REFORM REFORM (fr. reforme, from lat. reformo - transform) - transformation, change, reorganization of any side public life(orders, institutions, institutions); formally, any innovation, but usually R. is called a more or less progressive transformation.

Big legal dictionary. - M.: Infra-M. A. Ya. Sukharev, V. E. Krutskikh, A. Ya. Sukharev. 2003 .

See what "REFORM" is in other dictionaries:

- (lat. reformo) transformation introduced by legislation. In particular, the process of transformation of the state, begun by the authorities out of necessity. The ultimate goal of any reform is to strengthen and update the state foundations, which, ... ... Wikipedia

reform- y, w. reform f. 1. military, obsolete Reduction in troop numbers, resignation. Here, from time to time, the reform of the troops continues, and this week the States took a resolution to reduce the cavalry in each regiment by two companies, and are no longer leaving ... ... Historical Dictionary of Gallicisms of the Russian Language

- (French reforme, from Latin reformo I transform), transformation, change, reorganization of k.l. sides of societies. life (orders, institutions, institutions), which does not destroy the foundations of the existing social structure. With a formal view. under… … Philosophical Encyclopedia

- (new lat., from lat. reformare to remake, transform). Transformation of the existing order, change of form. Dictionary foreign words, included in the Russian language. Chudinov A.N., 1910. REFORM [fr. reforme Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language

See change... Synonym dictionary

- (foreign) novelty (due to the transformation of orders). Wed. “Reform” (in our country) liberation of the peasants. Wed. Work on judicial reform had to stop. A new court where three quarters of the population were subject to manual punishment... would be... ... Michelson's Large Explanatory and Phraseological Dictionary (original spelling)

REFORM, reforms, women. (from the Latin reformo I convert). A change in the design of something made for the purpose of improvement; transformation. Reform of the credit system or in the credit system. || Changes in legislation and state structure,… … Dictionary Ushakova

A range of measures aimed at bringing a company out of a critical, pre-bankruptcy state (more strict financial discipline, reduction or injection of new capital investment, etc.). Dictionary of financial terms... Financial Dictionary

- (French reforme, from Latin reformo I transform), transformation, change, reorganization of any aspect of social life (economy), order (institutions, institutions); formally an innovation of any content, but a reform... Modern encyclopedia

- (French reforme from Latin reformo transform), transformation, change, reorganization of any aspect of social life (orders, institutions, institutions); Formally, innovation of any content, but reforms are usually called more... ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

Books

• Reform or revolution, R. Luxembourg. The title of this work may at first glance cause surprise. Social reform or revolution? Can social democracy be against social reform? Can she...

In politics, as in all public life, not to move forward means to be thrown back.

Lenin Vladimir Ilyich

Alexander 2 went down in history as a reformer. During his reign, significant changes took place in Russia, the main one of which concerns the solution of the peasant question. In 1861, Alexander II abolished serfdom. Such a radical step was long overdue, but its implementation was associated with big amount difficulties. The abolition of serfdom required the emperor to carry out other reforms that were supposed to return Russia to a leading position on the world stage. The country has accumulated a huge number of problems that have not been resolved since the era of Alexander 1 and Nicholas 1. The new emperor had to place great emphasis on solving these problems, carrying out largely liberal reforms, since the previous path of conservatism did not lead to positive consequences.

The main reasons for reforming Russia

Alexander 2 came to power in 1855, and he immediately faced an acute problem in carrying out reforms in almost all spheres of state life. The main reasons for the reforms of the era of Alexander 2 are as follows:

1. Defeat in Crimean War.
2. Growing discontent of the people.
3. Losing economic competition to Western countries.
4. Progressive entourage of the emperor.

Most of the transformations were carried out in the period 1860 - 1870. They went down in history under the name “liberal reforms of Alexander 2.” Today the word “liberal” often scares people, but in fact, it was during this era that the basic principles of the functioning of the state were laid down, which lasted until the end of existence Russian Empire. It is also important to understand here that even though the previous era was called “the apogee of autocracy,” this was flattery. Nicholas 1 was drunk on victory in Patriotic War, and apparent dominance over European countries. He was afraid to make significant changes in Russia. Therefore, the country actually reached a dead end, and his son Alexander 2 was forced to solve the gigantic problems of the Empire.

