19
(Arkhiv Samizdata Doc. Nos. 340, 602, 1152-e, 3256 & 4451).
Slavophiles, however, understood things quite differently. From their viewpoint, “all of
our debate should have one goal – the welfare of Russia” (Arkhiv Samizdata Doc. No. 1858-
b). In particular, they argued that Russia was not privileged in the Soviet Union but rather
victimized. As a result, if there was to be a discussion of inequality, it should be focused on
the denied equality of Russians against the privileged positions of various other national
groups (Arkhiv Samizdata Doc. No. 1696). For instance, an anonymous group called the
“Russian patriots” appeared in the early 1970s. In their A Word to the Nation, the Russian
patriots noted that “somehow a popular version of story that Russians were the privileged
people had appeared” (Arkhiv Samizdata Doc. No. 590). In fact, “exactly the opposite was
true.” That is, even though Russians constituted 57% of the entire Soviet population, they
played “a disproportionately small role.” Likewise, a popular charge often made against
Russia was that she was draining the resources of other republics in the Soviet Union. The
Russian patriots, however, asked “Who was really draining whom?” They claimed that
“Transcaucasian republics had turned into a monstrous parasite” that was feeding on the
body of Russia and draining her of vital essentials in the process.
Under such circumstances, the Russian patriots laughed at the various national groups
which demanded equality vis-à-vis Russia and even sought independence from the Soviet
Union, while not recognizing their de facto privileged positions. Indeed, if there was to be a
genuine equality among different nations in the Soviet Union such that Russia could play
her proper role, the positions of “others” would significantly deteriorate. For instance, an
independent Armenia without the benevolent assistance from Russia “could not even exist
on her barren plateau, surrounded by hostile neighbors.” Also, a union republic called
“Kazakhstan” would not even exist because “only one third of its population was
indigenous” – Russians constituted the bulk of the remaining population. That is,
Kazakhstan should really be called “Russia” if there were a genuine equality among
different nationalities in that region. Likewise, the situation of Kirghiz was not so different
because it was “half Russian.” Finally, Ukrainians were warned that “the current frontiers
of Ukraine did not correspond to its ethnography” because “seven million Russians as well
as many Russified Ukrainians” lived there. As a result, if Ukraine were to succeed in its
demand for equality and independence, it would have to concede “Crimea, Khakov,
Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, Odessa, Nikolaevsk, Kherson, Denpropetrovsk and Sumi.”
Under this new territorial arrangement, “what would they do without access to the sea and
Convention