Twenty years ago, April 25, 1993 was the all-Russian referendum, appointed by the Congress of People's Deputies in March of that year in order to determine the sympathies of the people to the conflicting branches of government.
Still in the the USSR (in 1991) it became apparent that "at the top of Power" consent lost. We are, however, believed that in Russia, freed from the responsibilities of the metropolis, which threw the yoke of the Communist Party and the Union of the Centre, things will go smoothly. Well-being of the residents will begin to rise, all perk and under the wise leadership of Deputies Democrats and former first secretary of the Moscow City Party Committee, who brushed off the dust of party traditions of his presidential mantle, go boldly into the grace of capitalism. We were happy to change the socio-political formation. This process is one called "reforms", the other a "betrayal" of people's interests. Anyway, it was a peaceful democratic revolution. More precisely - the bourgeois-democratic. The bourgeoisie came to power, greedy and cynical as the other, and does not happen. Enough to read the works of the classics of Marxism. And we were convinced of their rightness of their own experience. And who still do not believe, let him listen to speeches spokesman of the Investigative Committee of Russia, the most popular figure on our TV.
Tension in relations of deputies (representatives) and executive power became apparent by the end of 1992, when many politicians started talking about the negative results of Gaidar's reforms, which caused the reduction of major products, rapid population stratification on the very poor and the very rich during voucher privatization. Kremlin and stick to the budget cash flow "budding oligarchs", all kinds of Gusinsky-Berezovsky, while silencing the Russian deputies was not as easy as it is now.
It has been only a year after the Bialowieza collapse of the Soviet Union, ratified, by the way, the Supreme Council, but impatient Russians were expecting the arrival of capitalism, and behind him - an abundance of goods and well-being of the masses. Nothing like this has happened, except for a truly capitalist devaluation of the national currency and the constant firing "businessmen" to each other. As a result, some supporters of Boris Yeltsin have cooled their leader, and the Congress were invited to vote for the impeachment of the President from office. Was taken by secret ballot, and the proposal was not supported by a sufficient number of deputies.
The revolution came to an critical point. Still possible to curb the predators, the revolutionary flood turn for the benefit of the people and the Russian state. This required a simultaneous re-election and to appoint deputies and the President of Russia. It would be possible to go the other way - to approve the new Constitution of Russia, and then re-elect the executive widely representative government. Here then offered a third way, a completely non-constructive - to appoint poll Russians. This, as we now see, was the last treatment by the authorities to the people in the modern history of Russia.
The first such attempt to bring democracy to the people running the state was directly question citizens of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev had started in March 1991. Then, in the summer of 1991 at the initiative of the Leningrad City Council of Deputies of city residents were asked whether they wish to return to Leningrad its original name St. Petersburg? The results of the first survey on the preservation of the Soviet Union's updated, as we have seen in six months, the authorities have ignored. But the desire of the majority of the respondents on the banks of the Neva River to become residents of St. Petersburg, we, members of the Leningrad City Council, implemented in September 1991. Although, according to the witnesses alive, then mayor of Leningrad Sobchak in the previous year opposed the "rename", being the chairman of the Leningrad City Council and a candidate for mayor. He feared likely to lose blockade survivors of Leningrad, in the ranks of the voters.
The Congress of People's Deputies of the Russian Federation of 29 March 1993 adopted a resolution number 4684-I "On the All-Russian referendum 25 April 1993, summing up the results of the procedure and mechanism for implementation of the results of the referendum." The deputies of the St. Petersburg City Council also did not want to stay away from large-scale analysis of public opinion and added to Russia's own four ballots, which placed the two most important in the history of the city and the country's problem. The first to raise the status of the city up to the national level, the second convening of the Constitutional Assembly for the elaboration and adoption of the new Constitution of Russia.
The prosecutor of the city of St. Petersburg wanted to stop this local survey, as proposed by the Petrograd Soviet themes touched the all-Russian policy. But the city court ruled in favor of the Petrograd Soviet, and additional papers given away to citizens.
In the northern capital boil passions and then Yeltsin rallied supporters or defenders of the Supreme Council of Russia. No one at these meetings did not forbid people to freely express their opinions, sometimes in harsh terms, but remember, no massacre, neither the one nor the other party is not allowed.
Results of the referendum were as follows. Ballots received about 68.9 million people, or 64.2% of the eligible to participate in the referendum. Opinions are divided in this way.