What reforms were carried out

We have already said that the main reform of Alexander 2 was the abolition of serfdom. It was this transformation that confronted the country with the need to modernize all other areas. In short, the main changes were as follows.

Financial reform 1860 - 1864. A state bank, zemstvo and commercial banks are created. The activities of banks were mainly aimed at supporting industry. IN Last year reforms, control bodies are created, independent of local authorities, which carry out inspections financial activities authorities.

Zemstvo reform of 1864. With its help, the problem of attracting the broad masses of the population to solve everyday issues was solved. Elected bodies of zemstvo and local self-government were created.

Judicial reform of 1864. After the reform, the court became more “legal.” Under Alexander 2, jury trials were introduced for the first time, publicity, the ability to bring any person to trial, regardless of his position, the independence of the court from local administrations, corporal punishment abolished and much more.

Educational reform of 1864. This reform completely changed the system that Nicholas 1 tried to build, who sought to separate the population from knowledge. Alexander 2 promoted the principle of public education, which would be accessible to all classes. For this purpose new primary schools and gymnasiums. In particular, it was during the Alexander era that women's gymnasiums began to open and women were admitted to the civil service.

Censorship reform of 1865. These changes absolutely supported the previous course. Control continued to be exercised over everything that was published, since revolutionary activities in Russia were extremely active.

Urban reform of 1870. It was mainly aimed at improving cities, developing markets, healthcare, education, establishing sanitary standards and so on. Reforms were introduced in 509 cities out of 1,130 in Russia. The reform was not applied to cities located in Poland, Finland and Central Asia.

Military reform of 1874. It was mainly spent on the modernization of weapons, the development of the fleet and the training of personnel. As a result Russian army has once again become one of the leading companies in the world.

Consequences of reforms

The reforms of Alexander 2 had the following consequences for Russia:

• Prospects have been created for building a capitalist model of the economy. The level of state regulation of the economy was reduced in the country, and a free labor market was created. However, the industry was not 100% ready to accept the capitalist model. This required more time.
• The foundations for the formation of civil society have been laid. The population received more civil rights and freedoms. This applies to all areas of activity, from education to real freedoms of movement and work.
• Strengthening the opposition movement. The bulk of the reforms of Alexander 2 were liberal, so the liberal movements, which were attributed to Nicholas the First, began to gain strength again. It was during this era that the key aspects that led to the events of 1917 were laid down.

Defeat in the Crimean War as a justification for reforms

Russia lost the Crimean War for several reasons:

• Lack of communications. Russia is a huge country and it is very difficult to move an army across it. Nicholas 1 began construction to solve this problem railway, but this project was not implemented due to banal corruption. The money intended for the construction of a railway connecting Moscow and the Black Sea region was simply torn apart.
• Disagreement in the army. The soldiers and officers did not understand each other. There was a whole gulf between them, both class and educational. The situation was aggravated by the fact that Nicholas 1 demanded severe punishment of soldiers for any offense. This is where the nickname of the Emperor among the soldiers comes from - “Nikolai Palkin”.
• Military-technical lag behind Western countries.

Today, many historians say that the scale of the defeat in the Crimean War was simply gigantic, and this is the main factor indicating that Russia needed reforms. This idea is supported and supported, among other things, by Western countries. After the capture of Sevastopol, all European publications wrote that autocracy in Russia had outlived its usefulness, and the country needed changes. But the main problem was different. In 1812 Russia won a great victory. This victory created among the emperors the absolute illusion that the Russian army was invincible. And now the Crimean War dispelled this illusion, Western armies demonstrate their superiority in technically. All this led to the fact that officials, who pay great attention to opinions from abroad, accepted a national inferiority complex and began to try to convey it to the entire population.

But the truth is that the scale of defeat in the war is extremely overestimated. Of course, the war was lost, but this does not mean that Alexander 2 ruled a weak Empire. It must be remembered that in the Crimean War Russia was opposed by the best and most developed countries of Europe at that time. And despite this, England and its other allies still remember this war and the valor of Russian soldiers with horror.

