In the history of each country, there are years that are considered turning points at the change of eras. They are characterized by a rapid change of events at almost all levels. public life, an acute crisis, and often the outbreak of hostilities. This is exactly what happened in 1918 in the history of Russia. About the most prominent personalities of this period, the events that then unfolded on the territory of the country, and their significance for future generations, we will talk now.

On the eve of 1918

Before fully plunging into the maelstrom of the ups and downs of 1918, in order to understand their full depth and causes, it is necessary to briefly describe what events preceded it.

First, it must be said that the year 1914-1918 in the history of Russia and the whole world is the period of the First World War. Exactly given event served as the initial impetus for all the changes that took place in our country, as well as in most European states of that period. The Russian Empire, which had begun to rot, did not pull, either militarily or economically, for long-term hostilities. In fact, it could be predicted from the results Russo-Japanese War 1904-1905.

The Romanov dynasty, ruling for more than 300 years, began to rapidly lose its former authority. The events of the unfinished revolution of 1905 were only harbingers of the coming storm. And she soon exploded.

Certainly the most significant events on the eve of the described period, February and 1917 began. The first of them put an end to the autocracy of the Romanovs, and the second laid the foundation for a completely new model of statehood based on principles that had not been put into practice by anyone before.

But how viable the new state was to show the turning point in 1918 in the history of Russia.

Immediately after coming to power, the Bolshevik Party began a whole chain of reforms in the country.

On January 26, 1918, a Decree was issued announcing the beginning of the calendar reform. Its essence consisted in the transition from the Julian calendar used by the Orthodox Church, and until then considered official in Russian Empire, into Gregorian, introduced into use in most countries of the world, more accurately responding to the astronomical calendar. The reform was completed on February 14, when Soviet Russia officially switched to the new calendar system.

On January 28, the Decree of the Council of People's Commissars on the formation of the Workers 'and Peasants' Red Army was issued. This is what laid the foundation for the future greatness of the armed forces. Soviet Union.

On February 2, a Decree was announced that separated the Orthodox Church from the state. From that moment on, all religious directions in the country had formally equal rights, and religions were declared.

Negotiations with Germany

The primary and vital task for Soviet power was a way out of the First World War, which by that time for Russia, of course, had been lost. But, of course, there was no question of any complete surrender. It was necessary to conclude an agreement with the Central Powers, with which at that moment Russia was at war, on the most favorable terms for the latter, possible in the current difficult situation.

The importance of these negotiations for the Soviet government is evidenced by the fact that they started on December 22, 1917. They were quite difficult, since neither side wanted to make significant concessions.

The Soviet delegation was forced to reconsider its positions on many issues by the resumption of hostilities and a very successful advance German troops on the Russian-German front. These events prompted the Bolsheviks to make significant concessions.

Treaty of Brest-Litovsk

In 1918, the Brest-Litovsk peace treaty was finally signed. Soviet Russia agreed to significant territorial losses, including giving away Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic States, Finland, and a number of Transcaucasian regions. In addition, she pledged to pay significant sums of money in the form of reparations to the victorious powers, to stop hostilities against them and, in fact, to disband the army.

The Soviet government could not fail to understand that by signing this separate treaty, it would lose even illusory hopes for recognition of its legitimacy by the Entente countries, and would also get involved in direct confrontation with them. But there was no other way, since peace with Germany was a matter of survival.

The beginning of the formation of the White movement

From the very beginning of coming to power, the Bolsheviks had many opponents within Russia itself. The main core of their formation was the so-called White movement. He was joined not only by sincere monarchists, but also by supporters of republican models of statehood, more democratic than those that the Soviet government could offer, as well as other opponents of the Bolsheviks.

However, the leadership of the White movement, unlike the Soviet government, considered itself the legal successor of the Russian Empire and the Provisional Government, dissolved during October revolution. The signing of the separate Brest-Litovsk agreements with the delegations of the Central Powers contributed to the de facto recognition of the leaders of the White movement by the Entente countries as the legitimate government of Russia. Although with legal registration this provision they were in no hurry.

Volunteer army

The combat wing of the White movement was the Volunteer Army, which began to form at the end of 1917, first under the leadership of General Alekseev M.V., and then - Kornilov L.G. It is the latter that can be considered its real creator. final formation The Volunteer Army was completed on January 7, 1918.

But Kornilov was killed on April 13 of the same year during the liberation of Ekaterinodar from the Bolsheviks. The no less active Anton Ivanovich Denikin took over the leadership of the Volunteer Army.

These events show the depth of the political crisis that has covered the country. Awareness of its seriousness brought 1918 in the history of Russia. War was inevitable.

Intervention of the Entente countries

As mentioned above, the conclusion of a separate treaty with Germany and its allies put the Soviet government in direct confrontation with the Entente countries. Moreover, this conflict was not only purely political in nature, but also escalated into armed clashes. 1918 - 1920 in the history of Russia is characterized as the period of the most active phase of foreign military intervention.

The hostile actions of the Entente countries against Soviet Russia were initiated by the French landing in Murmansk in March 1918, as well as by blocking the Arkhangelsk port by the British fleet.

Later, when the Civil War in Russia was going on full swing, Vladivostok, Odessa, Kherson, Sevastopol, Batumi and other cities became the object of foreign aggression. The geography of the invasion expanded.

Joined the intervention British colonies and dominions, as well as countries that are not members of the Entente (USA, Japan and others).

Civil War

1918-1922 in the history of Russia is characterized as a period civil war. Although many historians count its beginning from 1917, and consider 1924 as the date of completion. But the most active actions, of course, begin to unfold precisely in the period we are studying.

By the spring of 1918, the Volunteer Army was fully formed as a combat-ready force that could challenge the Bolshevik Red Army.

Since March, active fighting. The uprising against the power of the Soviets first covers the region of the Don Cossacks, and then the Kuban. In particular, it was during the assault on Yekaterinodar that the first commander of the Volunteer Army, Kornilov Lavr Georgievich, died.

White movement in eastern Russia

In June, a committee of members of the All-Russian Constituent Assembly(KOMUCH), who considered himself the successor to the Provisional Government of Kerensky. Was created People's Army KOMUCH, which was the eastern front of the White movement. She entered into hostilities with the Red Army of the Bolsheviks, however, with little success.

In September 1918, the Provisional All-Russian Government (Ufa Directory) was created in Ufa on the basis of KOMUCH. In turn, after unsuccessful political and military actions, it was dissolved in November by Admiral Kolchak. Then in Omsk he was appointed the Supreme Ruler of Russia, and from that moment he was recognized in Russia. Immediately he showed himself to be a very active leader and an excellent commander, having won several important victories over the Bolsheviks. However, the peak of his political and military glory came in the next year, 1919.

All new unexpected turns brought 1918 in the history of Russia. Events rushed without slowing down.

Execution of the Romanovs

One of the most controversial events that marked the year 1918 in the history of Russia was the execution by the Bolsheviks on July 17 in Yekaterinburg of the Romanov royal family, headed by former emperor Nicholas II. Until now, historians have not agreed on how expedient this act of cruelty was, and whether members of the dynasty that had lost popularity among the people really represented real threat for the Soviet government.

National separatism

1918 in the history of Russia was also marked by the rise national separatism in the regions that were part of the Romanov power. Some state formations on the ruins of the empire managed to defend their independence (Poland, Finland, the Baltic countries), others were forced to cede their sovereignty in the course of a difficult struggle (UNR, Georgia), others were generally a fiction that never had real instruments of power (BNR), the fourth, in fact, were satellites of Soviet Russia ( Far Eastern Republic, Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Republic, LitBel, etc.).

The most tragic year was 1918 in the history of Ukraine. Here a struggle unfolded between the troops of the Ukrainian nation state(UNR), who replaced him with the hetmanate of Skoropadsky, Volunteer army Denikin, the Red Army of the Bolsheviks and various anarchist, and sometimes just gangster armed formations.

Notable personalities

All of the above events could not have happened without action specific people. Let's see who most influenced the situation that 1918 formed in the history of Russia, who ruled, led the troops, and shaped the political atmosphere.

Let's start with the representatives of the Soviet government. Undoubtedly, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, who was both the leader of the Bolshevik Party and the Soviet state, had the greatest influence on events from this side. It was he who largely influenced the events that made 1918 a turning point in the history of Russia. Photo of Lenin can be seen below.

In addition, such party functionaries as Leon Trotsky, Lev Kamenev, Felix Dzerzhinsky played a significant role, Joseph Stalin began to gain more and more weight. In addition, such commanders of the Red Army as Mikhail Frunze, Grigory Kotovsky and others became famous during this period.

The most active organizers of the White movement, as mentioned above, were Lavr Kornilov and Anton Denikin, and by the end of 1918, Admiral Alexander Kolchak came forward.

Results

Thus, by the end of 1918, the young soviet state was in the ring of enemies, which was formed from representatives of the White movement, local national formations and foreign interventionists. The struggle was just beginning, but the Soviet government did the main thing - it held on to the first wave of enemy pressure. This fact, as well as the disunity of the opponents of the Bolsheviks, which turned into an open armed struggle between them, led to the fact that the fate of the country for the next 70 years was a foregone conclusion. However, the consequences of that significant year palpable even now.

In order to adequately perceive the changes taking place in the political system of Russian society, it is necessary to know what served as the basis for building a modern political system.

In October 1917, the Provisional Government was overthrown as a result of an armed uprising, and once again the question arose in Russia of creating a new system supreme bodies state power. The decision of this issue was undertaken by the II All-Russian Congress of Soviets, which met in Petrograd on October 25-26, 1917. The first act adopted by the congress was the Decree "On the Establishment of the Council of People's Commissars", as the highest body of executive power until the convocation of the Constituent Assembly.

During the elections to the Constituent Assembly, only 25% of voters voted for the Bolsheviks. Even in alliance with representatives of the only party supporting them, the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries, they could not form a ruling majority (out of those present at the meeting, they together accounted for 38.5%). The proposal submitted by the Bolsheviks for approval to the Constituent Assembly, to declare Russia a republic of Soviets, in which all power in the center and in the localities belongs to the Soviets, did not receive support. After a lengthy debate, the proposal of the Socialist-Revolutionaries to proclaim the state a Russian Democratic Federative Republic was accepted.

The decision taken by the Constituent Assembly did not suit the Bolsheviks, and by the Decree of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of January 7 (20), 1918, it was dissolved.

Due to the fact that the hopes of the Bolsheviks to legitimize the political regime with the help of the Constituent Assembly did not materialize, the question arose of giving it legality in a different way, which was done by adopting the first Soviet Constitution on July 10, 1918 by the V All-Russian Congress of Soviets.

The All-Russian Congress of Soviets was declared the supreme authority in the RSFSR. It was formed through multi-stage elections from among the representatives of local congresses of Soviets. The representation rate was not equal: representatives of city councils were elected at the rate of 1 deputy per 25,000 voters, and representatives of provincial councils at the rate of 1 deputy per 125,000 voters.

The All-Russian Congress of Soviets was a body that acted on a non-permanent basis, and therefore, in the period between its meetings supreme authority The All-Russian Central Executive Committee (VTsIK) was announced in the country.

The scope of the competence of the Congress of Soviets went far beyond the legislative body, including the powers of the executive body of state power. Moreover, a number of issues could not be resolved by a collegiate body of this magnitude. The overwhelming majority of issues within the competence of the congress simultaneously fell within the competence of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee. The Constitution assigned only two issues to the exclusive competence of the Congress of Soviets: the establishment, addition and amendment of the basic principles of the Constitution and the ratification of peace treaties.