1. Do you trust the President of the Russian Federation Boris Yeltsin? (58.7% answered "yes" to the whole of Russia, 72.7% - in St. Petersburg)
2. Do you approve of the socio-economic policies carried out by the President of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Russian Federation in 1992? (53%, 65%)
3. Do you think it necessary to hold early presidential elections in the Russian Federation? (49.5%, 23%)
4. Do you consider it necessary to hold early elections of People's Deputies of the Russian Federation? (67.2%, 48.9%).
5. For improving the status of St. Petersburg to the level of a republic within the Russian - 74.6%, for the adoption of the new Constitution of the Russian special Constitutional Assembly - 78.9% of city residents who took part in the vote.
Shows clearly that the residents of St.Petersburg, on the other hand, strongly supported the President trusted him more than in the whole of Russia, and therefore naively believed that Yeltsin will endow Northern Palmyra privileges of the republic, and call on the top of people's representatives for the scrupulous edit the new Constitution. Neither one nor the other president of Russia did not. The executive branch was pleased that the majority of Russians who took part in the survey, supported by the president and the course of reform.
The Kremlin had no one to listen to offers Petersburg deputies, because the results of the referendum were never able to resolve the political and constitutional crisis. It was necessary to dissolve the Soviets, which was done by Boris Yeltsin September 21, 1993. But St. Petersburg City Council, as the highest authority in the "pro-Yeltsin" the city was dissolved much later, three months later, after the popular approval of the new Constitution contained therein expanded powers of the president and the December elections to the State Duma and the Federation Council.
Two decades later, we will try to give a political assessment of the outcome of the referendum of spring, which largely determined the subsequent events in Russia and in the world. I suggested two questions direct participants of the historical events in the full sense of the word heroes of the democratic revolution, law professor S.N.Egorov, in 1991-1993, the head of the Committee for the property in the St. Petersburg City Council, the author of the alternative draft constitution of Russia, and culturologists A. G.Bogdanov, who first launched in the Mariinsky Palace, the Russian tricolor in September 1990, in the USSR.
1. What, in your opinion, would have been to St. Petersburg, Russia, had proposed in St. Petersburg, the order of development of the Constitution was implemented in 1993?
2. Now referendums be held. And one can often hear that an objective assessment of the views of citizens on the policy states give opinion polls. Perhaps, and the election of deputies to replace the cheaper tools that offer scientists?
First. In my opinion, the referendum was too late. We had to make decisive steps to re-election and deputies, and the President in 1991. Then were strong democratic sentiment among ordinary citizens. For example, I recall with what fury in early 1992, retired Yeltsin criticized for allowing hyperinflation, surrounded by older women limousine president, who arrived on a visit to St. Petersburg, and shouted something very unflattering. And I'm in this crowd beat a huge drum-picked bones mostalygoy, which for the occasion I donated director of "Eliseevsky store".
By the spring of 1993, all this was forgotten. We promote democracy and depose the Communist monopoly in 1989-1991, - gunpowder revolution. After the explosion of the powder turns into smoke, he was broke. And many of the specific people who have taken the revolutionary solutions, now you will not see on the political scene. Do not let them on the TV screen and on the radio.
The second. The result of a poll is largely predetermined by those who this poll order, pay, poses the question. And now authorities are customers that responses can be predicted without doing sociology. The political aspect of the Democratic Revolution 1990 - 1993's in the fact that people have the power to administer the communist past, tried to take possession of the property, before "the whole people." Think of vouchers and how Gaidar companions traveled to the city of Gorky to Nemtsov privatize retail stores. That historic referendum I remembered stopping the mouths of the opposition. In April 1993 I was in Moscow and wandered into the pro-Yeltsin meeting organized by Anatoly Chubais personally. Of course, he began to write critical poster on a sheet of paper tucked, but democratic vigilantes tied up and dragged me out of the room. Then he apologized, adding that in the difficult times we need not a criticism, but the consolidation of society around a strong political figure of the president of Russia.
Such is the paradoxical result of our democratic revolution for me: before the Revolution party officials and security officers "beat" me for having published the newspaper "anti-Soviet Pravda", after the press began to liberal reformers for the fact that I do not agree with the robbery of the country and the impoverishment the common people. Neither polls nor the elections will not help improve the situation, once suppressed freedom of speech in our country, as it was twenty years ago.
