From: ftsam@acad3.alaska.edu (Sergei Maurits)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.soviet
Subject: Re: Liberal Moscow daily attacked by f...
Date: 16 Oct 92 07:55:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: acad3.1992Oct15.235517.1
Organization: University of Alaska Fairbanks

In article <IGOR.92Oct14011000@krishna.cs.columbia.edu>, igor@cs.columbia.edu
 (Igor Pankevich) writes following S.Maurits posting:

SM:

>> ... The minor political episod opposed to it is nothing but desperate attempt
>>of both sides to attract some more attention. Sort of political advertisement.
>>It is a boring habit now for all "parties" accounting up to 50 members to make
>>some noise. The fact that Pamyat' has 5,000 or even 50,000 followers changes 
>              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>nothing. The times when any demonstrations allowed by Central Committee and 
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>organized by KGB really meant changes (or their absence) had passed. This is
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>just information for these who didn't notice it and continue to apply ten
>>years' old standards. IRA activity in London is criminal chronicle and nothing
>>more. Why one must pay more attention to similar level events in Moscow?   


IP:

> 
> Well, do you remember ( I mean, have you heard and remember ) how the
> Nazi came to power in Germany? Everybody was laughing at them till
> they actually seized the power and began to rule the country. And then
> - "nikto i ne piknul" (in English, anybody?). Well, there were some
> anty-facists there, but _they_ didn't change anything. And the example
> of IRA doesn't prove anything: Britain is the country where democracy
> has won long ago (though not formally :-), and Russia is just a
> country with a suitable place for the next, new Reich to grow roots,
> and who would have thought? Of course, I am no Kassandra, but I think
> that such facist organizations as Pamyat' deserve a much closer
> attention than you suggest they do. As Mike Ratner put it (in
> different context, though), "better safe than sorry".
> 
> --Igor

Igor, I hate to continue never-end discussions where number of ">"-signes
substantially exeeds two, but in this case I couldn't help myself and resist
the temptation. The reason is I missed YOUR point to support MY case in the 
initial posting.

(BTW, a month or so ago an interesting posting about year of 1933 events
was made by a person from Germany. Unfortunately, I forgot his name, sorry.)

Nasi not seize the power, they won free elections (not overwhelmingly though).
The most interesting part of that story that the second popular party was
Commies. In other words, the desicive majority (as far as I remember about 70%)
was "pro" radical changes in economical and political status qvo obviously
fraught with potential violence. The difference in "choice" of Nazi- or
Commi-scenario is not crucial in this sence. If somebody convinced that 
someone else must be destroyed for general prosperity, the creteria of enemy 
selection is a metter of second importance (Jews and/or Slaves or property
owners). 

Another myth is "everybody was laughing at them [at Nazi-S.M.]". Bloody clushes
of rival political groups were everyday reality. Just remember a favorite song
of Young Pioneeres (I guess we share some childhood experiences): "Pogib nash
younuj barabanschik ... ". This is authentic document, BTW. (I can mention the
movie CABARET for these who wern't lucky enough to be a Pioneer, to say nothing
about Feightvanger -sp?- novels.) The violence was oozed in the air. Very 
similar to pre-revolution years in Russia, I guess.

Can you remember a single similar event in nowadays Russia (I mean core Russia,
the geopolitical surroundings with centures-old intro-ethnic conflicts is a
different story as well the last crimes of Russian Communism - crack downs in
Tbilisi, Baku, Vilnus, Riga, and finally in Moscow - they were state-initiated,
let me say, ordered attempts)? Just simple birst of civil violence due to any
reason - can you nameit? I can't. Compare it to the scale of transitions and 
answer the question: is this country a really suitable place for the next Reich
after that? I have no other explanation then exhostness of Russia by violence
(or dissipation of passionarity -sp?- according to the different terminology)
during several last centuries. Looks like political or historical experience 
of the nation is not just a word. (Again, look at Germany).

I don't think that the radical groups activity deserves a closer attention
unless they are possesing a mass support in the society. The economical 
hardship is much more dangerous since it produces a supportive base for
radicals. So, so far the topic of my choice in the Russian news is economics - 
the thing that really affects the silent majority. 

Serega, AK