Thus, the All-Russian Congress of Soviets, being the highest legislative body, performed its functions nominally. In reality, the whole legislature and a significant part of the executive power belonged to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee. This conclusion is confirmed by the practice of legislative activity of this period.

After the formation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in December 1922, the question arose of creating a new structure of state authorities.

With the formation of the USSR, the legal status of Russia changed, and the need arose for its constitutional consolidation. The new Constitution of the RSFSR, adopted in 1925, reproduced the design of legislative bodies and the procedure for their formation, enshrined in the former Basic Law. However, there have been some changes in the scope of competence of the legislature. The exclusive powers of the congress, in addition to ratifying peace treaties and establishing and amending constitutional principles, now included the right final approval partial changes to the Constitution of the RSFSR adopted by the sessions of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee, as well as the final approval of the constitutions of the autonomous republics.

Changes in the socio-economic development of the USSR and the subjective position of its political leadership led to the adoption in 1936 of a new Constitution of the USSR. By analogy, new constitutions were adopted by the union republics included in it. In the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, the Constitution was adopted on January 21, 1937 by the Extraordinary XVII All-Russian Congress of Soviets.

The new Constitution introduced significant changes in the structure and procedure for the formation of the legislative bodies of the RSFSR. The advantages include: replacement of the two-stage system by a single supreme legislative body - the Supreme Council; consolidation at the constitutional level of the institution of parliamentary immunity; consolidation of the institution of universal, equal, direct elections of the Supreme and other Soviets by secret ballot.

The role of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee in new structure State power was exercised by the Presidium of the Supreme Council. He issued decrees containing the most important normative instructions, and he was also assigned the right to interpret the laws of the RSFSR. With this practice, the actual legislative body of state power in the country turned out to be not the Supreme Council, but the Presidium elected from among its members. In addition to this, it is necessary to note the practice of electing deputies of the Supreme Soviet, which excluded the possibility of nominating several candidates for one mandate.

In the Constitution of the USSR of 1977, in Article 6, the role of the CPSU was fixed as the core of the Soviet political system, the leading and guiding force of Soviet society. This provision was duplicated in the constitutions of the union republics. The Constitution of the RSFSR of 1978 also included a provision establishing that draft laws submitted for consideration by the Supreme Council of the RSFSR are discussed at its meetings, and a list of subjects of legislative initiative in the Supreme Council appeared, as well as the fact that the laws of the RSFSR are adopted not only by the Supreme Council but also by popular vote (referendum).

In Russia from October 1917 to 1989. formed an unparalleled developed countries system of public authorities. The Congresses of Soviets (later - the Supreme Soviets) of the RSFSR were legislative bodies only formally, they carried out only certain legislative functions. In practice, this role was performed by the party-state bureaucracy represented by the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers (until March 1946 - the Council People's Commissars). The courts were completely controlled by the party organs and the executive branch.

Significant changes in political life The USSR and the RSFSR began in 1989-1990. In February 1990, the CPSU abandoned its fixed status quo, as a result of which Article 6 of the USSR Constitution was canceled, which was reflected in the organization of state power and the implementation of the principle of separation of powers in the activities of federal bodies. However, the process of introducing amendments and additions to the Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1978 was carried out inconsistently, without any plan of state-legal reform developed in advance.

In 1989, elections were held for people's deputies of the USSR and in 1990 - people's deputies of the RSFSR on an alternative basis. The principle of "full power of the Soviets", incompatible with the principle of separation of powers, had a dominant influence on the structure, essence and nature of the activities of the legislative bodies of the USSR and the RSFSR. Therefore, to simultaneously overcome this approach and for a relatively short term it was impossible to create the theory and practice of Russian parliamentarism. For the reasons noted above, the Constitution of the Russian Federation in a later edition (1992) is of a transitional nature and combines both elements of the former concept of “full power of the Soviets” and elements of parliamentarism in the structure and organization of the activities of state power.

The system of public authorities, according to this Constitution, is based on the principle of separation of powers, as well as the delimitation of jurisdiction and powers between the Federation and its subjects. However, in violation of this fundamental principle, the Congress of People's Deputies of the Russian Federation was declared the supreme body of state power. Thus, the congress was placed above the system of state bodies based on the principle of separation of powers and delineation of jurisdiction and powers. Moreover, the congress was given the right to take into consideration any issue within the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation, thereby violating the principle of separation of powers not only horizontally, but also vertically (between the federation, its constituent entities and local self-government).

To exercise a significant amount of legislative powers, in addition to the congress, another body was provided: the Supreme Council, which was referred to as the body of the Congress of People's Deputies, a permanent legislative, administrative and control body of state power. The formula of the article, fixing the legal status of the Supreme Council, suggested that it should not be a purely legislative body of state power, since it combined the powers of two or even three branches of power.

In accordance with the Constitution, the Supreme Council was formed not by voters, but by the Congress of People's Deputies from among its members. Although elements of representativeness were still present in the selection of members of the Supreme Council, and even the principle of their rotation, which is unconventional for our country, was used, in this case we can talk about an attempt by the party-state bureaucracy to reproduce the dual system of legislative bodies traditional for our country: the Congress of Soviets - the All-Russian Central Executive Committee, the Supreme Council - Presidium, Congress of People's Deputies - Supreme Council.

The Supreme Council had a bicameral structure, and the chambers differed in the specifics of their activities, were equal in rights and had equal powers in the legislative process, and considered the same bills. Sessions of chambers passed mainly separately.

The legislative process did not end with the adoption of the law by the congress or the Supreme Council. This was followed by the procedure for signing the law by the president. Although the laws adopted by the congress or the Supreme Council had no formal differences in legal force, the procedure for signing them was different. In particular, the laws adopted by the Congress were subject only to promulgation by the President. His signature under them was of a formal nature, since he did not have the right of veto over them. On the laws adopted by the Supreme Council, the president could impose a suspensive veto within the prescribed 14-day period, which was overcome by the usual majority of votes of deputies of each of the chambers. In practice, deputies in most cases agreed with the president's remarks and made the necessary changes to the text of laws.

According to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, as amended in 1992, the Congress of People's Deputies is proclaimed the highest body of state power, which has not only legislative, but also a number of constituent functions in relation to the executive and judicial authorities. If we proceed from the fact that the congress is a parliament, then in this way a parliamentary republic was established in Russia.

As a result of a referendum in 1990, the post of president was established in the country with fairly broad powers. In accordance with the Constitution, he was elected by citizens on the basis of universal, equal, direct suffrage. The first presidential elections were held on June 12, 1991, at which B.N. Yeltsin was elected President of the Russian Federation.

Thus, the nature of the form of government and the organization of state power can be defined as a presidential-parliamentary republic of the Soviet type.

Mixed forms of government, as practice shows, are not sustainable, and the crisis of this form of government in Russia has historically been quite natural, as evidenced by the events of October 1993, which were initiated by the presidential decree "On a phased constitutional reform in the Russian Federation." As a result, the activities of the Congress of People's Deputies and the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation were interrupted and the system of the country's authorities was radically changed.

The Constitution of the RSFSR of 1918 is the constitution of Russia in 1918-1937. It was adopted by a resolution of the V All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers, Peasants, Red Army and Cossack Deputies on July 10, 1918. Proclaimed the All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers', Peasants', Red Army and Cossack Deputies the highest body of state power.

State structure

The All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers', Peasants', Red Army and Cossack Deputies, which was not a permanent body and was convened by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of Soviets of Workers', Peasants', Red Army and Cossacks' Deputies (VTsIK SRKKiKD) was proclaimed the supreme body of state power once a year for a relatively short period. All the rest of the time, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the SRKKiKD worked without control by representative bodies, which created opportunities for it to abuse power up to turning it into a “collective monarch” - this was especially pronounced even before the adoption of the constitution of 1918, when the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the SRKKiKD (which consisted mainly of members and supporters of the RCP (b)) in May-June 1918 invalidated the elections to the councils of workers' and peasants' deputies, which were won by the RSDLP and the AKP, and later (June 14, 1918) and canceled the mandates of all members and supporters of these parties in the current workers' councils and peasant deputies. The Permanent All-Russian Council of Workers' and Peasants' Deputies, which called for the creation of the RSDLP(b) in March-October, was never created. At the same time, the All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers, Peasants, Red Army and Cossack Deputies was proclaimed a sovereign body - it could pass laws, budget, establish taxes, ratify international treaties. Elections to the All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers, Peasants, Red Army and Cossack deputies were not universal - people living on unearned income were excluded from the elections; were not equal - city councils and village councils sent different number delegates were not direct - the All-Russian Congress was elected by city councils and provincial congresses of councils.

[edit] Local government

Local government bodies were local congresses of councils of workers, peasants and Red Army deputies, which were also not permanent bodies and were convened by local executive committees. Permanent provincial councils of workers, peasants and Red Army deputies in those provinces in which they were, were dissolved and replaced by non-permanent congresses of councils of workers, peasants and Red Army deputies. Local bodies of state power in towns and villages were city councils of workers and Red Army deputies and village councils of peasant deputies, which were permanent bodies. They were elected by the workers and peasants for a period of 3 months. At the same time, the members of these councils could be recalled by voters.

[edit] Meaning

Political system, established by the constitution of 1918, was practically not changed by the constitution of 1925 and lasted until 1937.

The Constitution of the USSR of 1924 is the first fundamental law of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; was approved by the Second Congress of Soviets of the USSR in January 1924.

The state structure based on Soviet power and the dictatorship of the proletariat, enshrined in the Constitution of 1924, reflected the multinational character of the Soviet Union.

The adoption of the Constitution contributed to the recognition of the USSR by foreign powers.

As necessary, amendments and additions were made to the text of the Constitution. In 1936 it was accepted new constitution THE USSR.

Adoption history

In December 1922, the First Congress of Soviets of the USSR approved the Declaration and Treaty on the Formation of the USSR. The agreement was signed by four republics: Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and the Transcaucasian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (which included Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan). Each of the republics already had its own constitution. The congress decided to draw up an all-union constitution. On January 10, 1923, the Presidium of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR formed 6 commissions to prepare the future Constitution:

Commission for the creation of regulations on the Council of People's Commissars, STO and People's Commissariats of the USSR

budget commission

Commission for the development of regulations on the Supreme Court of the USSR and the OGPU

Commission for Approval of the State Flag and Emblem of the USSR

Commission for the development of regulations on the Central Executive Committee of the USSR and its members

commission on the personnel of people's commissariats and collegiums.

On June 26-27, the draft Constitution was discussed, supplemented and approved by the Plenum of the Central Committee of the RCP (b). On July 6, the II session of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR approved the draft Constitution of the USSR and adopted a resolution "On the Enactment of the Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics." On January 31, 1924, the Constitution was unanimously adopted by the Second Congress of Soviets.

[edit] Structure of the 1924 Constitution

The Constitution of the USSR consisted of two sections:

Declaration on the formation of the USSR

Treaty on the formation of the USSR.

[edit]Declaration of the formation of the USSR

The declaration formulated the principles of association (voluntariness and equality), special character national policy of the Soviet state. She did not just declare the creation of the Union. She set him a goal, being permeated with the aspirations of the world revolution that reigned at that time. Quotes from the Declaration:

“Since the formation of the Soviet republics, the states of the world have split into two camps: the camp of capitalism and the camp of socialism.”

"Access to the Union is open to all socialist Soviet republics, both existing and having to arise in the future"

"the new union state ... will serve as a faithful bulwark against world capitalism and a new decisive step along the path of uniting the working people of all countries into the World Socialist Soviet Republic.

[edit] Treaty on the formation of the USSR

Main article: Treaty on the formation of the USSR

The agreement as amended by the Constitution of 1924 included 11 chapters:

Chapter I

Chapter II. On the Sovereign Rights of the Union Republics and on Union Citizenship

Chapter III. About the Congress of Soviets of the USSR

Chapter IV. On the Central Executive Committee of the USSR

Chapter V. About the Presidium of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR

Chapter VI. About the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR

Chapter VII. O Supreme Court the USSR

Chapter VIII. On the People's Commissariats of the USSR

Chapter IX. About the United State Political Administration

Chapter X. About the Union Republics

Chapter XI. About the emblem, flag and capital of the USSR

[edit] Main provisions of the 1924 Constitution

The First Union Constitution gave an exhaustive list of subjects of jurisdiction. According to the Constitution, the exclusive jurisdiction of the Union included:

foreign relations and trade,

solving issues of war and peace,

organization and leadership of the armed forces,

general leadership and economic and budget planning,

development of the foundations of legislation (all-union justice).

The approval and amendment of the basic principles of the Constitution were within the exclusive competence of the Congress of Soviets of the USSR. The union republic retained the right to secede from the USSR, the territory could be changed only with its consent. A single union citizenship was established.

The Supreme body of the USSR was declared the Congress of Soviets of the USSR, elected from the city Soviets and from the provincial congresses of Soviets. At the same time, a system of indirect elections of congress delegates was established.

In the period between congresses, the supreme authority was the Central Executive Committee (CEC) of the USSR, which consisted of the Union Council (elected by the congress from representatives of the republics in proportion to the population) and the Council of Nationalities (composed of representatives of the union and autonomous republics).

Between sessions of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR, the highest legislative body was the Presidium of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR (elected at a joint meeting of the chambers), which could suspend the decisions of the congresses of councils of the Union republics and cancel the decisions of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR, People's Commissariats of the USSR, the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the Union Republics.

The Central Executive Committee of the USSR formed the highest executive and administrative body - the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR, which included the chairman of the Council of People's Commissars, his deputies and ten people's commissars.

The change in the status of the union republics in the process of the formation of the USSR was expressed in the fact that they became part of the federal union and fell under the subordination of its authorities and administration. The jurisdiction of the republican bodies began to extend to those areas and issues that did not constitute the exclusive competence of the Union. The interests of the republics were represented in the structures of the union bodies (the Presidium of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR, the Council of Nationalities) by their representatives.

According to the Constitution, the center received significant powers to control the periphery. The constitution aimed to create a new political culture - "proletarian in content and national in form", and was a compromise between the communist plans for general unification and national traditions.

On July 4 - 10, the V All-Russian Congress of Soviets (the Fifth All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers', Soldiers', Peasants' and Cossacks' Deputies) takes place in Moscow, which on July 10 adopted the first Constitution of the Soviet state and a resolution on the construction of a mass regular workers' and peasants' Red Army.
***
On July 4, 1918, the 5th All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies opened in Moscow. The work of the congress proceeded in an atmosphere of exacerbation of the civil war. By this time, the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries had also taken the path of open anti-Soviet struggle and counter-revolutionary rebellions, who, in the spring of 1918, in protest against the signing of the Brest peace Soviet government.
Expressing the interests of the kulaks, they strove to prevent the development of a socialist revolution in the countryside and opposed the organization of committees. During the meetings of the Fifth Congress of Soviets, the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries raised a counter-revolutionary revolt in Moscow and with a provocative goal, hoping to disrupt Brest Peace, killed the German ambassador Mirbach. The Left SRs wanted to seize power, kill Lenin, Sverdlov and other leaders of the Communist Party and the Soviet government, liquidate the Soviet system and again plunge Russia into the imperialist war.
The anti-Soviet rebellion of the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries caused nationwide indignation. In a conversation with an employee of the Izvestiya VTSIK newspaper, V. I. Lenin noted that “the criminal terrorist act and the rebellion completely and completely opened the eyes of the broad masses of the people to the abyss into which the people's Soviet Russia is being dragged by the criminal tactics of the Left SR adventurers. The rebellion was liquidated within a few hours. The Fifth All-Russian Congress of Soviets decided to expel the Left Social Revolutionaries from the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Soviets.
The congress summed up the results of the first socialist transformations in the country. VI Lenin made a report on the activities of the Council of People's Commissars. He emphasized that the experience of work over the past months confirmed the correctness of the internal and foreign policy Soviet power. “... There is not a shadow of a doubt,” said V. I. Lenin, “that if we follow the path that we have chosen and which events have confirmed, if we firmly and steadily follow this path, if we do not give a single phrase If neither illusions, nor deceit, nor hysterics lead us astray, then we have the greatest chances in the world to hold out and help the firm victory of socialism in Russia, and thereby help the victory of the world socialist revolution!
The congress approved the activities of the Soviet government.
On July 10, the congress adopted the Constitution of the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic (RSFSR), the world's first socialist multinational state based on the principles of genuine democracy. It consolidated what had already been created by revolutionary creativity populace. Speaking to the delegates of the Fifth All-Russian Congress of Soviets, V. I. Lenin said: “If we can now propose a Soviet constitution to this congress, it is only because the Soviets have been created and tested in all parts of the country, because you created it, you all parts of the country experienced; only six months after the October Revolution, almost a year after the First All-Russian Congress of Soviets, we could write down what already exists in practice.
The Constitution of 1918 established that the leadership of the Soviet state belongs to the working class, which exercises power in alliance with the many millions of poor peasants. It legislated state ownership of land, the nationalization of factories, factories, banks, railway and water transport, the monopoly of foreign trade, as well as the socialist principle of labor organization - the duty of all to work ("who does not work, he does not eat"). It fixed the great democratic rights and freedoms won by the working people - the right to work, to education, freedom of speech, conscience, press, demonstrations, rallies, processions, etc., the equality of citizens regardless of their race or nationality, the equality of men and women . All citizens over the age of 18, with the exception of representatives of the overthrown exploiting classes and groups, were granted voting rights. “Proletarian democracy,” said V. I. Lenin, “is a million times more democratic than any bourgeois democracy; Soviet power is a million times more democratic than the most democratic bourgeois republic.
According to the Constitution, all nations were granted the right to self-determination up to secession and the formation of independent states. By proclaiming that the Russian Republic was established on the basis of a free union of free nations, the Constitution thus laid a solid foundation for the friendship of the peoples of Russia, legitimized the principle of proletarian internationalism, created important preconditions for the subsequent formation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
The adoption of the first Soviet Constitution meant the strengthening of the revolutionary legal order, the creation of a uniform system of government bodies in the center and in the regions. The Constitution summed up all the experience accumulated by the working people in building Soviet power.
The first Soviet Constitution was of great international importance. Its great ideas and principles have had a profound impact on the development of the world revolutionary movement. Protecting the interests of the working people, strengthening the equality and friendship of peoples, it served as an inspiring example for all the exploited and oppressed, fighting for their political, national and social liberation.

Insurance in the USSR (1918-1988)

In the early years of Soviet power, an attempt was made to introduce a system of free public services and to prohibit all commercial activity. Under these conditions, the institution of insurance ceased to exist. By a decree on November 28, 1918, all insurance companies operating in the country were liquidated, on November 18, 1919, life insurance contracts were canceled (without any payments), and on October 18, 1920, the insurance institute was abolished altogether, replaced by a free assistance to the population in case of emergency. However, due to the lack of resources and the severity of the Civil War, this scheme to help those in need remained on paper. life insurance property tourist

In 1925, state insurance operations were carried out on the basis of all-union legislation, the laws of the union republics published in its development, as well as the general rules of insurance and tariffs. In addition to the State Insurance of the USSR, cooperative organizations had the right to engage in insurance, they were allowed to organize mutual insurance of their own property instead of compulsory state insurance, subject to control and supervision by the Main Directorate of the State Insurance and reinsurance from the latter in a certain proportion of their risks. In addition, it was allowed People's Commissariat lines of communication insurance of passenger luggage with the collection of special insurance fees from the declared value, and the People's Commissariat of Posts and Telegraphs - postal items.

With the development of foreign trade, the question arose of the need to include export and import insurance in the range of operations of the State Insurance. Negotiations between the State Insurance Company and foreign insurance companies began in the middle of 1922, and only on March 11, 1924, the first reinsurance agreement was concluded with London Insurance.

In 1925, operations were launched in Persia (Iran). In 1926, a branch of the State Insurance was established in Tehran and in China.

In the west, in order to serve the interests of Soviet exports and imports, in 1925 in London, Gosstrakh was organized with the participation of the People's Commissariat for Foreign Trade and the Central Union of the Black Sea-Baltic General insurance company("Blackbalsy" or "Bibi") with a capital of 100 thousand pounds. In Germany (in Hamburg) a company is created under the name of the Black Sea-Baltic Transport Insurance Company ("Sofag"), the charter of which was approved on September 1, 1927.

In 1928, an agreement was concluded on cooperation between Gosstrakh and Gostrudsberkass, the predecessors of the Sberbank of Russia, according to which Gostrudsberkass, under the control of Gosstrakh, carried out personal insurance operations.

By the mid 1930s. there was a need to reconsider the attitude to the insurance of state property. Its cancellation was reflected in the pace of recovery of enterprises affected by insured events. On February 3, 1938, the Decree “On State Insurance of the Property of Enterprises, Institutions and Organizations” was adopted. Gosstrakh got the opportunity to carry out voluntary insurance of property belonging to enterprises and organizations; cooperative, trade union and public organizations. Compulsory insurance of public housing stock was also introduced. The changes, however, concerned organizations that were in local budgets - those that were in more high budgets(republican and allied) were not subject to the newly introduced insurance.

In 1934, the State Insurance was transferred to the affairs of personal insurance, in 1936 there was a merger with the Board of the State Insurance, which in 1931 was organized for the purposes of foreign trade insurance.

On December 5, 1936, the Constitution of the USSR entrusted state insurance to the sphere of responsibility of the highest bodies of state power of the USSR.

The Second World War radically changed the conditions in which insurance operations had to be conducted. The main task the industry began to fight losses from military operations, which required the adaptation of norms and tariffs, which followed in the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of July 8, 1942 “On Amending and Supplementing the Law on Compulsory Salary Insurance”. By more than 50%, the provision rates for the insurance of agricultural crops and animals were increased. Nevertheless, compulsory insurance was not enough, therefore, in the same 1942, a resolution “On voluntary insurance of crops, animals and means of transport” was adopted, which expanded insurance coverage by specified species. The importance of these measures was due to the need to both produce food for the army and the civilian population, and make up for losses in agriculture from military action. Tariffs for voluntary property insurance have also been substantially revised. A transition was made from a unified tariff to a differentiated one, taking into account the degree of risk of the insurance object. The Blackbalsea Company actively insured the deliveries of weapons, equipment and food carried out by the allies of the USSR (mainly the USA) under lend-lease and counter deliveries of gold (as well as timber) in payment for these deliveries.

In addition to agriculture, state insurance contributed to the development of industry. Since the beginning of the war, a significant part large enterprises, producing consumer goods, reorganized in a military way and was busy supplying the army. In wartime conditions, the preservation of the existing housing stock acquired particular importance. The obligation to insure public housing stock contributed to the timely restoration of buildings after fires and other natural disasters. For 1941-1945 State Insurance paid about 600 million rubles for the restoration of property destroyed by natural disasters, including 430 million rubles for collective farms.

Great importance was attached to insurance in areas freed from German occupation It was carried out on very favorable terms. The previously canceled responsibility of Gosstrakh for compulsory insurance of property of collective farms, citizens and state housing stock was immediately restored, voluntary insurance contracts remained in force until the end of the period provided for in them.

In December 1942, collective life insurance was liquidated and the following types of individual insurance were introduced:

• - mixed insurance with the responsibility of the State Insurance in case of death, disability and survival;
• - mixed insurance with additional payment of pensions;
• - simplified mixed insurance;
• - insurance in case of death from any cause and disability resulting from an accident;
• - accident insurance.

During the war years, individual life insurance was not widely used and plans, as a rule, were not carried out. In some republics and regions, more long-term life insurance was terminated ahead of schedule than new policies were issued. Therefore, the task of the insurance authorities was to consolidate success and avoid portfolio shrinkage.

In the 1950s On the basis of the decisions of the 20th Congress of the CPSU, the party and the government carried out a number of large-scale measures to reduce centralization in economic management and increase the importance of the union republics in economic and cultural development. One of the measures to increase the role and expand the rights of the Union republics was the reorganization of the insurance business. Decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR of April 17, 1958 "On the transfer local authorities Gosstrakh of the USSR under the jurisdiction of the Ministries of Finance of the Union Republics, direct management passed to the Union Republics. In connection with the adopted resolution, the Main Directorate of State Insurance of the USSR was liquidated, and instead, a department of state insurance was organized as part of the Central Office of the Ministry of Finance of the USSR. In the Union republics, their own departments (main departments) of state insurance were created. Such transformations increased the need to maintain the unity of insurance in all republics.

AT post-war years there has been a significant increase in individual insurance transactions. If at the end of 1945 1.8 million people were insured for all types of personal insurance, then by January 1, 1953 - 5.9 million people, including long-term types of life insurance (mixed, simplified mixed, life) - about 1.4 million and for short-term accident insurance - 4.5 million people.

Successes in the restoration and development of the economy created the prerequisites for the broader development of voluntary insurance of the property of collective farms and the population. Measures were taken to reduce the backlog in the development of voluntary insurance from the pace of economic growth. The measures taken had a positive impact on the development and distribution of voluntary insurance: in 1946, 22% of the country's collective farms were insured on a voluntary basis, in 1951 - 29%, and in 1953 - 30%. Contracts for voluntary insurance of animals in 1946 were concluded in 34% of collective farms, in 1951. - in 40%, and in 1953 - in 42%.

On December 28, 1948, the Council of Ministers of the USSR approved the Regulations on the Main Directorate of State Insurance of the USSR and its bodies. This Regulation determined the tasks and operations of the State Insurance of the USSR, as well as the rights and obligations, the procedure for the formation and expenditure of funds, the organizational structure of the State Insurance and the rules for the distribution of savings. The regulation significantly increased the role of state insurance in the fight against losses, their prevention and compensation for damage. Management and control over the activities of the State Insurance was carried out by the Ministry of Finance of the USSR, it also approved instructions, rules and tariffs, considered plans for state insurance, approved annual reports, etc.

After the December 1947 monetary reform the economic importance of state insurance has increased. With the increasing role of money in the economy, the strengthening of the Soviet ruble, the growth of its purchasing power and lower prices, the role of property and personal insurance in the country's economy has increased significantly.

On January 1, 1948, the balance sheet for the Foreign Insurance Department was separated from the consolidated balance sheet of the USSR State Insurance. Under the Ministry of Finance of the USSR, the USSR Foreign Insurance Department (hereinafter - Ingosstrakh) was organized, which was associated with foreign trade of the Soviet Union and insured export and import cargo, ships, Soviet property that was abroad. Ingosstrakh, remaining within the USSR a division of the Ministry of Finance, in 1970 received the opportunity outside the USSR to enjoy the status of a joint-stock company with 100% state participation-- this was done to facilitate contacts with foreign insurers.

from January 1, 1956, the conclusion of contracts for compulsory insurance of state housing stock, as well as voluntary insurance of property of state institutions, which are on the local budget and are under their jurisdiction, enterprises and organizations was terminated. The abolition of these types of insurance made it possible for the insurance authorities to raise the level of insurance services provided to collective farms and the population. To compensate for the damage caused by natural disasters to state institutions and enterprises, centralized monetary reserves formed in the state budget, as well as material and food reserves were used.

In the period 1962-1970. new types of personal insurance were introduced, including children's insurance, which began to be carried out on January 1, 1968. Children's insurance allowed parents and other relatives to create certain savings for their 18th birthday. In 1974, 6 million contracts were concluded for this type of insurance.

On August 28, 1967, in accordance with the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and the Decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, new conditions for insuring the property of collective farms were determined and the centralized management of the insurance business was strengthened. The Main Directorate of State Insurance of the USSR was restored. Changes were also made to the Model Regulations on state insurance bodies.

For 1971-1976 to popularize voluntary types of insurance in the cinema, on radio, and television, advertising was launched, which was combined with lectures, reports, and conversations.

Since 1972, liability for accident insurance has been expanded, the execution of mixed insurance contracts has been simplified: it began to be concluded without a medical examination for any amount, mixed insurance was also introduced with a double sum insured in case of disability.

During 1976-1980. A number of resolutions were adopted that are important for the further development of state insurance:

• 1977 - Resolution "On measures for the further development of state insurance";
• 1978 - Resolution "On improving the procedure for compensating losses of state farms and other state agricultural enterprises from natural disasters and other adverse conditions", which extended state insurance to the property of state farms and other state agricultural enterprises.
• On January 1, 1977, the State Insurance of the USSR introduced insurance for marriage (or wedding). The new type combined the features of mixed life insurance and children's insurance.

In 1980, by order of the government, a large amount of various risks associated with the 1980 Olympics in Moscow was insured by Ingosstrakh.

In the early 1980s in the USSR, only vehicles were insured, but not civil liability insurance. By 1983 total number means of transport owned by citizens exceeded 20 million units, while in 1973 it was almost two times less. In turn, in 1983 the number of contracts was 4 million units against 0.8 million units, respectively. At the same time, the number of insured events and payouts has steadily increased along with the growth of private car fleet and traffic. If in the early 1970s the share of contracts for which payments were made was more than 4%, then ten years later it exceeded 9%.

In the USSR in 1981, there were 23 types of state insurance, including 14 types of property and nine - personal.

Property insurance was divided into five branches:

• - insurance of property of collective farms;
• - state farms and other state agricultural enterprises;
• - cooperative and public organizations;
• - citizens;
• - State property leased or otherwise used.

A more detailed breakdown of property insurance by type included insurance of crops, animals, buildings and other property. On a mandatory basis, these types of insurance were carried out on collective farms and state farms, on a voluntary basis - in cooperative and public organizations. Buildings and animals in the households of citizens were insured not only on a mandatory basis, but also on a voluntary basis, household property and vehicles- only on a voluntary basis.

Personal insurance included two branches: life insurance and accident insurance. The breakdown by type within life insurance was as follows:

• - mixed life insurance;
• - insurance of children;
• - to marriage;
• - life in case of death and disability;
• - in case of death and disability;
• - pension insurance.

Accident insurance included:

• - individual accident insurance;
• - insurance of employees at the expense of organizations;
• - passenger insurance (was the only mandatory type of insurance).

By 1981, the share of insured workers in various sectors of the economy for life insurance exceeded 52%, while in 1970 this figure was slightly below 17%. The volume of payments in 1981 amounted to 5 billion rubles, while ten years earlier it was less than 1 billion rubles. Over 75% of payments were related to the expiration of the contract, that is, to the survival of the insured until that moment.

Since the beginning of 1983, in accordance with the Decree "On State Compulsory Insurance of Property Belonging to Citizens", compulsory insurance has been extended to residential buildings, dachas, garden houses and outbuildings. At the same time, the number of compulsory insurance risks was increased - this included risks of damage to buildings as a result of floods, mudflows, tsunamis, groundwater outflows, accidents in the heating system, plumbing and sewer networks etc. The sum insured was set at 40% of their value. The list of refusals in insurance compensation was also reduced - it included only cases of deliberate damage to property.

Since 1983, only cattle over the age of six months, as well as horses and camels over the age of one year, have become subject to compulsory insurance. Additionally, cattle, horses and camels could be insured under voluntary insurance. Sheep, goats, pigs, donkeys and mules were insured exclusively on a voluntary basis. Under this insurance, cattle could be insured within 40%, small livestock - within 80% of the average value of the animal, depending on the species and age. The cost was determined on the basis of government procurement prices.

Since 1984, state insurance began to cover the property of state farms, state farms-factories and other agricultural enterprises of the system of the USSR Ministry of Fruit and Vegetable Economy, but it did not cover agricultural enterprises of other ministries and departments.

During the years of perestroika in the USSR, the destruction of the monopoly of the State Insurance of the USSR and Ingosstrakh on insurance in the USSR began. The Law of the USSR of May 26, 1988 No. 8998-XI “On Cooperation in the USSR” adopted by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR marked the beginning of the demonopolization of the insurance business. This Law provided that cooperatives could insure their property and other property interests not only in state insurance bodies, but also could create cooperative insurance institutions, determine the conditions, procedure and types of insurance.

In 1990, two Decrees of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, important for the demonopolization of insurance, were adopted: securities” and No. 835 of August 16, 1990 “On measures to demonopolize National economy”, which allowed state, joint-stock, mutual and cooperative companies to operate in the insurance market.

Chapter 2. Development of the constitutional idea of ​​gender equality in the USSR Constitutions of 1918, 1936 and 1977

1. Constitution (Basic Law) of the RSFSR of 1918

The Constitution (Basic Law) of the RSFSR was adopted by the V All-Russian Congress of Soviets at a meeting on July 10, 1918.

New ideas of equality were included in a number of constitutional norms.

Article 3 Setting as its main task the abolition of all exploitation of man by man, the complete elimination of the division of society into classes, the merciless suppression of the exploiters, the establishment of a socialist organization of society and the victory of socialism in all countries, the Third All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies decides further:

Article 7The Third All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies believes that now, at the moment of the decisive struggle of the proletariat against its exploiters, there can be no place for exploiters in any of the organs of power. Power must belong wholly and exclusively to the working masses and their plenipotentiary representation - the Soviets of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies,

Article 18The Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic recognizes work as the duty of all citizens of the Republic and proclaims the slogan: "He who does not work, let him not eat."

Article 64The right to elect and be elected to the Soviets, regardless of religion, nationality, settlement, etc., is enjoyed by the following citizens of both sexes of the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic who are eighteen years old by the day of the elections:

a) all those who earn their livelihood by productive and socially useful labor, as well as persons employed in the household, providing for the former the possibility of productive labor, such as: workers and employees of all types and categories employed in industry, trade, agriculture and etc., peasants and Cossack farmers who do not use hired labor for the purpose of making a profit ...

The first Constitution of the RSFSR of the Soviet period in 1918 secured the legal equality of men and women. This was a reflection of the victory of the proletarian revolution.

By decrees adopted in December 1917, women were granted full civil rights and freedoms.

The 1918 constitution established that men and women have equal rights. This was the achievement of proletarian culture. For the first time in the history of Russia, the constitutional principle of equality between the two sexes was enshrined, and this, undoubtedly, was a step in the liberation and emancipation of women.

The Constitution of Russia used mainly the terminology of the period of revolutionary transformations. "Man" as a subject of law was not declared in the Constitution of 1918. "Citizen", "worker" - this is the terminology of the constitutional norms of the first post-revolutionary years. These constitutional concepts determined the understanding of the measure of freedom and equality of citizens in society. The citizen had the rights that the state granted him. He had those freedoms that were assigned to him. Based on the concept of the proletarian state, a man and a woman had the same status, they were equal. They were "workers" or, in accordance with Art. 7 of the Constitution of 1918 - "by the working masses".

Gender expertise of these constitutional provisions gives grounds for a fundamental conclusion: class ideology has led to the depersonalization of a person, personality, including by leveling gender characteristics.

