Russia today

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Tue Jun 16, 2020 5:01 pm

The State Duma proposed to cancel the state environmental review
06/15/2020
Green light pollution

Deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation have prepared a bill proposing to abolish the mandatory state environmental review during the construction of the most dangerous facilities, such as, for example, incinerators, waste and waste processing plants. In addition, expertise will not be needed for construction projects in specially protected natural areas.

Image

The motives of those who developed such a bill are quite understandable. Now in many cases, conducting a state environmental review not only slows down the construction of enterprises, but in some cases makes them impossible. Many objects have to be moved to places where they will not endanger the nature, life and health of people, or modify the project taking into account the comments of the examination. As a result, the cost of projects increases significantly, which brings additional costs to the owners of companies, investors.

The abolition of the state environmental review will reduce the cost of building these enterprises, reduce production costs, and reduce the cost of the production cycle itself. However, this raises the question of the safety of structures for people and the environment. Even now, there are many cases where cost savings and the pursuit of profit led to major environmental disasters that caused serious damage to the environment. The latest example is a major accident at a thermal power plant in Norilsk, as a result of which tens of thousands of tons of oil products fell into the ground and nearby water bodies. With the adoption of the new law, such accidents will become everyday. Business will get even more opportunities for the construction of factories that poison the environment with their emissions, near housing.

This situation is natural for capitalism, in which profit is the main measure of efficiency. Often, additional cleanup and safety requirements result in lower capital gains. Naturally, the capitalists are trying to eliminate all kinds of obstacles that limit earnings. However, the workers, above all, suffer from this. It is near their homes that dangerous enterprises will be built, it will be they who will work for these enterprises and suffer from emissions. That is why the struggle of the working people against capitalism is a struggle to preserve the environment, a struggle for the future of all mankind. The replacement of capitalism with a more progressive system will lead to an improvement in the ecological situation and a decrease in the environmental load.

https://www.rotfront.su/v-gosdume-predl ... it-gosuda/

Google Translator

This is much like Trump's take on the environment. In the face of climate change and the responsibilities the capitalism-caused Anthropocene the capitalists shake their fists at humanity, doubling down on their command of our lives and the future of humanity. No mercy for them.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Thu Jun 18, 2020 1:19 pm

The actions of Norilsk Nickel caused damage to nature by 154 million rubles
06/18/2020
Capital is the same everywhere

The Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation opened a criminal case due to the discharge of untreated sewage, which caused environmental damage by 154 million rubles.

Image

“According to the preliminary version of the investigation, from June 2017 to July 2019, unidentified persons from among the employees of the PF PJSC MMC Norilsk Nickel and JSC Mechanobringering responsible for observing environmental protection rules when designing and constructing an accommodation facility Wastes produced by the Talnakhsky enrichment plant made a number of violations, as a result of which untreated sewage was discharged into the water intake areas of the Tomulakh River, as well as into the soil in the vicinity of the Oktyabrsky mine. According to the conclusion of Rosprirodnadzor, the environment has been harmed, requiring more than 154 million rubles to recover costs, ”the press service of the UK said.

This case clearly demonstrates that in order to reduce costs and increase profits, the capitalists are ready to do anything. They will cut down forests , poison the soil and pollute the atmosphere , living on the principle of “after us at least a flood”. And it doesn’t matter if it is foreign businessmen or ours - they act in exactly the same way

https://www.rotfront.su/dejstviya-norni ... prirode-u/

Google Translator

******************************************

At the Kirov CHP-5 began to burn gas in coal furnaces
09/18/2019
High Tech Fraud

According to the Federal Press Agency, dated September 17, 2019, Rosprirodnadzor convicted T Plus PJSC of unreasonably reducing the hazard class of TPP-5 in the Kirov region.

Initially, CHPP-5 belonged to category I of the danger of negative At the Kirov CHPP-5 unreasonably underestimated the hazard class of productionimpact on the environment. This obliged the company to install automatic emission meters and gradually reduce pollution. Such measures entail additional - and sometimes quite large - costs.

Recall that according to paragraph 1 of Article 4.2 of Federal Law No. 7-FZ, all facilities that have a negative impact on the environment, depending on the level of such impact, are divided into 4 categories. The first of them includes enterprises that pollute nature as much as possible. For example, coal boiler rooms.

The violation was revealed during the verification of decisions of regional departments in the federal apparatus of Rosprirodnadzor. It was found there that the Kirov CHPP-5 was transferred to the II hazard category, which includes objects with moderate negative impact. Such facilities require significantly less environmental investment.

The motivation was the transfer of an extract from the fuel balance, according to which the station, which had not undergone any modernization, was able to use natural gas as fuel instead of ordinary coal. And the head of the local branch of Rosprirodnadzor Ildus Gizatullin , who approved the application, did not find anything suspicious about this. As well as in regular stories of company representatives on press tours about a million tons of Kemerovo coal burned annually at TPPs.

An important touch here, in our opinion, will be the fact that PJSC T Plus, and with it Kemerovskaya CHPP-5, belongs to the Renova group of Victor Vekselberg , which constantly appears in Bloomberg or Forbes ratings .

Unfortunately, this situation is not unique: we can constantly observe similar examples . And they also have one reason - the desire of the capitalists to enrich themselves in any way accessible to them. The position characterized by the proverb “After us at least the flood” is very characteristic of modern representatives of the ruling class. Such an approach to organizing life activities does not contribute to the prosperity of society as a whole.

https://www.rotfront.su/na-kirovskoj-te ... zhigat-ga/

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sat Jun 20, 2020 1:37 pm

Constitutional reform: goals and main provisions
06/18/2020

Analysis of some provisions of the Law of the Russian Federation on the amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of March 14, 2020, No. 1-FKZ
The annual message of the President of the Russian Federation to the Federal Assembly on January 15 of the new 2020 year was different from many on-duty speeches of past years. This time, Vladimir Putin came up with a number of initiatives that took the form of a bill by the President of the Russian Federation on amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation. After the message, just a couple of hours later, the Government of the Russian Federation resigned. The working group that should develop these amendments was formed promptly, and the amendments themselves were adopted no less quickly in the first and second reading by the State Duma of the Russian Federation.
On March 14, 2020, V.V. Putin signed the law on amendments to the constitution (the full name is the Law of the Russian Federation on amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of March 14, 2020 No. 1-FKZ “On improving the regulation of certain issues of the organization and functioning of public authorities”). All this speaks of the desire of the Russian authorities to carry out these changes as soon as possible, and even gain legitimacy in the form of popular support.

In the article, we will consider the legal and political aspects of constitutional reform, focusing on the content of the amendments themselves.

Constitutional reform: goals and main provisions. (Analysis of some provisions of the Law of the Russian Federation on the amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of March 14, 2020, No. 1-FKZ)

Image

About voting
A few words about voting. The question here, of course, is not just about legality (the Russian authorities did not give a damn about it for a long time), but about legitimacy. The concept of "legitimacy" is not equal to "legality." If legality is related to the field of jurisprudence and means compliance with the letter of the law, then legitimacy is more likely a political-psychological category, and it means recognition by the people of the right to govern themselves. In this case, with the vote, the authorities are preoccupied with the legitimacy of the amendments, that is, with the adoption of the amendments by a popularly approved character. After all, there are no legal grounds for holding a referendum.

According to Art. 136 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, amendments to chapters 3 to 8 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation (namely, these chapters are amended) are adopted in the manner prescribed for the adoption of the federal constitutional law, and come into force after approval by the legislative authorities of at least two-thirds of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation Federation.

We look at Art. 108 p. 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which specifies the procedure for adopting a federal constitutional law and reads: “... a federal constitutional law is considered adopted if it is approved by a majority of at least three-fourths of the total number of members of the Federation Council and at least two-thirds of the total deputies of the State Duma. "

That is, for amendments to those chapters of the Constitution in question, approval of at least three quarters of the number of deputies of the Council of the Federation of the Russian Federation and at least two-thirds of deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, as well as approval of at least two-thirds of the legislative bodies of the constituent entities of the federation, is sufficient . Why then do you need a vote?
The voting procedure from a legal point of view does not really matter (more on this on our website already has an article ). This procedure will be used, from a political point of view, to strengthen the legitimacy of the existing regime, whose popularity has been declining in recent years. Even the rating of the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin, which has traditionally been high and largely “pulled” the general loyalty of the population to power, according to a recent Levada Center survey conducted on January 23-29, 2020, dropped to 35%. According to a very recent April poll by VTsIOM, the rating of confidence in the President was only 27%.
It is worth noting that, understanding the voting situation, which is not amenable to any legal framework, the authorities introduced the RF Law on Amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of March 14, 2020 No. 1-FKZ “On improving the regulation of certain issues of the organization and functioning of public authority”. This issue is regulated by Art. 2 of the specified law. In h. 1. Article. 3 it is said that the all-Russian vote on the approval of amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation on amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation is held after the entry into force of this Law and if the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation gives an opinion on compliance with the provisions of chapters 1, 2 and 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation that have not entered by virtue of the provisions of this Law and on the conformity with the Constitution of the Russian Federation of the procedure for the entry into force of Article 1 of this Law (i.e. we are talking about the entry procedure). The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation has already given such a conclusion.

We draw attention to the fact that Art. 2 does not speak about agitation “for” and “against” the issues raised in the vote. In h. 20 Article. Section 2 of the amendment law refers to the provision of airtime to non-political parties for the purpose of campaigning for or against an amendment, which would have to be done in the event of a referendum, but about the purpose of informing the Central Election Commission and election commissions of subjects of the Russian Federation about preparation and conduct of all-Russian voting. There is also no distinction between different amendments. This is not surprising, because in the event of a separate vote, most Russian citizens would support the norms related to the indexation of pensions, but it’s far from the fact that they would support the norms related to “zeroing out” the presidential terms, increasing the powers of the President of the Russian Federation, for which, in fact,

The observers for voting in accordance with paragraph 16. of Art. 2 of the Law on Amendments are appointed by the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation and the public chambers of the constituent entities. As you know, the Public Chamber is actually a structure controlled by the authorities and it is easy to understand which observers this chamber will appoint.

