The Origins of Autocracy

Sakharov himself goes further than all the other witch-hunters. He is not allowed to maintain a shamefaced silence about the terror of Ivan the Terrible, in speaking of the epoch of "the estate-representa­tive monarchy," as Troitskii does. Nor is he, like Shapiro, going to dis­tract the reader's attention by such insignificant details of the Russian political process as serfdom or the eradication of all representative institutions. He intends not to defend, but to attack—by making a devastating critique of the Oriental despotism of Western Europe. For this purpose, of course, one cannot make do with "vyskazyvaniia" alone. Here there is required the strong tradition, developed to a virtuoso level by generations of housewives raised in the communal apart­ments of Moscow, who have fought for their place in the kitchen un­der the age-old slogan "You damn idiot!"

Do the opponents criticize the Assemblies of the Land? But after all, "such a system is very reminiscent of the alliance of the Tudor re­gime with Parliament, [which] was assembled only in order to sanc­tion the acts of an unconscionable tyranny." Is this not "Oriental des­potism in its English variant?" Sakharov asks triumphantly. Do the opponents see despotism in the actions of Ivan IV? But why do they not also see it in the actions of Elizabeth I of England?