Russian constitution online

[Rain]

I read the 'civil rights' section with sadness.

Almost half of all these are abused by Kremlin...starting with the first one -

1. The basic rights and liberties in conformity with the commonly recognized principles and norms of the international law shall be recognized and guaranteed in the Russian Federation and under this Constitution.

and right down to peaceful demonstrations, which have been branded unlawful recently.

http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/...const/ch2.html

R

[Soviet78]

Its good you brought this up. But its interesting to note that Russia isn't the only country facing these constitutional problems. In fact, every 'democracy' has them. The main problems are embedded in the constitutions themselves: First, they have a notwithstanding clause, which effectually means that the government can say 'in the interests of democracy, we can't let you have that right'. Second, there is the ability to change the constitution...which allows governments to change them for their own needs.

The USA can proudly say that they are one of the only countries (if not the only country) in the world not to have the notwithstanding clause. Nevertheless, the Patriot Act (Bush's legislation) is changing that, and changing it fast. So get out there Americans, and take you country back!!!! Or just sit around like the rest of the world having to face the realities of their REAL rights. Certainly Western democratic countries don't use the clause or change their constitutions too much, but fake democracies (hint, hint) do it all the time.

[Booger]

I wouldn't worry too much about that 'Patriot Act'. It's getting bombarded with legal challenges. Many of our Legislators are dead set against it. Americans also have something called the 'Privacy Act'. Americans LOVE their privacy. If you're an American citizen, you have little to worry about.

[Soviet78]

Originally posted by Booger
I wouldn't worry too much about that 'Patriot Act'. It's getting bombarded with legal challenges. Many of our Legislators are dead set against it. Americans also have something called the 'Privacy Act'. Americans LOVE their privacy. If you're an American citizen, you have little to worry about.

I wouldn't say you have nothing to worry about. We thought we had nothing to worry about economically until Gorbachev came along and destroyed everything. All I'm saying is that it just takes one bad leader to completely change something for the worse.

[Rain]

That's true, Soviet. The doctrine of pre-emptive strikes is the latest example of democratic ideals being twisted.

By the way, what do you think should Gorbachev have done differently? I knew there were democratic changes throughour the country, perhaps there was a chance to modify the system instead of destroying it. It hurt too many people...

R

[Soviet78]

I think for one thing, he could have retained more control over the major industries, rather than letting individuals run them. I think he should have provided funds for small businesses, and comprehensive business plans for the government and large industries to be able to work with these small businesses. He should have retained state control of the media and other outlets, but he should have shut down a lot of the propaganda machines that the government had running 'for the glory of the communist party' etc. A lot of people were getting quite sick of this. He shouldn't have been so soft with Reagon and NATO. Reagon certainly wasn't soft with him, and the problems in Eastern Europe eventually spilled into the USSR. Certainly, he should have done some of the things he did, like allowing more freedom of religion, but he shouldn't have given the republics more power (because of the Union's many industries sometimes being contained within one republic, meaning they would have a disproportionate amount of power). I think he should maintained the USSR's involvement in the world, as it was a sign of strength and commitment to fighting world poverty. I think he should have listened to Rizhkov, who warned him and his allies in the party of the outcomes of eroneous actions.

One of the interesting things to note about the USSR is that its industrial base (ie industries that make more industries) was very close to the US's in the 1980s (meaning the USSR had very nearly the strength of the US in heavy industry). If Gorbachev had committed more of this area to consumer goods, the people of the USSR would be living a lot better than they did (which wasn't bad, just not as well as they could have been). Instead, he messed around with industries that were doing fine, turning them into bankruptcies.

Of course I think his anti-alcohol laws, while noble, were wrong. They made people against him and took money away from the government's budgets. I am not a drinker but I find that this policy just complicated more things than it solved (and the eventual collapse of the program showed its futility and waste).


The question of democracy is an interesting one. Most people would believe that the idea of democracy is a good thing. Well, to them I only have two points to make:

1. Russia is hardly more democratic than it was during the USSR's time. This went on during Yeltsin's time and is going on today with Putin.

2. Is the right to decide your leader really that big of a necessity? The people of the USSR have been given many other democratic rights that Westerners, particularly Americans, have never enjoyed. These included unions (that actually worked), elected local labor, neighbourhood, and other representatives (that worked for and represented you directly), and other such peoples and institutions. My point about the leaders is clear: most don't really have a lot of power anyway (except for formal power). Does anyone remember Brezhnev?

The choice between the freedom to say that something sucks and having bread on the table is an obvious one. Unfortunately, Russians have picked the former, and now it will take a long time to get out of the hole we've dug ourselves into. Unfortunately, the communists didn't do a good job under Gorbachev as well, giving people more reason to join the 'democratic' front. Certainly, we haven't experienced many positives from this new direction that the country's heading in. Hopefully, that will change in time.