According to Part 5. Article. 3 of the law on amendments, amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation are considered approved if more than half of the citizens of the Russian Federation who took part in the all-Russian vote voted for them. As you can see, there is no turnout threshold either (of course, in fact, the authorities are interested in a higher turnout, and will strongly call for a vote). According to the same clause 3 of the article, if less than half of the citizens of the Russian Federation who participated in the all-Russian vote voted for amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, such changes are not considered approved and the amendments do not enter into force.

Obviously, this norm is designed to somehow "strengthen" the "authority" and legitimacy of the vote itself. But even formal formalization in the law on amendments does not give it legitimacy, because the Constitution of the Russian Federation says in black and white that the procedure for adopting amendments to chapters 3–8 of the Constitution is the same as the procedure for adopting the Federal Law. Here, the order is clearly changed. But we are well aware that whatever the letter corresponds to the letter of the law, the bourgeoisie will do in its own way. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation has already clarified that everything is legal.

Moreover, as explained by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, “the constitutional legislator, guided by the principle of democracy, in order to constitutionally legitimize his decision, was entitled to appeal to the all-Russian vote, not directly provided for by the current legal regulation for adoption of the constitutional amendment.”

That is, as you can see, we should consider this an act of concern for the principle of democracy. Seriously speaking, it is obvious that this vote will not reflect the will of the working people.
Let's just imagine what mass fraud will be at this vote. If serious fraud regularly takes place in the elections to representative bodies and the election of the President of the Russian Federation, then it is not difficult to understand what will happen in the so-called vote. Recall that opposition observers are forced to admit to the elections, while preparing for the elections they are forced to imitate at least some kind of election campaign with debates, etc. In the case of voting, all this is completely absent. There are no independent observers (the Public Chamber will appoint the “right” people), there is no wide discussion of the pros and cons either. The result of such a circus is easily predictable.
Even if the citizens of the Russian Federation vote “against” the amendments, the result will be as it is needed by those who organize the elections.

It is useful to remember the words of Comrade Stalin: “It is not those who choose and vote who rule, but those who rule” (Stalin I. V. Compositions. T. 4. - M .: OGIZ; State Publishing House of Political Literature, 1947. P. 37 )
And today the big bourgeoisie rules in Russia. And she organizes the vote not in order to realize the will of the working people, but in order to obtain the results necessary for herself, and then use them to express the will of the minority on behalf of the people. Therefore, there should be no illusions about the vote. The workers have no reason to go to him; the surest way out is to boycott the dubious procedure. A particularly vivid example of the fake character of the upcoming “vote” is the output of the Constitution of the Russian Federation as amended in some bookstores. As you can see, no one doubts the result.
Image

Voting
About the amendments
Talk about changing the Constitution has intensified in recent years. The initiators of a public debate on the amendment of the Constitution were a number of senior officials. In October 2018, the Chairman of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation V. D. Zorkin published an article “The Letter and the Spirit of the Constitution”, which expressed ideas for revising the constitution in the spirit of collectivism and solidarity (V. Zorkin, Letter and the Spirit of the Constitution // Russian Newspaper. October 10. 2018 No. 226 (7689)). At the same time, the article dealt with amendments to the constitution, but not about changing the foundations of the constitutional system. In July 2019, the Chairman of the State Duma of the Russian Federation and one of the leaders of “United Russia” V.V. Volodin also came up with ideas on the need for amendments to the Constitution. Like Zorkin, Volodin did not speak about changes in the foundations of the Constitutional system, but in his articlefound a place to expand the powers of parliament. In 2018, the Public Opinion Foundation conducted a survey , according to which 66% of respondents believe that the fundamental law needs to be amended (Sociologists saw a record Russian request for amendments to the Constitution). Such synchronism in raising the topic of the need for amendments to the Constitution gives reason to believe that the work on preparing public opinion for the current constitutional reform, like this reform itself, went ahead.

If we turn to the essence of the changes, then, as we will see, there is nothing fundamentally new, despite the information resonance, in them.

Actually, in his message to Vladimir Putin, he said that "the potential of the 1993 Constitution is far from exhausted, and I hope that for many more decades the fundamental principles of the constitutional system, human rights and freedoms will remain a solid value base for Russian society."

The main changes can be grouped into three blocks:

political;
socio-economic;
value-ideological.

Key policy amendments include:

a ban on the President and senior officials from having foreign citizenship and owning deposits in foreign banks;
The president must have lived in Russia for at least 25 years;
The President can hold office for no more than two terms without the word “in a row”, while the previous terms of the incumbent President are “nullified” and he can again be nominated for elections;
The President may apply to the Constitutional Court to review bills;
judges of the Constitutional Court are appointed by the Federation Council on the proposal of the President of the Russian Federation, while the number of judges is reduced from 19 to 11;
The State Duma may approve the chairman of the government; the appointment of security ministers by the President after consultation with the Federation Council;
the Council of State is constitutionally fixed;
the immunity of the President is introduced after the termination of the exercise of his powers;
proclaims the priority of the Constitution of the Russian Federation over international law and the ability not to comply with international law if they contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation;
local government becomes part of a single public authority in the Russian Federation, etc.
By socioeconomic amendments include:

consolidation in the Constitution of remuneration of not less than the subsistence level;
consolidation of indexations of pensions on the basis of the principle of universality;
consolidation of respect for work, etc.
The value and ideological amendments include:

mention of god in the Constitution,
consolidation of the succession of the USSR,
children as a Russian treasure,
state-forming status of the Russian people.
The new amendments indicate that the Russian Federation honors the memory of the defenders of the Fatherland, and protects the historical truth. Diminishing the significance of the feat of the people in the defense of the Fatherland is not allowed.

Let's figure out what the amendments essentially change?

Voting
Amendments and Foundations of the Constitutional System
Of course, digging into the legal intricacies of the old and new versions of the Constitution can be extremely entertaining, but, as Marxists, we must look at the root of the issue, and the root is who owns the property in the means of production. In this sense, from the point of view of ordinary workers, nothing fundamentally changes.
Those norms that are introduced do not affect the foundations of the constitutional system, and it is precisely these foundations that consolidate such norms as private property under the guise of a “variety of forms of ownership” (Article 8), including private ownership of land (Article 9). The very system of parliamentarism with the lack of the right to recall deputies also remains untouched. That is, even if we imagine a fantastic picture in which the state of the Russian Federation complies with the constitution, then even in this case nothing will change for ordinary workers. As the bourgeois robbed us, they will rob us. Therefore, do not overestimate this constitutional reform. It's just that this is the next stage in the attack on the rights of the working people, which has been going on for the past 30 years.
Even if we assume that the authorities listened to the most radical voices of Russian society and went to the revision of the foundations of the constitutional system, there will be no sense from changes in the Constitution alone without providing them with political will and a new economic basis. Here we must understand that any Constitution, like law in general, is, firstly, the will of the ruling class elevated to law and, secondly, a reflection of the correlation of class forces in society.

The ruling class writes laws not for themselves (rather “for themselves”), but for the working people. The ruling class itself, when it is profitable for him, skillfully circumvents the laws, and even directly violates it. One can recall at least the formation of the current political-legal and socio-economic system and the adoption of the current 1993 Constitution, which happened contrary to the laws in force at that time. It is a well-known fact that the then President Boris N. Yeltsin adopted the unconstitutional Decree 1400 “On phased constitutional reform in the Russian Federation” and the subsequent execution of the legally elected Supreme Council of the RSFSR in 1993. Ending with the referendum on the adoption of the new Constitution.

Recall that on October 15, 1993, Decree No. 1633 was issued regulating the holding of a referendum. There is every reason to believe that this decree had no legal force, because, firstly, it was signed after the unconstitutional coup on October 3-4, 1993 by Boris Yeltsin, and secondly, it contradicted the Law of the RSFSR of October 16, 1990 “On the referendum” RSFSR ".

According to Art. 35 of this law “when conducting a referendum on the adoption, amendment and amendment of the Constitution of the RSFSR, decisions shall be considered adopted if more than half of the citizens of the RSFSR voted on them for participation in the referendum” ( Law of the RSFSR of 16.10.1990 No. 241-1 “On referendum of the RSFSR " ).

In Art. 22. Decree B.N. Yeltsin said, “The Constitution of the Russian Federation is considered adopted if more than 50 percent of the voters who voted for it voted for its adoption” ( Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of October 15, 1993 No. 1633 “On Conducting a Popular Vote on the Draft Constitution of the Russian Federation” ).

As a result, according to official figures, 53% of voters participated in the referendum, of which 54% voted for the Yeltsin draft constitution. That is, less than 29% of voters voted for the adoption of the Yeltsin constitution , which is clearly contrary to the law “On the referendum”.

The events of 1993 eloquently show that for the ruling class, constitutional norms are not an insurmountable obstacle when it comes to the fundamental interests of maintaining its rule. Ultimately, the balance of class forces decides everything, not the letter of the Constitution. Any Constitution is a reflection of the correlation of class forces in society. While this ratio is in favor of big capital, there is no need to speak seriously about specific changes. Changes for the better themselves will be possible not as a result of the consolidation of the most beautiful and good intentions in the Constitution, but as a result of the class struggle for their rights of broad sections of the working people. If you do not fight for rights, they will remain only good wishes. Therefore, from the very fact of fixing this or that norm, real life will not change at all.