Spring referendum in 1993 I remembered rabid propaganda "right" answer, which in all media flourished in March and April 1993. And, if I listened to the opinion of St. Petersburg based on the constitutional assembly, then today we would live very differently. Surely, it is better.
First of all, the Russian constitution would not be so bad. Let be preserved constitution of the RSFSR. It does not interfere with democratic reforms. Corrected and amended by deputies elected in the spring of 1990 on an alternative basis, the constitution, and I can not argue about it with anyone, in September 1993, was the best of the current, modern, Yeltsin.
The present constitution was the most authoritarian Russia in Europe, even worse than the French, and with which it is written off. The Constitution, figuratively speaking, it is - the name of the ship. Like its name, so the ship will sail. People can not live better than that provided for in the Constitution.
Here are a few fundamental flaws of our fundamental law. No democracy or equality that the Constitution does not provide for, so do not be surprised that we have not seen in our lives. And the fact that "some are more equal than" specifically laid down in this constitution, written by impostors volleys of tank shells fall of 1993, and not people's representatives at the constitutional assembly.
Not provided for in the current constitution and federalism also, so that in a single city of federal significance, such as St. Petersburg residents can not make your life better than the national average. We have no right to even shorten its city crooks and thieves.
If people have developed the constitution, specifically selected for this purpose, the basic law, for certain, would be higher quality, our boat was floating in a right direction, and we swam in it would not chained to the oars, and could even influence the selection of its the course.
We know the names, because of whom we now live so badly. These are the main authors of the project the current constitution Russia: Professor Sergei Alekseev, Sergey Shahrai, Anatoly Sobchak, and other persons approved by the commission, Boris Yeltsin. Nearly 800 people with varying degrees of activity and diligence involved in the short-term program from October to December 1993. They put their hand to the project, which was allegedly approved nationally in December 1993. Most of them are still surviving.
The second question I can only perceive as a bad joke.
Opinion poll null and void does not have. Force are the results of this survey, which is open to all citizens of the country, and which is conducted under the rules established representative government.
In the previous example with the adoption of the constitution in December 1993, I recall that the position of the voting approved the President. Norma was the most gentle. If more than fifty percent will vote, and the majority of them approve the draft constitution, and that's in the bag! Voting took place on December 12, 1993 simultaneously with the election of deputies of the State Duma of the first convocation. The turnout was 54.8%. For the adoption of the constitution voted 58.4% against - 41.6%. A new constitution was adopted, so the support of one third of the voters and Russia entered into force on the day of its publication in the "Russian newspaper" - December 25, 1993.
The authors, developers of the Constitution, which we note two decades, by the way, in December 2013, asserting that it was "a leap into the future", "a giant step toward democracy," etc. In particular, they boast, there was a second chapter, which lists the rights of man and citizen. But this chapter, unfortunately, the net return, not feasible in practice.
For example, no matter how "fair" elections were neither, now rules are such that we can not elect their representatives in government. The Constitution is the right to declare though, but not guaranteed.
That is - to achieve the management of the country representatives of the citizens, to subdue the power of the people - should be a major issue on the political agenda. The democratic revolution goes on and on until the benefit of the people. Indeed, while this will be the main issue is not even hope for improvement can not be. Penny the price of this "opposition" that does not even know to put on the agenda and that the main issue.
Весна 93-го. По первому каналу транслируется концерт в поддержку президента и правительства, приуроченный к проведению всероссийского референдума. Все, кто за реформы и демократию должны проголосовать «Да, Да, Нет, Да». Мастера советской и антисоветской культуры демонстрируют фигуры высшего холуяжа.
Spring of '93. On the first channel broadcast a concert in support of the president and the government, proximate to the nationwide referendum. All in favor of reform and democracy should vote "Yes, Yes, No, Yes." Masters of Soviet and anti-Soviet culture carny.
From
ertata.ru
It is difficult to think of any other case in history in which the will of the president in violation of the Constitution the supreme legislative body is not simply dissolved, but in public, in front of the whole world destroyed by tank shells. No wonder soon after the October massacre there were such an analogy, saying that on the orders of Hitler burned the Reichstag in Germany, but was empty on the orders of Pinochet in Chile were shot presidential palace and his defenders, but Pinochet was then president. A coup d'etat in Russia, that is, the gravest crime committed is the head of state.
