Tuesday , February 18 2020
Home / Society / Ban ideology in the Constitution — harmful misunderstanding

Ban ideology in the Constitution — harmful misunderstanding



Запрет идеологии в Конституции — вредное недоразумение


Rector of St. Petersburg Humanitarian University of trade unions, a member-correspondent of the Russian Academy of Sciences, academician of the Russian Academy of education, doctor of culturological Sciences, Professor, honored science worker of the Russian Federation.


Ban ideology in the Constitution — harmful misunderstanding

I believe that renewed recently, the discussion about the appropriateness of the ban of ideology in the Constitution of Russia is not accidental. The problem of ideology becomes one of the most serious in the country’s development. Read the 13th article of the Constitution: “no ideology may be established as state or obligatory”. Weird. So no? No one can be required?

Ideology is a system of ideals, values, attitudes and beliefs through which a person expresses his attitude to the existing social reality in General and its specific aspects. One or the other ideology is the basis of any human activity. Activity is impossible without goals and objectives develops on the basis of ideology.

A state without goals? Government officials operating outside the conventional system of ideals, values, attitudes and beliefs? That is, one may, for example, Home value and the other not necessarily?

It is obvious that no state without ideology can not exist. The Russian Constitution is the ideology, embodied in the law. And all other laws contain ideology. State, method of its construction and operations — also an ideology, embodied in reality. Even from this point of view, Article 13 — denial of the Constitution itself. The ideology in Russia — something that exists but cannot be called by its name. Harmful situation.


If the ideology in society is not formulated, articulated, not recorded, there is “default”, then it cannot be discussed, challenged, comparable to other ideologies, to improve. Something like a reversion to the primitive (dumb) society.

Meanwhile, during the centuries of evolution in the world of practice, in which society prepares its interests in the form of various ideologies, and on this basis forms the political parties. The competition of ideologies of certain parties win and come to power, carrying out a further appropriate their ideology a policy on behalf of the state, having the “mandate” of most members of society. The victory of the party in the elections makes sense because ultimately, it is her ideology should be implemented by the state apparatus.

See also:  Yushchenko spoke about Ukraine's future

It is crucial that the organization of life of the state and society is impossible only by the adoption of laws (called in sociology hard regulators), since they must exist for morality, ethics, a set of cultural codes (soft controls), also based on ideology. The victory of the party in the elections means in a modern developed state not only the possibility of the adoption by Parliament of the laws relevant to its ideology, but also the duty of the bureaucracy to behave in accordance with soft regulators of this ideology.

The task of developing and improving national ideology always takes on the elite. The people appreciated the results, accept them or not accept. If the elite is successfully doing its duty in the country there comes a period of sustained socio-economic development. Unable to cope — the country gets in trouble.

Article 13 appeared in our Constitution, in the specific historical circumstances that have in the past. And lives like a loose scab, perebintovany to sagusa the wound.

The Constitution was prepared in April-November 1993 really the best minds in Russia at that time, and present, too. Many of them live and work among us, enjoy a well-deserved reputation. These people can explain in detail what factors the moment hung over them in the first place — the desire to take into consideration the bitter mistakes of the past and to put constitutional barriers to voluntarism of some new “Central Committee”, delete someone’s monopoly on the ideological development of the country.

In the commentary to the Constitution of 1994 (the outstanding jurist B. N. Ministry and others) have drawn attention to the consolidating in the ideological diversity that is in contrast to the monotony of the Soviet Constitution. Meant the right of the public to the competition of ideologies, the choice of the most corresponding to requirements of time and adjustment to it or revise as required by democratic procedures. Article 13 was understood by the jurists, and then as the guarantee of civil liberties, eliminating the persecution of people for their beliefs. That, of course, and it is very important.

But in the end, today turned out a ban on support for the government of any ideology in General, complete formal elimination of the state from the sphere of ideology. First of anything like that even thought: “the Developers sought to prevent in the future the new totalitarianism, when any came to power the political party wants to declare their ideology forever faithful, not subject to criticism and revision, told me a member of the constitutional court of the Russian Federation Gadis Hajiyev. — Now, reflecting on this situation in deeper and deeper, comparing with the canons of law, we face serious issues.”

See also:  In Moscow detained the student textbook and the Constitution

Alas, in the official commentary to the Constitution, its 13-th article of the head of the constitutional court V. D. Zorkin was forced to point out the prohibition for public officials to be guided in their work by anything except specific legislation. He notes that this prohibition also applies to other legal entities, including public enterprises, the Church, educational institutions, artistic creativity and other spheres of collective human activity. The author States that this constitutional provision “means a significant narrowing of the limits of state power.”

Formally, it turns out that no one can have any ideology other than individual. Only how he will take it is unclear. As is known, the ideology inherited not genetically transmitted. If you follow this understanding of the 13th article, in practice, the Newspapers can print only the legislative texts, instruction on gardening and use of Laundry detergent, and universities and schools to teach only scientific knowledge. However, this is questionable. Because the structure of the Universe, the notions of matter and the theory of evolution — also an ideology. Interesting fact is that the officials, acting within the framework of the 13th article, have no right to be guided by their moral principles!

Here is what writes about this eminent jurist I. A. Aleksandrov: “In fact, the ban on state ideology is nothing other than the prohibition of any advocacy by the state, prohibition of purposeful propaganda of humanistic, universal values through the structure of public authorities, through academic and educational institutions, causing negative consequences: legal nihilism, growing crime, crowding out public awareness public criminal consciousness”. In General, interesting happened in our country, the constitutional recognition of the role of ideology. Deeply original. There is no such anywhere else and no one. And does Russia need such originality is an issue requiring serious discussion.

Materials: Alexander Zapesotsky

© 2019, z-news.link. All rights reserved.

Check Also

The former head of the Federal penitentiary service has committed suicide in a courtroom

The former head of the Department of motor vehicles FSIN Victor Sviridov had committed suicide …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *