We have a choice. You can continue to tolerate, and complaining about the greed, fraud, ruthlessness and treachery of the oligarchs. We can say to ourselves that we are powerless before officials of the repressive apparatus and policies, which creates a huge social gap between the rich and the poor, wantonly destroying the environment, and leads people to untold suffering. Or we can unite to create a more rational, moral, prudent, sustainable and social society and appropriate culture. Destructive forces are already in place. Tomorrow comes today! Today we decide our destiny tomorrow!
“To know what was going to happen, it is enough to see that it was…
This comes from the fact that all human deeds are made by people
that had and always will have the same passion, and therefore
will inevitably have to give the same results”
March 10, the State Duma began consideration of the second reading of the bill on amendments to the Basic law.
During the meeting, United Russia Deputy Valentina Tereshkova offered to remove the limitation on terms for the current President or “record” that after the entry into force of the law on amendments to the Constitution the incumbent President is entitled to run for the office of the President.
This proposal was met with applause at the suggestion of speaker Volodina went on a break for consultations on this issue within the factions and the President.
Vladimir Putin, who came to the state Duma, to speak to MPs about the amendments, allowing him to again run for the presidency, supported “nullification” of presidential terms , provided that the constitutional court will give an official conclusion that such an amendment would not conflict with the principles of the Basic law.
Less than an hour after the speech of Vladimir Putin, the amendment of “zeroing” was supported by 380 deputies, 43 voted against and one abstained. Almost immediately after that, the bill on amendments to the Constitution were approved in the second reading.
March 16, 2020 , the Russian constitutional Court (CC), having considered the request of the President, acknowledged that the entry into force of the amendments to the Constitution proposed by the legislator and approved by the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, to the Constitution and the amendments are not inconsistent with the provisions of chapters 1, 2 and 9 of the Basic Law.
The COP has also recognized a constitutional amendment on so-called zeroing presidential terms. The COP concluded that “the constitutional principle of democracy implies the possibility of realization of people’s right to vote in free elections that the person he deems most worthy of the position of the head of state” and subject to “threats to the state and society”, States political and economic systems preference at the present time it is necessary to give stability rather than of change of power.
Its conclusion, the constitutional court once again clearly demonstrated, on the one hand – how cynical can easily overcome and trampled by a positive power of the principles laid down in the legal constitutions, and with another – in whose interests the constitutional court and his ilk perform their functions, Reaffirming the legitimacy of the decisions taken in the interests of the ruling elite, and thereby creating a precedent for society’s perception of those decisions as legitimate.
At the recently held press conference, the CEC Chairman , Ella Pamfilova has made it clear that voting for the amendment does not mean anything, they are already taken, and “the opinion of the people is not provided the current operating Constitution”.
“Already we all know that that procedure, in accordance with the current, the current Constitution, which took place, she already legitimitize those amendments which are accepted. It is absolutely legitimate, based on the fact that the legitimately elected state Duma and the Federation Council and our legitimate elected legislative assemblies of constituent entities of the Russian Federation. 2/3, 3/4 and 2/3 passed this law, adopted these amendments are in itself this process is legitimate and can only be treated with more respect to the fact that the President did not stop his political will, and the desire to hear, in this case does not present under the current Constitution, the opinion of the people.” – said Ella Pamfilova. Cm. https://zen.yandex.ru/media/rabotnik/glava-cik-ella-pamfilova-popravki-uje-legitimny-mnenie-naroda-ne-predusmotreno-5e7a017f6705ff4a55a23876.
More than a half century ago, like Calcarea the current Russian reality, the prophetic Frederick Bastiat wrote “When plunder (read corruption, betrayal of national interests) becomes a way of life of a group of people living together in society, they create legalizing its legal system (read the Constitution, the constitutional court, the judicial system of the Russian Federation) , and praised his moral code (read state-run media)”.
As for the present opposition of all stripes, with a perseverance worthy of a better cause, they’re comfortably sitting in armchairs, continue to tilt at windmills. Apparently, in addition to a permanent transfusion of a sieve, the insipid discussions of the moment, windbag calls for personal resignations and/or vote against amendments to the Constitution or boycott the vote, they now have nothing to offer the citizens of Russia.
Alas, most of the opposition still cannot figure out:
Firstly, it is a functioning political regime, and not formally adopted a legal Constitution, establishes a de facto existing, often unconstitutional methods of implementation of political power; the ways of interaction between society and the state; the extent of participation of citizens in government; the attitude of state institutions to the legal framework of its own activities; the degree of political freedom in society; the openness of the political (power) elites; the actual state of the legal status of the individual.
Second, formally adopted a legal Constitution – is nothing more than a key dogma of the ruling elites, which proclaimed good intentions of the authorities towards the people, it is the illusion of rights of man and citizen declared in the relevant articles of the Constitution, arbitrarily interpreted by the authorities to their advantage.
Thirdly, voting for the amendment means anything at all, they are already de facto accepted, and “the opinion of the people is not provided the current operating Constitution” (Ella Pamfilova).