"For the purpose of preserving the unity and integrity of the Russian Federation to bring the country out of the economic and political crisis, to ensure public and social security of the Russian Federation; restoration of the authority of the government, based on Articles 1, 2, 5, 121-5 Constitution of the Russian Federation, the results of the referendum April 25, 1993, decree: 1. Cancel exercise of legislative, administrative and control functions of the Congress of People's Deputies of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation. Prior to the new bicameral parliament of the Russian Federation - the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation - and its acceptance of the relevant authority to be guided by presidential decrees and regulations of the Government of the Russian Federation. "
This is a quote from the decree №1400 issued by Boris Yeltsin, September 21, 1993 and served as the starting point of future tragic events. Yeltsin, referring to the article of the Constitution, cynically trampled fundamental law of the state. "The powers of the President of the Russian Federation can not be used to change the nation-state structure of the Russian Federation, the dissolution or suspension of any of its duly elected government bodies. Otherwise, they will be terminated immediately, "reads 121th article of the most downtrodden and less than two weeks later he shot by the Constitution. No wonder after the parliament and suspended the decree of the Constitutional Court.
It turns out that it is "for safety" on October 3-4 in Moscow are killed hundreds of defenders of the House of the Soviets and the bystanders. A chief proponent in Yeltsin's interpretation of "unity and integrity of Russia" at that time was the head of the separatist Chechen Johar Dudayev. After Dudayev was one of the few regions of the then heads who publicly supported Yeltsin's actions, considering the decree number 1400 as "a correct perception of Moscow Chechen experience." As to the "overcoming the economic crisis" - this, too, everything is obvious. The Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation was the last obstacle in the way which has already begun looting of public property, set in the Soviet Union, when the Soviet government.
Судьба России в XXI веке
Каким государством станет Россия в 21 веке: демократия, деспотия, монархия, олигархия, анархия или, может быть, гуманизм?
Блог создан после выборов в представительные органы власти в декабре 2011 года, которые, по мнению проигравших партий, были сфальсифицированы.
Народ возмутился пренебрежением его мнением и вышел на митинги. Депутаты Ленсовета в те тревожные дни сделали соответствующие заявления.
Группа депутатов Ленсовета 21 созыва (полномочия с 1990 по 1993 год) и сегодня внимательно следят за судьбой России, публикуют в этом блоге свои газетные вырезки, ссылки на интересные сообщения в Интернете, наблюдения, заметки, предложения, статьи.
Новейшая история России в книге
The Fate of Russia in XXI Century
What kind of state will become Russia in the 21st century: oligarchy, despoteia, monarchy, anarchy, democracy or, perhaps, clericalism?
A group of deputies of Lensoviet 21 convocation (powers from 1990 to 1993) today preoccupied follow the fate of Russia, put in this blog his Offers, Notes, observation, links to interesting posts on the Internet, articles, press clippings.
Blog launched after the election to representative bodies in December 2011, which, according to observers were rigged.
The people protested so obvious fraud and went rallies. Deputies of in while made declarations.
The fate of the revolutionary reforms in the book
Pavel Tsyplenkov
in 1993 - Member of the St. Petersburg City Council
"Yes, yes, no, yes" in St.-Petersburg. 1993.
Other sources. Video. Memories of eyewitnesses. Articles in newspapers of St. Petersburg.Why have quarreled representatives and executors?
 |
a controversial figure in the history, it is aware of everybody. But his recent revelations of what was happening in the dashing nineties may be worthy of attention. |
Tension in relations of deputies (representatives) and executive power became apparent by the end of 1992, when many politicians started talking about the negative results of Gaidar's reforms, which caused the reduction of major products, rapid population stratification on the very poor and the very rich during voucher privatization. Kremlin and stick to the budget cash flow "budding oligarchs", all kinds of Gusinsky-Berezovsky, while silencing the Russian deputies was not as easy as it is now.
It has been only a year after the Bialowieza collapse of the Soviet Union, ratified, by the way, the Supreme Council, but impatient Russians were expecting the arrival of capitalism, and behind him - an abundance of goods and well-being of the masses. Nothing like this has happened, except for a truly capitalist devaluation of the national currency and the constant firing "businessmen" to each other. As a result, some supporters of Boris Yeltsin have cooled their leader, and the Congress were invited to vote for the impeachment of the President from office. Was taken by secret ballot, and the proposal was not supported by a sufficient number of deputies.
