POLITICS AND SOCIETY

THE MOVEMENT "IN DEFENSE OF CHILDHOOD"

SOURCE: Dvizhenie "V zashchitu detstva." My v otvete za budushchee. Materialy vserossiiskoi konferentsii Ispolnit' dolg pered budushchim (8 aprelya 2000 g.) [Movement "In Defense of Childhood." We Are Responsible for the Future. Materials of the All-Russian Conference "To Fulfil Our Duty to the Future" (April 8, 2000). Moscow: "Mysl'" 2000.

These proceedings of a conference of the movement "In Defense of Childhood" (MIDC) reflect a certain type of civic activism in Russia today. The MIDC is a movement of teachers and educators, others whose work brings them in contact with children and young people (such as youth workers and pediatricians), and parents concerned to improve conditions for normal development of the young in a harsh, uncaring, and dangerous social environment. Founded in late 1992, the movement now has branches in many towns and cities throughout the country.

Much of the grassroots activity described by speakers from local branches of the MIDC could be presented as "non-political" charitable and social work. Activists look after and feed neglected children, investigate conditions in children's homes, spread information about the harmful effects of drugs and alcohol, support youth theaters and youth clubs, and organize summer camps and sports competitions that keep kids off the streets.

The MIDC, however, presents its activity within an explicitly communist ideological framework. To create a sports team, notes one speaker, is to create a children's collective. Other speakers share their experience of teaching social studies with a view to instilling in pupils a communist outlook. Great importance is attached to reviving the Pioneers, the Soviet organization for young children, and in some places activists have succeeded in forming new Pioneer groups.

The movement's long-term strategy is to build "teachers' and parents' councils" (or "soviets," soviet being the Russian word for council). These are to complement "councils / soviets of workers, peasants, and specialists" in the eventual restoration of Soviet power.

Thus the existence of movements like "In Defense of Children" challenges the conventional wisdom of the Western discourse that identifies the growth of "civil society" with the consolidation of democracy. One could perhaps argue that the grassroots nature of the MIDC's activity "objectively" (as Marxists like to say) furthers the democratization of Russian society despite the fact that the movement's ideology calls for the restoration of the Soviet system.

The MIDC describes itself as "inter-party." That is, it draws support from several of the smaller left and communist parties. Most supportive is the Russian Party of Communists, the only party whose leader (Anatoly Kryuchkov) spoke at the conference.

The dominant theme of the speeches is the contrast between the care that was lavished on children by the Soviet authorities and their neglect at the hands of the "anti-people's regime." Symbolic of the fall from grace is the confiscation for commercial or government use of the "palaces" where children formerly developed their artistic and scientific talents under professional supervision -- and without payment.

Besides the direct withdrawal of resources formerly devoted to children, the increased burden on parents (and especially on the many single mothers) struggling to make ends meet makes it impossible for them to pay proper attention to their children. And often "their nerves give way" and they physically assault their children, who may then run away to join the masses of other fugitive and abandoned children.

A few speakers do acknowledge that some problems were basically the same in Soviet times as they are now. One example is the encouragement of alcoholic consumption by the state (except under Gorbachev). Another is the widespread corruption and abuses of people in positions of power at the local level. A playwright tells how she took up the cause of teachers who were fired when they protested against the theft of school property by the principal of their school. Her plays were taken off stage, she was harassed by the KGB, and one newspaper editor warned her that if she didn't shut up she would end up in a psychiatric prison. The same abuses continue, as does the persecution of those who protest against them. The social role of those idealistic people who call themselves "communists" converges with that of similar people who call themselves "democrats."

Another issue that arose at the conference is the right attitude to be taken toward patriotism. A young man from the Left Youth League shocks the "Soviet patriotism" of his older colleagues when he argues that patriotic slogans now play into the hands of fascist and other anticommunist forces. Communists should therefore adopt a consistent class position, and should not take part in "military-patriotic work" (i.e., pre-draft military training). He admits that he did not get very far in influencing young people before he got fired.

This source is not, of course, a reliable indicator of the scale and sources of the problems affecting children in Russia. The information is fragmentary, and there is the problem of political bias. Nonetheless it gives insight into some of the processes going on below the surface. For example, a teacher from Yekaterinburg reveals how pressure is put on parents to make numerous "voluntary" financial contributions to the cost of what is still supposed to be free public education. I intend to include more material about the plight of children in Russia in future issues of the RAS.