54
PARTISAN REVIEW
Nationalist opposition groups arose later in the mid-sixti es. As a
rul e they consist of semi-intelligentsia who have not yet occupied any
rungs of the ladder. And alLhough they are slighLly more open and
radical , they constantly declare their loyalty to the authorities, do not
attack the authoritarian structure of the regime, and do not support but
attack the democratic movement. The main difference between them
and the semiopposition nationalists in the upper echelon is their
religiosity: they believe that Russian nationalism cannot be separated
from Orthodoxy-more precisely, from Pan-Orthodoxy.
The characteristic feature of both nationalist factions is their small
size.
In
their best times , documents of the nationalists were signed by
approximately a dozen people. Solzhenitsyn unintentionally shows
how insignificant the numerical base of Russian authoritarian nation–
alism is when he declares that "Among Soviet people whose opinions
do not conform to the official stereotype, there is a well -nigh general
view that what our society needs . .. is freedom and the multiparty
system. The adherents of this view include all the supporters of
socialism, but it is also more widely held than that ... This almost
perfect unanimity is an example of our traditional passi ve imitation of
the West."
If
the strength of the upper echelon faction of nationalism der ives
only from the support of the regime, then that of the lower echelon
derives from the support of Solzhenitsyn's authority ... and the re–
gime's as well! The history of the journal
Vee he,
the sole periodical
organ of the lower echelon nationalists, illustrates the movement 's
relationship to the regime and shows its course.
In
1971-1973, when the KGB was waging an especially furious
attack on the human rights movement and its main organ
Khronika
tekushehikh sobytiy
and was arresting or expelling from the country
everyone suspected of participation in the
Khronika, Vee he
calmly
continued to appear.
In
1975, Osipov, the editor of
Veehe,
suddenly
circulated an announcement that the KGB was preparing a provoca–
tion against him. Soon a declaration came from all members of the
editorial board of
Veehe,
under the leadership of Ovchinnikov, that
Osipov had been expelled from the editorial board for " immorality and
intrigue." Ovchinnikov was "chosen" editor, and put out one last
number of
Vee he,
without Osipov. Osipov, with a small number of
friends, made an announcement that the board's action against him
was inspired by the KGB and that Ovchinnikov was a former KGB
agent. And this was true. The only thing Osipov did not say was how
he cou ld have worked with Ovchinnikov.
In
the fifties , Ovchinnikov