The revolution came to an critical point. Still possible to curb the predators, the revolutionary flood turn for the benefit of the people and the Russian state. This required a simultaneous re-election and to appoint deputies and the President of Russia. It would be possible to go the other way - to approve the new Constitution of Russia, and then re-elect the executive widely representative government. Here then offered a third way, a completely non-constructive - to appoint poll Russians. This, as we now see, was the last treatment by the authorities to the people in the modern history of Russia.
The first such attempt to bring democracy to the people running the state was directly question citizens of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev had started in March 1991. Then, in the summer of 1991 at the initiative of the Leningrad City Council of Deputies of city residents were asked whether they wish to return to Leningrad its original name St. Petersburg? The results of the first survey on the preservation of the Soviet Union's updated, as we have seen in six months, the authorities have ignored. But the desire of the majority of the respondents on the banks of the Neva River to become residents of St. Petersburg, we, members of the Leningrad City Council, implemented in September 1991. Although, according to the witnesses alive, then mayor of Leningrad Sobchak in the previous year opposed the "rename", being the chairman of the Leningrad City Council and a candidate for mayor. He feared likely to lose blockade survivors of Leningrad, in the ranks of the voters.
The Congress of People's Deputies of the Russian Federation of 29 March 1993 adopted a resolution number 4684-I "On the All-Russian referendum 25 April 1993, summing up the results of the procedure and mechanism for implementation of the results of the referendum." The deputies of the St. Petersburg City Council also did not want to stay away from large-scale analysis of public opinion and added to Russia's own four ballots, which placed the two most important in the history of the city and the country's problem. The first to raise the status of the city up to the national level, the second convening of the Constitutional Assembly for the elaboration and adoption of the new Constitution of Russia.
The prosecutor of the city of St. Petersburg wanted to stop this local survey, as proposed by the Petrograd Soviet themes touched the all-Russian policy. But the city court ruled in favor of the Petrograd Soviet, and additional papers given away to citizens.
In the northern capital boil passions and then Yeltsin rallied supporters or defenders of the Supreme Council of Russia. No one at these meetings did not forbid people to freely express their opinions, sometimes in harsh terms, but remember, no massacre, neither the one nor the other party is not allowed.
Counted - have cheered up
1. Do you trust the President of the Russian Federation Boris Yeltsin? (58.7% answered "yes" to the whole of Russia, 72.7% - in St. Petersburg)
2. Do you approve of the socio-economic policies carried out by the President of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Russian Federation in 1992? (53%, 65%)
3. Do you think it necessary to hold early presidential elections in the Russian Federation? (49.5%, 23%)
4. Do you consider it necessary to hold early elections of People's Deputies of the Russian Federation? (67.2%, 48.9%).
5. For improving the status of St. Petersburg to the level of a republic within the Russian - 74.6%, for the adoption of the new Constitution of the Russian special Constitutional Assembly - 78.9% of city residents who took part in the vote.
Shows clearly that the residents of St.Petersburg, on the other hand, strongly supported the President trusted him more than in the whole of Russia, and therefore naively believed that Yeltsin will endow Northern Palmyra privileges of the republic, and call on the top of people's representatives for the scrupulous edit the new Constitution. Neither one nor the other president of Russia did not. The executive branch was pleased that the majority of Russians who took part in the survey, supported by the president and the course of reform.
The Kremlin had no one to listen to offers Petersburg deputies, because the results of the referendum were never able to resolve the political and constitutional crisis. It was necessary to dissolve the Soviets, which was done by Boris Yeltsin September 21, 1993. But St. Petersburg City Council, as the highest authority in the "pro-Yeltsin" the city was dissolved much later, three months later, after the popular approval of the new Constitution contained therein expanded powers of the president and the December elections to the State Duma and the Federation Council.
Ask the heroes of the Revolution
1. What, in your opinion, would have been to St. Petersburg, Russia, had proposed in St. Petersburg, the order of development of the Constitution was implemented in 1993?
2. Now referendums be held. And one can often hear that an objective assessment of the views of citizens on the policy states give opinion polls. Perhaps, and the election of deputies to replace the cheaper tools that offer scientists?
Alexander Bogdanov.
By the spring of 1993, all this was forgotten. We promote democracy and depose the Communist monopoly in 1989-1991, - gunpowder revolution. After the explosion of the powder turns into smoke, he was broke. And many of the specific people who have taken the revolutionary solutions, now you will not see on the political scene. Do not let them on the TV screen and on the radio.