Gender aspects of electoral rights and freedoms of Russian citizens. Gender concepts are not alien to the 1918 Constitution. Section 4, entitled "Active and Passive Suffrage", does not refer to gender. There is only a generalizing formula "persons of both sexes." Women's right to elect and be elected traditionally chauvinistically masculine. Women were allowed to vote, they could be elected to government bodies. But this assumption was fundamentally proletarian in a new way. In a new proletarian way, it meant that a woman had to have one single confirmation of her right to participate in elections - she had to be a “unit” employed in the household, and she had to be a “unit” providing the subject with the possibility of productive labor, i.e. e. two conditions for participation in the elections were designated in a proletarian way and combined with the attribute of the female sex. Thus, in a very selective, proletarian way, the voting rights of women were secured. But it was big step forward.

The political right to elect and be elected was organically combined with another constitutional right, which was declared a duty. It was a duty to work. Article 18 of the Constitution of 1918 recognized work as the duty of all citizens of the Republic and proclaimed the slogan: "He who does not work, let him not eat." The combination of political rights with the obligation to work for the future ideologically meant that citizens of both sexes were obliged to work, and only on this basis could they be subjects of political relations. They were mobilized to participate in the affairs of the state on the principle of equal subordination of the workers and peasants to the will of this state. Freedom as a natural condition for equality was cut off in principle.

The understanding of freedom in the 1918 Constitution proceeded through the denial of the exploitation of man by man. This was the essence of the proletarian understanding of freedom - freedom from exploitation.

In fact, the Constitution of 1918 was anti-feudal, anti-serfdom, since it was aimed at overcoming the dependence of a person, whether a man or a woman, on those who oppressed him. It is no coincidence that the idea of ​​equality in the Constitution of 1918 had a strictly ideological content. It was filled with the idea of ​​combating exploitation: "Citizens of both sexes are equal in freedom from exploitation"...

2. The Constitution of the USSR in 1924

This act can hardly be called a constitution. This is a document of revolutionary transformations, a document of power, which has secured its right to be power. In fact, this is a decree, not a constitution, because the constitution always deals with society, with human rights. The constitution is a document of civilization, not a decree of the state. From this position, the Constitution of 1924 is of no interest for gender expertise.

The Constitution of 1924 does not touch upon the status of a citizen, man, woman in society. Section 1 of the Constitution is the Declaration on the Formation of the USSR, and the final section included the Treaty on the Formation of the USSR.

In the Constitution of 1924, the ideas that later determined the construction of the state and the relationship between the state and the individual, the position of a person in society, and the relationship of the sexes are completely absent. A person as a subject of constitutional relations in any dimension, whether on the basis of gender, faith, nationality, race, is not present, and equality as the main principle of the proletarian state is not even mentioned in this Constitution.

3. Constitution (Basic Law) of the USSR 1936

The Constitution (Basic Law) of the USSR was approved by the Extraordinary VIII Congress of Soviets of the USSR on December 5, 1936.

It also contains ideas embodied in norms that developed the ideology of equality between the two sexes.

Article 12. Work in the USSR is a duty and a matter of honor for every able-bodied citizen, according to the principle "he who does not work, he does not exist."

The principle of socialism is being implemented in the USSR “from each according to his ability, to each according to his work.

Article 118 Citizens of the USSR have the right to work, that is, the right to receive guaranteed work with payment for their labor in accordance with its quantity and quality.

The right to work is ensured by the socialist organization of the national economy, the steady growth of the productive forces of Soviet society, the elimination of the possibility of economic crises and the elimination of unemployment.

Article 122. Women in the USSR are granted equal rights with men in all areas of economic, state,cultures noah and socio-political life.

The possibility of exercising these rights of women is ensured by granting a woman equal rights with a man to work, wages, rest, social insurance and education, state protection of the interests of mother and child, state assistance to mothers with many children and single mothers, the provision of leave to a woman during pregnancy with maintenance, a wide network maternity hospitals, nurseries and kindergartens.

Article 123. Equality of rights for citizens of the USSR, regardless of nationality and race, in all areas of economic, state, cultural and socio-political lifeis an immutable law.

Any direct or indirect restriction of the rights or, conversely, the establishment of direct or indirect advantages of citizens depending on race and nationality, as well as any preaching of racial or national exclusiveness, or hatred and neglect, are punishable by law.

Article 135. Elections of deputies are universal: all citizens of the USSR who have reached the age of 18, regardless of race and nationality, gender, religion, educational qualification, residence, social origin, property status and past activities, have the right to participate in the elections of deputies, with the exception of persons recognized insane in the manner prescribed by law.

Every citizen of the USSR who has reached the age of 23 can be elected as a deputy of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, regardless of race and nationality, sex, religion, educational qualification, settlement, social origin, property status and past activities.

Article 137Women enjoy the right to vote and be elected on an equal footing with men.

Two articles in the Constitution of the USSR of 1936 contain provisions on equality. The first (Article 123) concerns general issues of equality. The second (Art. 122) - equality of men and women.

In general, the Constitution of 1936 enshrined general principle equality of citizens of the Soviet Union only on two social indicators that did not raise any political doubts: race and, oddly enough, nationality. Race discrimination was not relevant in the Soviet Union. Moreover, the equality of all races was a proletarian principle, which was supported by the Soviet state as an international principle.

The State Committee on Statistics did not keep statistics on this social indicator. And therefore it is not possible to discuss speculatively the implementation of this principle in relation to such a social characteristic as race. A different assessment can be given to the proclamation and observance of the principle of equality on a national basis.

The sign of equality on the basis of nationality was initially denied by Stalin's policy itself. After the adoption of the Constitution of 1936 (as before, by the way), this principle was denied by everyday life. The resettlement of peoples, the acute "Jewish question" in the dimension of Stalin's policy - all this denied the idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe equality of citizens of the USSR on the basis of nationality.

The question arises: why was the understanding of equality so limited - only on the basis of race and nationality? This is explained by the fact that the proletarian ideology, which later became the foundation of the Soviet ideology, did not recognize equality on the basis of origin, property status, attitude to religion, beliefs, membership in public associations, and other circumstances.

The principle of equality on the basis of belonging to one or another religion, creed was not denied, but was not declared in the Constitution of 1936. Article 124 of the Constitution fixed the provision on the separation of church and state, and this fixed the separation of believers from unbelievers. Compliance with their equality policy was not allowed. Rights were granted to those citizens who professed the state ideology, not religion. Regardless of gender religious affiliation was the basis of inferiority of citizens, classifying them as unreliable.

Origin and the principle of equality in the Soviet state were not fundamentally combined, since, in accordance with Art. 1 of the Constitution, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was "a socialist state of workers and peasants." This was the principle setting of the state and the party, which was the party of workers and peasants. Origins other than workers and peasants initially excluded the citizen from the scope of the principle of equality, whether male or female.

Property status as a social characteristic was the basis for attributing citizens to a class, to a social group. But due to the fact that the propertied classes were destroyed, the question of the property status did not arise. Equality was possible only between workers and peasants, including property equality.

This chain of exceptions can be continued, but the logic of the exceptions is the same: equality was violated by the idea of ​​withdrawal of rights, if it was connected with ideological ideas. The equality of both men and women in society was subject to endless restrictions.

The principle of equality cannot have exceptions. He is "connected" to a Citizen who is equal in rights to another Citizen, whether male or female. It is absolute, this principle.

Exceptions also concerned the principle of equality on the basis of sex. Outside of the exceptions mentioned above, equality was subtracted once again.

Article 122 of the Constitution of the USSR enshrined that “a woman in the USSR is granted equal rights with (highlighted by me.- L.Z.) by a man. This constitutional provision equalized the status of one sex with the status of the other - male. There is hardly any reason to talk about the gender idea of ​​equality between the two sexes, since the standards laid down in the Constitution were one-sided - masculine. This is not a standard in the modern sense, which is based on the idea of ​​respect for human rights regardless of gender, be it a man or a woman. But this was an important step in understanding that a woman should be equal with a man in all areas of economic, state, cultural and socio-political life, albeit in conditions of limited freedom, the boundaries of which were determined by the state.

This was manifested in two more articles of the Constitution, which contained special normative provisions regarding the equality of citizens in the exercise of the basic political right - to elect and be elected.

Article 135 fixed that the elections of deputies are universal: All citizens of the USSR who have reached the age of 18, regardless of gender, have the right to participate in elections.

Any citizen could also become a deputy - regardless of gender.

Article 137 enshrines that “women enjoy the right to elect and be elected on an equal footing with (emphasis mine.- L.Z.) - men.

Constitutional consolidation of equality, namely the right to elect and be elected provided for a long time by special political regulations of the Communist Party of the USSR. Democracy in a socialist way included, as a necessary element, the representation of women in all power structures.

33% women - among the members of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and similarly in the Supreme Soviets of the republics of the USSR, and up to 50 % women were represented in all grassroots power structures - the Councils of People's Deputies. Women, in accordance with the ideological and political guidelines of the Communist Party, were supposed to personify the victory of the ideology of the Soviet state and the Communist Party. A working woman, however, like a working man, had to personify the strength of the state of workers and peasants.

These "standards" were not a quota set by the state. This was the ideological setting of the party, according to which the representation of men and women personified the victory of socialist democracy. In reality, behind this was the system of governing bodies of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, which worked to demonstrate the success of the policy towards women.

Such a policy did not have a solid foundation, since the society did not adapt the ideology and culture of gender equality. This ideology "came down" from above and, therefore, was not truly embedded in real public relations. But the illusion of achieving equality was supposed to reflect the "successes" of socialism, and it did.

On the basis of gender, equality was adjusted towards the proletarian, socialist roles of workers - men and women. The slogan "Who does not work, that does not eat" still remained generally accepted, although it had exceptions. And exemptions were made on the basis of gender.

First, the right to work was declared a duty in the workers' state (Article 12 of the Constitution). At the same time, this duty of a citizen to work was declared as a right. Article 118 of the Constitution of the USSR stipulated that “citizens of the USSR have the right to work, i.e. the right to secure employment” (the right was secured by the absence of unemployment).

But this right was filled with proletarian, Soviet ideological content. In accordance with the criminal and administrative legislation, persons evading the performance of their labor duties were prosecuted. These norms had a legally directed effect: they concerned mainly the male population. They acted until the beginning of perestroika. Anyone who did not work was declared a parasite.

The woman, in accordance with the idea of ​​the Soviet state, was not only a worker, but also a mother. And the role of a mother certainly gave her reason to be freed. from duty work in production while providing she's right be equal to a man. The right to work was not rigid associated with the obligation to work only for a woman. She could only have the status of a mother. The role of the father from the obligation to work did not release.

The gender-specific role of a man during all the years of Soviet power consisted in one thing: to be a worker, an employee. The role of the father was not provided for by the ideology of equality. And the state provided the man with work, which was not a right, but an obligation healthy men.

The status of paternity was not provided for in the 1936 Constitution. Part 11 Art. 122 of the Constitution of the USSR proclaimed the state protection of interests mothers and a child, state assistance to large families and single mothers providing woman maternity leave with maintenance, the creation of a wide network of maternity hospitals, nurseries and kindergartens.

This constitutional norm meant the reproduction of the traditionally patriarchal ideas of society regarding women and their roles in society. Despite the fact that equality for the sexes was guaranteed in all areas, paternity, the status of the father, was not fixed at the level of constitutional legislation. According to the Constitution of 1936, there are no grounds to talk about the equality of the two subjects of family relations, father and mother.

In the 1930s, the principle of upholding the rights of women in relation to their children was practically indisputable. These are the roots of the old-fashioned family life, where the wife is the mother, and the father is the worker. And this model was reproduced in the norm of the Constitution. The man did not have the right to state protection of the interests of paternity and state assistance to large and single fathers. Paternity was not included as a standard of equality in the sphere of state patronage, patronage. This gender-asymmetric norm (art. 122) reflected the idea of ​​the unequal status of mother and father in society.

