In the address at Harvard, Solzhenitsyn said: "Israel, I think, should not be reckoned as part of the West, if only because of the decisive circumstance that its state system is fundamentally linked to religion."
That one sentence alone would have been sufficient to sound the battle stations alarm at The New York Times. He was being quite generous, though, given that the state of Israel is about many things, but true religion ain't one of them.
I'm guessing his view of Jewish/Christian relations seen first hand and his comment on Israel had something to do with his book "200 Years Together" not being published in English.
Thanks to the good Dr. Peterson, I finally got to read The Gulag Archipelago, in the full three volume edition. Had way way back as a student read "One Day...".
What astonished me was that - I'm a Eng Lit & Lang grad from Oxford (1972) so used to and indeed happy to read long and "difficult" books (being a major bibliophile from a young child helped) indeed some time after I graduated, ended up working on Library Catalogue systems. Anyway, I thought this might be hard going.
Quite the opposite. That hoary cliché "unputdownable" was the case. A must read.
So I spent 6 weeks in the Soviet Union, Summer of 68 as unbeknownst to us, and the good citizens, the tanks rolled towards Prague. Locals always wanted to talk to us, and wanted to know what was going on outside the curtain. In Pyatiogorsk, on fellow attached himself to us and gave us a tour of the local sights.
With regard to the many examples of heroic Soviet statuary, he noted - "They are not very tasty".
Czech students who approached us in Moscow immediately arrested at gunpoint by plainclothes cops.
It was there that this completely unpolitical 16 year old understood that Communism and all its deviant isms, is hell on earth. Utopia, on other words
I imagine many of the “ruling class” start with good intentions, but soon realize governance is difficult and feel justified in taking whatever actions they deem necessary to maintain their position.
In "The Screwtape Letters", C. S. Lewis wrote, "I would not encourage in your minds that delusion which you must carefully foster in the minds of your human victims. I mean that the delusion that the fate of nations is in itself more important than that of individual souls. The overthrow of free peoples and the multiplication of slaves states are for us a means...; the real end is the destruction of individual souls. For only individuals can be saved or damned..."
And we are damned so easily when we neglect the conscious inclusion of the Shadow in daily life, without which, there cannot be a positive relationship to other people, or to the creative sources in the soul; there cannot be an individual relationship to the Divine.
True civilization lies in self governance, not in dominion over others.
Solzhenitsyn was a clear-eyed observer and reporter. He told the truth. He saw the truth of communism, and the tribe which used it for revenge against Christians and Muslims. He saw the results of its implementation, and he predicted clearly what would happen if it was implemented elsewhere.
Great analysis. However, just a bit of misinterpretation of the original communism in the beginning.
"communism…meant…the state of no private ownership of property, everything kept in common, and all administered by an elite…."
Yes, the original Marx-Engels communist theory (for there had been no practice before the Bolshevik coup of 1917) proclaimed that human governance would naturally evolve to the state of no private property.
But…and it's a huge but…Marx-Engels' theory saw this nirvana as having NO administration--they envisioned the proletariat ruling itself--after the natural evolution, or revolution, that erased all classes. So, no, communism was NOT envisioned as having an elite administration.
However, when theory became practice--that is, in 1917--Lenin was suddenly plunged into the tornado of reality, from his desk-bound theorizing. He learned very quickly that the proletariat was completely uninterested in anything except their own interests.
Lenin's sudden plunge into governing a real-world population led him to justify the massive administrative bureaucracy of commissars. Thus was born what you describe as "communism administered by an elite."
The actual name for that is Marxism-Leninism. The difference between theoretical communism and Marxism-Leninism is exactly the elite administrators. Lenin's justification, without saying it exactly, was that the proletariat was too stupid and easily manipulated by the bourgeoise to immediately take the lead in the headless state. Therefore, Lenin declared, the proletariat needed protection and guidance. That protection and guidance could only be provided by an "Elite Vanguard" of committed Marxist revolutionaries. This Elite Vanguard could only be provided by a dedicated Communist Party with strictly enforced standards, education, and hierarchy.