V. I. Lenin argued: “… the most important “decisive” interests of classes can be satisfied only fundamental political reforms in General; in particular, the main economic interest of the proletariat can be satisfied only through a political revolution that replaces the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie by the dictatorship of the proletariat”.
However, we must note, in Russia today does not only real but also potential opposition forces, capable to carry out fundamental political transformations, and to implement the necessary transformation of the existing social order, in all its totality, in order to ensure sustainable human development in the country and deploy it from the colonial – export-raw to innovative socially oriented type of development, for the benefit of all the people of Russia and of the Russian state.
The key feature existing in Russia today, the social order is that it was designed and implemented on the fragments, more recently, powerful state, with the direct participation of the United States, the West, the direct complicity of top officials and corrupt elites. Russia is a de jure sovereign state, de facto was under powerful external control.
In 1992 Russia joined the IMFand the government of Yeltsin–Gaidar 1.06.92, was signed with the Fund “Letter of intent”, committing themselves to implement the program of “transition to market”, laws, codes, Constitution, designed only by the experts of the Fund.
The IMF, in turn, pledged to provide: their development and transmission to the government of the Russian Federation for “go to market”; the allocation of funds for their development by the IMF experts and implementation officials of the Russian Federation; to exercise control over their execution. That is responsible for the formation of institutions of a “market economy” in Russia, for the results de jure was transferred to the IMF, representing the economic interests of the United States, “seven”.
Yevgeny Fyodorov says: “today, power in Russia is focused on external control. <…> In that period (in the 90s) was produced by large-scale reconstruction of all state administration bodies“. Cm. Fedorov E. “A Coup. Technology betrayal.”: IG “All”; St. Petersburg; 2016, ISBN 978-5-9573-3016-5.
That elements of external control not conspiracy fiction, told personally by the head of state Vladimir Putin. How could it be that “the United States got access to all the top secret objects of the Russian Federation“, “in the Holy of holies of the Russian nuclear weapons complex: the enterprises engaged in development of nuclear warheads and ammunition, the production of plutonium and weapons-grade uranium In their premises, as is usual in this case, in a top secret Russian sites were American flags,” — said Putin.
“All this lasted for 10 years. In the framework of this agreement Russia had withdrawn from the military the treatment of 500 tons of weapons-grade uranium, equivalent to about 20 thousand nuclear warheads,” – said the head of state.
The West and today continues to provide constant powerful influence on Russia through the financial sector, giving “gently” recommendation to the Russian authorities through the IMF and “counseling” them through all kinds of structures. For example, the famous American consulting Agency PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and Oliver Wyman helped by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. KPMG Netherlands advises the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of economic development. British Deloitte & Touch helps the Ministry of economic development and the Ministry of construction of Russia and the Federal Antimonopoly service of the Russian Federation. The aforementioned PricewaterhouseCoopers is advising the Ministry of transport of the Russian Federation, the Federal property Agency, Ministry of education and science, FAS and the Ministry of construction.
A typical example of external control Russia – the document from the IMF, strictly regulating pension reform in Russia, entitled “Russian Federation staff report for consultation 2017 in accordance with article iv” (June 15, 2017). In this document , the IMF clearly indicates the Russian authorities when, how and with what parameters it is necessary to carry out pension reform. Here are some excerpts from the document:
“p. 16. The authorities are committed to fiscal consolidation.
<…> “While the approval of the pension reform can only occur some time after the presidential election, they discussed three sets of measures that can be considered: i) strengthening and alignment established in the legislation retirement ages; ii) reduction of pension benefits in case of early retirement; iii) the reduction of pension payments for pensioners who have not reached compulsory retirement age.”
The full text of the document can be downloaded at: http://www.imf.org/~/media/Files/Publications/CR/2017/Russian/cr17197r.ashx.
Examples of very “fruitful cooperation” between Russia and the IMF: the Budget rule, imposed by the IMF, according to which all revenues received from the sale of petroleum products at a price in excess of $ 40 per barrel, should be sent not to the real sector of the Russian economy, and for the purchase of the American currency then, to invest the national welfare Fund (NWF) and then output from Russia abroad (read USA); the Monetary policy of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, which many well-known economists, politicians and the opposition regard as direct treason and betrayal of national interests of Russia; Privatization of profitable state property of the Russian Federation , etc.
In connection with the foregoing, it seems unlikelythat large-scale constitutional reform 2020, started in Russia, could be carried out without direct or indirect participation of the United States and/or preliminary “consultations/recommendations” and approval from the United States, especially since the Constitution of 1993 was written, if not under the dictation of specialists of the United States, with their direct participation.
In our opinion, in the context of the foregoing, held in Russia the constitutional reform 2020, in part, is:
– To give new momentum and new forms completely bankrupt the current government and, thus, to cancel all its illegal and criminal acts before the people and the law (the reincarnation of the previous government in fact, but in new forms).
