Putin's election
How Putin can be elected for the 3rd consecutive term if Russia's constitution allows only for 2 consecutive terms?
Posted Dec 2, 2023, 12:10 AM UTC
187
When he was out of allowed terms he has rewritten the Constitution and said this resets his counter somehow.
31
He wrote in the constitution that he is special
16
Would be much more interesting to watch what kind of new bullshit reasoning he'll do to stay in power after the next two terms, if he lives 12 extra years.
5†
It's like you imply that Putin is mortal. Are you a heretic?
10
It also would be very interesting to live through those 12 years, but I don't want to be entertained any longer
3
Either trick would have sucked even in the kindergarten
2
Unfortunately he is the only kid in his kindergarten
10
Technically he didn't, he or his party, or however this works, proposed a law to change some parts of the constitution, people voted for that because there were some other changes like "kittens are cute, don't you agree?". These additional stuff was promoted heavily on the TV, but no one, except opposition, said a word about the terms trick. Personally, I understood what was going on, but my reaction wasn't so much to oppose but like "Oh you, I see what you did here". I don't think he's failing on the job, so might as well let him finish his plans for the country.
11
I guess, that just demonstrates the value of constitution in Russia.
It's a piece of paper that could be disregarded, amended, rewritten, and the words in it are open for interpretations, based on whoever's opinion actually matters in Russia.
16
That constitution was assigned to us by the USA (victor of the Cold War) when the USSR collapsed/was defeated.
1†
Even if it was true back 30 years ago, isn't Russia strong and independent nowadays? So, if the constitution is bad, why not drop it altogether and vote for a new one in a proper referendum? Why do all the circus with the amendments that don't change anything fundamentally?
12
Even if it was true back 30 years ago, isn't Russia strong and independent nowadays? So, if the constitution is bad, why not drop it altogether and vote for a new one in a proper referendum?
Если что, конституция была сделана именно для того, чтобы президент смог вытворять все эти штуки.
Т.е. следите за руками. Конституция в РФ неплохая, несмотря (а скорее благодаря) иностранному вмешательству, в общем-то, что с поправками, что без. Она неплохо описывает институты, вполне демократичные притом, говорит положенные ритуальные речи про права, свободы, не содержит архаичного дерьма и в целом неплохой рабочий инструмент.
Проблема в том, что при её принятии все очень боялись тытылитарного реванша, который нахлынет красно-коричневым потоком и все это отменит, восстановит СССР, далее везде. Напомню, на дворе 1993 год, как только разрешили Первые Свободные выборы (губернаторские в регионах) - на них назначенные Кремлем полпреды-реформисты-демократы полетели к хуям за своей полной дегенеративностью, и это давало вполне ясную картинку того, что может случиться на выборах 1995 и 1996.
Самым успешным европейским опытом глубокой демократизации общества при отсутствии внешней оккупации на тот момент была Испания, которая, что характерно, испытывала те же проблемы, и где коричневый реванш был сорван благодаря фигуре короля.
В 1981 году [Хуан Карлос] оказал успешное сопротивление попытке государственного переворота, устроенного военными, стремившимися восстановить франкистский режим. После этого лидер испанских коммунистов Сантьяго Каррильо, за шесть лет до того называвший короля «Хуаном Карлосом Недолгим», воскликнул перед телекамерами в избытке чувств: «Боже, храни короля!»
(если что, Каррильо тот еще пидорас, еврокоммунист и фашистский стукач)
Да, о восстановлении монархии в РФ не могло быть и речи, соответствующие движения, (особенно за вычетом ультрареакционных) всегда были маргинальными, поэтому благожелательного автократа, последнюю линию защиты демократии от народа, пришлось имитировать президентом.
Так што наличие Путина в современной системе власти - это не какое-то использование ошибок и противоречий (типа Веймара), а фича. Путин нужен, чтобы декоммунизировать, но за окончанием своей задачи декоммунизирует он что попало.
5
Sorry, to break it to you but the USSR constitution had exactly the same significance in its time.
4
Wait, was Russia (USSR) a lawless country without fundamental laws? How does that make your life more protected?