The authorities act as both the customer, the executor, and the evaluator of reforms in the country. Therefore, reformers do not encroach on the basic informal principles that determine the nature of governing the country

In 2015, Russia found itself in a perfect storm: geopolitical problems were layered on top of economic ones. The decline in oil prices coincided with a war of sanctions and international isolation, and the depreciating ruble did not help the development of import substitution in most industries. What are the key challenges the country is facing and how long will it have enough strength?

Five Principles of Power

2015 in Russia began with a scandal due to the cancellation of electric trains in a number of regions of the country, and ends with scandals surrounding the connections of the Prosecutor General with criminal groups, as well as problems with the launch of the Platon system. All these episodes represent elements of the country’s governance mechanism, which is most accurately characterized by the formula “bad governance” (the author’s translation of the English term bad governance).

“Unworthy governance” in relation to Russia and a number of other post-Soviet states means that the quality government controlled they are disproportionately worse than would be expected based on the objective level of socio-economic development. The defects of this management mechanism are not just unseemly “deeds” of individual high-ranking figures, but integral and natural manifestations of the political and economic order that has developed in today’s Russia, which determines the nature of governing the country. It is based on the following principles:

• appropriation of rent - the main objective and the main content of government at all levels;
• the mechanism of power and control gravitates toward hierarchy (“vertical of power”) with a single monopoly center for making significant decisions;
• the autonomy of economic and political players within the country in relation to this center is conditional and can be arbitrarily changed;
• formal rules of the game that set the framework for the activities of government and management bodies are a by-product of the distribution of resources within the “vertical of power”;
• The management apparatus within the “vertical of power” is divided into organized structures and informal cliques vying for access to rent.

The age of “pockets of efficiency” turns out to be short-lived: patronage from political leaders does not last forever, and the possibility of long-term large-scale financing is limited. Having completed the initial task and achieved the first results, “pockets of efficiency” hardly survive routinization, which is often accompanied by the loss of their exclusive status. In addition, “efficiency pockets” are good precisely because they are compact. But they begin to grow rapidly in size because organizations that are too large cannot be shut down or destroyed from the outside. At the same time, the risks of their internal degeneration also increase, since their management model can become a smaller copy of that very informal “core”, the negative effects of which they are designed to limit.

Neither “borrowing” nor “growing” institutions by themselves solve problems. Reforms are sacrificed to the current tasks of maintaining the political-economic order, the harmful influence of which can be reproduced even further for a long time, turning misrule in Russia into a kind of “vicious circle.” Most likely, Russian citizens will have to pay a very high price to get out of this “vicious circle” and dismantle the current political and economic order.

On the eve of Knowledge Day, our correspondent met with the teacher - Hero of Labor Russian FederationLyudmila Kornilova to talk about the upcoming school year, students, their parents and, of course, teachers.

On Knowledge Day - an exciting meeting

About what this one will be like academic year. Every year brings something new. History teaching is undergoing a transition to linear system and completion of the concentric system in accordance with historical and cultural standards (the concentric system involved studying history in two stages: grades 5-9, and then studying the same material for more high level in 10-11th grades. - Author). There will be certain innovations in the OGE. This year, in a number of regions, 9th grade students will take an oral exam in the Russian language. Astronomy teaching is returning to school. But the most exciting thing is the first meeting with my 9th grade class. It’s always interesting what the students have become, they’ve probably grown and matured. This period is the most difficult in their life. They are still children, but they already want to do adult things, but they are not always ready to be responsible for them.

- What reform do you think is not needed? modern school?

I would not like it to be said, as in the 90s: “The school should only provide educational services" Then they kicked everything out of her educational work. I believe that school both teaches and educates a person, forms citizenship and patriotism. The educational direction needs to be strengthened.

- Who is to blame for poor parenting, the school or the parents?

And who said that modern children are worse educated than the previous generation? They are creative, mobile, hungry for everything new. I believe that there should be a union between parents and schools. Teachers develop what is already inherent in the child. If there is a dysfunctional situation in the family, the school will fight for him. It is, of course, unrealistic to blame all educational work on teachers alone. Yes, we teach, help, educate. What if a student sees and hears other examples at home?

