Konstantin Kydryashov

Depopulation is one of the main contemporary challenges to the Russian state. Depopulation is a serious problem for many developed countries of the world. Even a high social model of consumption does not save from depopulation. Currently, many Western countries are trying in vain to resolve their own demographic crisis. However, this problem was not solved, but they actually caused an acute crisis of the political superstructures of the EU by their actions. They gave euro skeptics an opportunity to question the very existence of the EU. In our Fatherland, the severity of the demographic crisis generated by depopulation is aggravated by both geographical and historical circumstances. In the twentieth century, Russia lost tens of millions of its citizens during the First World War, the Civil War, the Great Patriotic War, the famine of the twenties and forties, and millions of its citizens left the country forever. Social and military shocks prevented the natural course of Russian demographic processes, distorted the age and sex pyramids of the country's population, thus giving rise to numerous and endless challenges to the demographic development of the USSR, which have not been eliminated until now. The death of the USSR led to the fact that thirty million Russian people remained outside of Russia. This has complicated the situation with new challenges that are to be solved by the Russian Federation now. All this creates a real threat to the security of our state. These are the challenges of underpopulation; challenges of structural demographic changes, low birth rates; high mortality challenges; internal migration challenges; immigration challenges, emigration challenges.

Stalin is a man whose life course people began to argue about during his lifetime, then continued their argument immediately after his death. They are arguing about it now and are unlikely to stop arguing in the nearest future. It would be strange if many political myths had not been created around such a significant figure. Opinions about it differ significantly in modern Russia, and conclusions may lead to a new civil war.

In recent decades, global financial institutions have consistently, purposefully and unswervingly been doing a great job of refusing modern countries from cash as a means of payment. The first step in this direction has long been taken. The world has already created various restrictions on the use of cash in all sorts of financial transactions. Besides, numerous economic incentives to reduce cash flow have been introduced, and the computerization of the financial system has been completed. What are the prospects of this world phenomenon in our country? To what extent these processes comply with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the regulatory and legal framework of Russia, whether human and civil rights, freedoms will be violated because of this, and other issues will be considered in this article.

The United States of America became the birthplace of the classical presidential Republic. The war for independence clearly showed the rebellious colonists that the country desperately needed its own strong head of state, who should be the head of the executive power, and the fear of a possible “tyranny of assembly” led to the rejection of traditional British parliamentarism. The need to create an effective system of checks and balances realized by them led not only to the emergence of an independent judiciary, but also to the real possibilities of each federal branch of power to exercise not only their own powers, but also, depending on the situation, to neutralize the attempts of other branches of power to go beyond the constitutional authority and usurp state power.

The state, its head, the state power itself always need the trust and support of its own population. State power in the United States in the scientific literature has traditionally been regarded as truly democratic and legitimate. Until 2016, the US establishment has never raised the question of presidential power legitimacy, with the exception of the civil war period. However, even now it continues to split American society, not allowing D. Trump to pursue his own policy.