-2
Of course the USSR had a constitution! Even better we had 3 constitutions in the USSR!
So yeah, changing the constitution is a pretty normal thing in Russia, it's just the last time it happened was 1977 and 1993 so people forgot.
5
All constitutions are like that if the constitution gets in the way its always amended or scraped for example in America technically firing people who are pro Palestine is infringing on their first amendment right but no one cares
1
People kinda voted to support these changes. They choose which constitution they want to follow. Democracy at its finest.
-2†
Pretty much every major elections since 2014 are faked. Mathematically proven fakes.
3
Putin himself has amended the Constitution, which removes the word "in a row" and leaves "2 terms". Then the deputies of the State Duma introduced an amendment that gave the current president the opportunity to be elected again. I respect Putin. I think that since he made such amendments, it means that the country is ready for a change of leader, and he was going to leave. I am of the opinion that the amendment was introduced in order not to turn the president into a "Lame duck" in his last term. Moreover, serious events are taking place. It will be difficult for me to vote for him if he runs for election... But I would not advise those who are waiting for him to leave to celebrate! Power in countries such as Russia, the United States, and China is only nominally tied to the head of state. In fact, power is in the hands of large power groups, which direct politics. Russia's "turning back" is impossible.
9
Did i get it right, you think Putin will not be a president next term?
1
Yes, I think that Mikhail Mishustin's candidacy is being prepared with a high degree of probability.
-2†
I have to explore more about him. Thank you.
1
I wrote that I don't even consider Putin an independent president. He represents a certain power group. At least, it would be the most reasonable thing for him to do, because if your power is absolute and does not rest on the interests of many people, you will have to be in power all the time so that you are not eliminated by any other new authorities.
5
Because he's a dictator. Rules are for serfs and plebs like us.
9
We don't give a slightest shit about constitution, it does not define rules on how we live.
7
The constitution is more what you'd call "Guidelines", than actual rules.
6
Can you elaborate on what defines how you live? Aren't laws separate countries from tribalism, autoritarism, mafia codex (you name it)?
4†
First of all, even in tribalism, mafia and in prisons there are laws.
Secondly the constitution is a law and not the law. Regular laws affect people much more than the constitution and some of them even bend constitution, for example Yarovaya law which imo breaks secrecy of correspondence.
7
I also like to add that even laws don't determine the most in my life. The work determines a lot. 5 days a week I have to work, spend my most active hours (I don't know how to say it, there are hours when I'm fresh and let's say they are called active hours, and when I'm tired it's not called active hours) at work, get tired and spend evening somehow. 2 days are weekend (so I can spend whole day doing something I want). And work also determines my benefits, which determines my "opportunities". My freedom is limited by work. It's either time spent on work or money spent for myself that I get by working. The local authority for me is a corporation. The higher authority is the state, but I almost don't notice the effect on me; the company I work in defines my life more than the state (I have to add that stuff like war also affects me, fortunately, in my case only my mental health). Also fortunately, the working conditions are nice, but again, if I speak for myself.
4
To be fair, the fact that you work 5 days a week is determined by law, how you pay taxes is determined by law, the way you get hired is determined by law, how and how much you pay for living expenses is partially determined by law.
Even the way salaries are paid (and the fact they paid at all) is determined by law.
6
Common sense as the main driver + extreme liberalism.
-3
The strictness of Russian laws is offset by the non-binding nature of their enforcement and compliance control.
4
Election? What election? An election presupposes an uncertainty in the outcome and that votes will acually be counted. Did somebody here say that they respect Putin? Talk about Stockholm Syndrome! That's like marrying your rapist, who also murdered your family.
4
Other candidates have electile disfunction.
2†
Проебалтам снова не спится.
2†
Just like he did it in the spring of 2012. He will bring the Internal Troops//Rosgvardiya into Moscow, rewrite the Constitution again and elect himself basically at gunpoint with ordinary people threatened into voting for him, usually by the FSB who would tell them that they must, or else they will be fired from their jobs.
2†
I must have missed the 2012 events entirely. What has happened there?
