#why? every other post-USSR country went through the procedure

[justacynicalromantic]

Russia has hit Odesa's civilian grain export infrastructure again last night, for the third night in a row. This is a deliberate attempt to create high food prices in Africa and the Middle East. Deliberate.

The UN is no longer able to keep the peace. If it isn't capable of creating a convoy to protect the export of Ukrainian grain, then it's time to shut the whole institution down.

(and of course they also hit civilian houses)

[kj1966-blog]

We all are born prejudice free. However, as we grow up mental trash is being poured into our heads continuously.

Considering that propaganda machine has tirelessly kept on persuading us that what we are told is the ultimate truth, naturally, many people do not even realize that they might think is true is actually false.

As a result of the collapse of USSR, I personally went through a mental spring cleaning and I must admit that the process of removing accumulated mental trash is not very pleasant.

It is believed that the United States is a locomotive of democracy. But is it so?

FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY

Democracy originated more than 2,400 years ago in ancient Greece. The word “democracy” means “rule by the people.” While this definition tells us that the citizens of a democracy govern their nation, it omits essential parts of the idea of democracy as practised in countries around the world.

What are the five foundations of democracy?

Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is the key international guarantee of voting rights and free elections, but its provisions are strongly related to other articles, specifically Article 2. The ICCPR also includes guarantees of freedom of expression (Article 19), assembly (Article 21), association (Article 22), and non-discrimination (Article 26).

ICCPR, Article 25: Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in Article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions:

(a) To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives; (b) To vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors; (c) To have access, on general terms of equality, to public service in his country.

It seems that the United States does not meet this requirement as the 2016 US presidential elections have demonstrated that majority votes aren’t the decisive factor.

In the US every state gets a certain number of votes depending partly on the size of its population. The way it’s worked out means there’s a minimum of three votes per state.

On 15th November 2016, BBC published “Reality Check: Is US system a ‘disaster for democracy’?”. In it, BBC explained that in most states, the most popular candidate wins all of its votes, even if 49% of people voted a different way. The system is different in Maine and Nebraska, where voting is broken down into Congressional districts, which means not all the state’s electoral college votes have to go to the same candidate.

Winning a state like California, which gets 55 of the total 538 electoral college votes, will put a candidate a long way towards the 270 state votes needed to win the presidency. Even if they win that state by a single vote, they get all 55 votes.

It is better to win by a small margin in lots of states than win by a landslide in just a few – the scale of the win (and therefore the number of people who support you) is meaningless – you still only get one state with a fixed number of electoral college votes.

The Guardian reported that there’s no debate at this point that Hillary Clinton has won the popular vote and the delegate count to win the Democratic primary. But even Clinton supporters should agree that our supposedly “democratic” system for picking nominees for president is terribly broken and should be dramatically overhauled.

  kjworldwidecitizen.blog

  Another confirmation that the U.S. does not meet fundamental principles of democracy was illustrated in analysis of Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world.

Pew Research Center reported that Donald Trump won 304 electoral votes to Hillary Clinton’s 227, with five Democratic and two Republican “faithless electors” voting for other people. That result was despite the fact that Clinton received nearly 2.9 million more popular votes than Trump in November’s election, according to Pew Research Center’s tabulation of state election results. Our tally shows Clinton won 65.8 million votes (48.25%) to almost 63 million (46.15%) for Trump, with minor-party and independent candidates taking the rest.

According to Pew Research Center, this mismatch between the electoral and popular votes came about because Trump won several large states (such as Florida, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin) by very narrow margins, gaining all their electoral votes in the process, even as Clinton claimed other large states (such as California, Illinois and New York) by much wider margins. Trump’s share of the popular vote, in fact, was the seventh-smallest winning percentage since 1828, when presidential campaigns began to resemble those of today.