We emphasizethat it is not only in the “zeroing” of presidential terms, how much it is in new forms of powerthat continue, with a clean slate, will serve the interests of the United States and the West, unchanged to carry out colonial policy in Russia;
– Contribute to the legitimization of the “Yeltsin’s coup of 1993” and subsequent suicidal for Russia not a legal liberal reforms of the 90s and the legalization amassed as a result of these anti-national and criminal reforms of capital;
– Contribute to the realization of next stage of privatization of profitable state-owned in Russia to legitimize the results of privatization and to make them irreversible.
Note, one of the landmark decisions of the Russian government was the adoption of a regular program of privatization of property which is in Federal ownership, by three years from 2020 to 2022-th.
The plans of the current privatization “until 2022 envisages the privatisation of federally-owned shares of economic entities 207, 86 of Federal state unitary enterprises, as well as 1168 other types of property of the state Treasury of the Russian Federation”. “In particular, the project includes plans to reduce the state’s share in the Charter capital of the seven largest companies: Sovkomflot, VTB Bank, Makhachkala and Novorossiysk commercial sea port, “Rosspirtprom”, “almazuvelirexport”, Kizlyarskiy cognac plant,” said the MAYOR.
In this respect, implemented in Russia by the constitutional reform 2020 closely linked to the so-called “shock doctrine”: using the confusion of Nations and States, caused massive social upheaval, wars, terrorist attacks, natural disasters, popular uprisings, rebellions and revolutions, for the implementation of unpopular economic/political measures known as “shock therapy”. The three pillars upon which this strategy: privatization, deregulation and a sharp decline in social sector spending.
Milton Friedman and his associates worked out this strategy: wait for a deep crisis, then vigorously sell off state assets, which appeared and gained their value as a result of hard work of many generations, long-term investments nationwide money and knowledge in the development of the country, while citizens have not yet recovered from the shock and continue to do these “reforms” are legitimate and irreversible (one of the objectives of the constitutional reform 2020). He argued that the new government (the contours of which already appear in the constitutional reform 2020) is six to nine months, when it is possible to achieve major change, if she does not use this opportunity and take decisive actions during this period, she will not be given to other equally rich.
These ideas of Friedman open up new government opportunities for quick enrichment – only this time you need to subdue for new lands and countries, and the state, its public functions and assets of, sell all sorts of so-called auctions for prices far below their actual value.
Joseph Stiglitz, summarized the principles of shock therapists: “Only the rapid attack in the moment when the”fog of transition” opens a “window of opportunity” that allows to change before people will be able to protect its previous vested interests”. This is the shock doctrine.
Tested this doctrine was in Chile, and then repeatedly used in different countries of the world, including in Russia. In 1993, the decision of Boris Yeltsin,the pre-which has enlisted the support of the West and primarily the USA, to send tanks to open fire on the Parliament building, allowed the privatization of national property, at very low prices and gave rise to the infamous Russian oligarchs. At this time the head of the state property Committee was Anatoly Chubais, therefore his name is associated with privatization, and especially its disastrous consequences for Russia.
Note, the privatization of the 90s was carried out under the supervision of several dozen American experts , headed by a personnel scout Jonathan hay. “Experts” from the United States, as noted above, was admitted to the most secret defense companies that were involved in the production of nuclear weapons and weapons-grade plutonium.
Speaking about the Russian reformers of the 90s and the results of their policy, Columbia University Professor and Nobel laureate in Economics Joseph Stiglitz has noted: “the Greatest paradox is that their views on the economy was so unnatural, is so ideologically skewedthat they have not managed to solve even the more narrow goal of increasing economic growth. Instead they have a purely economic slowdown. No rewriting of history can’t change that“.
In the publication “the White book. Economic reforms in Russia 1991-2001” Sergei Glazyev and Sergei Batchikov write: “…over the years of reform the country in terms of socio-economic development was thrown back decades, and according to some parameters in the pre-revolutionary period. Never in the foreseeable future, even after the devastation from the Nazi invasion, there was no such prolonged and deep decline in the level of production in almost all sectors of the domestic economy”. It is estimated that Russia’s losses, as a result of the suicidal for Russia liberal reforms of 90-ies, were comparable to Soviet losses in world war II 1941-1945
In a moment of candor, Chubais told about the true purpose of privatization of the 90s: “We were not collecting money, and the destruction of communism. … we knew that every plant sold is a nail in the coffin of communism. Whether expensive, cheap, free, surcharge — twenty question, twenty. … Privatization in Russia and 97 in General was not an economic process. She decided on an altogether different scale of the problem … It was solved the main task — to stop communism. This problem we solved. We decided it completely”.
Above, we noted that according to the Minister of Finance Anton Siluanov privatization 2020-2022 gg is not a source of funds to address budget problems. A. Siluanov admitted that privatization is necessary to reduce the state’s share in the economy (recall recommendation M. Friedman) and is seen “only as a structural measure.”
The question arises: whether the privatization 2020-2022 gg., as “solely a structural measure”, by analogy with the privatization of the 90s, another Chubais nail, but now in the coffin of Russia?!
April 1, 2020.
To be continued
© 2020, paradox. All rights reserved.