But bourgeois power in Russia over the past almost 30 years has significantly strengthened. If in the early 1990s it was largely a semi-banana “elite” politically and economically dependent on larger predators, today large Russian capital has strengthened its position within the country and is striving outwardly. The big bourgeoisie of the modern Russian Federation seeks not only to plunder the legacy of the Soviet era, but also to guard the loot from its own working people, as well as from "Western partners."

The evolution of Russian capitalism from pro-Western and peripheral to imperialist (periphery, of course, has been preserved, but has been diluted with certain, sometimes substantial, imperialistic ambitions of Russian capital) has led to the need for certain changes in the legal superstructure. Since we began to consider the amendments, we will go through the main ones.

Author: Igor Petrygin-Rodionov
About socio-economic amendments
A number of norms proposed for adoption of amendments are completely populist in nature. This applies primarily to the norms of the "socio-economic bloc." These standards are formulated, firstly, broadly and generally, and secondly, they leave “loopholes” for non-fulfillment.

For example, Art. 75 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation it is proposed to supplement paragraph 5, which states that “the Russian Federation respects the work of citizens and ensures the protection of their rights. The state guarantees a minimum wage of at least the size of the living wage of the able-bodied population in the whole of the Russian Federation. ”

It seems to be not bad: both the work of citizens is respected, and wages below the subsistence level cannot be paid. But there’s a loophole.

So, according to Art. 4. Clause 2 of the Federal Law "On the subsistence minimum in the Russian Federation", the subsistence minimum is established in the manner determined by the Government of the Russian Federation, in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation (except as provided for in paragraph 4 of this article) - in the manner established by the laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation Federation. According to Art. 1 Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 30, 2017 N 1702 “On the procedure for establishing the subsistence minimum per capita and for the main socio-demographic groups of the population as a whole in the Russian Federation”, the subsistence minimum is established by the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of the Russian Federation in agreement with the Ministry economic development of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation. ”

Thus, to put it more simply, then linking the minimum wage to the subsistence minimum and fixing it in the Constitution does not give anything, since the subsistence minimum itself is established by the Government of the Russian Federation and can change it, either upward or downward. . So much for “respect for work”.

There are amendments that openly proclaim the solidarity of different classes, which is already a sign of fascist ideology.

In particular, Art. 75.1 is formulated as follows: “in the Russian Federation, conditions are created for the country's sustainable economic growth and the well-being of citizens, for the mutual trust of the state and society, the protection of the dignity of citizens and respect for the person of work are guaranteed, the rights and obligations of the citizen are balanced, social partnership, economic, political and social solidarity. ”

As you can see, this rule does not oblige anyone to anything and is declarative in nature. Its meaning is to put out the contradiction between labor and capital, to proclaim social solidarity between workers and those who live at their expense.

In general, the social block of amendments, as well as a number of other promises of V.V. Putin in the last Address to the Federal Assembly, are called upon to fill in the failed "Strategy 2020" or, as the propagandists called it, "Putin's Plan 2020". Here are just a few figures: the promised steady GDP growth of 6.5%; real 0.5%. The concept declared the goal to increase the real disposable income of the population following the results of 2020 by 64–72% compared to 2012.

However, while in 2007–2013, household incomes grew (by 22% in total), then in 2014 they began to decline. As a result, from 2012 to the third quarter of 2019, the real disposable income of Russians decreased by about 5%. The same applies to poverty: they promised to reduce it to 6-7%, but in fact it fell only from 13 to 12%.

Many other figures can be given (For more details on this topic, see The concept of Russia's development until 2020 turned out to be impossible. Why did the trajectories of the national goals of 2008 and the actual development of the country), but the data provided leave no illusions that these new promises, clothed in the norms of the Constitution, will turn out to be just next promises and will repeat the fate of the once loudly advertised “Putin Plan 2020”, but this time the promises took the form of the norms of the Constitution, so many things were previously enshrined in the Constitution or other laws, for example, the indexation of wages is clearly spelled out in Art. 134 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, however, the authorities are not in a hurry to comply with this norm, and when, several years ago, on the initiative of ROT FRONT, through the approval of the Karelian Legislative Assembly , a bill was submitted to the State Duma of the Russian Federation , “United Russia” successfully failed.

End of part 1, continued following post
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sat Jun 20, 2020 1:51 pm

)Continued from previous post)

Image

On the ratio of international and domestic law
Regarding the correlation of the norms of the Constitution and international law, some citizens, like supporters of the notorious GCD, had the feeling that now Russia would not live under the dictation of international law, but could rely on the norms of national law. Finally, the occupation is dropped!

But such views are rooted in legal illiteracy and political inconsistency, which is used by politicians like Yevgeny Fedorov, who seek to dust the brains of workers with talk of "occupation", and in fact shift the responsibility for social injustice from the homegrown bourgeoisie to an external enemy. It’s much easier to scold America, living in Russia, than "your" "half-breed" bourgeoisie.
In fact, not all international norms take precedence over the Constitution, but only those that have been ratified by the Russian parliament. After ratification, international norms become part of the Russian legal system and take precedence over Russian law, but only after ratification! Actually, this is preserved in the Constitution even after amendments, since the norm, fixing this provision, is in the first chapter, which is not subject to changes.
According to Part 4 of Art. 15 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, “generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation are an integral part of its legal system. If other rules are established by an international treaty of the Russian Federation than stipulated by law, then the rules of the international treaty apply ”(italics ours).

We emphasize once again that this provision is maintained, since Chapter 1 is not subject to revision, it is not amended, so lovers to speculate about the "colonial" position of Russia can not relax.

On the other hand, it is obvious that if the Russian government ratified an international legal act, is it logical that it needs to be implemented, otherwise what will all international treaties cost? In the article of the Constitution, by the way, it is written in black and white that the norms of international treaties have priority over domestic legislation, and not all international legal norms. So there is no "dictate of international law" here, and if there is, then this "dictate" is ratified by the Russian authorities.

Changes are made to Art. 79. According to the current version of Art. 79 of the Constitution, “The Russian Federation may participate in interstate associations and transfer to them part of its powers in accordance with international treaties, if this does not entail a restriction of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen and does not contradict the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation.”

That is, Russia can participate in international organizations within the framework of international agreements, if this does not contradict the foundations of the constitutional system and does not impose restrictions on human rights and freedoms. If this contradicts the foundations of the constitutional system and carries restrictions on the rights of Russian citizens, the state may withdraw from the agreements. But while the state has not withdrawn from international treaties, it does not have the right not to execute them.

What is proposed to change?

In the new edition of Article 79 we read: “The Russian Federation may participate in interstate associations and transfer to them part of its powers in accordance with international treaties of the Russian Federation, if this does not entail restrictions on the rights and freedoms of man and citizen and does not contradict the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation . Decisions of interstate bodies adopted on the basis of the provisions of international treaties of the Russian Federation in their interpretation, which contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation, are not subject to enforcement in the Russian Federation ”(our italics).

As you can see, the new version of the norm, such a wording gives grounds for the widest arbitrariness in relation to ratified international legal norms. Obviously, such a “supplement” to Art. 79 of the Constitution, will give rise to the Russian authorities not to comply with decisions of international courts, conventions, citing the fact that they allegedly "contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation."

The Russian government likes to talk about the double standards of Western countries. It is difficult to argue with this, but only the Russian authorities themselves do exactly the same, fixing the actual right not to execute international treaties in the Constitution. In fact, it reflects the ambitions of greater independence of the Russian ruling class from the West, the desire to play a more significant political role in the inter-imperialist confrontation.

Image

On value-ideological amendments
As for the “value-ideological” social block of norms, they are more of an ideological declaration reflecting the rolling of the Russian state into obscurantism, conservatism, bourgeois patriotism, solidarity and, ultimately, fascism.

On the one hand, we have norms that are frankly declarative and non-binding. For example, in Art. 67.1 of the Constitution is supplemented by a clause on succession with the USSR, although it is.

The same article in part 3 states that “the Russian Federation honors the memory of the defenders of the Fatherland, and protects the historical truth. Diminishing the significance of the people's deed in the defense of the Fatherland is not allowed. ”

In h. 4 Article. 67.1 it is proposed to write: “children are the most important priority of the state policy of Russia. The state creates conditions conducive to the comprehensive spiritual, moral, intellectual and physical development of children, the education of patriotism, citizenship and respect for elders in them. The state, ensuring the priority of family education, assumes the responsibilities of parents in relation to children left without care ”.
Regarding the Great Patriotic War, the norm is clearly demagogic, non-binding in nature. As if without constitutional consolidation of respect for victory in the Great Patriotic War, we would not honor the exploits of veterans? And vice versa, it is as if those in power would stop these norms from establishing yet another plaque to Mannerheim or another odious historical character who fought on the other side of the front line. As if this would prevent Putin from singing the pro-fascist philosopher Ivan Ilyin and throwing mud at those socialist ideas and achievements for which veterans of the Great Patriotic War shed blood. And most importantly, as if this would stop the modern bourgeois government from fighting the cause, the system that ensured victory.
On the other hand, a number of norms reflect the ideological degradation of the ruling regime and the intensification of obscurantism, nationalism and conservatism.

In particular, paragraph 2 of Art. 67.1 says: "The Russian Federation, united by a thousand-year history, preserving the memory of the ancestors who transmitted to us ideals and faith in God, as well as continuity in the development of the Russian state, recognizes the historically established state unity."

Despite the fact that legally this norm is also a pure declaration, we see that the religious law and the recognition of “state unity” are formally enshrined in the main law.

The theme of unity generally runs through all the amendments, which is not surprising. It is extremely important for the bourgeoisie in the conditions of an increasing social split to propagate the ideas of unity, the ideas of God, etc., in order to try to somehow unite the working people around themselves. It is another matter that real unity from the fact that it is prescribed in the Constitution does not come. Here the question may arise: what to do with the secular nature of the Russian state, enshrined in Art. 14 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation? But here, as the people say, there is no violation in the form, but in fact, a mockery.

So, we read, in the Conclusion of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation: “The inclusion in the text of the Constitution of the Russian Federation of an indication of faith in God transmitted to the people of Russia by their ancestors (Article 67.1, part 2) does not mean a rejection of the secular nature of the Russian state proclaimed in its Article 14 and of freedom of conscience guaranteed by its Article 28 , since in its wording it is not associated with confessional affiliation, it does not declare the presence of certain religious beliefs mandatory in the Russian Federation, it does not put the citizens of Russia in an unequal position contrary to article 19 (part 2) of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, depending on the availability of such faith and its specific orientation and is intended only to emphasize the need to take into account in the implementation of public policy that historically significant socio-cultural role,which the religious component played in the formation and development of Russian statehood. ”
But why then not emphasize in the Constitution the values ​​of atheism, humanism, in the end, which played no less role in the history of Russia? Obviously, despite the lack of attachment to a particular denomination, we have before us the propaganda of religious views and their separation from others. Yes, from the point of view of law, this norm does not oblige anyone to anything, but the very appearance of such a norm indicates a tendency to slide into obscurantism. The leader of the Communist Party, by the way, at the stage of amendments, supported this rule .
Another example illustrating the imposition of the most reactionary views is the constitutional consolidation of the state-forming status of the Russian people.

We read part 1. Art. 68 "The official language of the Russian Federation throughout its territory is Russian as the language of a state-forming people."

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in its conclusion notes that this provision “is based on an objective recognition of the role of the Russian people in the formation of Russian statehood, the continuation of which is the Russian Federation. It does not detract from the dignity of other peoples, cannot be considered incompatible with the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation on the multinational people of the Russian Federation (article 3, part 1), on the equality of human and civil rights and freedoms regardless of nationality (article 19, part 2), on equal rights and self-determination of peoples. ”

But this is pure sophistry, because it is obvious that if we are talking about the equal rights of peoples, that all peoples are equally valuable to the Russian state, that the state itself is multinational, there can be no talk of a state-forming people and its special role. This is the point of recognizing the state as multinational. Moreover, the thesis of the state-forming people is basically unscientific.

First , we, as Marxists, must remember that the states are formed not by nations, but by classes. Peoples in their modern sense arose later than states, but states arose when society could not reconcile class contradictions. Therefore, the passage about the state-forming people is an anti-scientific deception, designed again to extinguish the class essence of the state as an apparatus of violence, a machine of oppression of one class by another.

Secondly , if you study Russian history, it will become clear that Russia (like the USSR) was developing as a multinational state, and the working people of all nations and nationalities contributed to the development of the country. In the Russian Empire, a strict policy of Russification was carried out, oppressing the small peoples of non-Russian regions. In the USSR, a policy of equality of peoples was pursued, the right to self-determination was secured until the secession from the USSR. You might think that only the Russian people won the Great Patriotic War.
The consolidation of the state-forming status of the Russian people is fraught with the growth of nationalism not only of Russian, but, as a response, of nationalism of other nationalities inhabiting Russia. This leads to the provocation by the authorities of another split of workers in national apartments, which, however, is not surprising, because the bourgeoisie always turns to nationalism and clericalism during the hours of the threat of an exacerbation of the class struggle, and today there are certainly threats of such an aggravation.
But so far, we have concerned only those amendments that should play the role of a "distraction maneuver." The role of the amendments considered by us is not to really change something, but rather to dilute the amendments, for the sake of which it is all about, enticing citizens with social Wishlist or religious-nationalist and state-patriotic demagogy. The main thing is ahead.

Image
Now God keeps not only America

The main point of the amendments
The main political meaning of the amendments is that the ruling class carries out a “transit of power” and its further strengthening. It is worth noting here that for the workers again it doesn’t matter who will personally lead the Russian bourgeoisie. From the one who exactly will sit in the presidential chair, while maintaining capitalism, the working lives will not change. But for the one who exactly sits in this chair, the question is really important, because the loss of power can turn former partners in accomplice into prosecutors and escorts. On the other hand, the ruling class itself is also not interested in changing the top manager if the one who is now in power is coping with the tasks of strengthening the rule of the big bourgeoisie. Putin, as you know, copes with this task, because the amendments are aimed at maintaining him as a top manager of the big bourgeoisie in power, and at the same time strengthening this very power. This is their main meaning.
The question of the specific forms of this “transit” was probably initially not completely understood by the authorities themselves. At first, it seemed that the “Kazakhstan version” would take place, during which V. V. Putin would take the post of head of the State Council, and the State Council itself, in violation of the principle of separation of powers, would become the supreme authority in the country, while traditional institutions (President and Parliament) will be nominal executors of the will of real power, concentrated in the State Council. However, Putin’s speech in the State Duma of the Russian Federation on March 10, 2020 clarified the situation and showed that a similar option, if any, was decided to be abandoned. The Council of State is a rather cumbersome structure, and it is hardly suitable for the political center of power. Yes, and the State Council is formed by the President, that is,

Now we are talking about “zeroing out” the presidential terms of the current President. This provision is reflected in the law on amendments in two places.

So, h. 3. Art. 81 states that "one and the same person may not hold the office of the President of the Russian Federation for more than two terms."

It seems that we are talking about a greater change of power and the weakening of the institution of the presidency, because in the current version of the Constitution of the Russian Federation we are talking about two consecutive terms. But no.

We read further in part 3.1 of the same article: “the provision of part 3 of article 81 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, limiting the number of terms during which one and the same person can hold the office of the President of the Russian Federation, applies to a person holding and (or) holding a position Of the President of the Russian Federation, without taking into account the number of terms during which he held and (or) holds this position at the time the amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation comes into force, introducing an appropriate restriction, and does not exclude him from holding the position of President of the Russian Federation for a term admissible by the indicated provision ”(italics ours).

Thus, the President, it seems, cannot occupy his post for more than two terms, but those terms that were before (and there were four in total and two in a row) are, as it were, “not considered”, therefore, in fact, it may . Logic is on top.

In another place of the amendment law, namely, in paragraph 6. of Art. 3 states that “The regulation established by parts 3 and 3.1 of Article 81 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation as amended by this Law on the amendment of the Constitution of the Russian Federation permits the number of terms during which the same person may hold the office of the President of the Russian Federation,does not prevent a person holding and (or) holding the post of President of the Russian Federation at the time this amendment enters into force, to participate as a candidate in the election of the President of the Russian Federation after including the amended version in the text of the Constitution of the Russian Federation for the allowable number of terms established by the amendment, regardless of the number the terms during which the specified person occupied and (or) occupies this position at the time this amendment enters into force ”(emphasis added).

From the point of view of many expert lawyers, this clearly contradicts the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of November 5, 1998 No. 134-O “In the case of the interpretation of Article 81 (part 3) and paragraph 3 of the second section“ Final and transitional provisions of the Russian Constitution Federation ". Recall that in the 1990s, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation did not “nullify” the presidency of Yeltsin and did not give him the right to go for a third term. But you can always adopt a new law and a new conclusion of the Constitutional Court and allow you to go not only for the third, but also for the fifth and sixth terms.

This is what the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation did in the current 2020, issuing an extremely vague but definitely allowing Putin to run for the fifth and sixth term: “Decision on the maximum number of terms of office (consecutive terms of office) during which it is possible to take the post of head of state with the republican a form of government by one person (including as transitional provisions) is always, in essence, a matter of choosing a balance between different constitutional values. On the one hand, the constitutional characteristic of a democratic state based on the rule of law presupposes, although it does not predetermine, the establishment of rather strict restrictions in this aspect. On the other hand, the constitutional principle of democracy implies the possibility of the realization by the people of the right to elect a person in free elections, which he considers the most worthy of the post of head of state, despite the fact that his determination in the framework of electoral competition always remains with voters, and the fact that a person has the status of acting head of state does not at all predetermine victory in the elections, since other candidates may be limited to publicizing their programs and criticizing the current heads of state, and the latter is objectively linked by the need to present the results of their activities over the past period. Against the background of this basic balance, the constitutional legislator can also take into account the specific historical factors of making the corresponding decision, including the degree of threats to the state and society, the state of the political and economic systems, etc. ” that his determination in the framework of electoral competition always remains with the voters, and the fact that a person has the status of the incumbent head of state does not at all predetermine the victory in the elections, since other candidates can be limited to publicizing their programs and criticizing the incumbent head of state, and the latter is objectively related to the need to present the results of their activities for the past period. Against the background of this basic balance, the constitutional legislator can also take into account the specific historical factors of making the corresponding decision, including the degree of threats to the state and society, the state of the political and economic systems, etc. ” that his determination in the framework of electoral competition always remains with the voters, and the fact that a person has the status of the incumbent head of state does not at all predetermine the victory in the elections, since other candidates can be limited to publicizing their programs and criticizing the incumbent head of state, and the latter is objectively related to the need to present the results of their activities for the past period. Against the background of this basic balance, the constitutional legislator can also take into account the specific historical factors of making the corresponding decision, including the degree of threats to the state and society, the state of the political and economic systems, etc. ” since other candidates may be limited to the publication of their programs and criticism of the current head of state, and the latter is objectively related to the need to present the results of their activities over the past period. Against the background of this basic balance, the constitutional legislator can also take into account the specific historical factors of making the corresponding decision, including the degree of threats to the state and society, the state of the political and economic systems, etc. ” since other candidates may be limited to the publication of their programs and criticism of the current head of state, and the latter is objectively related to the need to present the results of their activities over the past period. Against the background of this basic balance, the constitutional legislator can also take into account the specific historical factors of making the corresponding decision, including the degree of threats to the state and society, the state of the political and economic systems, etc. ”

Apparently, we are offered a stream of water, telling how difficult it is for the current president, who needs not only to inform his program, but to present his affairs, and his victory is not a foregone conclusion .... The flow of branchy constructions of the words of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation must lead to something. And what is the result? How did judges of the Constitutional Court circumvent the 1998 precedent?