Trump’s victory another example of how Electoral College wins are bigger than popular vote ones

Pew Research Center highlights that in fact, the very nature of the way the U.S. picks its presidents tends to create a disconnect between the outcome in the Electoral College and the popular vote. The last time a popular-vote loser won the presidency in the Electoral College was, of course, in 2000, when George W. Bush edged out Al Gore 271-266 despite Gore winning some 537,000 more popular votes nationwide. The other electoral-popular vote mismatches came in 1876 and 1888; in all four instances the Democratic nominee ended up the loser. (In the 1824 election, which was contested between rival factions of the old Democratic-Republican Party, Andrew Jackson won a plurality of the popular and electoral vote, but because he was short of an Electoral College majority the election was thrown to the House of Representatives, which chose runner-up John Quincy Adams.)

Even in the vast majority of U.S. elections, in which the same candidate won both the popular and the electoral vote, the system usually makes the winner’s victory margin in the former a lot wider than in the latter. In 2012, for example, Barack Obama won 51% of the nationwide popular vote but nearly 62% of the electoral votes, or 332 out of 538.

According to The Washington Post, the 2016 election was the first one held after the Supreme Court weakened the Voting Rights Act in 2013. As a result, it saw increasingly restrictive voter ID laws, the shuttering of polling stations in minority-dominated districts and exhortations to “monitor” polls for alleged fraud in nonwhite communities, which reportedly experienced systematically longer voting queues. It’s difficult to assess how much such measures affected turnout. But whether it changes an election’s result, targeting one party’s supporters to discourage or prevent them from voting undermines democracy.

Residents of Washington line up for early voting in the 2016 presidential election at the Chevy Chase Community Center in Washington on Oct. 29. (Jim Lo Scalzo/European Pressphoto Agency)

The Washington Post highlights that recent studies of competitive authoritarian elections reveal how leaders undermine informal norms of fair play in ways that do not violate procedural democracy but prevent democracy from functioning effectively.

In particular, misinformation has become central to nondemocratic elections around the world. Of course, politicians always skirt the truth. But until 2016, falsehoods in U.S. presidential campaigns mostly involved misrepresentations of complex policy proposals. By contrast, this election saw an extraordinary number of blatantly false statements. Fake news often overwhelmed factual reporting.

      kjworldwidecitizen.blog

  The system which exists in the U.S. doesn’t make any sense. If the majority does not rule but instead is being ruled by the minority, why the United States is still considered as a democratic country?

Possibly, the answer to this question could be found almost everywhere: TV, radio, newspapers, social media or even when we walk down the street.

The answer is in the growing inequality gap, almost vanished middle class, ballooning sovereign debt, a spike in hate crimes and Donald Trump, the least qualified person to be the President in the history of mankind.

The accumulated mental trash is not as harmless. If we don’t clean up our mind regularly, we might be completely blindfolded because propaganda rubbish won’t let us see the reality clearly.

Without clarity, people could lose the ability to detect the core reason for a problem. And without knowing what and where malfunctioned, it is impossible to find a solution.

It is well known that even small unresolved problem could grow into a huge monster. Repeating statements which are obviously false is not going to turn them into true statements.

Since it is not too late, perhaps this is the right time for people to start mental spring cleaning, get rid of all mental trash and start fixing badly wounded society.

  THE EXISTING VOTING SYSTEM QUESTIONS THE STATUS OF THE UNITED STATES AS A DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY We all are born prejudice free. However, as we grow up mental trash is being poured into our heads continuously.

[drubblernews-blog]

New Post has been published on http://drubbler.com/2017/02/24/latest-tips-of-soviet-power/

Latest tips of Soviet power

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push();

Polina yakovleva, February 24, 2017, 22:12- REGNUM

Hospital “presidential housing. “The main country here has its own Chamber. Cozy, almost home atmosphere. Here, in one of the rooms, have a ballot. 73-year-old General Secretary Konstantin Chernenko is currently declining to “polling station” in a wheelchair. His assistants will remember how hard he was given these “performances”. This time he is terminally ill, meets with the force and rises to meet Protocol obligations.

the Soviet tv receives picture voting Secretary 1 .

two weeks later, He dies. It will be the last Soviet leader, upokoennym near the Kremlin wall.

at the launch of “flywheel” global changes will need 65 days.

