The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Vladislav Krasnov Archive
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Relevance Today
International “Reading Solzhenitsyn” Conference in Lyndon, Vermont, September 7-8, 2018
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

Dear friends and colleagues, the topic of my presentation, If an artist imagines himself as a god…,”[1]READING SOLZHENITSYN: AN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE. George Krasnow, PhD. Russian-American Goodwill Association (RAGA). Presentation: “If an artist imagines himself as a god…. A.I. Solzhenitsyn – on the role of a writer and art, and Russian national character in the imagination of the writer.”

https://www.northernvermont.edu/about/news-events/ev...erence
alludes to Solzhenitsyn’s Nobel Lecture delivered in Stockholm in 1974[2]Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, Nobel Lecture given in 1974 for his 1970 award. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/literature/1970/so...cture/. There is no better way to celebrate the writer’s approaching Centenary (on December 11, 2018) than by reviewing what he had to say about his art at this festive occasion at half-way of his career. In writing my book “Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky: A Study in the Polyphonic Novel”,[3]Vladislav Krasnov. Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky: A Study in the Polyphonic Novel, 1980. https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Dostoevsky-Study...304727 I was guided by his vision of art, expressed in the Nobel Lecture and elsewhere.

The Nobel Lecture

No, Solzhenitsyn did not imagine himself as a god. He is another kind of artist, the one, he says, who “recognizes above himself a higher power and joyfully works as a humble apprentice under God’s heaven, though graver and more demanding still is his responsibility for all he writes or paints—and for the souls which apprehend it. However, it was not he who created this world, nor does he control it; there can be no doubts about its foundations. It is merely given to the artist to sense more keenly than others the harmony of the world, the beauty and ugliness of man’s role in it—and to vividly communicate this to mankind….

Those who listened to his Lecture knew very well that he himself had gone through “the lower depths of existence—in poverty, in prison, and in illness” which nonetheless failed to extinguish his “sense of enduring harmony.” They knew that the man in front of them had challenged the mightiest police state in the world. Soviet leaders figured that by kicking him out of the USSR, they will cut him off from his Motherland and deprive his art of its nourishing roots. They miscalculated. Their ruthlessness backfired. Fifteen years later, at the time of perestroika and glasnost, they were mired in a confusion desperately trying to save their System and themselves.

I doubt that by 1991 there were many of them who still believed in the Marxist-Leninist ideology their predecessors had imposed on Russia in 1917 via the October Revolution and bloody Civil War. But in 1974 their professed ideology held sway not just in the USSR but over a third of mankind.

In the Nobel Lecture Solzhenitsyn mentioned neither Marx nor Lenin, but implicitly its main thrust was against both; and against the so called cultural Marxism that dominated Western elites then and is still viral today.

But in 1974 — how many armored divisions and nuclear missiles silos could Solzhenitsyn marshal against the mightiest military power marching then across the globe under the banner of Marxism-Leninism, the teaching that was thought “all-powerful because it was corrects” (as Soviet propaganda proclaimed)?

Solzhenitsyn counted all potential “troops” on his side. “So perhaps the old trinity of Truth, Goodness, and Beauty is not simply the decorous and antiquated formula it seemed to us at the time of our self-confident materialistic youth,” he said alluding to his own training in dialectical materialism as part of Marxist-Leninist indoctrination mandatory for all schools and colleges.

Then he reminded Western elites about the everyday reality of the USSR: “If the tops of these three trees do converge, as thinkers used to claim, and if the all too obvious and the overly straight sprouts of Truth and Goodness have been crushed, cut down, or not permitted to grow, then perhaps the whimsical, unpredictable, and ever surprising shoots of Beauty will force their way through and soar up to that very spot, thereby fulfilling the task of all three”.

The Harvard Commencement Address

On June 8, 1978, Solzhenitsyn delivered the Harvard University Commencement address. The chosen topic was: “A World Split Apart”.[4]“A World Split Apart” https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/alexanders...rd.htm He defined it thus: “This deep manifold split bears the danger of manifold disaster for all of us, in accordance with the ancient truth that a kingdom — in this case, our Earth — divided against itself cannot stand”. This split was caused by the Cold War between the USSR, PRC and their allies who espoused the need for a violent world revolution and the rest of the world that remained unsure whether Marxist “doctors” practicing vivisection offered the right cure. Soviet professions of “peaceful co-existence” abroad sounded hollow when Soviet leaders refused to “peacefully co-exist” with their own citizizens.

Then Solzhenitsyn focused on the West’s failure to understand Russian civilization’s dire predicament under Soviet ideological rule. According to him, “Western thinking systematically committed the mistake of denying its (Russia’s) autonomous character and therefore never understood it, just as today the West does not understand Russia in Communist captivity.

Some of his predictions sound even more prophetic today: “if our society were to be transformed into yours, it would mean an improvement in certain aspects, but also a change for the worse on some particularly significant scores”, such as “those offered by today’s mass living habits, introduced by the revolting invasion of publicity, by TV stupor, and by intolerable music.”

To be sure, some Americans were disappointed by the seeming lack of praise for the USA. But then Solzhenitsyn’s purpose was not to flatter the country that gave him refuge but help it lead the world in resistance to Communist violence.

James Herold, a prominent New England architect and our Forum’s participant, was in the Harvard crowd of some twenty thousand who came to listen to the Russian in driving rain. He remembers he heard people saying: “Who is this guy who teaches us how to live!” But James felt “this guy” was right about America then and even more now.[5]The Voice of America (VOA) reports about our Forum includes James Herold’s remarks https://www.golos-ameriki.ru/a/solzhenitsyn-100-anni...8.html

One Day

Krasnov-3 It all started on one day in November 1962 when Solzhenitsyn’s first tale, “One Day of Ivan Denisovich,” was published in Novyi Mir, a leading Soviet magazine, after the party boss Nikita Khrushchev gave the permission. The story of its publication was indeed as “whimsical, unpredictable, and surprising” as was its great appeal to Soviet readers . It bordered on the miraculous. It was then that the USSR began a decisive slide from “Soviet” to “Russian”, from Marxist “materialism,” “class struggle” and “world revolution” to such idealist notions as Truth, Goodness, and Beauty. This slide toward Russian spiritual identity was sometimes brutally interrupted but never stopped until the collapse of USSR in 1991.