1
From December 0f 2011 to March of 2012 Putin amassed a large number of police, Internal Troops and army units and brought them all to Moscow in fear of a potential uprising (as there were ongoing protests of Russian nationalists and liberals), and rewrote the Constitution. He extended the term for presidency from 4 to 6 years, and also made it legal that he can reelect himself over and over again, provided someone rules for one term in-between to not formally break the law, like it was in the case with Dmitry Medvedev. It doesn't help that the Constitution says "you can be a President for no more than two terms in a row", but due to specifics of the Russian language it can be understood as either "you only can be a President for two terms in total" or "you can serve as President for 2 terms in a row, and then get elected again after someone else's term again". The Constitution writers insist it's the former, while Putin and his clique insinuate it's the latter. And guess who won in the end.
4
[deleted]
1
I'll vote for him again =)
1†
I perfectly understand you. Unfortunately, all the other candidates would be worse than him. You need healthy political candidates to choose from.
-2†
Just curious to know. Who is healthy candidate all over the common west? Biden? Trump? Sunak? Macron? Scholz? I think voting is the common circus. Just a game.
13
Indeed democracy is a scam your basically choosing amongst a list of preselected candidates who are mostly the same and vary in only a few areas an outsider would never be allowed to win elections let alone contest them
9
I strongly disagree with your statement. I know shtload of people around the democratic countries who got elected to important positions without having previous political experience.
1
Parlamentarism has failed across the board. In Germany I get to choose between imperialist war mongers and imperialist war mongers with a green paint job (save me wagenknecht)
5
My view is that all politicians get corrupted more or less, but a limited number of terms prevents complete autocracy, dictatorship, and nepotism. Meanwhile, the opposition is allowed to expose the corruption of the ruling people.
With the current system, you are not allowed to know what Putin is doing wrong. You are only allowed to hear what Western leaders are doing wrong, thanks to opposition.
Correct me if I am wrong. I want to know if my logic is flawed.
1
prevents complete autocracy, dictatorship, and nepotism.
It does not. See USA.
Basically, goes like this. With sufficient amount of money you buy all media platforms. Then you won. Because now you can implement state censorship without being the state and manipulate public opinion via Illusory Truth Effect attack.
Then with more money, you make a little club for friends in high places, and your friends will prevent anyone from reaching high places unless they meet your expectations.
Play this right, and you get totalitarian society in guise of democracy where you control everything while not being the nominal ruler or even known.
It is happening now. Private property is used to bypass freedom of press and freedom of speech laws. For example in gaza conflict there was talk that "someone did not represent events correctly". That's censorship. It means there's "correct" version of things that is approved and one that is not approved.
Because idea of democracy was coined in time where such degree of information manipulation was not possible, democracy is completely defenseless against any of this. Your politicians are aware of it and have been using the system flaws for decades.
With the current system, you are not allowed to know what Putin is doing wrong.
That is false, though. A commonly told fairytale in the west.
Regarding opposition, if someone is showing you "the truth", they in turn can easily be a tool used by the third party to pursue their goal and are not your friend. Their truth can also be a lie. A good example of that are orange revolutions. Gather enough people, rile them up, say it is all "in the name of good", "to make the world better", "to defend all that is good and fight all that is bad", they believe you, and then you make their country a puppet state.
4
This is the root case. You gonna need an opposition to know what's going wrong with the current leader's deeds. Did I get it right, you can't see it by yourselves? All I can see, some dirty deeds in the west are only discovered if it's needed to punish some politician. Do you remember Dominique Strauss-Khan? And we have the same here. So there's the same shit in different coat.
3
Don't forget that Putin himself is the reason there's no "healthy political candidates to choose from". They are not allowed to get popularity from the very bottom, from city district level, and if someone somehow gathers popularity despite that, they're either jailed or killed.
5†
You exaggerate putins power , countries are run by elite consensus putin is in power because more elites than not want him in power if the majority of elites no longer want him in power he will be toppled one way or another like how boris Johnson was toppled or how John f Kennedy was topppled via assassination
-1†
Whether Putin built this system himself, or he was controlled by hidden elites behind him to build this system, or he manipulated the elites who thought they control him, does it really change the result? If you're not from the system, you won't even be allowed to register yourself as a candidate.