Thus, your description of communism as having an "administrative elite" is exactly Marxism-Leninism. Every implementation of communism since 1917 has been based on Marxism-Leninism, NOT communism.
This, of course, is NOT to say that communism would work if only it were implemented in its true form. Its true form is totally against human nature. And the Elite Vanguard concept is just a recognition of human nature. Recognizing this leads to the only conclusion--that Marxism/communism is a total unnatural, unhuman fraud. And that Marxism-Leninism just puts a bandaid on the fatal flaws. The whole system, as Solzhenitsyn, and others, have observed is against human nature, inhumane, corrupt, and rotten.
Fallen maybe? Yup. Those who believe that they can remedy human nature are a huge threat. Utopia, the end point of the Left, is in reality mass slaughter and bloodshed as history shows us.
"Maybe communisms enduring appeal to certain people is that it appeals to the worst aspects of human nature?"
Remember that there's two sides to "Communism."
The Theoretical--Marxism--where Darwin's theory of constant evolution (with the implication of constant evolution eventually arriving at perfection) is theorized to apply to human governance. That end-state of perfection being a nirvana in which each is supplied according to his needs, and each provides according to his abilities. In which no one labors for others, only participating in activities which he finds fun and rewarding.
This vision/promise appeals to certain types of people--starry-eyed idealists who have little connection to reality, and no experience in the school of hard knocks (and those who have experience, but were too obtuse to learn from it). Before USSR/China/Cambodia/N. Korea, this was the main motivator for American followers of communism. While many were motivated by envy, it's likely that many were motivated by unrealistic idealism--dreaming of the promised nirvana, with no track record yet showing the absolute bankruptcy of its promises.
The other side of "Communism" is the reality--Marxism-Leninism--in which there is an Elite Vanguard guiding/goading/prodding/punishing the proletariat.
This version appeals to a whole 'nother type of person. This is where the Experts come to the fore. They mouth the Theory, and apply the reality. They revel in their Party membership and its privileges. They crush, destroy, purge, torture, genocide, with abandon, loving every minute of it.
While envy drives the theoretical followers, the practical followers are driven by lust--for power, control, trappings of the elite--privileges, housing, food, travel, goods unavailable to the masses--a better life for themselves and their progeny. They know that the theory is bullshit. But their reality is so much better, and thus, they are so much better than the masses. The practical results of Marxism-Leninism spawned what in Russia was called the Nomenclatura, and in China, the Princelings.
What comes mind here is, "...suppress The Truth in unrighteousness..." (Romans 1:18). And the Way and the Life (John 14:6). It's all of a piece. Lies, secularism, and death always go together. The enemies of Christ's ultimate authority invariably lash out against anyone who represents a Christian worldview, however inadequately or incompletely they do so. In this, Psalm 2 is also instructive. ("Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot a vain thing?" i.e., the overthrow of Christ, reigning from heaven.)
In the address at Harvard, Solzhenitsyn said: "Israel, I think, should not be reckoned as part of the West, if only because of the decisive circumstance that its state system is fundamentally linked to religion."
That one sentence alone would have been sufficient to sound the battle stations alarm at The New York Times. He was being quite generous, though, given that the state of Israel is about many things, but true religion ain't one of them.
I'm guessing his view of Jewish/Christian relations seen first hand and his comment on Israel had something to do with his book "200 Years Together" not being published in English.
Good point!
Thanks to the good Dr. Peterson, I finally got to read The Gulag Archipelago, in the full three volume edition. Had way way back as a student read "One Day...".
What astonished me was that - I'm a Eng Lit & Lang grad from Oxford (1972) so used to and indeed happy to read long and "difficult" books (being a major bibliophile from a young child helped) indeed some time after I graduated, ended up working on Library Catalogue systems. Anyway, I thought this might be hard going.