The second. The result of a poll is largely predetermined by those who this poll order, pay, poses the question. And now authorities are customers that responses can be predicted without doing sociology. The political aspect of the Democratic Revolution 1990 - 1993's in the fact that people have the power to administer the communist past, tried to take possession of the property, before "the whole people." Think of vouchers and how Gaidar companions traveled to the city of Gorky to Nemtsov privatize retail stores. That historic referendum I remembered stopping the mouths of the opposition. In April 1993 I was in Moscow and wandered into the pro-Yeltsin meeting organized by Anatoly Chubais personally. Of course, he began to write critical poster on a sheet of paper tucked, but democratic vigilantes tied up and dragged me out of the room. Then he apologized, adding that in the difficult times we need not a criticism, but the consolidation of society around a strong political figure of the president of Russia.
Such is the paradoxical result of our democratic revolution for me: before the Revolution party officials and security officers "beat" me for having published the newspaper "anti-Soviet Pravda", after the press began to liberal reformers for the fact that I do not agree with the robbery of the country and the impoverishment the common people. Neither polls nor the elections will not help improve the situation, once suppressed freedom of speech in our country, as it was twenty years ago.
Sergei Egorov.
First of all, the Russian constitution would not be so bad. Let be preserved constitution of the RSFSR. It does not interfere with democratic reforms. Corrected and amended by deputies elected in the spring of 1990 on an alternative basis, the constitution, and I can not argue about it with anyone, in September 1993, was the best of the current, modern, Yeltsin.
The present constitution was the most authoritarian Russia in Europe, even worse than the French, and with which it is written off. The Constitution, figuratively speaking, it is - the name of the ship. Like its name, so the ship will sail. People can not live better than that provided for in the Constitution.
Here are a few fundamental flaws of our fundamental law. No democracy or equality that the Constitution does not provide for, so do not be surprised that we have not seen in our lives. And the fact that "some are more equal than" specifically laid down in this constitution, written by impostors volleys of tank shells fall of 1993, and not people's representatives at the constitutional assembly.
Not provided for in the current constitution and federalism also, so that in a single city of federal significance, such as St. Petersburg residents can not make your life better than the national average. We have no right to even shorten its city crooks and thieves.
If people have developed the constitution, specifically selected for this purpose, the basic law, for certain, would be higher quality, our boat was floating in a right direction, and we swam in it would not chained to the oars, and could even influence the selection of its the course.
We know the names, because of whom we now live so badly. These are the main authors of the project the current constitution Russia: Professor Sergei Alekseev, Sergey Shahrai, Anatoly Sobchak, and other persons approved by the commission, Boris Yeltsin. Nearly 800 people with varying degrees of activity and diligence involved in the short-term program from October to December 1993. They put their hand to the project, which was allegedly approved nationally in December 1993. Most of them are still surviving.
The second question I can only perceive as a bad joke.
Opinion poll null and void does not have. Force are the results of this survey, which is open to all citizens of the country, and which is conducted under the rules established representative government.
In the previous example with the adoption of the constitution in December 1993, I recall that the position of the voting approved the President. Norma was the most gentle. If more than fifty percent will vote, and the majority of them approve the draft constitution, and that's in the bag! Voting took place on December 12, 1993 simultaneously with the election of deputies of the State Duma of the first convocation. The turnout was 54.8%. For the adoption of the constitution voted 58.4% against - 41.6%. A new constitution was adopted, so the support of one third of the voters and Russia entered into force on the day of its publication in the "Russian newspaper" - December 25, 1993.
The authors, developers of the Constitution, which we note two decades, by the way, in December 2013, asserting that it was "a leap into the future", "a giant step toward democracy," etc. In particular, they boast, there was a second chapter, which lists the rights of man and citizen. But this chapter, unfortunately, the net return, not feasible in practice.
For example, no matter how "fair" elections were neither, now rules are such that we can not elect their representatives in government. The Constitution is the right to declare though, but not guaranteed.
That is - to achieve the management of the country representatives of the citizens, to subdue the power of the people - should be a major issue on the political agenda. The democratic revolution goes on and on until the benefit of the people. Indeed, while this will be the main issue is not even hope for improvement can not be. Penny the price of this "opposition" that does not even know to put on the agenda and that the main issue.
Remarks
Spring of '93. On the first channel broadcast a concert in support of the president and the government, proximate to the nationwide referendum. All in favor of reform and democracy should vote "Yes, Yes, No, Yes." Masters of Soviet and anti-Soviet culture carny.
