1. Some of the points made in these comments are argued more fully in Rigby, T. H., Brown, Archie, and Reddaway, Peter, eds., Authority, Power and Policy in the U.S.S.R. (London: Macmillan, forthcoming), chapter 1.Google Scholar Because of space limitations, arguments in the present essay are stated baldly and contrasts are drawn sharply. Moreover, there is no discussion of the growth of technocratically motivated and executed change in both East and West, which, as my colleague Dr. Robert F. Miller has pointed out to me, tends to > blur some of the comparisons made here and to raise new problems about the reformist-; conservative dichotomy.

2. See Schwartz, Joel J. and Keech, William R., “Group Influence and the Policy Process in the Soviet Union,” American Political Science Review, 62, no. 3 (September 1968): 840–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. The best collection of studies illustrating the multidimensional character of differences in policy advocacy is still Skilling, H. Gordon and Griffiths, Franklyn, eds., Interest Groups in Soviet Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971.Google Scholar

4. Hough, Jerry F., The Soviet Union and Social Science Theory (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1977), p. 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5. Cocks, Paul, “The Policy Process and Bureaucratic Politics,” in Cocks, Paul, Daniels, Robert V., and Heer, Nancy Whittier, eds., The Dynamics of Soviet Politics (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1976), p. 162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6. See “Chem vyzvano novoe napravlenie v sel'skom stroitel'stve,” Radio Svoboda: Issledovatel'skii biulleten', no. 42 (October 20, 1978).