During the years of Soviet power, the state undermined economic role men as heads of the family. This role was destroyed by socialist wages. The state and the communist party assumed a patriarchal role in relation to the family, securing the economic dependence of all family members as the basis of society on the state employer.

If a woman had the right to choose: to be a mother or a worker, or to combine two roles, then a man had no such choice. He had to work. But in his only role-status, he was placed in a one-line economic dependence on the state. And he was obliged only to the state for his "well-being" (however, like a woman). He was tied to a patriarchal state and, in addition, totalitarian in its sutras. He was economically dependent.

This undermined the idea that was traditional for the Russian (pre-revolutionary), in principle, patriarchal family: the head of the family is the male breadwinner. It could be a father, husband, brother - all males. Soviet economy was not able to give the man, who was traditionally considered the head of the family, sufficient material support to support the family. Involuntarily the socialist state, the socialist economy made the role of the head of the family economically untenable. This is one of the reasons for the change in the nature of family relations in the 20s, 30s and subsequent years.

In addition to this reason, there is another. A woman entered the socialist labor market. She received an equal right to work with a man. She became economically independent. And it also determined the nature of relationships in the family. The family began to line up as an egalitarian family, where the husband and wife had independent earnings, but at the same time they were economically tied to the state. The woman left the economic dependence on her husband-breadwinner, and the economic role of the husband - the head of the family, the breadwinner remained only in tradition - in the history of the family. From a certain time, economic power began to belong to the state - the only employer-breadwinner. The gender dependence of already two sexes on the socialist state has become a characteristic of the family and society since the early 1930s.

It is impossible to assess the Constitution of 1936 without analyzing the political repressions that followed the adoption of the Constitution.

The idea of ​​equality was hardly of fundamental importance during this period of the country's history. The "equality" of the two sexes - men and women in the implementation of the policy of repression - is the subject of a special examination.

With the unconditional political and ideological orientation of repressions, their important component was repressions against “enemies of the people” and their families. The data now known to all, published in the press, allow us to draw a conclusion. The repressed citizens of the USSR - Russia and other republics, for the most part were not "enemies of the people". They were "enemies" of a system that ruthlessly destroyed people, and a state ideology that was forcibly imposed and spread, and which was also used to destroy people.

The repressions, of course, were not based on the ideology of gender symmetry. But due to the internal logic of repression, it was the symmetry of gender repression. She reproduced the rule of extermination of people - men and women, "enemies of the people", enemies of the system. rare family was not repressed. Even children were hurt. They were not carriers of ideology. But they were the connecting link of generations. To the system that was destroying their parents, they were potentially dangerous. They were, from the position of the totalitarian system, the successors of the clans, which personified the idea of ​​resistance to the system.

CHSVN (member of the "enemy of the people" family) - these are wives and children, these are sons and husbands. These are the people who were subjected to repression. They were citizens of the USSR. They remain in the memory of those people who became the grandchildren of repressed members of the family of enemies of the people.

CHVN is an abbreviation for gender symmetry, it is an indicator of the destruction of almost the entire family.

The gender symmetry of repression has never been explored. It should be the subject of future research to establish the truth.

The repression was based on a power ideology, which was reproduced in the practice of the destruction and humiliation of society. A woman-mother, a woman-wife as an object of violence in many cases was included in the circle of repressions only on the grounds that she was an object of patriarchal, totalitarian relations, where a woman was recognized as an object of the application of force - the power of power.

This is an example of gender "symmetry" in the use of force. And, probably, it is no coincidence that in history the Constitution of the USSR of 1936 is a symbol of the power of a totalitarian state and violence. During the repressions, the Constitution of 1936 was used as decoration. It was used for ideological purposes as a tool for asserting the idea of ​​the state taking care of the citizen and his family, while simultaneously destroying the family, family members. But neither men, nor women, nor children could imagine that the Constitution of gender symmetry could become for them the last concern of the state about gender well-being, their last "burial". No one has calculated the costs of the use of violence and the ideology of violence of the state. Power, masculine in nature, led to victims, and the victim, as you know, is not an object of concern for a totalitarian state. She is to be protected, whether male or female. Gender symmetry in protection from violence should be a subject of special attention of society and states.

4. Constitution (Basic Law) of the USSR 1977

The Constitution (Basic Law) of the USSR was adopted at the Extraordinary Seventh Session of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of the ninth convocation on October 7, 1977.

Equality as a principle was reproduced in the next few articles of the Constitution.

Article 34. Citizens of the USSR are equal before the law regardless of origin, social and property status, race and nationality, sex, education, language, attitude to religion, type and nature of occupation, place of residence and other circumstances.

Equality of rights for citizens of the USSR is ensured in all areas of economic, political, social and cultural life.

Article 35. Women and men in the USSR have equal rights. The exercise of these rights is ensured by providing women with equal opportunities with men in obtaining education and training, in work, remuneration for it and promotion at work, in socio-political and cultural activities, as well as special measures for the protection of labor and women's health; creating conditions that allow women to combine work with motherhood; legal protection, material and moral support for motherhood and childhood, including the provision of paid leave and other benefits to pregnant women and mothers, the gradual reduction of working hours for women with young children.

Article 53. The family is under state protection. Marriage is based on the voluntary consent of a woman and a man; spouses are completely equal in family relations.

The state takes care of the family by creating and developing a wide network of children's institutions, organizing and improving the service of everyday life and public catering, paying benefits on the occasion of the birth of a child, providing benefits and benefits large families, as well as other types of benefits and assistance to the family.

History reference. The adoption of the Constitution of the USSR in 1977 was preceded by a nationwide discussion of the text. It was written in the project: "A woman in the USSR has equal rights with a man." It was noted that this wording could be understood in such a way that a man is a kind of “standard of rights”, and a woman is equated to him. The Constitutional Commission took into account numerous comments and changed the formula of Part 1 of Art. 35 in such a way as to emphasize the full equality of women and men. According to the proposals made during the national discussion, the text of Art. 35 items added about creating conditions allowing women to combine work with motherhood. From the text of Art. 35, the provision on state assistance to single mothers, which had previously existed in the draft Constitution, was withdrawn. Attention was drawn to the inaccuracy of the term itself (a mother cannot be single, since she has a child) and to the inappropriateness of specifically emphasizing in the Constitution the specifics of the situation of citizens whose personal life for some reason was not entirely successful.

These remarks are contained in the political and legal commentary on the Constitution of the USSR of 1977.

Article 35 of the Constitution of the USSR of 1977 fixed: “A woman and a man have equal rights in the USSR. The exercise of these rights is ensured by providing women with equal opportunities with men in obtaining education and training, in work, remuneration for it and promotion at work, in socio-political and cultural activities, as well as special measures for the protection of labor and women's health; creating conditions that allow women to combine work with motherhood; legal protection, material and moral support for motherhood and childhood, including the provision of paid leave and other benefits to pregnant women and mothers, the gradual reduction of working hours for women with young children.

Article 35 was in Section II "The State and the Individual". In practice, this article was the foundation for subsequent constitutional norms that contained the specific rights of Soviet citizens.

A distinctive feature of the 1977 Constitution was the idea of ​​granting citizens the full range of economic and social rights under minimum volume political and civil rights.

Such a constitutional doctrine, from the positions of a socialist and, at the same time, a totalitarian state, determined the position of the state in relations with citizens. Men and women had equal rights without exemptions, since exemptions were made for everyone.

A distinctive feature of the constitutional norm was the provision on granting women equal with men. opportunities with aim to guarantee not only equality in rights, but also equality in fact.

The legal registration in the Constitution of the USSR of 1977 of the principle of equality does not cause criticism. It already reflected the state's understanding that legal and de facto equality did not coincide. ut. Behind the formula about ensuring equal opportunities, creating equal These conditions contained the recognition that there is no equality between the two sexes in society. It has not been achieved.

Gender methodology helps to give an in-depth analysis of what was the real situation of the two sexes in a society that had the title of a developed socialist state.

As correctly noted in the studies, socialism offered the emancipated woman, within the framework of the socialist doctrine of human rights, the contract of "obedience" (A.A. Temkina), the contract of the "working woman", which preserved and maintained the double burden of women while maintaining the traditional role of men in society. The roles of women in the society of developed socialism were much more numerous than the roles of men. The woman had to be mother. This was declared an honorable duty, and it was consecrated with state symbols: the more a woman had children, the more honor surrounded her. The country affected by the war consistently pursued a demographic policy that promoted the reproduction of the population. A woman-mother in Russian history has always played the role of a woman of duty to the country and the state.

The role of the mother was ideologized. She, this role, had nothing to do with the role of the mother of the family, where the family determines the future. It was included in the system of relations that were built into the socialist social ideal.

At the same time, the image of a working mother was held in high esteem. The USSR Constitution of 1977, like the previous Constitution of 1936, provided that a woman, however, like a man, was obliged to work. Work was considered a duty and a matter of honor. The role of the mother-worker was ideologically supported by the Soviet press, party documents and was provided by the state system, which made it possible to combine work with motherhood. This is a carefully thought out side of gender politics.

Father is a hard worker never figured as a subject of relations in Soviet history. The role of the father-worker has never been textbook. It's more of a home look. It was not presented to society. In political ideology, this image has never had an official status. He received this status only in the early 90s, when society began to consider the problem of de facto equality in the new social conditions.

Role women civil society women was announced as political role women of the Soviet period. It was connected with the ideological views of the party, and they were obligatory for the entire Soviet people.

The role of the male citizen was not stated. A man, from an ideological position, did not need roles. He distributed them himself.

Citizen-worker-mother is the conquest of socialism. The woman was declared to have three social roles, while at the same time declaring that she had the right to choose. However, there was practically no choice, since there was no freedom. A woman was limited by her freedom of choice in a socialist state, where the “menu” of freedom was offered to all women almost the same.

The official image was important in terms of demonstrating the party's policies, which were supported by women. Women's issue in its gender dimension was an ideological issue. And this is noted in all works today.

So, an analysis of the three roles of a woman Soviet period helps to understand the real policy pursued by the Soviet state, based on constitutional norms. It created real conditions (by depriving many men and women of their freedom of choice) for the inclusion of a woman-mother in social production. Created a system - working in a socialist way - a system of gender ensuring the opportunity to combine two functions - motherhood and participation in social labor. And this should be recognized as a positive moment, while leaving the traditional role of men in Soviet society.

Ideology was combined with politics and through it with legislative practice. And practice gave one paradoxical result at the end of the life of the whole state: in the absence of equality, a woman got the opportunity to combine the role of a worker and a mother almost on an equal footing. She took on a double burden and does not want to give it up, while seeking equality and the realization of equal opportunities with men through the redistribution of family roles, achieving their symmetry.

Paternity has traditionally been associated with the role of husband and father of a child. The social burden was not prescribed by the traditions of the family. With the change in the nature of social relations, the role of the father in the family is fundamentally different. It must be connected with the performance of household duties. This makes it possible to combine marriage and family relations in a new way on the basis of the principle of equality.

New time gives birth to new images. And these images are historically defined. With the departure of socialism from the lives of several generations of people, the images are erased from memory. But they still live real life. The family is a stronghold of traditions. And it is in the family that equality reforms are needed.

Development of the principle of equality in Soviet period. Assessing the development of the constitutional idea over several decades from today's positions, it must be admitted that society was able to implement in general only the idea of ​​legal, formal equality of men and women, eliminating explicit, open) discrimination.

