist project of defeating the USSR in the upcoming war and in order to bleed the Stalinist regime in personnel terms.
Now there is another topic: Citizen and state power.
Constitution 1993 not determines the right to nominate candidates for deputies, not obliges them to accountability to voters, not provides for the right to recall the deputy. All this remains in silence, and it is these particular features of the Constitution that provide legal opportunities for the government in the Russian Federation, contrary to the Constitution’s declaration that the people are sovereign, to be truly clan-mafia and autocratic, not dependent on society and suppressing it.
What is the difference between the 1936 Constitution? The fundamental difference is that the right to nominate candidates for deputies of all levels is held by labor collectives, public organizations: the ruling All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks was also among the public organizations.
The second peculiarity was that the elected deputies continued to work for the most part in the teams that nominated them or from whom they were elected. They received a normal salary, like everyone else in accordance with their professions and lived the life that their voters lived. Sessions of the Supreme Soviet of the Union and the Supreme Soviet of the Union Republics were convened twice a year. What privileges did the deputies have? The privileges were mainly related to the performance of their parliamentary duties: an extraordinary receipt of tickets, the preemptive right to use hotels and rest rooms at railway stations and airports, if a deputy went on vacation or was driving for business reasons. Everything was subordinated to the expediency of public administration. In addition, the Constitution directly provided for the regular reporting of deputies to voters and provided for the right to recall deputies of all levels at any time. In between sessions, the Soviet government was represented locally by the executive committees, the city executive committee, the regional executive committee, and at the republican level by the presidiums and councils of the respective levels and the government, which was accountable to the councils. Moreover, the supreme bodies of state power were represented by two councils, the Council of Nationalities and the Council of the Republic or the Council of the Union, respectively. Any law was adopted on the principles of equality of the Soviets. If one of the chambers did not adopt the law, the organization of the conciliation commission was assumed. If the law was not adopted in the second vote at the next session, then the dissolution of the Supreme Council of the Union or the Republic and extraordinary elections followed. If we analyze the rights of deputies, the competence of councils of different levels, the rights of citizens on the election and nomination of deputies, it turns out that the Constitution of 1936 was aimed at ensuring real democracy. This was guaranteed by the direct nomination of the candidate by labor collectives, the work of deputies in the period between sessions. In addition, there were mandates of deputies. That is, if there is a problem, citizens can issue it as a mandate to the deputy. It should have been registered with the relevant board. This should have been an item on the agenda of the regular session of the council, and the decision had to be somehow communicated to the citizens.
If these principles were not implemented in life, and the reality was that the nomenclature of the party and the Soviet government led and manipulated the whole process of nominating and electing candidates, then it is not the Constitution that is to blame, but the mentality of the society it was in that era.
The current Constitution does not guarantee or guarantee anything that guaranteed what the Constitution of 1936 required. The political practice based on it is such that the election of deputies is now carried out on the basis of party lists, which form the parties themselves. That is, if in the USSR the party was one and its party nomenclature manipulated the entire process of reproduction of the cadre corps of the state, now many parties and the media are manipulating this, which are supported by one or another group of the big bourgeoisie, like the parties themselves.
Next, another interesting thing. The current Constitution provides for the following procedure for its amendment, Art. 134:
Proposals for amendments and revision of the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation may be made by the President of the Russian Federation, the Council of the Federation, the State Duma, the Government of the Russian Federation, legislative (representative) bodies of the subjects of the Russian Federation, and a group of at least one-fifth of the members of the Council of the Federation or deputies of the State Duma.
That is, public organizations do not have the right to initiate legislation in the aspect of discussing the Constitution. And all the legislation created on its basis supports the independence of the bureaucratic-deputies from society and, thus, the current Constitution and the legal system built on its basis do not provide the schemes and procedures provided by the legislation for changing the current legislation on the initiative of any public organizations or other legally unformed community initiatives. Thereby, the current Constitution provokes a revolutionary situation if the gap between the interests of the authorities and the interests of the people will continue to grow.
In addition, if the 1936 Constitution explicitly proclaimed that the activities of the Ministry of Finance, the government are subordinated to the country's socio-economic development plan, the current Constitution and the Legislation on the activities of the Central Bank are structured so that the list of foreign agents should be headed by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. The fact that his leadership is not appointed by Wall Street, but that the candidate is submitted by the President, and the Duma argues that it does not play a fundamental role, because the Central Bank is guided by commercial interests in accordance with the Law on its operation, and commercial interests are formed by transnational global usurers corporations, who have usurped banking for several hundred years.
Banking is economically necessary. Still, macro level accounting and macro level accounting should be carried out in the economy. But usury is one thing, and accounting, transfer payments - is another.
The USSR Constitution says nothing about usury, but, nevertheless, lending rates were mainly at the level that ensured the self-sustainability of the banking system and, in part, interested citizens in keeping their savings not in a mattress, but in savings banks. But the economy was under the dictates of the plan, and if the plans and methodologies of planning were at the proper level, then the pace of economic development and the level of well-being and development of the culture of the USSR would have been much higher than it really was. It was necessary to change the system of planned indicators, and the principles of macroeconomic management by the middle of the 50-s, based on the fact that I.V. Stalin wrote in the paper “The Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR”, which in principle focused on building a more effective system of macroeconomic management than the one that was in the Soviet Union in Stalin times and even more so in the Khrushchev-Brezhnevskys.