Organizations without politics

- Is there a place in a modern school for any organizations, associations, or actions?

Of course, a complete return to the past is not necessary: political organizations will not return to school. Children's public organization is necessary and must exist. You just need to unite children according to their interests and areas, where teenagers will make a free choice of activities, show independence, argue, look for ways to solve problems, and creatively self-actualize. This is a volunteer movement, and search work, and an environmental direction. The options can be very diverse.

- What is your attitude towards the Unified State Exam? There is a lot of controversy about this.

The advantage of the Unified State Exam is that it evens out the chances. Children, regardless of where they study, in a village or city, have a chance to enter a university. A child from the outback with good scores can study in Moscow, St. Petersburg, Saratov. The downside is that students, having chosen subjects for passing the Unified State Exam, are deeply engaged only in them, others consider them unimportant. There is another problem when passing: some tasks go beyond the limits school curriculum, putting stress on the test taker. It would not hurt to simplify the procedure for carrying it out. Since this is an exam, the atmosphere should be more confidential.

- Is it difficult to be a teacher, starting from scratch, especially for young teachers?

Yes. The young teacher has a university diploma, but he has yet to become a teacher. And how great it is if at first you young specialist there will be a wise mentor nearby who will help, support, teach. If a teacher worked at a school for 2-3 years and did not leave, it means he will remain there for life. Sometimes you enter a class, there are guys in front of you, each with their own mood, problems, and you have to make him into a like-minded person in 45 minutes. And when, at the end of the lesson, you hear from the students: “Thank you for the lesson,” you are sincerely happy. Is this a bad job?

Your lyceum has the best students in the region. Have you ever been to a rural school where it’s cold and all the amenities are outside?

I myself studied at such a school in my homeland in the Stavropol Territory. The main thing, after all, is not the amenities, although they are important, but the teachers and the atmosphere. Then in our village there was not even a single building, we walked from one room to another, we had to walk 4 kilometers to school. By the way, I had a class teacher who worked while my father was studying. Hence the great respect, I still remember her. I am sure that you can study anywhere, even in such a school amazing, wonderful people grow up. If there is no desire, then all knowledge in the city will pass by the child.

Sometimes parents discuss the actions of the teacher. Is this appropriate?

No. The family should cultivate respect for the teacher. This is exactly how I was raised; judgmental conversations directed at teachers were never allowed in my presence. Yes, and I grew up in a family of teachers, my mother taught at school, and I saw what it was like hard labour. And when parents discuss a teacher in front of their children, this creates disrespect for the teacher. I always tell parents: “If you have problems, come, we’ll solve them together.”

- Parents complain about the huge volume homework. What does it depend on?

Regulated by SANPIN, it determines the level and scope of tasks. If a student goes to a specialized lyceum, he must prepare for an in-depth study of the subject, including on his own.

Why do students need ratings?

- How do current students differ from those who studied 10-15 years ago?

The previous generation studied in a collectivist environment. They tried to stay together and be friends. Now a generation has come whose upbringing is based on individualism. These are different children, they behave differently. And we all still have to see over time what they will become in the future.

Is it bad when a student strives to be the best? A person who can be a leader and will be able to prove himself is successful in life and in work. This means that this must be the case at school if we want to see young people adapted to modern life after graduation.

What is your attitude towards physical punishment applied to your own children? Previously, this approach was considered effective.

Unacceptable! A long time ago there was such a case in my practice. I spoke a lot with the father of such a student on this topic: “A person who is humiliated will never become successful and will not be able to stand up for himself.”

- Your advice to parents sending their beloved children to first grade for the first time.

See a teacher as a friend, an adviser. And go to school with all your questions and doubts, and not discuss them in the family with your child. As for specific, not general advice, then you should help the child adapt to school, do not break down, do not scold if something does not work out. You just need to explain that everyone has difficulties and we need to learn to overcome them. And further. You cannot compare a child with other children, saying how smart he is, but you... He is who he is. Just love your children!

Announced by the Russian government pension reform will inevitably lead to a political crisis and, as a consequence, to the destruction of Russia as a state.

One of the characteristics of a state is government, which extends to the entire territory of the state, has special mechanisms control and coercive apparatus.