Actual equality, social equality of men and women, despite the constitutional provisions, did not exist in Soviet society. The mere consolidation of the constitutional principle and even its development in the current legislation could not solve the problems, since the legitimacy of constitutional and legislative provisions depends on how much it is recognized and shared by society.

Despite the sharply negative assessments of the entire Soviet period, the October Revolution of 1917, that sound today, one cannot fail to note positive points brought with it by the socialist idea. What did October give a woman? He raised the issue of gender equality to the state level; repealed laws that infringe on the legal status of women. It is unacceptable to underestimate this.

Another thing is that social practice has revealed the limited, illusory nature of fixed gender equality, has come into conflict with life itself. The idea of ​​gender equality has not become an organic part of either the culture of society, or human rights, or real state policy. Moreover, the thesis repeated for 70 years about the achieved equality of men and women, about the absence of discrimination in the position of women, has played bad joke with the public consciousness of the nation. Society as a whole, liberated from the totalitarian regime, is confident that we have equality achieved men and women and there is no discrimination, even any of its manifestations, against women. Such an attitude in the public mind hinders a critical look at the state of affairs, a national formulation of the problem of gender equality, and the elimination of discrimination against women in Russian society.

Based on Russian realities, the paradoxical task is not to adapt the idea of ​​equality of men and women in the public mind, but to destroy the myth of achieved equality. This formulation of the problem entails a different logic of its solution. The main question is as to destroy the 70-year-old myth of gender equality. It is necessary to clarify that the formal equality of problems has not decided that actual equality is possible only in conditions of freedom. (Freedom under conditions of formal equality always has a precarious position.) Under the conditions of totalitarianism, where a free person, individuality was initially denied, there could not be a legal principle of equality, since law is measure of freedomsubjects with equal opportunities: men and women. It is no coincidence that a totalitarian state could not and was not able to ensure equality. legal way, it only offered its right-denying regulators of totalitarian socialism (Nersesyants V.S.) - party doctrines, ideology, dictatorship of the proletariat, administrative methods (restrictions, benefits, compensations - tough, normative regulation). These are methods by no means of a legal nature, with the help of which the state tried to achieve equality between men and women (experience allows us to conclude that the proclaimed equality is capable, under certain conditions, of being a serious threat to freedom and development).

Failure to achieve de facto equality was objectively predetermined, since achieving equality is possible only under conditions of freedom, and not under a totalitarian regime.

In order to understand the experience of achieving gender equality, one more remark is important. History has shown that the elimination of privileges in favor of men (V.I. Lenin), emancipation women do not solve problems. Liberation from dependence on a husband, a man does not lead to the achievement of equality. This is only the first, mandatory step in this direction. There is a huge distance between emancipation and equality.

The totalitarian state and the communist party, realizing that gender equality in the foreseeable future is unattainable and impossible, was forced to act in a patriarchal, patronizing role in relation to women. This is a distinctive feature of the totalitarian state of the Soviet type. This is the so-called inverted system of sexism, based on certain principles, approaches, ideology of benefits, prohibitions and compensations. The state and the communist party, while proclaiming emancipation, in fact always adhered to the patriarchal-totalitarian idea of ​​the division of social functions between men and women. They used a woman as a tool for solving economic and demographic problems, depending on the tasks facing the country. This was especially clearly manifested in labor, social and marriage and family legislation.

Having set a course for democratic reforms, the Russian state and society are trying to critically comprehend the patriarchal ideas, principles, legislative norms, fixed regulators of gender equality that have been left to us as a legacy, and free the woman. The emancipation of women is again on the agenda. The objective prerequisites for this at the economic and political level are beginning to be laid, but a paradigm for resolving the women's issue in the emerging civil society, the essence of which is the freedom of citizens and their equal opportunities, regardless of gender, has yet to be formed.

Political realities of the time of perestroika. Totalitarian the state collapsed. No real equality has been achieved. Perestroika marked the beginning of a new stage in the development of society and the state, in which the principle of equality was interpreted in a different way.

The perestroika reforms assumed the democratization of relations in society and the redistribution of economic influence in favor of society. The state did not assume that they could lead to such serious problems regarding the two sexes in society. Perestroika has posed many problems in relation to the principle of equality between men and women, and therefore the nature of the reforms must be assessed taking into account their gender implications in society.

What fundamentally distinguished perestroika from the stage of “stable”, stagnant relations? This, of course, is a change in the types of social relations, a change in the nature of power and the type of economy. This is a change in the consciousness of those who experienced the time of the change of eras: socialism was a society of stable relations and roles of men and women. New times have changed these relationships and roles.

The paternalistic power of the administrative state, the communist party, which for many decades cemented the policy towards its own citizens - men and women, was lost. And this change of power, which, with the help of a system of measures and a system of approved regulators, kept the level of representation of women in government at the planned level, influenced the position of women.

Socialism has gone and destroyed the interim measures of gender symmetry in the position of the two sexes in the power structures. The government was unable to maintain woman in these structures.

Perestroika changed not only the government, but also the methods of managing society. And that was the biggest change. The government was unable to use the old methods of management. She was already limited in the manifestation of her abilities.

The change in management methods has led to the fact that the structures that provide the opportunity for a woman to combine two functions - "mother" and "worker" - were destroyed. The destruction of the entire system of pre-school and out-of-school institutions, including kindergartens, nurseries, after-school groups, and so on, has affected character employment of women. They were the first to forced was looking for and changing jobs. They were the first who had to go to the labor market in search of work outside their specialty. Thus, the system of providing opportunities for women to combine work was undermined. about the specialty with motherhood. This affected a significant number of women.

Since men never combined the roles of fathers and workers, they did not face this problem of destroying the system that ensures the combination of functions.

Perestroika and relationships in the field labor. The emerging labor market did not accept a woman as a professional. Women who were released from the production sector as a result of the closure of enterprises, staff cuts, re-profiling of enterprises, conversion, were forced to leave the production sphere for traditional women's employment: trade, credit and banking institutions, and the service sector. Their influx has increased. These spheres at the beginning of perestroika were women's.

Women were not allowed by the male community to power in the economy, since they did not occupy leading positions in it in the pre-perestroika period. A woman in the pre-perestroika period was the personification of a professional woman (up to 60% of women had a secondary specialized or higher education) or a woman worker, but not a woman leader.

Male leaders who were in power in the pre-perestroika period during the redistribution of property to the floor or through privatization access to new property is quite legitimate.

The illusion of equal power in the economy cannot be accepted by women.

The history of perestroika taught citizens a lesson: men and women could not have equal access and equal opportunities in the redistribution of property. Property, as a result of perestroika, became owned by the male class, since they were closest to this property. In the first years of perestroika, men entered the economy, business as shareholders of large enterprises, owners of cooperatives, small "firms", and financial structures. Many of them have connected themselves with power in the economy through the use of the traditional method - force; And this power was combined with the power of money, which later created a male class of owners of the new Russia.

Perestroika and political culture. As for political relations during the transitional period, women were quite active subjects of political life. But it was the activity of professional women who accepted the ideas of perestroika.

The new political culture was not connected with the possibilities of the old government. The old power, the power of the nomenklatura, was traditionally male. And despite the party quota for women (33 % - in the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, 50 % - in local councils), it did not change its essence during the entire Soviet period. The time of change made us talk about the representation of various social groups in state structures. In the late 80s, within the framework of the old party traditions, women declared themselves as an independent subject of political relations. Women's lobby in politics headed by the Committee Soviet women, later the Union of Women of Russia. In 1989, in the elections to the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, women received a quota - 15.7% of the total number of deputies of the Supreme Soviet. This was an indicator of the prospects for the formation of a system that was ready to follow the path of taking into account the interests of various groups of the population. 15.7% is not a quota of the old nomenklatura model, it is a gender-softened indicator of the need to take into account the interests of women as a social group. This is at the same time an indication that socialist equality was being called into question, and the party had no confidence that, in the absence of rigidly distributed seats, the principle of equality (or the illusion of equality) could be maintained.

But not only the indicator of women's representation in parliament, but also other indicators can speak about the policy towards women.

Constitutional changes in 1992 The state, having lost economic, political and ideological support in the concept of equality during the period of perestroika, has lost the main foothold in the conduct of policy, including policy towards men and women. Male power during the perestroika period announced the rejection of principle of equal opportunity for both sexes.

It is no coincidence that in 1992, perhaps the most radical change was introduced into the text of the Constitution of 1977, dedicated to the equality of the two sexes: it was fixed that a man and a woman have only equal rights and freedoms. Equality of opportunity as a guarantee of compliance equal rights was excluded from Art. 33 of the Constitution of 1977. The constitutional provision that "men and women have equal rights and equal freedoms" remains. In this edition, it was supposed to resolve this issue in both drafts of the Constitution of the Russian Federation published for public discussion.

This was a departure from the idea of ​​equal opportunities for the two sexes, which the fading socialist state “guaranteed” with its inherent methods. It was obvious that the old, in principle, completely weakened totalitarian state was not capable of providing conditions for gender equality according to socialist standards. This meant that the idea of ​​the equality of men and women was limited to only one single idea of ​​equality of rights. This was a retreat of the state, let us emphasize this once again, from the ideology of equality in a socialist way, where the illusion of equality of conditions for the realization of equal rights was created by administrative methods.

Illusions are not realities. And equality of rights does not mean equality of opportunities for their realization. State of the late 80s -. beginning of the 1990s, it was no longer possible to provide, with the help of the old administrative methods, the conditions for proletarian-socialistly planned equality. This was the defeat of the socialist state and its ideology of equality.

The principle of equality between the two sexes had to be rewritten once again in the history of Russia.

Draft Constitution of the Russian Federation 1993, Constitutional Conference 1993 G.: development of ideas of equality of men and women. The constitutional process in Russia in 1993 gave rise to two draft constitutions. One was presented by the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation, the other - by the Constitutional Conference. The Constitutional Conference, having concentrated the political will, was able to "translate" political decisions, values ​​into a legal act - the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

The specificity of the constitutional process in the Russian Federation was that prepared in the course of its document - the Draft Basic Law - was the result of political compromise and political struggle. During social change the role of law turned out to be secondary, largely subordinated to political interests. The legitimization of the Draft Constitution of the Russian Federation could be carried out only by the will of the people - a referendum, which took place on December 12, 1993.

The entry into force of the new Constitution of the Russian Federation meant, in fact, a change in the foundations of the social and state structure of Russia. Its acceptance by society meant that it was able to shake the traditional character of society and became, to a certain extent, an instrument for its modernization. She proclaimed new values ​​at the level of constitutional norms, the main of which is human rights.

In the Draft Constitution of the Russian Federation of 1993, the issue of the status of women has its own history. As the Constitutional Conference proceeded, several drafts of the Constitution were prepared. The first of them - the basic one - dated May 9, 1993, the second - dated June 1, 1993. In both of them (Articles 9 and 14), the provision on the equality of citizens contained several clauses: “Everyone is equal before the law and the court; equality of rights and freedoms is guaranteed by the state, men and women have equal rights and freedoms.

These provisions were quite traditional, justified, but seemed insufficient. The guarantees of women's rights were insufficient. The doctrine of equal rights itself does not solve the problems of real equality. Procedures are needed to ensure gender equality and mechanisms to achieve equality in practice, in real practice. Equality in rights is only the first step in achieving real equality between the two sexes. It was necessary to develop the doctrine through the reproduction of the idea of ​​equal opportunities, which in a fundamentally new way are capable and should have provided a policy of equality in freedom.