11 March by the Secretary-General of the CENTRAL COMMITTEE of the CPSU Mikhail Gorbachev will become.

April 23 at the plenum will be announced beginning of acceleration policy… “ 2, 3

in the middle of may, during a meeting with activists of the Leningrad city, Gorbachev says his famous” rebuilt “ 4 .

but all that happened later. February 24, 1985 years the country has elected Supreme Soviets Union and autonomous republics, as well as local councils of people’s deputies. The habitual constituencies elections under the command of the COMMUNIST PARTY. That this is the last campaign in this format might, then, is that we in a bad dream on Sunday.

simple slowdown

“go funeral Secretary General. Citizen tries to break closer to the mourning procession. His KGB officers stopped and asked:

— you have an invitation?

— no, I pass! ”

almost a year before Constantine Chernenko, in February 1984, Yuri Andropov died in November 1982 year-Leonid Brezhnev.

Society to a series of “funeral” the Kremlin concerned already calm and politically correct. As there, Leonid Filatov? “Act strictly according to the law — that is, Act … sneaking. The reaction was “kitchen” jokes, which perfectly convey the mood of the people.

a country bursting with events and lived under “Advanced socialism”. Because alternative statements from high tribunes until it was 6. 271 million. man (18 million of which are in the 5 ) read the editorials of newspapers about the growth of economic potential, income and professional successes — Rezhskogo nickel plant workers fighting for the early tasks of the five-year plan, assumed the counterplan and advanced Socialist obligations … ”

Committee on Statistics predicted that national wealth in 1987 year will nearly 50 times in comparison with the year 1913.

However, not all okay in the Soviet State. The collection of statistics did not include an exhaustive “arms race” and the Afghan war, international economic and scientific-technical insulation USSR, strained relations with the largest communist neighbour China, the effects of the political crisis in Poland, the beginning of the 80 ‘s dissident movement, though and could be divided into “Westernizers” and the “Slavophiles”, merged in unison remove power from the Communist Party.

growth, turning into the overall drop, do not justify its name 6 .

many today blamed the economy as the reason for the collapse of the country. However, not all problems lead to a systemic crisis, and not every systemic crisis is destroying the State system.

“stagnant phenomena” in the Soviet economy of that period in the 27th Congress of the CPSU Mikhail Gorbachev speaks. For others, it was a time of stability. “As the State Planning Commission and 20 years ahead of scheduled” — lived the majority of Soviet citizens. Estimated, planned. Including participation in elections. Voluntary-compulsory. And, in fact, the turnout was such that captures the spirit of almost 100%. Yes there is talk in April weekends dedicated to the day of the birth of Lenin, collectively Meli, painted voroshili, melted snow 160 million people.

the basic law. Childhood, adolescence, youth

here is already 8 years the USSR lived and chose the new “vneklassovoj” of the Constitution.

the election of the first years of Soviet power, universal and secret. Voting rights were denied the “exploiters” (those who used hired labor), private traders, priests, former police officers and a number of other categories of the population 7 . The year 1936 Constitution declared the USSR State workers and peasants “. The Basic Law of 1977 year — already in the preamble commits suicide “dictatorship of the proletariat” in favor of “shhenarodnogo State”.

“a new historical community of people — the Soviet people” exercised State power through the Councils of people’s deputies 8 .

to elect and to be elected at the Supreme (Tips … USSR, Soviet republics, autonomous republics), as well as in the local hierarchy which picture of the status of the administrative-territorial unit. Paramount, along with regional, regional councils of people’s deputies, the Councils of people’s deputies of the autonomous communities and autonomous okrugs, regional, city, district, located in urban and rural councils of people’s deputies — constituted a unified system of public authorities 8 . Supreme Soviets were chosen for 5 years, local councils of people’s Deputies is at 2.5 years.

“leading and guiding force of the Soviet society, the nucleus of its political system, Government and public organisations was the COMMUNIST PARTY 8 .

Apply voice

who in 1984 year voted the first Communist country, “Konstantin Chernenko? Like all — for the only candidate “in place” that was in his bulletin. Agreed that the Secretary General of the party, and led.

how and when Soviet citizens vote explained numerous polygraph. products, media and agitators.