A significant part of the mechanism of legitimation of power is trust. It is trust that provides the social basis for support for government institutions and the political and economic course pursued by these institutions. Elections to government bodies can be viewed as a mechanism for exchanging social support from voters for promising, promised decisions by government bodies. Hence the concept of credit of trust.

In the democratic ideal proposed to Russians, the relationship between the authorities and the majority of society should be built on trust. And it is with trust that the Russian authorities have had big problems for the last thirty years.

One of the clear signs of a decline in public trust in government is the reluctance to exercise one’s right to vote in elections. In reality modern Russia reluctance to take part in elections in most cases is of a protest nature. The reasons for such a protest are the citizen’s disappointment not even in a specific party, but in political regime. When they don’t like a party, they vote for another party. And ignoring elections is a signal to the authorities that society, at a minimum, does not believe the existing political system, to all parties and to everyone state institutions. This is a “black mark for power.”

It must be said that for the last three decades, the authorities have been testing society’s trust with manic persistence, quite regularly dealing tangible blows to this social phenomenon. Here we can recall the behavior of the Russian elites with their already habitual, regular and extrajudicial fraud.

In the late 90s, the authorities had great difficulty luring 25% of voters to the polls. The crisis of confidence then affected not only politicians and representatives of various businesses. The vast majority of Russians did not trust the army, and law enforcement agencies had an almost zero trust rating. People didn’t even want to believe doctors - a paradise arose for all kinds of healers and psychics.

The situation in modern Russia until recently was completely different. For several years, especially after Crimea, trust in the authorities was restored literally drop by drop. At the same time, the phenomenon of trust itself can be called unique - a low level of trust in the government and bureaucrats in general, a rather negative attitude towards representatives of United Russia and a record level of trust in the president and individuals in power who are considered by society as pro-presidential.

The latest presidential elections showed that Putin received an unprecedented credit of public trust as an instrument for implementing the urgent transformations in society. And the president promised. Remember, “we will restore the country,” “we are all Russia.”

And unfulfilled hopes with such a huge credit of expectations are a guaranteed foundation for future social upheavals.

What reforms can we talk about in a society that does not trust the authorities? And what sane government, which really wants to carry out reforms, begins these transformations by destroying the mechanism of public trust? On what other basis will it be possible to unite people for their interaction in the implementation of reform plans? By force?

It is clear that power without the trust of the population is short-lived. Especially if the country has a difficult economic situation. Trust is not a self-shaking wallet made of folk tale with an inexhaustible resource. In order to receive something from a wallet called “trust”, you must first put something into this generator. At the same time, put it down much earlier than the desire to shake it arises.

Now let's talk about pension reform. What made people so angry? Not even the “pension reform” itself, although it is difficult to call banal robbery a reform, but the way it was done and presented to society. The authorities have demonstrated, clearly and without alternative, that the people are cattle. Rednecks with whom no one will talk and whose interests the authorities do not intend to take into account.

On the opening day of the World Cup (the rednecks will not notice the football battles), suddenly and categorically.

All subsequent monologues about discussions and debates, taking into account local opinions and finding ways in the chambers were already superfluous. All these cheerful grandmothers who fully support and approve, sad United Russia members who don’t want to, but “there is no other way”, verbose experts who enthusiastically talked nonsense about the number of workers and pensioners.

Endless attempts to manipulate society. Rude and vulgar. With a clear demonstration of a disregard for listeners.

What reforms? What and how are you going to reform? What will society gain as a result of your reforms?

Just yesterday, government officials were talking in unison about the successes of the Russian economy, the pace of rapid growth, and now the same people are talking about the impending budget crisis, from which the country can be saved only by robbing potential pensioners. If the Motherland is in danger, then why should these citizens alone pay for its salvation? Maybe it would be better to shoot them altogether to save the country? And then dispose of everyone who approaches the retirement age.

Do reforms require money? The authorities optimized expenses, put things in order in the financial affairs of the state, and revised salaries deputies and members of the government, returned money from overseas, and brought order to the Pension Fund. Mobilization of the entire society, including pension costs? That would be understandable. And this would be generally accepted by society.