Very simply, the conclusion says the following: “In addition, the Decree of November 5, 1998 N 134-O emphasized, as applied to the situation considered in it, that“ the Constitution of the Russian Federation does not contain a special clause that of the second section “Final and transitional provisions”, the term of office of the President of the Russian Federation shall not be included in the time periods provided for in Article 81 (part 3) of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. ” This is fundamentally different from the situation when the provisions of Article 81 (part 3.1) of the Constitution of the Russian Federation as amended and part 6 of Article 3 of the Amendment Law provide for a special reservation that does not exclude the possibility of holding the office of the President of the Russian Federation without taking into account the number of terms, during which the person to which these provisions apply, held and (or) holds this position at the time the amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation enters into force. Thus, this position, expressed in the above Definition, essentially confirms the possibility of regulation provided for in this aspect by the Amendment Law. ”

That is, we made a dubious amendment to the Constitution, designating a “zeroing” of the term, and everything is fine: Putin can once again run for president. But after all, it was a question of compliance of this amendment with the norm of "no more than two terms." There is a clear contradiction with real life, but since we made a reservation by writing it to the Constitution, then everything is in order. In a word, everything is correct in form, but essentially a mockery. We secured that a person cannot hold a post of president for more than two terms? Secured. So, the current President cannot be put forward for election next time? Can. How so? We simply won’t consider the previous terms, and therefore the current President can again run for office twice. Dates, as it were, are starting to go anew.
Well, is it not a mockery of logic and common sense? And is not this conclusion of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation an exemplary example, once again confirming that law is nothing but the will of the ruling class elevated into law? We are silent about the fact that this provision contradicts the principle of equality of all before the law, because this amendment puts V.V. Putin in an exceptional position in comparison with other Russian citizens: only he was given the actual right to hold a presidential post for more than two terms. And then there is a reference to the vote, which, as we have already shown above, in itself will be a perfect fiction.
“Given that the amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation provided for by Article 1 of the Amendment Law, including its Article 81 (part 3.1), are considered approved only if more than half of the citizens of the Russian Federation who participated in the all-Russian vote vote for them, it is assumed that the possibility provided by her for holding the office of the President of the Russian Federation for more than two consecutive terms will arise only if she receives support as a result of the will of the people of the Russian Federation. This gives additional constitutional legitimacy to the relevant decision. ”

But you and I have already considered what this vote is, how observers will be appointed, what airtime will be spent on, etc.

In addition to the norms associated with resonant “zeroing”, amendments introduce a number of positions that strengthen the presidential power. Those who at first thought that this was a real reduction in the powers of the President in favor of the parliament are deeply wrong. The only thing that can be considered a conditional “limitation” of the presidency is a time limit, but “zeroing” of the previous terms actually “nullified” this conditional “restriction”. But there are more than enough provisions in the new version of the Constitution that strengthen the position of the President.

Here are some examples of specific norms that strengthen the position of the President:

According to the new wording of paragraph a. Art. 83 The President receives the right to appoint and dismiss the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation, approved by the State Duma on his proposal. In the previous edition, the President only appointed the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation with the consent of the State Duma of the Russian Federation. Obviously, the right to appoint and dismiss the Chairman of the Government without resigning the Government as a whole makes the figure of the Chairman of the Government more controlled, and on the other hand, it is easier for the President to make personnel changes. The President also retains the right to resign.
According to paragraph b of Art. 83 The President exercises overall leadership of the Government of the Russian Federation. In the old version, the President could only preside over meetings of the Government of the Russian Federation. The change is cosmetic, but still some strengthening of presidential power.
According to paragraph 1 of Art. 83 The President approves, at the proposal of the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation, the structure of federal executive bodies, makes amendments to it. Moreover, the President in the structure of federal executive bodies determines the bodies, the management of which is carried out by the President of the Russian Federation, and the bodies, which are managed by the Government of the Russian Federation. That is, the President himself can determine those executive bodies that will be directly subordinate to him, and those that will be subordinate to the Government. In the previous version of the Constitution, this was not.
According to paragraph 1 of Art. 83 The President appoints to the post after consultation with the Federation Council and dismisses the heads of federal executive bodies (including federal ministers) in charge of defense, state security, internal affairs, justice, foreign affairs, emergency prevention and disaster management, public security. Earlier, some senior officials were appointed by the Federation Council on the proposal of the President (Attorney General), and some were appointed by the President on the proposal of the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation. The change is again insignificant, but reinforcing the position of the President.
According to n. 5 Article. 83, forms the State Council of the Russian Federation in order to ensure the coordinated functioning and interaction of public authorities, determine the main directions of domestic and foreign policy of the Russian Federation and priority areas of socio-economic development of the state. Previously, there was no norm at all that enshrined the status of the State Council in the Constitution.
P. 1. Art. 92.1 introduces the norm according to which the President of the Russian Federation, having terminated his powers, has immunity. This was not in the previous version of the Constitution either. That is, now, by law, the President cannot be asked for crimes committed by him if he terminated his powers not because of impeachment. There is no doubt that this rule is an attempt to protect the current President from former partners in accomplice, as well as putting him in a virtually unpunished position.
According to Part 2. P. b Article. 95, the President, who terminated his office not as a result of removal from office, becomes the life senator of the Federation Council. He may waive this right. Also, as we see, a clear strengthening of the presidential institution of power.
According to Part 1. Article. 110, the President exercises overall leadership in the executive branch. In the previous edition this also was not.
In part 4. Article. 111, the President’s right is fixed to dissolve the State Duma in the event of a three-fold rejection of the nomination of the Prime Minister. In general, this norm itself shows all the decorativeness of the parliament, which even from the point of view of the Law cannot impose on the President “his” Prime Minister. But in the current version of the Constitution, the President does not have the right to dissolve the State Duma, but has a procedural obligation. In the new edition, as you see, he receives such a right. That is, he may not dissolve the State Duma of the Russian Federation, but simply approve his Prime Minister. After all, the dissolution of the State Duma of the Russian Federation and new elections, if not cool, but a crisis. In the new version of the Constitution, the President can avoid this crisis by pushing his candidacy for the post of Prime Minister.
The President also receives the right to make a request to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation not only for existing laws, but also for bills. In particular, this will allow the President to return objectionable bills to the State Duma in case it overcomes the presidential veto.
In addition, in the new edition of the Constitution 132 of the article, devoted to local authorities is proposed to supplement 3 part, according to which local authorities and public authorities are part of a single system of public authority. Now there is no such clause in the Constitution. As you can see, here we also see an increase in power.
Thus, as can be seen from the above amendments, the new Constitution is permeated not by the desire to increase the powers of representative bodies of power, but rather, to strengthen the power of the president.

Maybe someone will ask, but what about the ban on senior officials to have deposits abroad and foreign citizenship? But to this we will answer that even now officials have restrictions, for example, regarding the prohibition of doing business, but this does not prevent them from owning the business through their wives, relatives and friends. The same thing here. As long as the ban on having foreign accounts and foreign citizenship does not extend to the official’s inner circle, the ban will successfully bypass the party.

Author: Igor Petrygin-Rodionov
findings
In our opinion, all of the above can be reduced to several conclusions:

Firstly , any changes in the Constitution are a reflection of changes in the system of production relations and the correlation of class forces. In Russia, over the 30 years of restoration of capitalism, the imperialistic nature of capitalism has developed, albeit in many respects. The strengthening of capitalism led to the logical strengthening of the position of the ruling class, which was reflected both in the growth of its economic and political strength. Hence, the strategic task of constitutional reform is to further strengthen the power of the big bourgeoisie in the face of a growing class split between the proletariat and the petty-bourgeois strata of the working people on the one hand and the big oligarchic bourgeoisie and the bureaucracy that has grown together with it on the other.
Secondly , if we talk about the main tactical task of the current moment, then constitutional reform is the desire to ensure the transit of supreme power, and more specifically, the preservation of the current President in power as a guarantor of the stability of the bourgeois (oligarchic) ​​system, neoliberal socio-economic policy and controlled political system with poorly functioning democratic institutions. This is its main political meaning. Also, the new version of the Constitution of the Russian Federation significantly strengthens the presidential powers, further enhancing the presidential character of the Russian Federation.
Thirdly, to make the whole process important in the eyes of wide sections of the population, the political amendments are supplemented by social amendments, which are unlikely to be implemented, but will attract a larger number of participants for voting, as well as increase the positive attitude of Russians to the amendments as a whole. The same, in our opinion, should be attributed to the rules prohibiting senior officials to have foreign citizenship and foreign bank accounts. As long as this requirement does not apply to family members of officials, in practice they will be meaningless, but as a declaration they can be approved by the general public. It is not for nothing that voting for amendments is supposed not separately, but as a package. Voting itself is not necessary to ensure legitimacy, but to strengthen the legitimacy (approval by the population) of the government, which has recently begun to weaken.
Fourth , the introduction of value-ideological norms into the Constitution, which do not change anything in essence, expresses the desire of power under the slogans of patriotism, spirituality and historical memory to rally the population around itself and camouflage the growing class split. On the whole, this set of norms testifies to the further orientation of the authorities towards strengthening the ideas of conservatism, state patriotism and religious obscurantism, solidarity, in a word, about its ideological development towards fascism.
Fifth , these amendments in no way improve the lives of the working people of Russia, but only further strengthen the vertical of bourgeois-oligarchic power, and therefore support for these amendments is unacceptable. RKRP considers the boycott of the dubious procedure to be the most acceptable tactic .
Today, bourgeois propaganda cultivates constitutional illusions in the minds of the working people, trying to pass off the constitutional reform as something fateful and important, capable of changing the fate of the working people. But this is a hoax. Only their own class struggle and the conquest of power by the working people can truly change their lives for the better. Under the dominance of big capital, no matter what is written in the constitutions, all this will be nothing more than the will of the big bourgeoisie enshrined in law, and the simple working people of Russia can not expect anything good from these reforms.