In general, the Constitution 1936 g. Can be characterized by the words: that we do not store, losing crying. Objective regularities of the biosphere as a whole, objective regularities of life of a biological species, Man Reasonable, sociocultural regularities, economic regularities are such that if we want to solve the problem of society and social development, the 1936 Constitution will have to be returned under pressure of circumstances, and the ideas that are in it concluded to develop, but already taking into account the fact that there is a sufficiently general theory of control, there are ideas about the full function of control and how it is implemented in the economy on macro and micro in the ears. And if, again, to give a general description of the Constitution of 1936, correlating with the level of culture that was, then it was not logically contradictory and it did not contain hidden reservations that would deny what it proclaims.
The 1993 constitution is logically contradictory and, moreover, contains implicit omissions that inherently accompany the principles proclaimed in it, such as the fact that everyone is guaranteed freedom of economic activity without any reservations about the organization of exploitation. In general, it does not allow society to develop culturally and economically. This is the totalitarian Constitution of financial slavery.
This raises another question. Here was the Constitution of 1977 g, the so-called Constitution of developed socialism. If you do not go into the analysis of its texts, and pay attention only to key episodes, then, in fact, it was a test of society for intellectual and moral readiness to abandon the achievements of the period of building socialism and communism in the USSR. This found its expression in two points:
1. the term "workers' deputies" was replaced by the term "councils of people's deputies". What is the difference? Yes, the fact that among the people there are not only working people, there are those who simulate labor activity, there is an outright criminality that does not consider itself obliged to work for the good of society and considers it possible to join the system of exploitation of man by man and carry it out on unlawful grounds, which is what distinguishes the criminals from the legal bourgeoisie and other exploiting classes. Society recognized the replacement of the expression "working people's deputies" by the expression "people's deputies" without any objection. But this replacement legally allowed the parasites to nominate their own deputies, and some of the deputies did indeed become parasite's deputies, not workers' deputies.
2. The second point. Article 6 of the 1977 Constitution (This is the notorious article around which various social forces fought during the perestroika period.): The CPSU is the leading 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. (What would seem to be objections?) Armed with the Marxist and Leninist teachings, the Communist Party determines the general perspective of the development of society. What is the Marxist-Leninist teaching? Realistically, this is an expression of the same biblical concept, only in secular forms. The philosophy of diamat is actually a substitute for dialectic logic. Even before the appearance of diamat in Russia, Khomyakov Alexey Stepanovich first pointed to this, analyzing Hegel's philosophy. By default, this article of the 1977 Constitution removed society from state power and transferred the full state power to the nomenklatura of the CPSU and the state and economic bureaucracy that had merged with it, which by that time had become the exploiting classes, but they did not need the ideals of socialism. Therefore, they have become the driving force of adjustment.
This analysis of the Constitution can be completed. If we go to the substance of the question, then the current Constitution represents a real danger to the future of the people and the country. In addition, due to the service orientation of the liberal-market economic model, it carries in a hidden threat of economic genocide (remember Thatcher's statement: the existence of 15-20 million people is economically justified on the territory of the USSR), and besides, again, due to the service orientation of the liberal-economic model, it carries hidden threat of dismemberment of the country on industrial holdings, territorial boundaries, whose activities will become state borders of post-Soviet states. One of the presidential candidates who did not pass at the elections, after the elections, announced the theses that the administrative boundaries within the Russian Federation should be changed so that they correspond to the territorial distinction between the production of various large companies. In fact, Prokhorov announced the first stage of the project for the further dismemberment of the country on the basis of the current Constitution.
History has shown that the texts are in themselves, and the life of society and law enforcement practice is in itself. If you look at it from the standpoint of Enough General Management Theory, the system of legislation and its core, the Constitution, is a system of unstructured management of the life of society. Who manages? Interested sectors of society. The attitude to the power of all interested layers is always autocratic, that is: "I want to rule." Another thing is how this ability of ruling in this society is realized, who opens the way and how. How does the rest of society relate to this? If in the rest of society there is what is called legal consciousness, awareness of their rights and awareness of their obligations towards society and the state, then interests of legal consciousness bearers in the state express legislationif there is no legal conscience, then the Constitution and the legal system as a whole are not needed for banderlog, whatever that system may be, whether it is the Constitution of the Kingdom of God on Earth, or the Constitution of ideal slavery, which implements the principle of "a fool loves work, and a fool is happy about work." The threat to the rule of law on the basis of the current current Constitution is denial of banderlozhestva the bulk of the population because there is an objective law of control - the conformity of the control system to the control object. What is it expressed in? For example, there are two similar aircraft, the Boeing 747 and IL96-300. If we load the Boeing control algorithms into the IL96 autopilot, the ILXXUMX will be broken, and vice versa. This is a universal law, and not some voluntarism of those who wrote a sufficiently general management theory. This is a real practice of life in all areas of activity.