Quite the opposite. That hoary cliché "unputdownable" was the case. A must read.
Always great to hear from people in S’s corner (big corner!). Me? Gulag: twice.
Yes. A reread is deffo to happen. Currently re-reading the Bible (KJ Authorised version) - so I may be some time😊
Peterson. A fanboy of communist “art”. (so I’ve been told)
So I spent 6 weeks in the Soviet Union, Summer of 68 as unbeknownst to us, and the good citizens, the tanks rolled towards Prague. Locals always wanted to talk to us, and wanted to know what was going on outside the curtain. In Pyatiogorsk, on fellow attached himself to us and gave us a tour of the local sights.
With regard to the many examples of heroic Soviet statuary, he noted - "They are not very tasty".
Czech students who approached us in Moscow immediately arrested at gunpoint by plainclothes cops.
It was there that this completely unpolitical 16 year old understood that Communism and all its deviant isms, is hell on earth. Utopia, on other words
Thanks for that first hand account Jeremy 👍🏻
"They mean to be good rulers, but they mean to rule."
While certain of the latter half of this quote, I'm still looking for compelling evidence of the opening half.
I imagine many of the “ruling class” start with good intentions, but soon realize governance is difficult and feel justified in taking whatever actions they deem necessary to maintain their position.
True, but quite a few start with bad intentions.
In "The Screwtape Letters", C. S. Lewis wrote, "I would not encourage in your minds that delusion which you must carefully foster in the minds of your human victims. I mean that the delusion that the fate of nations is in itself more important than that of individual souls. The overthrow of free peoples and the multiplication of slaves states are for us a means...; the real end is the destruction of individual souls. For only individuals can be saved or damned..."
And we are damned so easily when we neglect the conscious inclusion of the Shadow in daily life, without which, there cannot be a positive relationship to other people, or to the creative sources in the soul; there cannot be an individual relationship to the Divine.
True civilization lies in self governance, not in dominion over others.
We were read The Screwtape Letters at school. Should be mandatory for all children.
Meanwhile, her in the UK
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/24/state-will-take-back-control-of-peoples-lives-says-starmer/
"Sir Keir Starmer has said the state will take more “control” in people’s lives."
Sir Cromwell, excuse me, can fuck - right - off
Nota bene for non-Brits. The huge Parliamentary majority the NeoPuritans have resulted from ONE in FIVE voting for them.
FUBAR does not even describe what is coming down the line in the UK
Solzhenitsyn was a clear-eyed observer and reporter. He told the truth. He saw the truth of communism, and the tribe which used it for revenge against Christians and Muslims. He saw the results of its implementation, and he predicted clearly what would happen if it was implemented elsewhere.
Great analysis. However, just a bit of misinterpretation of the original communism in the beginning.
"communism…meant…the state of no private ownership of property, everything kept in common, and all administered by an elite…."
Yes, the original Marx-Engels communist theory (for there had been no practice before the Bolshevik coup of 1917) proclaimed that human governance would naturally evolve to the state of no private property.
But…and it's a huge but…Marx-Engels' theory saw this nirvana as having NO administration--they envisioned the proletariat ruling itself--after the natural evolution, or revolution, that erased all classes. So, no, communism was NOT envisioned as having an elite administration.
However, when theory became practice--that is, in 1917--Lenin was suddenly plunged into the tornado of reality, from his desk-bound theorizing. He learned very quickly that the proletariat was completely uninterested in anything except their own interests.
Lenin's sudden plunge into governing a real-world population led him to justify the massive administrative bureaucracy of commissars. Thus was born what you describe as "communism administered by an elite."
The actual name for that is Marxism-Leninism. The difference between theoretical communism and Marxism-Leninism is exactly the elite administrators. Lenin's justification, without saying it exactly, was that the proletariat was too stupid and easily manipulated by the bourgeoise to immediately take the lead in the headless state. Therefore, Lenin declared, the proletariat needed protection and guidance. That protection and guidance could only be provided by an "Elite Vanguard" of committed Marxist revolutionaries. This Elite Vanguard could only be provided by a dedicated Communist Party with strictly enforced standards, education, and hierarchy.