20 years ago in the capital of Russia sinister crime committed against the people and democracy
It is difficult to think of any other case in history in which the will of the president in violation of the Constitution the supreme legislative body is not simply dissolved, but in public, in front of the whole world destroyed by tank shells. No wonder soon after the October massacre there were such an analogy, saying that on the orders of Hitler burned the Reichstag in Germany, but was empty on the orders of Pinochet in Chile were shot presidential palace and his defenders, but Pinochet was then president. A coup d'etat in Russia, that is, the gravest crime committed is the head of state.
"For the purpose of preserving the unity and integrity of the Russian Federation to bring the country out of the economic and political crisis, to ensure public and social security of the Russian Federation; restoration of the authority of the government, based on Articles 1, 2, 5, 121-5 Constitution of the Russian Federation, the results of the referendum April 25, 1993, decree: 1. Cancel exercise of legislative, administrative and control functions of the Congress of People's Deputies of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation. Prior to the new bicameral parliament of the Russian Federation - the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation - and its acceptance of the relevant authority to be guided by presidential decrees and regulations of the Government of the Russian Federation. "
This is a quote from the decree №1400 issued by Boris Yeltsin, September 21, 1993 and served as the starting point of future tragic events. Yeltsin, referring to the article of the Constitution, cynically trampled fundamental law of the state. "The powers of the President of the Russian Federation can not be used to change the nation-state structure of the Russian Federation, the dissolution or suspension of any of its duly elected government bodies. Otherwise, they will be terminated immediately, "reads 121th article of the most downtrodden and less than two weeks later he shot by the Constitution. No wonder after the parliament and suspended the decree of the Constitutional Court.
It turns out that it is "for safety" on October 3-4 in Moscow are killed hundreds of defenders of the House of the Soviets and the bystanders. A chief proponent in Yeltsin's interpretation of "unity and integrity of Russia" at that time was the head of the separatist Chechen Johar Dudayev. After Dudayev was one of the few regions of the then heads who publicly supported Yeltsin's actions, considering the decree number 1400 as "a correct perception of Moscow Chechen experience." As to the "overcoming the economic crisis" - this, too, everything is obvious. The Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation was the last obstacle in the way which has already begun looting of public property, set in the Soviet Union, when the Soviet government.
Судьба России в XXI веке
Философия блога.
Каким государством станет Россия в 21 веке: демократия, деспотия, монархия, олигархия, анархия или, может быть, гуманизм?Блог создан после выборов в представительные органы власти в декабре 2011 года, которые, по мнению проигравших партий, были сфальсифицированы.
Народ возмутился пренебрежением его мнением и вышел на митинги. Депутаты Ленсовета в те тревожные дни сделали соответствующие заявления.
Группа депутатов Ленсовета 21 созыва (полномочия с 1990 по 1993 год) и сегодня внимательно следят за судьбой России, публикуют в этом блоге свои газетные вырезки, ссылки на интересные сообщения в Интернете, наблюдения, заметки, предложения, статьи.
На страницах этого дневника вы найдете интересные статьи:
- Павел Цыпленков. Антисоветский переворот.
- Александр Сазанов. Колонка редактора. Теленавоз..
- Юрий Вдовин. Праздник на чужой улице.
- Сергей Басов. Гуманизм.
- Сергей Егоров. Судебная реформа: три главных направления.
Новейшая история России в книге
«Колбасно-демократическая революция в России. 1989-1993»
The Fate of Russia in XXI Century
Information about this site.
What kind of state will become Russia in the 21st century: oligarchy, despoteia, monarchy, anarchy, democracy or, perhaps, clericalism? A group of deputies of Lensoviet 21 convocation (powers from 1990 to 1993) today preoccupied follow the fate of Russia, put in this blog his Offers, Notes, observation, links to interesting posts on the Internet, articles, press clippings.
Blog launched after the election to representative bodies in December 2011, which, according to observers were rigged.
The people protested so obvious fraud and went rallies. Deputies of in while made declarations.
On the pages of this online journal - publication of the War, Economy, History, Politics, Culture, Finance:
- A.Sazanov. Editorial. TV manure.
- S.Basov. The humanism.
- L.Semashko. Si vis pacem, para bellum.
- P.Tsyplenkov. Fatherland and Freedom. Acquired and lost.
- S.Egorov. A judicial reform: three main directions.
- Yu.Vdovin. Savagery - the latest twist in the history of Russia?.
Комментариев нет :
Отправить комментарий