The House on Kropotkinskaya Street: Communist Party Life at the Local Level

The building on Kropotkinskaya Street is attractive--and old. It was the home of Denis V. Davidov, a Cossack general and war hero who forced Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow in 1812. Now it houses the Communist Party apparatus for the Lenin District of Moscow, one of 33 such sections of the city. Each has its own party organization and the Soviet equivalent of a city council.

The life of the Communist Party over time evolved from political mobilization to economic management--a fundamental shift.

General Secretary Mikhail S. Gorbachev’s speeches these past three years have made an issue of the shift. In one public statement he said that when he asks communists about economic problems, they have a great deal to say; when he asks about social or political problems, they are silent. Gorbachev has complained that for nearly 40 years Soviet ideology stagnated, that it was mired in formulas of the ‘30s and ‘40s. Dynamic political theory was central to Vladimir I. Lenin’s party, but to economic managers ideology takes a back seat.

Last month, Gorbachev gave the fullest picture to date of the leadership’s view: “We have come to the need to overhaul our political system . . . not replacing (it), but introducing qualitatively new structures and elements.” He added, “Socialist democracy means diversity of forms of social and political life.” The inescapable conclusion is that the party itself must be overhauled: “The key issue of reform in the political system concerns defining the functions of party and government bodies.” Gorbachev then defined the party role--just as Lenin had--in terms of political leadership, not economic management.

Boris Kravchenko, a local political leader who will be charged with part of that overhaul, sits in Room 38 of Lenin District headquarters under a portrait of Gorbachev. Kravchenko is a large, tall man with short brown hair, matching mustache and dark eyes. He reminded me of a Canadian heavyweight boxer I had coached in the ‘70s at UC Berkeley. Had I run into Kravchenko in those days, I would have urged him to come out for the team. His eyes reflected some experience in life. He looked to be about age 40; he is 35.

We sat at a long table with a multicolored map of the Lenin District and the local party leader began reciting the numbers: 250,000 people work in his district, while a third less live there. Among Kravchenko’s constituents, 51,000 are members of the party, a much higher than average ratio.

Kravchenko is responsible for “ideological work”--in American parlance, spreading the party line. He considers his job “very important. It involves discussion and understanding of the evolving principles of socialism--not only in concept, but as they apply to daily life and work.” What had changed recently, I asked, in the party’s approach?

Boris’ brow wrinkled as he took a drag on a cigarette, his eyes focused on the district map. He pointed at a sub-unit of several city blocks, No. 14. “There is much more contact with the people of the district,” he said. “We have 14 of these mini-districts. Each month every major party official must visit one of them to hold a neighborhood meeting, to hear what people have to say. When the district’s first secretary (the top man) has a meeting, 100 or 200 citizens attend. For someone like myself, maybe 50.” He smiled at the disparity: “It is understandable.”

He pulled a poster from a drawer. It listed the phone numbers of the district’s top three party officials, plus the equivalent of the mayor. For two hours each month, they take direct calls from citizens. As at the neighborhood meetings, every complaint is logged. Typical complaints involve housing, retail sales, work conditions. Seven full-time staff members work to resolve those complaints and a written response must be sent to the constituent within one month. “All this is new. In the old days, party officials had very little contact with the district’s people.”

What if there is a disagreement between the party and the local district officials on resolution of a problem? “It happens often, “ Boris said. “We call a meeting--the party, the district Soviet and someone from outside with no ax to grind. The decision is reached by consensus.” Does it work? Boris nodded, “Yes. it works.”

He talked about the upcoming June Communist Party conference--the first in nearly 50 years. “It will evaluate perestroika (restructuring) to date: First, the task of removing the party from economic management and returning to our political work; second, defining the limits of socialist pluralism; third, revival of the ‘Leninist style’ of party work--open, honest, self-critical.”

Does he expect decisions on such issues as multi-candidate party elections and guarantees of free expression and criticism? Yes, Kravchenko said, but he admitted an inability to predict exactly what those decisions would be. I told him that my impression, after having talked to several party members, was that discussions in preparation for the conference were hesitant at best, that people were waiting for “signals.”

Kravchenko nodded again, his brow wrinkled again: “It is an old problem, waiting for instructions from the top. Now the situation is mixed--varying from district to district. Each discussion requires courage and the ability to assume responsibility. Not everyone is used to that.”

After years of silence on central questions, was he personally confident that such questions would now receive a full hearing?

He looked at the map as he considered his answer and then turned toward me: “They will be discussed in full and there will be a clear-cut decision on each issue. I am sure it will be so. I base my opinion on these past two years in my present work.” Then he paused. “If you had asked these questions before June, 1985, I would have answered differently. Then, neither the party nor the country nor the people were ready to face these issues.”