At the first Soviet election turnout at stations was small 7 and propaganda network grew over the years. For example, Molotovskoj (now Perm) oblast by the 1947 year 43 thousand were recruited. agitators on elections (one in ten courtyards, one to 25 − 30 9 ).

it was important to explain and more — who are voting. The first time (that was not yet a habit) is why, actually, for one. The Chairman of the District Commission Kalagaev commented: “we must tell the voters, and even some fellow starts to appear questionable, how do you vote for one. Some thought that the vote must be for 10 − 15 people. This does not necessarily, not told. You understand that we will have a great deal of advocacy on this issue. ” The explanation proposed is: “the other candidates don’t have, because we do not nominate them for our County areas” 7 explained he leadership of the precinct election commissions Gor’kovsko-Leninsky district.

to elections was taken to walk early, do not tighten until the evening. And here in the early morning (often prior to the opening of polling stations) people ran in the elections. This symbol of the emancipation of the working class, eventually evolved into the procedure. In duty. However, pleasant.

more than 99.99% of voters came to the polling stations on February 24 (99.97%)- 15 . Working from 6 am until 10 pm, they smelled fresh pastries, there were music and human gvaltom. Somewhere a clear rhythm dancers struck — master of amateur performances. People were elated.

Polling booths for secret expression “were located in a separate room and were proven over the years a sample” ergonomic design “: two prefabricated plywood shield 2 x 1.6 meters x 1.2 meter. Front cabin was closed curtains. Top remained open. 7

the wooden ballot boxes for the vote, too, fit into the Interior. There is a version that the CPSU (b) back in November 1936, entered into correspondence about purchase “electronic ballot boxes. Negotiations were conducted with the American firm “Omatig Woutng korporeichen” thing, which was the sole producer of machines for voting. But the deal never took place. «Authentic» wooden ballot boxes and voting booths have remained in the country for decades.

elections for many years went by the same scenario.

in the local councils, the Parliament, by the first past the post system, i.e. the majority, chose one member. In the Supreme Soviet of the USSR could pick two, but also “one at a time — in the Union Council and the Council of nationalities.

To vote against, had to do more. And rather moral than physical. Vote “Yes” — you get the newsletter and opuskaesh’ in the URN. Vs-vycherkivaesh’ candidate.

the official results showed that the “against” votes less than 1% of voters. As the saying goes, within the statistical margin of error.

on the ballot — leaders and party elite. Legislative norms do not have representation of women, workers, farmers, non-party and the Communists. However, the recommendation of the Party (including Lenin principle of involving women in governance) and still the same chapter 6 of the Constitution on equality of citizens strictly observed and constitute important features of the Soviet electoral system.

consisting of elected deputies (USSR): 35.2% and 16.1%, 4.5% of farmers to managers; workers party organizations — 16.7%, State and Soviet authorities — 13.2%; 64.7% of men and 35.3 percent of women; youth up to 30 years is 22%.

in 1985, massively and amicably — all to the Supreme Soviets of the Union republics chose 6.730 man:

975 per person. — in the Supreme Soviet of the Russian SFSR,

650 persons. -in the Ukrainian SSR,

485 people. -in Byelorussian SSR,

510 persons. — in the Uzbek SSR, the same is in the Kazakh SSR,

440 persons. — in the Georgian SSR,

-450 in the Azerbaijan SSR,

for the 350 is in Lithuanian, Kyrgyz, Tajik SSR,

340 persons. — in the Armenian SSR,

-380 in the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic,

330 Pax. — in the Turkmen Soviet Socialist Republic,

325 people. — in Latvian SSR,

and 285 people. — in Estonian SSR.

to the Supreme Soviets of the autonomous republics elected deputies:

the Bashkir Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic is 280 persons,

Buryat — 170 Pax.,

Dagestan — 210 persons,

Kabardino-Balkar ASSR — 160 Pax.,

Kalmyk — 130 Pax.,

Karelian ASSR-150 Pax.,

Komi-180 Pax.,

Mari-150 Pax.,

Komi-175 persons,

North-Ossetian-150 Pax.

the Tatar-250 Pax.,

Tuva — 130 Pax.,

the Udmurt-200 Pax.,

Chechen-Inga (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push();