This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
How can the USSR have had a constitution in 1918, when it wasn't formed until 1922?! Silverhelm 08:43, 15 September 2005 (UTC).
Nothing here is sourced. Whose damn theory is it that the U.S Constitution is prescriptive as opposed to the soviet constitution? I have heard this theory before, but does this qualify as NPOV? Seems like some original research going on here too in the absense of documentation. Capone
Soviet constitutions guaranteed certain political rights, such as freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion
Really? Who says so?Xx236 (talk) 13:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm guessing the constitutions themselves, although I haven't read them. If your issue is with the use of "guarantee," remember that no rights are absolutely guaranteed, by any constitution or government. If the Soviet constitutions said "the people have rights x, y and z," then that's a guarantee of those rights, even though it may not have been worth the paper it was written on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 02:14, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, this text contradicts itself. This article is unsourced and terrible. I corrected it a little, but it needs a lot of work.Biophys (talk) 01:41, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I just want to let it be known that I take issue with Biophys's edits, which I find to be transparently POV-pushing, but I'm too lazy/disinterested to get into yet another WP battle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 04:37, 7 August 2008 (UTC)