Fixing "equal opportunities" in the text was of fundamental nature. First, the constitutional norm always has a special legal and political weight. Secondly, the consolidation of equal opportunities in the exercise of rights and freedoms by the Constitution of the Russian Federation means that the state undertakes to guarantee these equal opportunities, to implement a policy aimed at eliminating inequality and discrimination on any grounds, including gender. But the most important thing, perhaps, is that the very principle of not only equal rights and freedoms, but also equal opportunities for men and women is enshrined at the constitutional level. Such a formulation of the issue in the Constitution gives reason to believe that the cornerstone has been laid in the basis of a holistic policy of equal rights and opportunities for the two sexes, i.e. gender balanced policy.

For women, such a policy means creating conditions in conditions of freedom allowing them to enjoy their human rights and fundamental freedoms on an equal basis with men. The emphasis is not only on securing equality, but on the implementation, implementation, practical implementation in life of the rights that the legislation contains. Equality of opportunity is achievable under the condition of destroying the traditions of inequality between the two sexes in society, as well as stereotypes that have become part of everyday life. These stereotypes are manifested in culture and customs. They are prevalent in the public mind. They are used as a force that reinforces the patriarchal lifestyle of society. The task of the state is not to consolidate, but to destroy stereotypes and norms of inequality.

Talking about the constitutional level of regulation legal status women, it is necessary to note two more constitutional norms that have undergone significant changes during the Constitutional Conference.

Article 43 of the original draft Constitution (May 1993) contained next norm: “Family, motherhood and childhood are the subject of public concern and preferential protection by the law; caring for children, their upbringing - natural law and parental responsibility. The work of raising children is equal to any other work, is the basis for decent social security.

In the latest version of the draft, this provision is reproduced in Art. 37: “The family, motherhood and childhood are under the protection of the state. Caring for children, their upbringing is an equal right and duty of parents. The work of raising children is the basis for social security. Adult able-bodied children should take care of disabled parents.

The discussion of this article at the Constitutional Conference was fraught with serious fear that in the course of the reforms, the emerging unemployment, the wording “the work of raising children is equal to any other work, is the basis for social security” will be a cover, justification for the feminization of unemployment and, as a consequence, poverty . Such wording had the potential to cover up labor policy miscalculations and could help justify the exclusion of women from the market. labor on the basis of a beautiful constitutional declaration.

Another argument against equating the work of raising children with other work was the real financial situation in the country. The state was not able in practice to maintain decent social security, for example, at the level of at least the minimum wage, if this work was equated with other work.

These two arguments formed the basis for a more correct and realistic constitutional formula: "The labor of raising children is the basis for social security."

Article 7 of the final Draft Constitution of the Russian Federation also contained a provision that echoed the article discussed above. It is included in the section devoted to the foundations of the constitutional system, one of the characteristics of which is the “welfare state”, which provides support for the family, motherhood, fatherhood, childhood, various categories of citizens through the development of a system of social services, benefits and other guarantees of social protection. In this case, it is necessary to note the correct understanding of the social significance of both motherhood and fatherhood, the equality of social roles in the family.

The issue of equality between men and women was discussed separately. Many participants in the Constitutional Conference believed that the problem of gender equality had been solved. Some of the participants interpreted the principle of equality between men and women as the observance of equality only in rights. The position of a representative of non-governmental women's organizations in Russia (L. Zavadskaya) was determined by the need to eliminate gender discrimination. It was not enough to consolidate only the equality of rights, it was necessary to reflect in the draft Constitution the real state of affairs in achieving the principle of equality between the two sexes.

It followed from this that fixing only equal rights in the Constitution is not enough. Opportunities for the two sexes to exercise equal rights remained different. This concerned political, economic, social and cultural life. Consolidation of equality of rights does not always unambiguously lead to the result that the legislator plans. It is necessary to create conditions for equal rights to become a reality. Based on this, the Constitutional Conference discussed the problem of equality of opportunity as necessary condition realization of the rights of men and women. Double standards were included in Part 3 of Art. 19 future text of the Constitution: man and woman are equal rights and freedoms and equal opportunities for their implementation.

In the principle of equality, one single idea was concluded: to make people equal regardless of gender, to actually equalize the position of the two sexes in all spheres of society. This idea has been interpreted in the construction of equal rights and equal opportunities. The content of the principle is anti-discrimination in nature.

The constitutional meeting was a page in Russian history. It was devoted to the formation of the rule of law and the establishment of the doctrine of human rights. The idea of ​​human rights is the idea of ​​a developed democracy, where equality is component democracy.

Human rights is a framework of standards where there are political and civil, economic, cultural and social rights. And these rights have been examined from a position of equality.

The standards enshrined in the draft Constitution were absolutely uniform for the two sexes. And they were taken as a basis. The principle of a uniform approach from a position of equality to political rights did not cause any discussion, however, as well as to civil rights.

Political standards were unconditionally recognized as the same for the two sexes. Right to elect and be elected subjected to special examination as the main one in the system of political rights. No exceptions or reservations were made for women or men.

The only exception to the discussion of the principle of equality in the field of political - civil rights was the discussion about the right of citizens to bear military service(text of article 59 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). The gender aspects of the discussion went beyond the traditional notion that only men could serve in the military. It was a proposal was made by a representative of women's organizations of the country to note especially the idea of ​​equal access for both sexes to military service. However, this idea was not supported. During the discussion, the gender style of the norm was noted. The representative of a women's non-governmental organization - the Women's Union of Russia (UWR) - L. Zavadskaya sought to consolidate a position that emphasized equality of opportunities in access and choice of military service for both sexes.

During the Constitutional Conference, the problems of the social state were discussed in particular - a state that ensures the rights of a person as a citizen, guaranteeing his social and economic opportunities. Various positions were expressed on this issue. At first glance, all participants in the Constitutional Conference were gender sympathetic to the interests of both sexes in society; there were no statements discriminating against one or another gender.

The draft Constitution enshrined human rights standards in a welfare state, taking into account the status of a mother in society. The woman had and has one initially inherent function only to her - to be a force reproducing life. The status of the mother is special, and he was enshrined in the text of Art. 38 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

The draft Constitution originally contained an article providing a woman with all possible benefits for the exercise of maternal functions. It has been interpreted as a tribute to the mother woman. The welfare state, according to some experts, should have given a woman the right to be exclusively a mother and run a household. And for this work relied on payment - wages.

The idea, which came from the German, Scandinavian social democratic ideology, was reproduced in one of the versions of the text of the draft Constitution. The main idea was reduced to one moment: the state was obliged to provide materially for those women who are engaged in domestic work and are engaged in raising children. The work of a woman who works at home was subject to accounting and payment. It was a primitive idea of ​​taking into account the contribution of women to the development of society. It was rejected by the Constitutional Council. But it was interpreted in a different aspect - the protection of the rights of motherhood. But this position was further clarified. Another concept was introduced - parenthood (family). It was adopted as a constitutional standard. And this standard was supported by everyone who was a participant in the Constitutional Conference.

Human rights organizations especially insisted on this right. One of them had the status of an accredited human rights organization protecting those male fathers who were discriminated against. The basis of discrimination, as the representatives of the organization believed, was gender. They reasonably believed that the father had the same rights to the child as the mother. They opposed the practice of the courts, which discriminated against the rights of the fathers. This practice was and remains, unfortunately, the same in one thing: the mother, not the father, had and has the preferential right to raise a child in the event of a divorce of the parents.

This was the basis in the draft Constitution to equalize the rights of parents. In the latest version of the draft Constitution, parenthood as an idea that unites the rights of two sexes in society was specified: the concept of fatherhood and motherhood - the family - was introduced.

Considering other constitutional norms through the prism of a gender approach, one should note the use of linguistic stereotypes, which are especially difficult to combat. We are talking about the generally accepted and rooted in the public mind the term "citizen". The question of this arose at the Constitutional Conference when discussing articles on military service, defense of the fatherland (Transcript of the COP, group IV. July 18, 1993). “Protection of the Fatherland is the duty and obligation of a citizen of the Russian Federation. A citizen carries out military service in accordance with federal law. In Russian, there is another linguistic form - “citizen”. And in line with existing legislation both a citizen and a citizen can and do serve in the army. However, this amendment was not taken into account. (With regard to the status of foreign persons, the Constitutional Council went on the right track, speaking of "foreign citizens", i.e. using the plural.)

The choice of such a linguistic norm is associated with the state public consciousness. Of course, language form has yet to be correlated with social functions, speech behavior subjects who voted in favor of using the term "citizen" and not "citizens" when fixing this norm in the Draft Constitution.

The difference between the principles of equality in the Constitutions 1977 and 1993 Two constitutional constructions - two norms on equality contain a system of, at first glance, the same elements: equal rights and equal opportunities. This is enshrined in the Constitutions of 1977 and 1993. But these, at first glance, the same elements have fundamental differences. They are as follows.

First of all, the scope of the rights that the 1977 Constitution contained differs from the scope of the rights enshrined in the 1993 Constitution. This applies to the rights of both men and women. The 1993 Constitution reflected the liberal doctrine of human rights in a constitutional state, securing the full scope of civil, political, economic, social, cultural human rights in a society of freedom.

Secondly, the characterization of rights and the principle of equality are fundamentally different.

The content of the law, enshrined in the Constitution of 1977 under socialism, was strictly certain value: it was the will of the state, elevated to law. And it determined the content of the rights of a Soviet citizen. The fundamental difference between the Constitution of 1977 and; Constitution of 1993 was that it consolidated social and economic rights at actual disregard for political and civil rights and freedoms.

Under the rule of law, there is a fundamentally different understanding of law. Law is a measure of the freedom of equal subjects. The understanding of law as a will elevated to law (1977 Constitution) and law as a measure of the freedom of equal subjects (1993 Constitution) are diametrically opposed. Human rights in conditions of freedom are filled with a different content.

Thirdly, equality of opportunity in the Soviet state was achieved by a system of administrative measures.

Equality of opportunity in conditions of freedom can and should be ensured first of all by the system of civil society institutions and only then by measures (affirmative) of state support.

In the Constitution of 1993, the ideology of equality is radically changed. This is not the socialist idea of ​​equality as equality in freedom from oppressors, this is not the idea of ​​distributive equality in the period of developed socialism. This is the idea of ​​equality in freedom. This is a fundamental moment in determining the content of a constitutional norm.

Equality under socialism was achievable with the help of the power of the state, which ensured the regulation of all spheres of society.

Under the rule of law, the measure of society's freedom is different. It (measure) limits the state and its powers. It follows from this that the state, remaining a force, in a new way and in new conditions, with the help of new methods, must guarantee and ensure the observance of the principle of equality, which is contained in the Constitution.

The state must consistently uphold the position of equality between the two sexes. This is his constitutional role.

Fourth, gender aspects of equality under socialism were ensured by a system of measures of protectionist, security, authoritative and preferential legislation.

In modern conditions, equality of the two sexes is achievable with the help of a system of anti-discrimination measures that the state is obliged to carry out. Other mechanisms provide support and implementation of the principles of equality in the rule of law. A different ideology dominates society.

Fifth, the fundamental characteristic of the gender aspects of equality in the Soviet state in the historical dimension was reduced to two points: equality in freedom from exploitation (the proletarian period) and equality “distributive” - in the period of developed socialism. In both cases, this is equality regulated by the state.

Another characteristic of equality in a society that we call post-Soviet, in a society that is building a state of law. This is the equality of free subjects, equality in freedom.

Society is free if the individual is free. The individual is free if society is free. These two complementary characteristics of freedom are inextricably linked. They are the essence of law as a measure of the freedom of the individual in society and civil society itself.

In general, it should be noted that in a society of freedom, other mechanisms are at work, providing support and implementation of the principle of equality of the two sexes.

This list of distinctive features could be continued. But in general, the doctrines of equality in the two historical periods differ fundamentally in degree of freedom of citizens in society, their dependence on the state.