The government is for robbery, the deputies of United Russia believe that there is no other way, the Federation Council generally approves... And these gentlemen will not negotiate with society. If the Americans wanted to discredit, then it would be impossible to come up with anything better.

There is society and there is power. Separate from this society. Two separate enclaves. With completely different values. The authorities want money at any cost, and society has a huge long-term demand for justice. And the authorities demonstrated where the masses could move with their demands. The elite needs money and it will take this money.

Putin’s intervention in the conflict no longer makes sense. With his silent position, the president showed that he is on the side of money, not justice. The credit of trust given to him will now melt like an icicle in the spring. And since it was the guarantor of the constitution who was the main accumulator of trust in the authorities, now the authorities will have trust ratings similar to those in neighboring Ukraine.

Will there be mass protests and rallies? Unlikely. There will be a protest with feet - ignoring elections and government initiatives, an increase in the mass of critical sentiments.

And the presence of an external threat will no longer save the government. Without trust there can be no consolidation. And in Rus' they don’t like traitors even more than enemies. And the authorities, from the moment of the announcement of pension reform and tax increases, are already traitors. Everything, without exception.

The worst thing is that this state does not have mechanisms that could smooth out this conflict. Even if government officials wanted to negotiate with society and make some concessions. Who can act as a mediator? Zyuganov with the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Navalny with his frostbitten schoolchildren?

Russia remained under sanctions pressure, the people were sympathetic to the declining standard of living and problems in the economy for one single reason - there was a belief that, if not the entire government, then Putin and his team were working for the good of the country.

And no matter what reform Putin and the government propose now, there will be no success. However, there will be no reform. The majority of the population now understands this very well. One can only expect from these gentlemen to further rob the people and line their own pockets.

This pension money will cost the authorities dearly. And the worst thing is that with the degradation of this thieving power, this state will also degrade. To the point of self-destruction.

Share this post

Discussion: 5 comments

Wonderful article! It’s as if the author “scanned” my brain and all my thoughts, thoughts, and indignations about the pension reform were so clearly and intelligibly outlined in the article.
His prophecy that this reform is one of the stages of the destruction of the state is very frightening. This is not what I would like. Russia must be a strong, prosperous, safe country for its population.
Well, why were the Arabs able to make an oasis for their population in the desert, while our part of the elite can only line their own pockets and at the same time their conscience is “clean and transparent, so much so that it cannot be seen?!
I will repeat once again: I am against raising the retirement age!!!

Answer

The wrong country was called Honduras, the wrong one.

Answer

1. This is who our valiant government of the Russian Federation wants to screw over unfortunate 55- and 60-year-old workers?! (PS.: After all, they won’t take you to the Government or the Kremlin.)
   Most employers do not want such older workers.
   Of course I have, unique people, working until they die, but most, if we are forced to work, will not be happy. When we come to work, we work for 2 hours, and then we need to rest, maybe even take a nap, a “siesta,” so to speak, because we don’t have enough strength for an 8-hour day. The employer will be furious: “Where is the implementation of the financial plan?!” And we were like clap-clap with our eyes: “What-so-so financial plan, well, at least we remember where we work and dragged ourselves to work!”
   And we occupy jobs where younger citizens could work more effectively.
   Thus, the pension reform is, well, very, very “raw, damp”, to the best of your ability!

   Answer

   1. Humor is good. It’s not even a matter of the elderly person’s desire to take a “siesta.” Someone will argue that with age a person has less strength and capabilities? How much health is left? And imagine that a semi-retired man was taken away from work by ambulance. It wasn’t even an occupational injury, but the person felt bad. This is a guaranteed problem with the Labor Inspectorate. What if a person, God forbid, dies at work (it happens that the ambulance is in no hurry)? Will they blame the ambulance or is this enterprise trending? It’s just that I have been running the company for more than twenty years. And people of pre-retirement age worked for me. There were different people, and there were specialists. But these are elderly people. No options. And if they really work, then within 8 hours they get so tired that you can see it in the person’s face. Even the young ladies from the accounting department. Today in Russia alone there are 2 million young people who are no longer studying and are not yet working. More than 30 million in the “gray zone”, i.e. earn a living by doing odd jobs. And the number of jobs is only decreasing every month.

      Answer