From: kosinov@ceg.uiuc.edu (Greg Kosinovsky)
Subject: Re: Communism as a Russian guilt
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 22:16:41 GMT

sergei@upenn5.hep.upenn.edu (Sergei Borodin) writes:




>In article <kosinov.724974753@ceg.uiuc.edu> kosinov@ceg.uiuc.edu (Greg Kosinovsky) writes:
>>sergei@upenn5.hep.upenn.edu (Sergei Borodin) writes:

>>>In article <kosinov.724705426@ceg.uiuc.edu> kosinov@ceg.uiuc.edu (Greg Kosinovsky) writes:

>>>>1) Nash Sovremennik was nothing like the "Yiddish Magazine".

>>> That's for sure. And I'd add, nothing like other numerous magazines.
>>> Perhaps, "Novyi Mir" might be put in a row. 

>>  I am not going to respond to the line above, I just wanted to save it here
>>for present and future reference as a sample of Borodin's mentality.

>  ???? 
>  You, actually, were not required to respond. I said that NS was 
>  outstanding magazine, in my opinion, of course. And outstanding
>  in a good sense of the word. You don't agree -  your problem.
>  What does it have to do with one's mentality, though?
  The question of "outstanding" NS aside, what got me was the remark about
"Novi Mir being like the "Yiddish Magazine".

>>>> Can you name me ONE Russian Nationalist, who did NOT
>>>>challenge the fundumental Leninist dogma, who was imprisoned during Breznev
>>>>era.

>>>You mean "who did not challenge... AND was imprisoned", correct? Why would he 
>>>be imrisoned? For what reason? Ohh, I get it, from your point of view, Russian
>>>nationalism means "bei zhidov", correct? So, you're asking to name one person
>>>who said "bei zhidov" and for that reason was imprisoned. If I'm correct, am I?,

>>  No, you are absolutely not correct. The examples I wanted to hear were of
>>people getting imprisoned for teaching Russian language to children, for orga-
>>nizing seminars on Russian culture and literature, for speaking openly and
>>proudly of their Russian identity.

> OK.  Now a quote from Kosinovsky's article: 
> 
> " However, precisely becouse 'bei zhidov' was such a popular sentiment ..
>  .......... radical Russian nationalism was persecuted Less, ..." 

> Show me now that I misunderstood your words. Show me where "teaching 
> Russian language ..." was implied in the sentence above? However, it is
> clear why you completely changed your words - to make the next sentence
> possible:
   I my original post I had nothing whatsoever of "bei zhidov", I was talking
about Russian nationalism in general, without specifying its benign or 
xenophobic forms. In responding to that post, M.S.Verbitsky brouht up "bei 
zhidov", and I played along with that, because:
 a) the xenophobic form of Russian nationalism is quite prevalent (to put it 
mildly), and
 b) it is the form of Russian nationalism which, I believe, communists were
trying to manipulate and channel towards their ends, rather than suppress.
In asking for examples of suppresion of Russian nationalism "more brutal than
that of others" I left the field wide open for the type and manifestation of
Russian nationalism.


>> If you substitute the word "Jewish" for "Russian" in the sentence above, then
>>all of the above was happening -- in our (Brezhnev's) time -- and not just in
>>Stalin's time, when most major Jewish national artistic and literary figures were 
>>rounded up and shot in one sweep, following the assasination of Solomon Mihoels.

>  Stalin's time is a different issue. I don't want to go into that. 
 Agreed, and that's why my reference to Stalin's time was, clearly, an aside.

>  As for Breznev's era, will you argue that even teaching Russian
>  language at that time was possible in an official boundary *only*.
>  There were no way to speak proudly of any one's identity, since
>  the only identity existed was "Soviet People". 
 No, I don't quite agree. First of all, even for all the pushing of "Newspeak",
Pushkin was published in the original (you could skip the Newspeak preface.
Secondly, I think it is VERY significant that Hebrew couldn't be taught at all,
even if the textbook is the translated version of "Malaya Zemlya".

>  
>  Will you say that there were no *official* Jewish organizations
>  at that time? I bet you won't. And if you won't, tell me now
>  what is the point you're trying to make? That Jewish nationalists,
>  were persecuted more than Russian nationalists, which *now* means
>  (differently from previous article) "teaching Russian language, 
>  organizing seminars on Russian culture ..." -- 
>  -- is it, btw, pro Tsarja-batjushku, pro pravoslavie, pro, mozhet
>  stat'sja, filosofov russkih, nachala veka naprimer? And you're 
>  saying that those seminars a) were possible and b) were tolerated
>  by authorities?
 I know about the existance of the official organizations and the persecution
of unofficial once. However, let me try to illustrate my point using your own
examples. The seminar on Tsarj-batjushka we'll have to exclude -- that would be,
by any definition, anti-communist, and I stated from the very beginning that
openly anti-communist Russian nationalism was persecuted. Pravoslavie was studied
legally, though through state-controlled outlets, like all other religions. And
I don't know what, if any, was the standard punishment for stdying the 
unofficial Russian philosophers, but I certainly don't recall anything in the
Soviet press regarding people who engage in "anti-Soviet" activity by reading
such books. While not everithing that wasn't badmouthed in Soviet papers was
necessarily permitted, they reflected quite accurately what activity currently
draws the greatest ire of authorities, and is, therefore, "most strongly discou-
raged". What the papers were full of was of people (names, addresses, and every-
thing) of people engaged in distribution or even posession of "Zionist prpoganda"
i.e. writings of Jewish philosophers.
                       
						   Greg.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.soviet:11724 talk.politics.soviet:10131 soc.culture.europe:10939