Sometimes they talk about the need to fight for a socialist constitution, moreover, the draft of such a constitutionthere is. But in order to adopt a socialist constitution, the proletariat must first take power and change the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie to the dictatorship of the proletariat (the third, as you know, cannot be), socialize ownership of the means of production and build a communist society (first in the form of its lowest phase - socialism). And only after the proletariat takes power will it be possible to adopt the Constitution of Soviet socialist Russia. To achieve this, the class struggle of those who are most interested in the transition to socialism, that is, the working people (primarily the working class), their self-organization and understanding of their interests, is needed. It is in this main direction - the union of the labor movement with communist ideology,

Image

Osin Roman - member of the Ideological Commission of the Central Committee of the RKRP-CPSU,
Ph.D.

https://www.rotfront.su/konstitutsionna ... i-i-osnov/

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Mon Jun 22, 2020 1:59 pm

Volodin explained to the people that to be against the amendments means to “go against the people”
06/21/2020
If the will of the people is known, why do we need a “vote”?

State Duma Chairman Vyacheslav Volodin said that all those who disagree with the presidential amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation go “against the people” . If we accept this statement on faith, a logical question arises: why then do we need a “vote” on July 1 if the will of the people is already known? Or is Mr. Volodin just once again reminding the people that the people should be “for”? ..

Image

Volodin made his statement on the Russia 24 television channel . It is also available on the Duma TV YouTube channel . Literally, the chairman of the State Duma spoke like this:
“... I sincerely do not understand those who say today: do not vote or do not go to the polls. Wait, what are you talking about? Think about what you are calling for. What is the meaning of these calls? Do you want the country worse? Do you want standards that enhance the quality of life not to be adopted? It is against the people to go. You cannot make such proposals. ”
It is a pity that Mr. Volodin did not explain how it was possible to carry out a pension reform in 2018 , which significantly worsened the well-being of Russians and took away a well-deserved pension from tens of thousands of elderly people. But in the current constitution of the Russian Federation it is said that “in the Russian Federation laws should not be enacted that abrogate or derogate the rights and freedoms of man and citizen” ( Article 55, part 2 ).

Image
Vote - do not vote ...

Volodin also said that during the discussion of the amendments “not a single deputy spoke out against” , and added the idea of ​​conspiring all dissatisfied inside the country with foreign enemies of the Russian Federation, traditional for Russian government propaganda:
“... When inside the country they begin to sing along to those who criticize from abroad and try to disrupt the adoption of constitutional amendments for us - this is bad. Because the very obvious amendments proposed today for voting strengthen the country and make it stronger. "
Meanwhile, a thorough analysis of constitutional amendments clearly illustrates that most of them are openly populist in nature, while a smaller part is aimed at redistributing power within the ruling class and strengthening the dictatorship of big capital.

The July 1 vote itself is legally void . In fact, a mass opinion poll was organized under the guise of “popular will”, the results of which will then be used for propaganda purposes.

https://www.rotfront.su/volodin-obyasni ... -byt-prot/

Google Translator

A "do not vote" campaign would be a very hard nut this go-around in the USA. It shouldn't, but we gotta face tactical reality. I can already hear,"if ya don't vote against him then yer for him!" If I do it's solely for domestic tranquility( I could always fake it, but if it don't matter anyway...) Next time tho it might be an option.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Fri Jun 26, 2020 11:14 am

Delivery from hell: from Yandex.Food to Yandex.Coffin
06/25/2020
"Potogonka" and other methods of operation
Boys and girls who appeared on the streets of large Russian cities several years ago in colorful costumes with large square bags behind their backs indicated a new wave of the spread of precarious (precarious) employment in the labor market. In a pandemic, attention to them has increased - it is their work that ensures the existence of those who today "sit at home." However, the risks of getting a new disease are far from the main problem of couriers (although the lack of masks and disinfectants for those who provide people with food seems symptomatic).
Image
Delivery from hell: from Yandex.Food to Yandex.Coffin

A year ago, the death of a 21-year-old Yandex.Food courier who died at work from a heart attack and received a fine for truancy the day after his death thundered across the country. Injuries and deaths in road accidents in pursuit of the delivery of the next order on time (otherwise a fine), the absence of sick leave and vacations, lower wages overnight are the realities that workers of courier platform companies face daily.

And in this approach, which completely fits into the metaphor of “hellish sweating,” one can see gloomy prospects for the proletarians, whose relations with the employer are still within the framework of the Labor Code. Without broad and organized resistance to the offensive of capital on the labor and social rights of wage earners, such a prospect will come very soon. And couriers today are at the forefront of this class struggle.

Unstable employment - forward to the century before last!
The model of outstaffing, when an employee does not get a job in an enterprise, but in a recruitment agency, losing social rights and guarantees of employment, existed before. Many factories have used and continue to use this method to reduce staff costs (specialized labor hunters know where to find it cheaper) and to protect themselves from union activities (legally, such a worker was not related to the enterprise).
But platform companies have taken this approach to a qualitatively new level: by formally providing a service of access to the customer base, in fact they not only extract surplus value from those who perform certain tasks within the platform, but also get rid of any social responsibility to an employee, and often force him to independently provide his means of production, because legally he is a “freelancer”, i.e. not the proletariat, but the small proprietor.
The approach, which the ruling ideology calls “the economy of freelancers,” is characterized by it as a way of providing freedom and unprecedented mobility to employees. In practice, for the vast majority of precaries, this form of relationship carries an increase in the intensity and duration of labor, and, accordingly, permanent stress associated with the unstable nature of labor.

The quintessence of such relations is the “zero contract” rapidly spreading in Western countries, according to which the company pays only for the hours actually worked, without giving any guarantee for employment at all. At the same time, an employee with precarious work more often is free only formally, because in fact, the entire period of rest, he is in standby mode of a phone call. In fact, it turns into a thing on a shelf that the capitalist can take at any time he needs.
The world capitalist system returns society to the century before last, where day work was a natural phenomenon, and the fundamental social and labor rights, later won by the blood of the proletariat, were absent.
Image
Couriers Yandex.Food

In the struggle for the right to be an employee

Of course, this trend provoked resistance among workers in various countries with rich experience in organized proletarian struggle. At the end of 2016, in the English city of Durham, a two-day strike of assistant teachers against a transfer to temporary contracts thundered, stopping the work of about a hundred educational institutions. Couriers from the UK-based logistics company CitySprint have been able to achieve a quarter increase in salaries. And the cleaners of the London School of Economics managed to force the institute to abandon outsourcing and hire all the employees directly to the state. In France, bicycle couriers have united in a union to fight for their rights and are actively conducting protests in different cities, forcing the employer to enter into formal negotiations.

There are examples of the effectiveness of the struggle at the institutional level. As a result of the long struggle between Uber and Lyft workers, resulting in strikes and litigation, the California Senate passed a law under which digital platform employees will be considered official employees of these companies, not independent contractors, and they will be covered by social guarantees such as insurance, maternity leave, minimum wage, overtime pay. At the end of 2018, the UK Independent Labor Union, which advocates for workers in precarious work, won the fight against Uber for drivers' right to join the company.

Image
Courier Delivery Club

Young - a dangerous road

In our country, as well as throughout the world, precarious employment, imposed by platform companies, is manifested in various areas of production of goods and services. But courier youth is at the forefront of class confrontation. It is in large companies-platforms that deliver food products, such as Yandex, Delivery, Scooter, the wild forms of exploitation are most acutely felt. For the sake of easy gain, company administrations are changing working conditions and payment principles. The recent strike of Delivery workers was caused by the fact that, unexpectedly for all couriers, the company increased its delivery area, which led to a reduction in salaries and an increase in the number of fines. The administration backed off, but the participants in the strike thought about creating a union that would defend their rights systematically.

When there is no apparent arbitrariness at the level of the company as a whole, it is compensated by arbitrariness at the level of specific warehouses, whose directors can appoint shifts in violation of the contract, introduce their own fines, and force them to carry more orders for the same money. This is encountered, for example, by employees of Scooter in St. Petersburg.
Separately, it is worth mentioning logistics problems and other organizational issues that are within the competence of superiors - all of them are solved at the expense of ordinary employees, whether it is an oversupply of orders (“So you’ll speed up!”) Or a shortage of bicycles (“Nothing, you can walk by foot”).
Another interesting phenomenon is when the platform company uses outstaffing: in this case, the disenfranchised employee loses even more in the salary that the parasite intermediary bites off of him. Such a scheme was encountered, for example, by VkusVilla couriers.

All this, of course, makes you think about how to withstand this lawlessness of overexploitation?

Image
Courier Yandex.Food. Source: Life.ru

What to do?

One often hears the argument in favor of the impossibility of self-organization in courier companies-platforms, that the work there is perceived by people as temporary, no one plans to stay there forever.