As it turned out, Solzhenitsyn’s writing was deeply grounded in Russia’s soil. “And then no slip of the tongue but a prophecy would be contained in Dostoyevsky’s words: “Beauty will save the world.” For it was given to him to see many things; he had astonishing flashes of insight,” the writer said in Stockholm.

Dostoevsky proscribed

The few roots of Russianness surviving in the USSR by the 1960s had been trampled upon, ignored and abused—in favor of Marxism, a Western chimera, imposed on Russia. For many years Dostoevsky himself was excluded from Soviet school programs as a “conservative counter-revolutionary” and – Marx Forbid! – Christian “fanatic” peddling the “opium to the people”. And he was not the only Russian classic ignored and abused in the USSR. In the GULAG Solzhenitsyn met a number of followers of Lev Tolstoy’s non-violence. Ever since Lenin wrote that in Tsarist Russia TWO CULTURES were in a mortal combat, the one of “progressive revolutionary and democratic” Westernizers, and the other of “reactionary conservative” land-owners and Slavophiles, Soviet censors knew where to apply their scissors.

In addition to the “Slavophiles,” they removed from school-rooms, libraries and even archives, all deviant authors, including those of proletarian origin, if they failed to follow the “party-line” (Wonder where does the current “political correctness” come from?).

They certainly removed from book shelves the works of over 200 non-revolutionary Russian philosophers (Nikolai Berdyaev, Sergei Bulgakov, Semyon Frank, Ivan Ilyin, Abram Kagan, Pitirim Sorokin etc.), thinkers, and scholars whom Lenin ordered shipped to the West in 1922.[6]Philosophers’ ships https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophers%27_ships The fate was no kinder to millions of “White Russians” who had to flee Russia for life. Inevitably, some “Old Regime” scholars stayed on and even tried to absorb the “scientific wisdom” of Marxism out of curiosity or just to survive.

Mikhail Bakhtin denounces the monological principle

One of them was Mikhail Bakhtin (1895-1975),[7]Mikhail Bakhtin (1895-1975), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Bakhtin a literary scholar educated in old “tsarist” Russia. In 1929, after exposing himself to certain Marxist tenets, he published a book in honor of the officially disapproved Dostoevsky. He praised the novelist for his ability to hear a whole POLYPHONY of diverse ideological voices and stay fair even to those with whom he disagreed. Prompted by Solzhenitsyn’s 1967 interview with Pavel Licko[8]Pavel Licko, “Jedneho dna u Alexandra Isaevicha Soolzhenitsyna: Literarna tvorba a umelecke nazory,” Kulturny zhivot (Bratislava), March 31, 1967. in which the writer declared his allegiance to a polyphonic approach in his novels, I began to explore Bakhtin for my Ph.D. thesis at the University of Washington in Seattle.

Soon I learned that, after being exiled for several years to Central Asia, Bakhtin, just like Solzhenitsyn, was rehabilitated. However, finding a teaching position at a provincial university, he did not renounce his scholarly thesis but – 34 years later! – came up with a new expanded edition of his book.[9]Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics (Theory and History of Literature) by Mikhail Bakhtin. https://www.amazon.com/Problems-Dostoevskys-Poetics-...612285 Now Bakhtin boldly asserted that Dostoevsky’s polyphony was not an isolated matter of novelistic style, but “concerns prime principles of European aesthetics.

In fact, he called Dostoevsky the creator of “new artistic model of the world” in opposition to “the monologic principle as the trademark of modern times.” Bakhtin asserted that “In modern times, European rationalism with its cult of unified and solitary reason, and particularly the Enlightenment, during which the basic genres of European prose were formed, contributed to the strengthening of the monologic principle and its penetration into all spheres of ideological life.”

Bakhtin clearly alluded to the official Marxist ideology when he said that “All European utopianism is also founded on this monologic principle. And so is Utopian socialism with its belief in the omnipotence of persuasion.[10]See the discussion of Bakhtin pp. 8-9 in Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky: A study in the polyphonic novel. 1980, By Vladislav. Krasnov,. https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Dostoevsky-study...el/dp/ One could add that the latter belief had to be re-enforced by the GULAG and other corrective tools that came to the fore when persuasion failed. That’s what I said in my Ph.D. dissertation which in 1979 was published as a book, Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky: A Study in the Polyphonic Novel.

“Russian literature vs. Marxist maculature”

Now we come to the alternative title of my presentation: “Russian literature vs. Marxist maculature”. I first used this juxtaposition in my next book “Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle of National Rebirth[11]Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle of National Rebirth, Boulder, CO, 1991. https://www.amazon.com/Russia-Beyond-Communism-Chron...383617 published in the USA just before the fall of the USSR. This juxtaposition had a double entendre. First, it alluded to Marshall McLuhan’s notion that the medium is the message.[12]Marshall McLuhan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_medium_is_the_message Marx’s teaching was touted as a “science” of economics which dictated the need for a violent world revolution to conform to allegedly objective law of social development. Thus, the appeal was seemingly to reason.

Russian literature, on the other hand, like any other literature, only more so, appealed to the heart and soul of the reader, that is to the whole, holistic, human being. It appealed to his ethical and esthetic sense, indeed to Truth, Goodness and Beauty. To be sure, it also appealed to his rational mind and imagination, the latter being an important source of scientific discoveries, as Albert Einstein testifies. Such holistic view of life has animated Russian literature. That view of life may appear less “rational,” “clever,” and more “idealist” than Marxism, but it is still much wiser because it is true to life.

Second, the “maculature” (makulatura in Russian) alludes to an overload of Soviet propaganda materials, especially the works of Marxist-Leninist “classics” (Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin), which Soviet readers simply could no longer absorb. So they turned them into a second-use, blotted paper – makulatura in Russian – to be dumped in garbage cans. However, in the waning years of the USSR, there were organized campaigns to collect the unused works of the “classics.” They were sorted out by weight in kilograms and exchanged for a volume or two of “old-fashioned” Russian or foreign classics.

The point here is not to denigrate Marx’s economic theory or the “law of added value”. The main issue is an excessive, almost demonic obsession of Marx that he had discovered a fail-proof key to the happiness of mankind, if only the proletariat would obey the iron-clad “scientific” laws of history that dictate violent world revolution.

Dostoevsky, Bakhtin and Solzhenitsyn were familiar with both sides of the issue. Dostoevsky faced an execution squad for his sympathy for the “poor and downtrodden” and for his alleged participation in revolutionary circles. Bakhtin was active in Marxist study groups. Solzhenitsyn, during his university years regarded himself a Marxist and Communist. But all three, like thousands of their readers, came to the conclusion that the world revolution, after shedding rivers of blood, sweat and tears, failed to get rid of exploitation and injustice – and then covered up its failure by mandatory falsehoods.

