264
PARTISAN REVIEW
movement in Lithuania is intensely colored by Catholic religious
spirit. In the Ukraine the nationalistic movement is definitely antito–
talitarian. The Jewish movement deliberately dissociates itself from the
"general democratic" opposition, concentrating solely on the problem
of the outflow of Jews. However, this dissociation has a mainly tactical
significance, since practically all the activists of the Zionist movement
occupy antitotalitarian positions, while on the religious axis the
representatives of the Jewish movement occupy varying positions.
An objective analysis of support for the different varieties of
dissent among the population seems impossible at present. Mikhail
Agursky, who adheres to Solzhenitsyn's views, holds that the most
popular views in contemporary Russia are those of Solzhenitsyn. On
the other hand, the representatives of more leftist trends, such as A.
Levitin-Krasnov or V. Belotserkovsky, are of the opinion that the
liberal-socialistic position is most prevalent among the Russian people
today, at least among the intelligentsia. The representatives of neo–
slavophilism, for example M. Vagin or A. Udodov, argue that the
nationalistic way of thinking is the most typical of the Russian people.
None of these claims, though made out of heartfelt convictions, has
any objective confirmation. In my opinion two trends with the best
chance of obtaining mass support in contemporary Russia are first, the
nationalistic trend of Osipov and his followers, and second, the liberal
trend represented by Sakharov. It seems to me that between these two
movements, with all their nuances, the main struggle within the
framework of Russian dissent will occur, the struggle for the minds of
tomorrow's Russia. One cannot predict the exact forms these two
trends will adopt in the future. But the result of this struggle will
determine the destiny of Russia and perhaps that of all mankind.