We leave out the everyday wisdom “there is nothing more permanent than temporary”, as well as the circumstances of the pandemic (the reverse of which was the unfolding global economic crisis and, as a result, a sharp increase in unemployment), which sharply increased the average age of couriers. A dynamically developing courier market in the conditions of a weak trade union movement sets the capital approach for the proletariat for capital - by spreading precarious employment through the development of platform companies, it does not at all fight for a change in the Labor Code, which simply does not work there.
Therefore, without a struggle, here and now, Yandex.Food will be replaced not only by Yandex.Taxi, but also Yandex.Factory, where the disenfranchised employee will work until Yandex.Tomb. And to convey this objective knowledge, which is already understood by more and more employees, is one of our first tasks.
That is why ROT FRONT and the Revolutionary Komsomol - RKSM (b) today are deploying work to uphold the rights of courier workers, starting from outreach and ending with full-fledged class self-organization.

The absence of official right to a union and a legally recognized procedure for upholding collective rights among precarious workers dictates the requirements of a cautious and responsible approach in the process of forming cells. And together, this means that the less you have the opportunity to rely on the laws of the modern state, the more important your own strength, mass movement and cohesion for a successful struggle.

Everyone who works in courier platform companies or is ready to help courier workers in the fight for their rights is invited to join the initiative!

Alexey Pryakhin,
member of the Central Committee of the RKRP, honorary chairman of the RKSM (b)

https://www.rotfront.su/dostavka-iz-ada ... o-yandeks/

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sat Jun 27, 2020 1:51 pm

Anti-vaccination will help arrange children in school
06/26/2020
Deputies picked up obscurantism virus

Deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation proposed introducing fines for refusing to take a child to kindergarten or school due to the lack of vaccinations. The size of the fine is from 30 to 100 thousand rubles. The norm will protect the rights of parents of anti-vaccination. Now local authorities often refuse to admit children to preschool institutions and schools on the basis of their lack of vaccinations. Massive parental refusals of vaccinations have already become the norm in Russia, while leading to an increase in the incidence of some infectious diseases.

Image

One of the consequences of the collapse of socialism in Russia was the heyday of obscurantism and pseudoscience. The anti-vaccination movement that originated in the territory of the former USSR in the late 80s and early 90s acquired a wide scope in the second decade of the 21st century. At the same time, anti-vaccines complain of discrimination and violation of the rights of their children when they are denied admission to kindergarten or school due to lack of vaccinations. It should be noted, however, that such measures are being taken more likely due to concerns about the health of unvaccinated children. After all, such a child can become infected with a severe infection from apparently healthy people who tolerate the disease in a mild form due to their vaccinations. Any minor injury can also lead to serious consequences - for example, infection with tetanus, which has a high mortality rate (higher only in rabies and pulmonary plague). Clear,

Probably, in the State Duma of the Russian Federation there are supporters of the anti-vaccination movement, who undertook to lobby this bill. The measure is proposed, despite the fact that already now Russian experts are sounding the alarm, urging them to fight against this kind of obscurantism. In this context, it is necessary to think not about introducing responsibility for refusing to take a child to educational institutions, but about the responsibility of parents who refuse, contrary to the opinion of doctors, to vaccinate children. Refusal of vaccination should be possible only in case of contraindications established by the doctor - medical withdrawal.

We see how obscurantism blossomed violently in the vast expanses of the former USSR. The introduction of a false way of thinking, false ideas about the world is beneficial for the ruling class, because it is much easier to manage with illiterate people who believe in different nonsense. Instead of fighting against a real enemy, against oppression and exploitation, fighting for their interests, many citizens are beginning to squander their efforts to deal with various imaginary and false threats: vaccinations, “chipization”, the spread of the 5G network and others. Naturally, such a struggle does not harm the bourgeoisie and does not threaten the rule of the capitalists.

https://www.rotfront.su/antiprivivochni ... t-ustroit/

Google Translator

Not much difference from the US prez or the prez of Brazil, 'a cold', a little flu'.And if we go back in time, Ben 'Pitchfork' Tillman who rode anti-vac histeria and brutal racism to the SC governor's mansion and the US Senate. Ignorance is but one tool in the boss's box and ignorance is promoted on a wide range of subjects important to the bourgeoisie. Real education is the deadliest enemy of the ruling class.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Mon Jun 29, 2020 1:58 pm

Immediately after voting on the constitution, housing and utility tariffs will increase
06/28/2020

The reward of humility

As soon as the Russians approve the new constitution, they will be “delighted” with new housing and communal services tariffs. Starting July 1, tariffs will rise again by an average of 4% . This is done despite the difficult financial situation of the population, which has become even worse due to the coronavirus pandemic. The Ministry of Construction of the Russian Federation rejected the idea of ​​a moratorium on tariff increases. Apparently, feeding the people a large number of communal offices is more important for the state than the well-being of Russians.

Image
Octopus housing and communal services

Natalya Chernysheva , director of the ANO Organization of Public Control, believes that an increase in housing and communal services tariffs will cause an even greater wave of non-payments:

“The financial situation in most of the population is very difficult, many lost their jobs during the pandemic and will not be able to find it within a few months after the abolition of self-isolation. "The debt of the population can increase by 20-30% and lead to a huge cash gap in payments."

But dealers from housing and communal services insist on the next increase in tariffs. The Director General of PJSC GIT Sergey Minko declares that tariffs are rising “not from a good life,” but for the sake of modernizing the infrastructure:

“The increase in tariffs allows us to modernize the infrastructure and provide better services to residents ... You can’t even talk about overhaul - almost half of the housing stock is in disrepair. So the increase in tariffs is necessary and justified, especially since it does not exceed inflation. ”

It is unlikely that Mr. Minko will be able to explain why the depreciation of housing and communal services funds five years ago , and now amounts to 60-80% . Where does the money of citizens go? Maybe, as in the case of overhaul, money is simply stolen ? .. But the head of the largest holding in the housing and communal services generously gives the Russians trivial advice on saving money: install water meters, use energy-saving lamps. And also pay on time for housing and communal services and not save up debts. Otherwise, the unfortunate deadbeat may face collectors , which are often difficult to distinguish from bandits ...

How long will housing and utilities tariffs rise? The answer is simple: as long as citizens tolerate it.

https://www.rotfront.su/srazu-posle-gol ... onstituts/

Google Translator

bolding added... goddamn right
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Thu Jul 02, 2020 1:52 pm

Russian authorities invited right-wing parties to observe the vote
07/01/2020
Tell me who your friend is ...

At the invitation of the Russian authorities , representatives of right-wing conservative European parties observed the voting on constitutional amendments. Among the invited members of the parties are “Alternative for Germany” , “Alternative to the Bulgarian Revival”, the Italian “League of the North” and some others. Starting from June 25, observers visited polling stations and got acquainted with the voting procedure.

Image
orthodoxy or death

In fact, we see the personification of the famous phrase "say who your friend is, and I will say who you are." The Russian regime is rapidly ruling, with the movement to the right continuing throughout the years of the existence of modern Russian power, starting in 1991. Naturally, the further the power leaves socialism, the more it rules.

In terms of ideology, this process is expressed in the indefatigable praise of the White Guards, leaders of the counter-revolution, reactionary philosophers and writers (for example, Ivan Ilyin, Alexander Solzhenitsyn) and the denigrating of socialism, communism and Soviet power. We see that the symbol of Russia since 1991 is the tricolor tsarist flag, which was used by the Vlasovites. Hundreds of films distorting history are being shot in the country , monuments to the leaders of the white movement are being erected: Kolchak, Denikin, Ataman Krasnov.

In terms of economics, the process of ideological “correction” is manifested in the form of rigorous antisocial reforms: optimization and commercialization of the healthcare system, education; adoption of the worst labor code; the actual prohibition of strikes; raising the retirement age and many others. Naturally, ideology and economics are closely interconnected, since all antisocial measures taken should be ideologically supported accordingly. If words are not enough, then batons and other, even more compelling arguments are used.

https://www.rotfront.su/rossijskie-vlas ... i-nablyud/

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Tue Jul 07, 2020 1:35 pm

Legal cretinism of sapper Putin or reprisal of the KGB lieutenant colonel?
07/07/2020
We explain in a working way
Being in a certain euphoria from the percentages squeezed out of the vote for amendments to the constitution, experiencing, in the words of spokesman Dmitry Peskov , the triumph of the de facto referendum on confidence, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on July 5 in an interview with Russia-1 TV channel, that amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, adopted at a referendum on July 1, will avoid the mistakes of the Soviet period of Russian history and consolidate the inviolability of the borders of Russia.
Image

Speaking about what kind of mistakes in the state system we would like to avoid, Putin recalled that after the 1917 revolution in Russia there was a discussion about the ways to restore statehood, and in the 1922 union treaty “Lenin’s thesis on the right of union republics to secede from state " .

“Lenin rushed with this idea from 1908-1909. It all came from the idea of ​​the nation’s right to self-determination and then transformed into state-building in such a way that when creating a single state, the Soviet Union, in essence, it was a question of restoring historical Russia to its former borders - the newly created union republics had the right to exit from it, ”the president said.

He also recalled that Joseph Stalin had a different point of view - he advocated the autonomy of national associations and their entry into the RSFSR as autonomy.

“No withdrawal from the Soviet Union was envisaged for the future. But in the end, the Leninist idea was realized, and the right to secede from the Soviet Union was fixed in the 1922 Union Treaty, but nothing else was said, the procedure for secession from the Union was not prescribed, ”Putin explained, noting that these provisions“ started to wander from the Constitution to the Constitution of the Soviet period. ”
It was this provision, on the right of exit, in Putin’s opinion, that contributed to the destruction of the USSR in 1991. At the same time, Putin expressed a number of his own, regarding new ideas about the historical political practice of the Soviet government and the Bolshevik party.
With a request to comment on these statements, our correspondent Dmitry Volgin is talking with the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the ROT FRONT Viktor Tyulkin.
Image
Victor Tyulkin

Interview with the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the ROT FRONT Viktor Tyulkin
Corr .: Viktor Arkadievich, Putin is once again returning to the topic of time bombs, allegedly laid down by Leninist national politics under the Soviet Union and ultimately exploding the USSR. You, and other politicians, scientists and specialists, have already answered Putin's thesis and emphasized the absolute unscientific nature of this approach. Why is the president stepping on the same rake again and again?