Yevgeny Zamyatin, the first dystopia

One of the first Russian writers to notice that the October 1917 Bolshevik revolution went astray was Yevgeny Zamiatin (1884-1937),[13] Yevgeny Zamiatin (1884-1937), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yevgeny_Zamyatin whom Solzhenitsyn mentioned in his Nobel Lecture as an example of Russian visionaries. Zamyatin was a prominent author before 1917 and was also active in, and imprisoned for, Bolshevik revolutionary activities. This did not prevent him from writing in1920 the novel “WE,” a vision of a sterile and inhumane totalitarian society where all individual life was suppressed. Published in Germany in 1921, “WE” became the first dystopian novel in history of Europe. Soon it was followed by such Western classics as Aldous Huxley, Brave New World; Arthur Koestler, Darkness at Noon, and George Orwell’s Animal farm and Nineteen Eighty Four. Zamyatin’s novel was banned in the USSR and he barely succeeded in leaving the country.

Were Zamyarin’s novel timely published in Soviet Russia, would it not have saved millions lives in Russia allowing it evolve as a normal country where heterodoxy is tolerated? Would not the whole the 20th century have been less bloody?

Zamyatin’s favorite notion in the novel “WE” was entropy as a measure of energy that is needlessly dispersed in any given endeavor. It appears that mankind learned nothing from the bitter fate of the “rationalist” French Revolution which degenerated into revolutionary self-terror and Napoleonic wars of conquest. Alas, Lenin enjoyed his Bolsheviks to follow the French extremists, just do it “more decisively”. The entropy of the Bolshevik dystopia in Russia was countless times higher.

Let me say a few words about my essays that Solzhenitsyn liked. One was on Marx’s poetry debut. Two others are about the role of national character in a country’s history.

Karl Marx as a romantic poet

After I chose a voluntary exile from the USSR in 1962, I tried to read as much as I could the authors who were suppressed. But what I discovered was that censored were not just the works of anti-Communists, but even “classics” of Marxism-Leninism, including Marx himself. Certainly, his Jewish origin was barely mentioned and deemed irrelevant. His article “On the Jewish question[14]On The Jewish Question. 1843. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jew...stion/was not known at all. Then I discovered that at youth he was an ardent Christian, more so than his newly converted parents. Later, he came to see himself as a romantic poet. That’s what Oulanem, the young Karl’s romantic hero and alter ego, proudly proclaims in his poem of the same name:

The world which bulks between me and the Abyss

I will smash to pieces with my enduring curses!

I will throw my arms around its harsh reality.

Embracing me, the world will dumbly pass away

And then sink down to utter nothingness.

Perished, with no existence – that would be really living.

As you now see, in terms of my presentation, it was Marx, not Solzhenitsyn, who imagined himself as a god, not just in youth, but also when he wrote “Manifesto of the Communist Party”.[15]Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/com...01.htm

Karl Marx as Dr. Frankenstein

I quoted these lines in my 1977 essay “Karl Marx as Frankenstein: Toward a Genealogy of Communism”.[16]Wladislaw Krasnow, Karl Marx as Frankenstein: Toward a Genealogy of Communism,” https://www.unz.com/print/ModernAge-1978q1-00072/ ) It was based on Mary Shelly’s 1818 horror story “Frankenstein: The Modern Prometheus”. My intentions was not to put the young Marx down but rather to investigate how a prima facie Romantic poet transforms himself to a modern Promethean economist and ruthless political leader ready to endow the oppressed proletarians with the “gift” of world revolution fire.

The most intriguing aspect of Shelly’s work was that she let the well-meaning German scientist, Dr. Victor Frankenstein, create an artificial human being. Successfully! To be sure, Shelly’s artistic vision was spurred by the rapid advancement of science in Europe. However, as soon after the talented Victor celebrated his scientific victory, his creature started to misbehave turning doctor’s scientific Victory into a crushing defeat. His creature became The Monster so lavishly serialized in numerous Hollywood productions.

To be fair to Miss Shelly, she portrayed Frankenstein as a responsible man who tried to restrain his Creature. That failing, he tried to remove the Monster from densely populated centers of Europe. But where to? He found no better place than “the wilderness of Russia and Tataria” as it was known in Europe since Napoleon’s attempt to conquer it.

Russia as a Dumping ground for Western “science”

Something similar happened to Marx’s “creature”. He designed his world revolution for the most advanced countries, but no country in Europe wanted to serve as a lab. Finally, in 1917, a small group of international Bolsheviks of various ethnic backgrounds forced Russia to volunteer, in spite of the fact that the proletariat there was a small minority. Whether by a conspiracy or bad luck, Russia became the first lab for the Marxist experiment in building what was paraded as the first ever equitable and happy society since the Noah’s Ark. Thus Russia took upon itself the “Promethean”, God-fighting, theomachic, or Luciferan, if you will, task of re-making the world in defiance of any hitherto established religions, be it Christian, Judaic, Moslem or whatever.

I wrote this essay in 1976-1977, when the United States were swamped with thousands of Jewish immigrants fleeing from the USSR after a special deal between Brezhnev and Kissinger was made to allow Soviet Jews to emigrate “for family re-unification.” I saw this as a further irony of the Marxist dystopia transplanted in Russia. Because of his own Jewish background, was it not likely that Marx himself, had he lived in the country of his dream, would seek an exit visa? To Israel? Or the United States? In any case, Mary Shelly’s 1818 horror fiction turned into reality exactly one-hundred years later.

Max Weber undermines Karl Marx

Two other essays that Solzhenitsyn liked dealt with the role of national character in history. Of course, since I was trained as ethnologist and anthropologist in the USSR, I knew that any attention to national character was pretty much under a taboo lest it undermines the international solidarity of working people. But as soon as I defected, I hurried to read the forbidden books, including Max Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism[17]Max Weber https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protestant_Ethic_a...talism )) . I readily agreed with much what he had to say. Indeed, national character fostered as it has been by a belief system (religion, customs, habits, geography, history etc.) of a nation had considerable bearing on its economic standing in the world. It certainly had more influence on the disparity of income levels of different groups of population than the Marxist notion of exploitation of all working people.