Thus, your description of communism as having an "administrative elite" is exactly Marxism-Leninism. Every implementation of communism since 1917 has been based on Marxism-Leninism, NOT communism.
This, of course, is NOT to say that communism would work if only it were implemented in its true form. Its true form is totally against human nature. And the Elite Vanguard concept is just a recognition of human nature. Recognizing this leads to the only conclusion--that Marxism/communism is a total unnatural, unhuman fraud. And that Marxism-Leninism just puts a bandaid on the fatal flaws. The whole system, as Solzhenitsyn, and others, have observed is against human nature, inhumane, corrupt, and rotten.
I'm rather convinced that human nature itself is inhumane, corrupt, and rotten.
Maybe communisms enduring appeal to certain people is that it appeals to the worst aspects of human nature?
Chiefly, I believe, envy.
Proverbs 27:4: "Wrath is cruel, and anger is outrageous; but who is able to stand before envy?"
Fallen maybe? Yup. Those who believe that they can remedy human nature are a huge threat. Utopia, the end point of the Left, is in reality mass slaughter and bloodshed as history shows us.
"Maybe communisms enduring appeal to certain people is that it appeals to the worst aspects of human nature?"
Remember that there's two sides to "Communism."
The Theoretical--Marxism--where Darwin's theory of constant evolution (with the implication of constant evolution eventually arriving at perfection) is theorized to apply to human governance. That end-state of perfection being a nirvana in which each is supplied according to his needs, and each provides according to his abilities. In which no one labors for others, only participating in activities which he finds fun and rewarding.
This vision/promise appeals to certain types of people--starry-eyed idealists who have little connection to reality, and no experience in the school of hard knocks (and those who have experience, but were too obtuse to learn from it). Before USSR/China/Cambodia/N. Korea, this was the main motivator for American followers of communism. While many were motivated by envy, it's likely that many were motivated by unrealistic idealism--dreaming of the promised nirvana, with no track record yet showing the absolute bankruptcy of its promises.
The other side of "Communism" is the reality--Marxism-Leninism--in which there is an Elite Vanguard guiding/goading/prodding/punishing the proletariat.
This version appeals to a whole 'nother type of person. This is where the Experts come to the fore. They mouth the Theory, and apply the reality. They revel in their Party membership and its privileges. They crush, destroy, purge, torture, genocide, with abandon, loving every minute of it.
While envy drives the theoretical followers, the practical followers are driven by lust--for power, control, trappings of the elite--privileges, housing, food, travel, goods unavailable to the masses--a better life for themselves and their progeny. They know that the theory is bullshit. But their reality is so much better, and thus, they are so much better than the masses. The practical results of Marxism-Leninism spawned what in Russia was called the Nomenclatura, and in China, the Princelings.
Imposing beliefs is the whole point of any kind of legitimate power.
So much so that it's inevitable.
Inevitability of legitimate power is democide.
The Conundrum: Communism is the Ultimate Hypocrisy; God detests hypocrites. Thus, Closeted must struggle with windmills. Let us pray for him/her.
What comes mind here is, "...suppress The Truth in unrighteousness..." (Romans 1:18). And the Way and the Life (John 14:6). It's all of a piece. Lies, secularism, and death always go together. The enemies of Christ's ultimate authority invariably lash out against anyone who represents a Christian worldview, however inadequately or incompletely they do so. In this, Psalm 2 is also instructive. ("Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot a vain thing?" i.e., the overthrow of Christ, reigning from heaven.)
Address to send a check?
Did Goebbels know the future of the United states, too?
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/did-goebbels-know-the-future-of-the
"The Enlightenment is Socratic rationalism: reason is higher than anything, even God."