The Thinking Reed

At the end of 1986 the Public Prosecutor’s office began to investigate the doings of the Lyubers, since what was involved was a systematic and malevolent violation of public order. However, the investigation was not completed. After a demonstration in Moscow on 22 February 1987 by two thousand supporters of the youth movement, to demand that the activity of the Lyubers be stopped, some newspapers suddenly declared that Lyubers do not exist, any more than the Abominable Snowman. Literaturnaya Gazeta informed its readers of the demonstration, while stressing that there were no grounds for it since rumours about the Lyubers had been exaggerated by irresponsible journalists. The paradoxical feature was that this article was written by the well-known reporter Shchekochikhin, who had been the first to write about the Lyubers. Quite obviously, certain forces were not at all interested in mobilizing public opinion against this threat. Something else was obvious too — that the anonymous influential protectors of the Lyubers were one and the same with those opponents of Gorbachev’s liberalization who were keeping quiet for the time being.

The strategy of the new right is to use the expanded legal opportunities so as to combat liberalization itself (just as the ‘Black Hundreds’ did in the period of the 1905 Revolution). The inevitable difficulties and contradictions of the process of change, the unsuccessful economic experiments, the costs of reform — all can be exploited by the reactionary groups in the hope that the course of events will inexorably bring the country to a ‘critical point’, when the ‘restoration of order’ and ‘normalization’ will become the slogans of the day. The economic strategy of the reactionaries presupposes a sharp reduction in demand, to provide the means for renewing productive equipment, introducing new technology and so on. The well-known economists Selyunin and Khanin aptly described this plan as a ‘second edition’ of Stalin’s industrialization in the thirties.11 Their problem is to find an ideological and cultural-psychological justification for such a policy in present-duy conditions. Soviet society in the late twentieth century is different from what it was in the thirties, when Stalin carried through his ‘revolution from above’. The way of life has changed, and so too have the social structures. Nevertheless, there does exist a certain nostalgia for the past, for ‘totalitarian’ order, and not just among people of the older generation. Erich Fromm once wrote of the ‘flight from freedom’: certain social groups in Western society saw in the development of democracy a threat to their firm traditions, way of life and security, and these were not only the privileged strata but also a section of the lower orders. After the January 1987 Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU, which proclaimed the need for more thoroughgoing liberalization, the editors of Soviet newspapers began to receive letters from readers who doubted the need for changes. Sometimes these letters also contained open threats to the journalists.12 The disposition to flight from freedom is evidently characteristic of a certain section of the population; although, we must suppose, the strength of such feelings is not as great as the reactionaries imagine. In any case, the Lyubers’ actions are not mere hooliganism, but constitute an alarming cultural-psychological symptom.

One should not think that the new Right are like the orthodox, bureaucratic, conservative admirers of Brezhnev. Their ideal is a strong master, such as Brezhnev never was, and their ideology is in the nature of a synthesis of patriarchal nationalism with the traditions of totalitarianism. Such a synthesis is quite feasible, since Stalin, in the last years of his life, was clearly gravitating towards Russian nationalism. In the present context Astaf ev’s ideas assume rather obvious significance. Hatred of Jews, Muscovites, Western influence, spiritual freedom, the intelligentsia and the Left unite this well-known writer with the Lyuber hooligans. Astaf'ev quickly became an ideal hero for the supporters of reaction. Whether Eidelman wished it or not, his correspondence with Astaf'ev helped the new right to consolidate, whereas traditional liberalism increasingly lost influence.

An effective alternative to Russian nationalism (and to the anti-Russian nationalism of the minorities which has arisen parallel with and in reply to it) is offered not by the heritage of the sixties but by the new culture which has sprung up or emerged from clandestinity. In essence the activity of the young rock groups, or the discussions organized by rebel architects protesting against the destruction of our old towns, may prove to be more important cultural events than the publication of The Executioner’s Block and The Doleful Detective.