6
Tsar is good, the boyars are bad
4
Boris was ousted because of a gathering during Corona, not because of his political decisions. He broke the law by doing so, but most of the media outcry was of his moral hypocrisy.
I honestly doubt that Putin would be ousted because of his morality. Anyone exposing him would end up like Magnitsky, Nemtsov, Politkovskaya and others.
1
Какая тебе разница?
1†
разница
Why are you even here if you have no разница?
7
I came looking for booty.
1
Good bot
-1
Although I have not reached the age for elections, I will try to convince my Parents somehow not to vote for Putin. Over the last period, apart from new sanctions, deaths and unnecessary territories, he has brought nothing new. Russian Russian Liberation and the Salvation of the Russian World" rhetoric looks as if he is playing for Russia in Europe Universal IV, and is trying to capture the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. I mean, it's like he considered himself the Emperor of the 18th century, and he wants to expand his possessions for the sake of the treasury. His arguments "The Americans also bombed and staged wars" do not justify him. It's the same if you kill the man who drowned the Kitten yesterday. You will not be acquitted by the court for this. Yes, the Americans are just as Imperialist as the Russian Federation. But this is not an excuse for all that he has done in recent years. If he is elected again (which most likely will be, because there are no adequate elections in the Russian Federation anymore), then this will be the death of Russia.
1†
I will try to convince my Parents somehow not to vote for Putin
Don’t worry, he’ll still win.
14
Yeah, the kid's got a good heart, but doesn't yet understand how the "elections" here work
5
Over the last period, apart from new sanctions, deaths and unnecessary territories, he has brought nothing new.
Well, he splitted Roscadastr and Rosreestr and merged further with the Bureau of Technical Inventarization, so it's a second year in which I have no clue of what I'm doing at work (still getting salary though).
4
I will be voting for him again. All my family will too lol.
1
we play only with heads of our enemies
we damn have everything similar,dont think its an other part of the world without steam,epicgames and newgrounds.
1
wrong post
1
Putin can basically do whatever he wants, he has no internal enemies strong enough to challenge him. All the opposition parties, from the Communists to Yabloko, are either allied with Putin formally or informally or too insignificant to challenge him. Putin will not transform Russia into a dictatorship completely because that would be bad for optics, but he will do everything short of that, including allowing himself to be re-elected as long as he wants. This is a problem that Russia has faced since the end of the USSR, the problem of strongmen overpowering democracy.
1
Because he is a dictator, and will not step down from power until his last dying day
1
I want to spoil the ballot
1
The latest change in constitution reset his counter. The same change, amusingly, restricts total lifetime number of times to 2. Previously it was possible to shuffle candidates.
For the third time we'll get one of his clones and technically it will be a different candidate.
What was that change, and how it was formulated?
He meant that in a lifetime of a person a person can be elected only 2 times now. It is a new rule.
Previous rule limits number of consequent presidential terms to 2, so a person (for example, Putin) can only be elected 2 times (or 1 time) consequently and then another person should be elected (for example, Medvedev). But then previous president can be elected for another 1 or 2 terms (for example, Putin, which served 1 term).
The law is weirdly formulated that all previous terms don't count now. So now Putin can have 2 more terms. If constitution wasn't changed, Putin only had 1 term left.
There's some logic to that, because if not for this thing the change in constitution, Putin (having his third term in his life) at the moment should have been replaced with someone else at the moment constitution was changed. However, majority of people think that it was intentional, to give Putin more terms. Because it could be formulated differently, so the number of Putin terms did not increase by 1 more term. The new, I don't know how to say, rule (it's not a law, just a part of constitution) was named something like "resetting" in Russia and "resetting" became a meme and people made jokes about it.
the wording is basically the same as before. they just said since it's a new constitution, all pervious terms should not be taken into account :)
ROFL hard to comment on that logic or lack of it :)