Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 15 · column 4 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
Lieznnev laugneu. wm) vunmiuuiov Party members or police agents well-trusted by the authorities would be allowed that kind of freedom, he said. “Ordinary Russians are never allowed to travel outside the Soviet Union,” he emphasized, “much less allowed to spend time alone or in small groups with foreigners outside the country.”
Although Mr. Lezhnev assured his audiences that “I’m not a politician. My weapon is in my hand — my cello,” his message was both outspoken and unequivocal. It’s not a popular, or trendy message, as Dr. William Lynn Jr., Wakefield’s headmaster, noted.
The latter part of the ’80s is a time of Glasnost: the new openness advocated by Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev and his representatives.
However, Mr. Lezhnev cautioned Americans that democratization, as proposed by Mr. Gorbachev, bears no resemblance to the concept as it is known in this country. “Democratization” under the Soviet regime, he said, would mean “at most” a choice by voters between a slate of officially approved Communist Party candidates. There’s no way, he said, that truly free elections, where anyone could seek office, would be allowed.
As for Glasnost, Mr. Lezhnev said, “It has not touched the lives of ordinary Russians at all. They barely know the word. Glasnost is meant for foreigners — not the people inside the Soviet Union.”
Sure, Mr. Lezhnev admitted, there is more criticism of “official” doctrine, and more leeway for artists, composers and writers. That also, he said, is under the direction and whim of high party officials. He compared it to the Czech experience in 1968, and the Chinese Communist experience with “democracy” in 1986.
In both cases, when criticism worked, in any country. It will fail. It goes against the grain of human nature.”
91.1%