VT: Because in this case, Putin acts as a propagandist and is guided by the laws of propaganda developed by Mr. Goebbels. Propaganda must be massive and unquestionable. The lie, repeated thousands of times by millions of media, becomes the conviction of the masses. Simply put, Putin is intoxicating society, especially youth. The older generation and people who think of such primitive propaganda are unlikely to bite, but those who grew up in the post-Soviet period and have a knowledge of history at the level of dates and events according to the requirements of the USE perceive its calculations as quite serious and justified. And with each repetition of them more and more. So we will have to reveal more than once all the fallacy and deceit of this version.

Corr .: Well, let’s do it, if necessary, repeat and emphasize especially important things.

VT: Let's do it. Putin is once again showing, I would say, legal cretinism. Like, it would be necessary to write in a different way and everything would be different. This, of course, is naive nonsense. The destruction of empires and states does not come from records in laws, but from the actions of internal and external forces in that state. Does Putin know about this? I think he undoubtedly knows, but in order to process the minds and to keep silent about the main thing, he has been consistently pursuing his propaganda line about the mine, or, as he once said, even about the atomic bomb, under the USSR. He portrays himself as a kind of sapper who neutralizes a mine from the past, and the strengthening of the state leads to the future.

Image
Lenin lays a bomb under Putin's Russia

Corr .: But what is the main thing about which Putin is silent?

VT: The main thing is the fact that any state is an institution of class domination. The Soviet Union was built as a state of workers. The Great October Socialist Revolution established Soviet power in the country as an organizational form of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The very day after the revolutionary coup and the overthrow of the Provisional Government at the Second Congress of Soviets of Workers, Peasants and Soldiers' Deputies, the power of the working people was proclaimed, i.e. dictatorship of the proletariat. The power of the working people was that foundation, that foundation on which all structures were erected and great peaks conquered.
The main national-territorial structure of the USSR, we note, absolutely equally understood by Lenin and Stalin, was Soviet power, that is, the organizational form of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Stalin in his speech at the II All-Union Congress of Soviets on the death of V.I. Lenin emphasized: “The dictatorship of the proletariat was created in our country on the basis of an alliance of workers and peasants. This is the first and fundamental basis of the Republic of Soviets . ”
The Soviets are the most stable, of all known history, forms of the dictatorship of the proletariat, not only because the Soviets lasted longer and have great deeds behind them. Their stability and the greatest adequacy for fulfilling the function of the dictatorship of the proletariat is determined, specifically, by the fact that the Soviets are based on objective reality uniting people of work — their organization in the process of material production. (Bourgeois parliamentarism also relies on objective reality, but this reality is expressed by the omnipotence of money in the world of universal commodity production, the cult of capital, the spirit of profit). For the first time in history, workers in the Soviets received the right to use their organization in the labor process to conduct business management and political decisions - to elect deputies in their work collectives, and equally, at any time to recall them, control state authorities, and thus ensure the subordination of the state to their interests. In 1917, the highest, truly progressive form of democracy was established - proletarian democracy - for workers and for workers, the Soviet government.
Workers, as you know, do not need to share places on the market for trays. They always agree with each other. History has proved that neither the internal nor the external enemies, even such advanced imperialist units as Hitler's fascism, could destroy the Soviet Union while the power was Soviet and the Communist Party. And the same story showed that after the party and the state lost their class character, the state was destroyed quickly, with relatively no resistance to the market, that is, capitalism. So once again we emphasize the crucial importance of the class basis of the state.
And Mr. Putin is slipping away from this certainty in every possible way, I think for obvious reasons - he does not want to admit that today Russia is a state of the ruling class of oligarchs and exploiters, among which his friends, classmates and just acquaintances are very densely represented. Simply put, this is a classic example of a corrupt structure. Like all capitalists at all times, in order to mask this picture, the authorities rest on the supposedly existing nation-wide character of the state. This, of course, is stupidity, or rather, in power it is a deliberate lie. Stupidity is among the comrades from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, who, following Zyuganov, declare themselves statesmen and dream of a certain government of popular trust under the bourgeois system. For this, the government is grateful to them and even gives out awards, for example, to Zyuganov - the Stolypin medal.

Image
Russian oligarchs under reliable protection

Corr .: And the right to exit?

VT: The right of exit only strengthened the alliance, helping national entities and minorities to overcome the well-founded mistrust and fear of the past tsarist existence. It’s like in a human marriage, the right to terminate it is not given for mandatory use, but in order for the family union to be created consciously and freely, which means it would be stronger and happier.
And hopes for entries in the laws, which Putin trumps, without a political and economic basis, turn out to be a beautiful phrase or an empty phrase. Remember the fate of the referendum on the preservation of the USSR in 1991. Most people unequivocally supported the preservation of the Union, but the course towards the market and the aspirants to the new gentlemen did not give a damn about the will of the people, who had a higher power, and ruined the country to rule in divided parts and even pit peoples against each other with a friend, as Stalin noted, in protecting his market and his masters of producers. By the way, Vladimir Putin, along with his then chief, St. Petersburg mayor Anatoly Sobchak, undoubtedly personally participated in this process.
Corr .: Do you think that Putin understands all this and deliberately distorts history and reality? Why?

VT: I just can’t imagine that he didn’t know this. I’m a year older than Putin and studied with him in the same 281st school. I know our teachers of history and social studies, Malyshkina Vera Konstantinovna and Tamara Zinovievna Stelmakhova, and therefore I do not admit any doubts about their competence and good faith. I spoke with Vera Konstantinovna shortly before her death, incl. they discussed strange transformations of former students, and former ideologists of the party, and Soviet leaders. We remembered that history is today's politics, looking towards the past. So we understand the efforts of the bourgeoisie and its guarantor to present history in a light favorable to it. As the theory says, being determines consciousness.

Note that Putin is considering an example of a republic leaving the USSR from a purely mercantile position : “The procedure for secession from the Union was not prescribed. As a result, the republic, which became part of the USSR, received in its luggage a huge amount of Russian lands, traditional Russian historical territories. The right of exit was spelled out in the Constitution, but the procedure was not spelled out. As a result, the republic could leave the Union not “with what it came”, but by “dragging” “gifts from the Russian people” with it.
Putin, with a monarchical sweep on Russian historical territories, presents the reason that allegedly was not prescribed in the constitution and laws. But he is silent that the foundation itself was destroyed! After all, the republics were united, including entered and joined, in the state of workers. And when it became a fat enrichment tool, it is naive to rely on procedures.
Image
The composition of the republics that voluntarily entered the USSR

Corr .: So Putin is naive?

VT: No, of course. After all, he selects from past experience that which suits him or distorts him in the way that seems right to him. We note how he claims: "The Communist Party also did not fulfill the promise" Land to the peasants, factories to the workers. " At the end of World War I, land and factories were nationalized. In fact, the workers did not get these factories, the land did not get. ... In all these parameters, they actually said one thing, but did another. With more or less success, but they did just that, ”the head of state said.
Here Putin is silent that he nationalized the land and factories precisely with the state of workers and peasants, so that everything was done and all the social achievements of the USSR were built on this basis. But he really likes the formula “they said one thing, but did another thing”, which he uses today, and very skillfully, for example, the conducted survey on amendments. Many thousands of words have been said about the protection of animals from TV screens, silence about zeroing Putin’s terms.
Corr .: Putin also remembered: “Further, the thesis was generally wonderful in order to attract the army to our side. "Neither war nor peace." Trotsky came up with this. “And we are demobilizing the army.” But the army was not needed, because they themselves had decomposed it by this moment, the front had decomposed. The army even posed a domestic political threat, a huge number of armed people who rushed back and forth without any understanding of what was happening and what needed to be done. But “Neither war nor peace” is a very strange thesis. They also quickly abandoned this, and with the help of a stick and a carrot they began to create a workers 'and peasants' Red Army, and succeeded so well. “... But I say that according to all these parameters they actually said one thing and did another. With more or less success, but they did just that, ”the head of state said.

VT: Again, lying. However, it is understandable not to tell him that this Trotskyite fortress “Neither War nor Peace” was categorically suppressed by the party and Lenin, and the Red Army was created not by a whip and a carrot, but on the basis of the first conscious volunteers who responded to the call of the Decree “The Socialist Fatherland is in danger” ". By the way, the Day of the Defender of the Fatherland is celebrated on February 23rd. An example of the privatization of fame and parasitism on history.

Image
Decree "The Socialist Fatherland is in danger"

Corr .: Thank you for the conversation. In conclusion, please tell me how, in your opinion, Putin as a person understands that he is telling lies and does injustice?

VT: I think, humanly, if you do not clearly understand, then feel, and fear this. That is why he never, never, never met in the face-to-face debate with any opponent on the air. This is such a psychological inferiority complex, I would say, a renegade syndrome. After all, by and large, he betrayed the cause of his father, changed the oath. He seeks excuses, tries to create support in the form of religiosity and the cult of the Russian Orthodox Church. Well, do not believe us that the KGB officer sincerely believes in God.
So everything has a very material basis. Putin, in his campaign to amend the constitution, defends himself, his beloved, in his class. The interests of the people are not present here. This means that the struggle of the people for their interests is the business of the people themselves.
The conversation was conducted by Dmitry Volgin

https://www.rotfront.su/yuridicheskij-k ... ra-putina/

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply