government officials. To many patriots,rnthe time had come for constructivernchange; these “hberal conservatives,”rnsuch as Prime Minister Pyotr Stolypin,rntried gradually to reform the czarist system,rnto move it toward a constitutionalrnmonarchy, and to build civic institutionsrnin this land of autocracy. The Christianityrnpreached by like-minded intellectualsrnwould be that of the GoldenrnRule, of Christian love operating as thernmoral framework of society. But for thernUnion of the Russian People and otherrnextreme nationalist groups, collectivelyrnknown as the Black Hundred, this was arntime of violent backlash in which thernobscurantist wing of Russian Orthodoxyrnwould hunt down the satanic enemies ofrnHoly Russia. This was the time ofrnpogrom. Supported by the government,rntouting the Protocols of the Learned EldersrnofZion as well as anti-Masonic propaganda,rnthe Black Hundred would usernthese conspiratorial tales of machinationsrnby Jewish bankers, the Sanhedrin,rnand Masonic lodges—all directed towardrnworld domination and the destruction ofrnHoly Russia (as the most spiritually purernand able enemy facing them)—to explainrnthe troubles that had befallen thernFathedand.rnThe spadework for the bizarre theoriesrnof the Black Hundred had been done byrnFrenchmen seeking explanations for therncatastrophe of Jacobinism (and findingrnMasons, among others, responsible) andrnby Europe’s anti-Semites, whose suspicionrnand hatred of Jews would find arnready audience in Russia, a country withrna long and dark history of anti-Semitism.rnThe catastrophe of World War I and thernBolshevik coup appeared to confirm thernfears of conspiratologists. Had not manyrnprominent Bolsheviks been Jews? A certainrnwing of the White Russian emigrationrnwould find Zhidomasonstvo (Jewrnmasonry) behind the “stab in the back,”rnbut as Mr. Laqueur explains, they wouldrnnot be the only Russians afflicted by suchrnparanoid visions: conspiratorial Bolshevismrnitself would be both an effectivernstimulus and carrier of wild theories.rnMoreover, by 1941, as far as the SovietrnUnion’s leadership was concerned, internationalistrncommunism was as deadrnas Leon Trotsky, the Stalinist stake havingrnbeen driven through its heart as surelyrnas the pick wielded by a Stalinist assassinrnhad penetrated Trotsky’s skull.rnRussian nationalism was reborn as NationalrnBolshevism, and traditional anti-rnSemitism found its Soviet counterparts.rnanti-Zionism and “anti-cosmopolitanism.”rnMr. Laqueur ably chroniclesrnthe synthesis of communist and nationalistrnparanoia and gives a thorough andrnerudite survey of the extreme nationalistrngroups that have emerged as the “redbrown”rnopposition in Yeltsin’s Russia.rnThe Black Hundred tradition lives on inrntheir propaganda, this time seeking tornexplain the collapse of the Soviet Unionrnand finding the traditional enemies inrnleague with hostile intelligence services,rnthe U.N., and others in yet another attemptrnto destroy Russia.rnWhere Mr. Laqueur falters is in hisrnexposition of the phenomenonrnof Russian nationalism in general. Informationrnon Russian nationalism is, ofrncourse, necessary as background to hisrnstory, but one wonders if his lengthy discoursernon the Slavophiles, Solzhenitsyn,rnand other Christian Russian (as opposedrnto Soviet or National Bolshevik or BlackrnHundred) traditionalists is necessary. Itrnis apparent that the author’s sympathiesrnare with the “Westerners” in the debaternbetween those who seek Russia’s renewalrnalong Western models and the Russophilesrnwho see Russia reborn withinrnthe framework of national tradition. Perhapsrnthis explains a certain casual imprecisionrnof language when Mr. Laqueurrndeals with those on the “right.” Atrntimes, Mr. Laqueur uses terms likern”right,” “far right,” “extreme right,”rn”conservative,” and “nationalist” almostrninterchangeably, without attempting torndefine his terms. Despite his frequentrndisclaimers to the contrary (“[not] everyonernon the right of the political spectrumrnshares these [Black Hundred] fantasies”),rna reader, particulariy one notrnfamiliar with the current Russian politicalrnspectrum, may think that anyonernon the “right” is, at least, suspect. Definingrnone’s terms is particularly importantrnin a situation like Russia’s, where “right”rncan mean anyone from monarchistsrnto leftover communist bureaucrats. IsrnSolzhcnitsyn’s “conservatism” trying tornconserve the same things as the communistrnholdovers?rnFurthermore, Mr. Laqueur tends torndismiss out of hand the “right’s” preoccupationrnwith a spiritual rebirth as thernfirst step to the renewal of Russia. “Firstrnthe conscience, then the economy,” savsrnAleksandr Solzhenitsyn. Mr. Laqueurrnsimply misses the point if he believesrnSolzhenitsyn, and others following hisrnpath, are merely regurgitating Slavophilerntruisms. He frequently repeats his contentionsrnthat Russia’s problems are “social”rnand “economic” and that thern”right” (which right?) has no political orrneconomic programs to offer. Mr. Laqueurrnis wrong on both counts. Philosophersrnand observers from Adam Smith tornvarious Founding Fathers to Tocquevillernhave commented on the impossibility ofrnfree enterprise or republican governmentrnoperating justly and effectively withoutrnthe moral underpinnings of Christianity.rnSolzhenitsyn, based on his experiences inrnthe West, has identified the source ofrnour decay in the decline of religiousrnmorality, indeed of religious belief, andrnthe concomitant growth of materialism.rnThe program of Russophile traditionalistsrnlike Solzhenitsyn is the Stolypin programrnof rural reform and gradual economicrntransformation coupled withrnevolutionary democratization. If theirrnprogram is vague and sometimes confused,rnthen it is no more so than that ofrnYeltsin’s current government.rnDemocracy in postcommunist lands,rnto paraphrase Lech Walesa, needs itsrn”right leg” in order to stand on its ownrntwo feet. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn hasrnlamented the unfortunate coupling ofrnthe word “patriot” with the fanatics ofrnextreme nationalist groups, and the politicalrntar-brushing Yeltsin’s critics arernlikely to get in the press (ours and theirs)rndoes not help the situation. As Russianrnreligious philosopher Sergey Bulgakovrnonce observed, “When the place of thernRussian patriot is vacant, it will be takenrnby the Black Hundred.” crn,, ^Inmigdiia&lkf^^^rn^^^^ikrn^^s l-8#^?7’^9rnk . .,^^^^,,rnJANUARY 1994/25rnrnrn