A Capitalist Critique

If the Russians wanted a friendly critique of their society, they could have picked a more sympathetic source than the Economist of London (circ. 70,000). For 120 years, the magazine has shown a distinct distaste for government meddling in economic affairs, and Russian writers scornfully refer to it as "the mouthpiece of the City" and "Washington's advocate." Even so, one day last January, the Union of Soviet Journalists decided to invite a team of Economist reporters to make an extensive tour, all expenses paid.

Last week the fruit of that visit-a critical but qualifiedly optimistic 14-page survey entitled "Changing Russia?" -appeared in the Economist. The most arresting feature of Russia today, said the magazine, is the dramatic and potentially "convulsive" revolution in education; yet "even the most sophisticated and impressively learned" Russians suffer from "numerous blind spots about both home and foreign affairs." The Economist's conclusion: Russia is moving toward "a more sensible and relaxed form of society," but "there will be some massive setbacks on the way."

Pst! Got Any Socks? Exactly how the invitation to the Economist came about remains something of a mystery. Balding, 55-year-old Editor Donald Tyerman insists that it came from out of the blue-or Red. The Russians claim that Tyerman first broached the idea-possibly in the "oh-hell-let's-give-it-a-try" spirit of the reporter who requests an interview with Mao Tse-tung or J. D. Salinger. Either way, Tyerman was dumfounded when the Russians said da. Tyerman sent six staffers-including two who speak Russian and two women -off to Moscow in May for a 15-day visit. Hobbled by polio and unable to make the trip himself, he named as head of the team Home Editor Norman MacRae, who spent the summer of 1936 in Moscow while his father was British consul there. "It was during the worst days of the purges," said MacRae, 39, "so I certainly have not been starry-eyed about Russia."

Even if he were, the atmosphere during last month's visit would have cleared his vision quickly. The Economist team arrived just as Moscow was heating up a new "vigilance" campaign against foreigners. Worse yet, Izvestia Editor Aleksei Adzhubei (Khrushchev's son-in-law) addressed a pointed warning to Russian newspapermen only two days before the team hit town. "A bourgeois journalist may give you a friendly slap on the back, as if all journalists were one big family," said he. "But in our world, there is no unified journalism. Let nobody deceive himself about this."

Though some Russians were "quite relaxed and frank," many journalists "shied away from serious conversation" and "were exceptionally jittery," said the Economist. About the only Russians bold enough to approach the team on their own were "biznesmen from the thriving black market" who wanted to buy everything, "down to our socks."

Occasionally splitting up to cover more ground, the Economist team ranged from Leningrad and the Georgian capital of Tiflis (where they found just two statues of Favorite Son Joe Stalin) to Armenia. Some of the events on their itinerary were less than enlightening. In a Tashkent opera house, the six sat yawning through a two-hour program of eulogies for an obscure poet, but managed to salvage a guffaw when a Canadian Communist named Tim Buck stood up to describe how the local hero-who wrote in Uzbek -had given Buck's fellow Canadians "great inspiration fighting imperialists and warmongers."

Economically Screwy. The Russians, said MacRae, "did us really proud" in setting up interviews on economic problems, but they growled nyet to requests for a tour of Moscow's auto factory, a visit to Kazakhstan's troubled "virgin lands" program, a trip to Volgograd (formerly Stalingrad). "At Gosplan," said MacRae, "they were deliberately stonewalling us on some questions. We could see some of the younger Russians growing restive when they had to sit and listen silently to the older men give us evasive answers."

Despite the stone walls, the team emerged with a picture of a Russia that might be nearing "the stage of eventual breakthrough to a tolerably affluent urban society" but that is still addicted to production and marketing methods that are "economically screwy." Some day the West might find it a "cosier" country to live with, said the Economist. But for the present, "this is a country where free thinking is still a very timorous beastie."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.