Even though Weber’s thesis seemed to favor Protestant nations, he did not imply any racial or religious favoritism. He was good enough to point out, for instance, that Russian Christian Old Believers on the eve of Revolution had considerably better working habits than the rest of the population. Ironically, this was due to the thrift and communal spirit they had fostered thru centuries of official persecution. As it happens, the majority of most successful Russian entrepreneurs – and arts benefactors – before 1917 were from the families of Old Believers. Had the Russians read Weber’s works on a scale of one to a thousand Marxist makulatura volumes, would they not have been better prepared to the challenges of neoliberal economics imposed on them since 1991?

Whose fault: The Russian Mind or Western Cultural Marxism?

Soon I challenged Ronald Hingley (1920 – 2010),[18]Ronald Hingley, https://www.revolvy.com/page/Ronald-Hingley ) a prominent British historian and specialist on Russia, for suggesting in his book, The Russian Mind[19]The Russian Mind, a review https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/ronald-hi...-mind/ that Communist Totalitarianism was due to the disorderly national character of ethnic Russians whom he had observed both in the USSR and among Russian immigrants in UK.[20]Krasnov’s article about Ronald Hingley’s The Russian Mind is available only in Russian.ВладиславКРАСНОВ, Русскийскладумаилизападноесостояниеумов? О книге Рональда Хингли «Русский склад ума». Опубликовано в журнале “Континент”, 1978, № 17 и потом снова Континент 2013, 152

Читать онлайн http://magazines.russ.ru/continent/2013/152/18k.html

Rather than objecting to his observations, I argued that the expansion of Totalitarian rule in Europe and elsewhere was mostly due to the defeatist state of mind of Western intellectual and media establishment who were either tacitly or openly pro-Marxist. They protected their Idol by blaming the brutishness of Communist takeovers on innate boorishness of ethnic Russian apparatchiks rather than the inherent inhumanity of Marxist ideology they followed. Did Marx not enjoined his followers to reject all existing morality, especially Christian, as rooted in “bourgeois” mentality?

Richard Pipes’s Russophobia

One of Marx’s protectors was Harvard professor of Russian history Richard Pipes (1923 – 2018). He had the reputation of anti-Communist hard-liner, but argued that Soviet leaders cannot be trusted not due to their different ideological precepts but because they were usually descendants of Russian peasants who were cheats because their ancestors were serves who could survive only by cheating. It was an ethnic slur, I thought, and challenged him in my article “Richard Pipes’s Foreign Strategy: Anti-Soviet or Anti-Russian?”[21]Wladislaw G. Krasnow, “Richard Pipes’s Foreign Strategy: Anti-Soviet or Anti-Russian?” https://www.jstor.org/stable/i207433/ It was carried under my name Wladislaw G. Krasnow in The Russian Review, Vol. 38, No. 2 (Apr., 1979).Along with Pipes’s reply, it was later re-published in British “Encounter” magazine. Its Russian translation appeared in Russian expatriate magazine “Posev”, № 1, 1980.

ORDER IT NOW

In case the link fails to download, here is its summary in my 1991 book “Russia Beyond Communism[22]Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle of National Rebirth, Boulder, CO, 1991.

. “A respectable historian, (Pipes) has exerted considerable influence on U. S. foreign since he was National Security adviser in the Reagan White House. He has also been one of the chief purveyors on an essentially russophobic conception of Russian history… he blames, for instance, the brutality of Soviet regime chiefly on Russian national character as embodied in Russian peasants. Pipes is an avowed Solzhenitsyn opponent. Not only did he allege that the writer was “anti-Semitic” but ruled out any positive role for Solzhenitsyn in Russian future” (p. 281).

Earlier, on November 13, 1985, in a paper I read at the World Congress for Soviet and East European Studies in Washington, DC, I publicly defended Solzhenitsyn from the charges of “anti-Semitism” coming from Pipes and his ilk. This was duly reported by The New York Times. As the reporter Richard Grenier noted, I was not alone. “Prof. Adam Ulam of Harvard, another Soviet specialist, said Professor Pipes’s characterization of Mr. Solzhenitsyn was ”very unfair.” Grenier went on: “Conquest, author of ”The Great Terror,” called the charge of anti-Semitism ”ludicrous.”

Grenier also pointed out that Solzhenitsyn got support also from a number of prominent people, including Jews, from the USSR and abroad: Mstislav Rostropovich, Mikhail Agursky (Soviet dissident, then professor at Hebrew Universty) and Elie Wiesel. Finally, Grenier said, “Willing to go further in his defense than Mr. Solzhenitsyn himself was his wife, Natalia, who is herself half-Jewish. The charge of anti-Semitism is ”nonsensical” and ”absolutely absurd,” Mrs. Solzhenitsyn wrote in a letter. Her husband was surrounded by Jewish friends in Russia, she said, both in and out of the Gulag”.[23]Richard Grenier , Solzhenitsyn and Anti-Semitism.

https://www.nytimes.com/1985/11/13/books/solzhenitsy...e.html 

In 1989 I was able to arrange for an interview with Solzhenitsyn by David Aikman for Time magazine. David was my friend and colleague in the Department of Slavic and Far Eastern Studies at the University of Washington in Seattle. The interview was introduced by the publisher: “One Word of Truth: A Portrait of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn… a courageous man devoted to the battle for truth in the context of the distinctive disorders of modern, post-Christian culture”.[24]David Aikman and Solzhenitsyn, Time http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,917...0.html

Polyphony in the Period of Glasnost (1986-1991)

At about 1986 when I set out to write a book about Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika, I decided to apply polyphonic principle in my selection of dozens Soviet and expatriate “voices of glasnost” of various political and ideological leanings. All of them argued that the USSR had no Communist future and therefore Russia, as well as other ethnic entities of the Soviet Union, have to go back to their past in order to find an inspiration for their future. In short, I made my selection in favor of authors who were not destined to Marxist makulatura dust bins. In 1991, when the USSR was still intact, my study was published as a book, “Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle of National Rebirth.[25]Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle Of National Rebirth (C C R S SERIES ON CHANGE IN CONTEMPORARY SOVIET SOCIETY) 1st Edition By Vladislav Krasnov (Author), W. George Krasnow (Author)

Krasnov-1

As a prototype for reforms I suggested Solzhenitsyn’s “Letter to the Soviet Leaders” (1973).[26]Letter to the Spviet Leaders https://www.amazon.com/Letter-leaders-Aleksandr-Isae...139137 It offered a program of gradual “Russification” of the USSR. No, Solzhenitsyn did not ask Soviet leaders to relinquish their hold on centralized state power. He only insisted on allowing patriotic ethnic Russian non-party members of Christian persuasion into the ranks of country leadership. As to the official ideology of Marxism-Leninism, Solzhenitsyn advice was: “give it away to the Chinese.” At that time Mao-Tse-Tung[27]Mao-Tse-Tung, https://www.biography.com/people/mao-tse-tung-9398142 accused Moscow of “revisionism” and declared himself the true bearer of the flag of Communism. I was delighted to see two scholars from the People’s Republic of China participating in this forum. They assured us that Solzhenitsyn, totally unknown there during the 1960-s and 1970-s, has lately been on the rise and his books are sold in millions of copies.

At any rate, the PRC leaders woke up sooner than those of the USSR. They became less dogmatic after the devastating Cultural Revolution. Even without reading Solzhenitsyn, they intuitively followed some of his suggestions to Soviet leaders. Under Deng Xiaoping (1904 – 1997)[28]Deng Xiaoping https://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/20/world/deng-xiaopi...d.html they began to lean back on China’s cultural heritage and abandoned a number of Marxist dogmas by adapting a more pragmatic approach to China’s economy.

Soviet leaders, on the other hand, were too slow in shedding Marxist dogmas, certainly, in running their moribund economy. Remarkably, Solzhenitsyn mailed his Letter to all Soviet party bosses. None replied to the Nobel Prize winner in dereliction of their duty toward their citizens.

The Letter was quickly published in English. Alas, the reception in the West was rather hostile. It was judged as a quirk of an old man who allegedly turned to Russian “chauvinism” and “Tsarist past” while failing to see the bright future of a country successfully competing with the USA in space exploration. None noticed that Solzhenitsyn sought a gradual and peaceful evolution of Soviet society, even the possibility for the border republics to secede if they wished, via referenda.

“Why Not Solzhenitsyn?” A letter to Mikhail Gorbachev

In spite of the negative reception by US academic establishment, Solzhenitsyn’s world fame continued to grow. During the waning years of Gorbachev’s perestroyka when the Berlin Wall already fell and Poland and Czechoslovakia gained independence, I was feverishly working on my book “Russia Beyond Communism.” Still, I managed to urgently write the column “Why Not Solzhenitsyn?” On February 10, 1990, it was carried by “The San Diego Union”, a major California newspaper.

As the events in Eastern Europe have shown, people are now looking for a new breed of leaders, such as Solidarity founder Lech Walesa [29]Lech Wałęsa (born 1943) is a retired Polish politician and labour activist. He co-founded and headed Solidarity (Solidarność), the Soviet bloc’s first independent trade union, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1983, and served as President of Poland from 1990 to 1995. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lech_Wałęsaand Czech dissident playwright Vaclav Havel [30]Václav Havel (1936 – 2011) was a Czech statesman, writer and former dissident, who served as the last President of Czechoslovakia from 1989 until the dissolution of Czechoslovakia in 1992 and then as the first President of the Czech Republic from 1993 to 2003. As a writer of Czech literature, he is known for his plays, essays, and memoirs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Václav_Havel
”, I stated. “As for the Soviet Union, no one is better qualified for a national leader than Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the Nobel Prize winning novelist…After the untimely death of Andrei Sakharov, a nuclear scientist and a fellow dissident Nobel Peace prize winner, none come even close to the high moral ground Solzhenitsyn so eminently occupies.[31]Quoted as it appears in “Russia Beyond Communism”, p. 330.

As soon as the article was published, I sent a copy to Solzhenitsyn with whom I had been corresponding for a number of years. Then I wrote an Open Letter to Mikhail Gorbachev asking him to consider the implications of my article (a copy of which was inserted in the envelope). I asked Gorbachev to officially invite the world-famous author to return to Russia. A copy of my letter to Gorbachev, as well as of my article, I mailed to a number of Soviet newspapers.

Alas, I received neither reply nor even an acknowledgement from the Kremlin. This is hardly surprising since the relentless Gorbymania of Western media made Gorbachev confident of the one-party rule. Nor did I get any reply from Soviet media moguls, except one small Young Communist League’s newspaper in my native town in Perm that carried my Open Letter to Gorbachev.

I was disappointed but not too surprised. I knew of both lethargy of Soviet nomenklatura members[32]The nomenklatura (Russian: номенклату́ра Latin: nomenclatura) were a category of people within the Soviet Union and other Eastern Bloc countries who held various key administrative positions in the bureaucracy, running all spheres of those countries’ activity: government, industry, agriculture, education, etc., whose positions were granted only with approval by the communist party of each country or region. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomenklatura. The term was popularized in the West by the Soviet dissident Michael Voslenski, who in 1970 wrote a book titled Nomenklatura: The Soviet Ruling Class. and the slowness and unreliability of Soviet postal clerks, especially, with overseas mail.

Still, I felt more disheartened by a rather angry letter from Solzhenitsyn himself. He sternly reproached me for “dragging me into Russian politics without asking my permission.” I replied that I did not have to ask for permission for suggesting a course of action for my Russian compatriots to facilitate a peaceful transition to a post-Communist Russia. While the thrust of my Letter was on securing a timely and honorable return of Solzhenitsyn to his homeland, I left it up to Soviet authorities and public to devise their own ways of using Solzhenitsyn’s world fame and talents which were certainly not below those of Walesa and Havel.

How Can We Make Russia Livable

Still, a few months later I learned that my effort was not entirely wasted. Apparently my letter to Gorbachev prompted Solzhenitsyn to finally speak up about what needs to be done to take the USSR out of the dead-end of Communism. Here is what I wrote then in my book “Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle of National Rebirth” that just appeared in 1991:

A portentous event took place in Moscow on September 18, 1990. The Communist Youth League’s newspaper, Komsomol’skaia Pravda, brought to its nearly 22 million readers the long-awaited word of Solzhenitsyn, his pamphlet, ‘How Can We Make Russia Livable [Kak nam obustroit’ Rossiiu]’.[33]The usual translation of the article is Rebuilding Russia. I prefer my translation, ‘How Can We Make Russia Livable’ because it is stylistically less authoritative and more inclusive as it invites the readers to a common effort aimed not at an ambitious, grandiose and remote goal but at assuring people’s needs. The following day the weekly Literaturnaia gazeta offered the same to an additional 4.5 million readers. The event was extraordinary by any standard. Only five years earier these newspapers had berated the exiles author as ‘that vile scum of a traitor’” (p. 43)

Here is not the place to discuss Solzhenitsyn’s pamphlet in detail. So I repeat its brief assessment in the book: “Solzhenitsyn’s central idea is that the particular form of government and economy is secondary to a nation’s spiritual foundations. ‘If the spiritual resources of a nation have dried up’, he says, ‘then not even the best form of government, nor any sort of industrial development, can save it from death.’ One of the chief sources of the present malady is precisely the fact that the Communists reversed the order of priority by putting the ‘cart’ of economic and political power before the ‘horse’ of spirituality of human relations. As a result, not only the country’s political institutions, economy, and ecology but also ‘the souls’ of the people were destroyed in the name of the Marxist Utopia” (p. 53).

I was unable to judge the situation in the USSR during the few crucial months after the publication of Solzhenitsyn’s pamphlet as I was not rehabilitated yet from the same charges as were leveled against Solzhenitsyn. Only in April 1991 was able to set my foot in my home country for the first time after twenty-nine years of voluntary exile. My subsequent visits to Russia during the 1990s were short and intermittent.

Aleksandr Sevastianov: Solzhenitsyn was late

So much more I was delighted to read the following lines of Aleksandr Sevastianov,[34]Алекса́ндр Севастья́нов (род. 11 апреля 1954 года, Москва) — российский политический деятель. Бывший сопредседатель Национально-державной партии России, лишённой регистрации в 2003 году[

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Севастьянов,_Александр_Никитич He blogs (in Russian) at http://sevastianov.ru/biografiya/index.html
a self-avowed Russian nationalist and perceptive observer of Russian politics. In a 2009 article dedicated to Solzhenitsyn’s memory he wrote: “The timely arrival of Solzhenitsyn could have instantly changed the balance of power, give an absolute advantage to the patriotic wing of dissidence, shorten the hands of traitors, robbers and fraudsters, haters of Russia. No one had a greater prestige at that moment — not even Yeltsin. He himself live was then much more necessary in Russia than his books. His opponents were afraid of his arrival; they did everything to prevent his contacts with Yeltsin! For it could be otherwise”.[35]2009-01-03 Александр Севастьянов , Солженицын: упущенный шанс? Он не сделал того, для чего был рождён. http://www.apn.ru/publications/article21208.htm

Sevastianov also reported that “the Prosecutor General announced the termination of the case (against Solzhenitsyn) under article 64 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR (treason) in the absence of corpus delicti. The last obstacle for his return fell. Friends and admirers even those beyond the Iron Curtain, chant: “You are needed at home.” This is the truth. But Solzhenitsyn failed to return to Russia. To me, it is an inexplicable”.

Again a unique opportunity was missed,” morns Sevastianov, and then quotes Solzhenitsyn’s lame excuse: “So what – I did return at the moment of the highest political expectations of me in my homeland. And I am sure that I was not mistaken then. It was the decision of the writer, not a politician. I never groped for political popularity for even a minute.

Sevastianov disagrees it was a political issue. It was a call of history that Solzhenitsyn failed to respond to. I tend to agree with Sevastianov. But, being like him a great admirer of Solzhenitsyn, I am just as reluctant to blame exclusively the writer. If anything, the Russian intellectuals of the early 1990s, even the dissidents among it, were not as mature as those in Poland and Czechoslovakia to answer the history call. After all, they had stayed under totalitarian foot a whole generation longer. So I see it rather as a judgment from the Above–for the sins of October Revolution. The country had to be meted out an additional punishment in the form of lawlessness and oligarchy misrule during the 1990s.

Egor Kholmogorov

Another Russian admirer of Solzhenitsyn, Egor Kholmogorov,[36]See Egor Kholmogorov’s bio in Russian https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Холмогоров,_Егор_Станиславович

In English see ANATOLY KARLIN in Egor Kholmogorov: Russians in the 20th Century, Part I • MARCH 26, 2018 http://www.unz.com/akarlin/russians-in-20th-century-1/ See also his interview with Paul Robinson https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2017/11/18/inte...ogorov
in a recent article translated for The Unz Review as “Alexander Solzhenitsyn – A Russian Prophet” also thinks that the writer may have missed a chance to set Russia aright during 1991-1993. Like Sevastianov he gives very high marks to Solzhenitsyn’s statecraft proposals contained in the pamphlet: “Some formulas coined by the writer became part of government policy, such as the emphasis on the “preservation of the people”. Others became a political reality, such as his call for a nationally minded authoritarianism, as opposed to the aping Western multiparty democracy. There are also still many – such as his ideas regarding the zemstvo, organs of “small-space democracy” – that are yet to be widely heard and discussed”.

Moreover, Kholmogorov throws a gantlet to the West by praising Solzhenitsyn for “putting forward a detailed and consistent anti-Enlightenment doctrine: A return to God, voluntary self-restraint and self-restriction of humankind, emphasizing duties instead of ever-expanding “rights”, prioritizing inner freedom, and rejecting the sacrifice of national life not only to totalitarian utopia but also to the orgy of freedom. Solzhenitsyn’s doctrine is one of the most consistent and politically sound Conservative philosophies formulated over the last couple of centuries. His duel with the ghosts of Voltaire and Rousseau goes on after his death, and the score is still in the Russian writer’s favor.”[37]Egor Kholmogorov : Alexander Solzhenitsyn – A Russian Prophet. ANATOLY KARLIN • APRIL 24, 2018

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/prophet-solzhenitsyn/

Lest one suspect that Solzhenitsyn’s Russian admirers naturally tend to exaggerate the importance of their countryman in world history, in my view, spiritually attuned readers outside of the USSR, especially those with Christian roots, have been just as fascinated with him as a cultural hero and world historical phenomenon. I mentioned some of them in my book “Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky”. Thus, Heinrich Böll (1917 –1985) ,[38]Heinrich Böll (1917 – 1985) Germany’s foremost post-World War II writer was awarded the Georg Büchner Prize in 1967 and the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1972. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Böll one of Germany’s foremost writers and Nobel Prize winner himself, felt that there was a metaphysical level in Solzhenitsyn that was simply inaccessible for Western writers.

As professor of Russian Studies, language and literature, I observed a salutary impact of Solzhenitsyn on my students. During the turbulent Vietnam War era, more than once, I heard that Solzhenitsyn saved them from getting involved in insurrection against the status quo in the US. The tragic experience of Russia in the wake of October Revolution certainly cooled off many hot heads in the USA.

Eldridge Cleaver

One such hot head was Eldridge Cleaver whose book “Soul on Ice[39]Leroy Eldridge Cleaver (1935 –1998) was an American writer and political activist who became an early leader of the Black Panther Party. In 1968, he wrote Soul On Ice, a collection of essays that was praised by The New York Times Book Review as “brilliant and revealing”.In 1958, Cleaver was convicted of rape and assault and eventually served time. While in prison, he was given a copy of The Communist Manifesto. Cleaver was released on parole in 1966, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldridge_Cleaver was the rage around the States, especially on campus of the University of Washington in Seattle where I taught as a teaching assistant to provide for my Ph.D. studies. During the 1980s, I started corresponding with this former leader of the Black Panther Party, arguing that in some respects American Blacks were “freer” than “white” Russian dissidents inside the totalitarian police state. Later, I met him at a social event at the Hoover Institution. He was there with his wife Kathleen. By that time I knew that, after travelling to Cuba, Algeria and some communist countries Eldridge came to the conclusion that the plight of Blacks in the USA was not as bad as usually reported. I wandered what caused him to change his mind besides the travels; he beckoned to Kathleen and said: “She started to read Solzhenitsyn and then made me do the same. After the reading, we never were the same”.

It is obvious that Westerners of Christian cultural background have been more than others keen on Solzhenitsyn. A number of my articles, including on Solzhenitsyn, were published by a Conservative Catholic magazine Modern Age. Some others were carried by a Methodist review affiliated with the Southern Methodist University where I taught from 1974 to 1977.

Professor Edward Ericson

Margo Caulfield and Prof. Alexandre Strokanov’

Margo Caulfield and Prof. Alexandre Strokanov’

Shortly thereafter professor Edward Ericson, the author of “Solzhenitsyn, the Moral Vision,”[40]Solzhenitsyn, the moral vision Hardcover – 1980. By Edward E Ericson https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Moral-Vision-Edw...eviews In 1993 it was followed by Solzhenitsyn and the Modern World (Occasional Papers Book 2) Kindle Edition by Edward Ericson (Author), Russell Kirk (Introduction)

invited me to speak on at Calvin College campus. We became fast friends. I thought of his excellent 1980 book as soon as I got Professor Alexandre Strokanov’s invitation to the Solzhenitsyn Forum at the Northern Vermont University. I immediately wanted to forward it to Ericson. Sadly, I missed him as he passed away in April 2017.[41]CALVIN REMEMBERS ED ERICSON. May 02, 2017 | Lynn Rosendale

https://calvin.edu/news/archive/calvin-remembers-ed-...ricson

There is no better way to honor the memory of Professor Ericson than by quoting from of a review of his book written by Bradley P. Hayton. Titled “Americans Need Morally Corrective Glasses,” it says: “Whether or not we have ever chanced a reading, the writings and speeches of Solzhenitsyn have made great impacts on all our lives. Evangelicals, left wing as well as right wing, have been powerfully reaffirmed in their contentions that morality is at the base of all society. Solzhenitsyn is a man with a moral vision, a vision that sees the absolute and direct connection between morality and art, morality and literature, morality and politics”.[42]Review by Bradley P. Hayton https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Moral-Vision-Edw...eviews

Hayton’s review fully confirms Kholmogorov’s contention that Solzhenitsyn is a world phenomenon. He focuses on the most salient trait of Solzhenitsyn’s mission to the world:

Solzhenitsyn is not theoretical. His writings are grounded in reality, in life, and in action. He is a Christ-like figure, fully human and yet with a divine mission and moral vision. He feels the pangs of human suffering, knows human sin, and heralds human salvation. He has been likened to a prophet who proclaims words of encouragement and hope to a people in despair and darkness. He stirs our minds to the realities of ultimate concern in the face of death”.[43]Bradley P. Hayton https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Moral-Vision-Edw...eviews

Robert Legvold on Daniel Mahoney’s book

Of later books about the writer I would recommend Aleksandr Daniel Mahoney’s Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: The Ascent from Ideology.[44]Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: The Ascent from Ideology (20th Century Political Thinkers)

by Daniel J. Mahoney (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Aleksandr-Solzhenitsyn-Ideolo...521133
The title spells out its thesis: secular ideologies which plagued the 20th century offer no salvation for global politics.

Robert Legvold, a knowledgeable and perceptive specialist on Russia and global politics, reviewed the book for “Foreign Affairs”.[45]Robert Legvold’s review of Mahoney’s book https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-revie...eology He says outright: “Mahoney reintroduces Solzhenitsyn as a political thinker who deserves to be included in the ranks of Raymond Aron, Jacques Maritain, Martin Buber, and John Dewey, among others.

Trying to free Solzhenitsyn from the reactionary and antediluvian reputation he has in the West”, Legvold rightly observes, “Mahoney highlights his deeper commitment to government under the rule of law and the right of “every private citizen” to “independence and space”…Above all, he would vanquish ideology, that most pernicious product of the Enlightenment, with its arrogant and limitless their AWARENESSinhumanity justified in the name of “Historical Necessity.” It seems that both Mahoney and Legvold are in agreement with Sevastianov and Kholmogorov in their awareness of the pernicious role Marxist ideology played in Russia’s history, as well as of its corruptive influence in the West, especially when paraded as “Cultural Marxism”.

The Tour of Solzhenitsyn’s Estate

After two full days of conferencing at Northern Vermont University in Lyndon, we were very fortunate to have made a trip to Cavendish where we saw the house of Solzhenitsyn as well as the Museum of Local History. Mr. Ignat Solzhenitsyn[46]Ignat Solzhenitsyn (born1972) is a Russian-American conductor and pianist. He is the conductor laureate of the Chamber Orchestra of Philadelphia and the principal guest conductor of the Moscow Symphony Orchestra. He is the son of Russian author Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignat_Solzhenitsyn, the writer’s son and a prominent musician himself, gave an excellent tour of his father’s writing and research quarters. He made it clear that the whole family was happily involved in the writer’s titanic effort to free Russian history from Soviet distortions and omissions. All family worked 12 hours every day. Happily? Yes! Ignat says that the house routine also included one and a half hour every day when father directly interacted with his three sons teaching them physics and math.

Margo Caulfield: “The Writer Who Changed History”

Krasnov-2

Our visit to the Museum of Cavendish was revealing. In addition to its local history, a major part of the Museum was dedicated to the memory of its most famous exile. In addition to seeing many Solzhenitsyn photographs decorating it walls, we had a chance to talk to Margo Caulfield, the Museum’s supervisor and Director of Cavendish Historical Society.

I immediately saw on her desk a book with the remarkable title: “The Writer Who Changed History”. As it turned out, the book’s author was Margo Caulfield herself. On its back cover, I read “This book was born of an attempt to answer an American third-grader’s question: “How could it be that a decorated Soviet officer was removed from the front lines and imprisoned for years simply for making a negative comment about Stalin?”

It was a good question, and Margo Caulfield answered it superbly in her children’s book “Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: The Writer Who Changed History[47]Margo Caulfield, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: The Writer Who Changed History. February 2016

https://www.amazon.com/Aleksandr-Solzhenitsyn-Writer...160855
. Well documented and illustrated, it is brief but comprehensive. Above all, it is written in the awareness that America needs to grow to the stature of a man to whom it gave a refuge and freedom to restore 20th century history, at least, as far as Russia is concerned. I read the book when I was flying from Vermont to Moscow. I kept thinking that Russian youngsters too need to read such books to fortify their resolve to make the 21st century less cruel and more promising than the Brave 20th Century World.

It is not for nothing that Hilton Kramer of The New York Times once called Cavendish “the capital of contemporary Russian literature”.[48] A Talk With Solzhenitsyn, The New York Times, May 11, 1980. By HILTON KRAMER https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/98...slogin

The Ark of the First Circle

ORDER IT NOW

As a matter of fact, just last night my dear friend and I watched the last sequel of the film series based on Solzhenitsyn’s novel “The First Circle” for which he got the Nobel Prize. The film for which Solzhenitsyn was the screen writer was shown on Russian television channel “Kultura” in the course of a week.[49]Gleb Panfilov’s 2006 film series “The First Circle” (in Russian) https://tvkultura.ru/about/show/brand_id/3858/ We were overwhelmed by the fact that the prisoners of a research lab involved in Soviet armaments program were actually condemned to the “easy” first circle of the Dantean Hell. “Easy” – because they were better fed and able to question the system unlike prisoners of the deeper layers of the GULAG or even the “free” citizens outside the barbed wires who lived in a constant fear of making a political mistake.

Toward the end of the show Solzhenitsyn’s own voice behind the screen (the film was made in 2006 when the writer was still alive) reminded the viewer of what was the highest point of the novel. Reviewing the chapter titled the Ark and placed near the middle of the novel, Solzhenitsyn says that the sleeping quarters of the prisoners were placed in the middle of a half-destroyed Russian church near its cupola. The inmates had just celebrated the birthday of one of them, and prepared for the night. Solzhenitsyn’s voice says:

From here, from the Ark, confidently plowing its way through the darkness, the whole tortuous flow of accursed History could easily be surveyed as from an enormous height, and yet at the same time one could see every pebble on the river bed, as if one were immersed in the stream.

In these Sunday evening hours solid matter and flesh no longer reminded people of their earthy existence. The spirit of male friendship and philosophy filled the sail-like arches overhead.

Perhaps this was, indeed, that bliss which all the philosophers of antiquity tried in vain to define and to teach others.” [50]Quoted from Vladslav Krasnov, “Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky”, p. 121

https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Dostoevsky-Study...304727

It is hard to disagree with Hayton who sees Solzhenitsyn as “a prophet who proclaims words of encouragement and hope to a people in despair and darkness”.

Hayton praises Ericson for showing Solzhenitsyn “as a man driven by a moral vision. He penetrates into the many writings of Solzhenitsyn, unleashing his Christian view of life that envelopes every sphere of human activity. In order to demonstrate the remarkable continuity in the vision of Solzhenitsyn, Ericson freely quotes from the author throughout. Solzhenitsyn’s powerful message grips the reader on every page as Ericson probes into each of his writings and speeches.”

George Friedman

It would be wrong, however, to think that Solzhenitsyn’s appeal is limited to conservatives and Christians. No, his appeal extends to people of all nationalities and walks of life. George Friedman[51]George Friedman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Friedman was born a Hungarian Jew whose parents survived the Holocaust and then escaped from Communist Hungary. He is the former founder of STRATFOR, a private intelligence firm, and now runs Geopolitical Futures. That’s what Friedman wrote in his Obituary article “Solzhenitsyn: Struggle for Russia’s Soul[52]George Friedman, “Solzhenitsyn: Struggle for Russia’s Soul” on September 7, 2008. Remarkably I found his article on an Indian site http://www.vijayvaani.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?aid=14 Courtesy www.stratfor.com on September 7, 2008:

There are many people who write history. There are very few who make history through their writings. Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who died at the age of 89, was one of them. In many ways, Solzhenitsyn laid the intellectual foundations for the fall of Soviet communism. That is well known. But Solzhenitsyn also laid the intellectual foundation for the Russia that is now emerging. That is less well known, and in some ways more important”. Friedman is certainly right when he says that “Solzhenitsyn was far more prophetic about the future of the Soviet Union than almost all of the Ph.D.s in Russian studies. Entertain the possibility that the rest of Solzhenitsyn’s vision will come to pass. It is an idea that ought to cause the world to be very thoughtful”.

“Thoughtful”, sounds just right. But I would go further. If we are really thoughtful, we may see that Solzhenitsyn has had and is likely to have more healing effect on the West in general and the USA in particular.

Jordan Peterson on Solzhenitsyn’s growing relevance

A good indication that Solzhenitsyn’s relevance grows is the great interest shown in him by Dr. Jordan Peterson,[53]Jordan Bernt Peterson (born June 12, 1962) is a Canadian clinical psychologist and a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto. His main areas of study are in abnormal, social, and personality psychology, with a particular interest in the psychology of religious and ideological belief, and the improvement of personality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson See also his site https://jordanbpeterson.com/ a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto and the author of the multi-million copy bestseller 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos. Judging by what Peterson has to say in his recent podcast with Jocko Willink,[54]John Gretton “Jocko” Willink is an American podcaster, author, and retired United States Navy SEAL. He received the Silver Star and Bronze Star for his service in the Iraq War. Willink was commander of SEAL Team Three’s Task Unit Bruiser during the Battle of Ramadi. Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jocko_Willink Solzhenitsyn’s works provide one of the strongest antidotes to chaos increasingly besetting our world.[55]Jocko Podcast 155 w/ Jordan Peterson: Jordan Peterson and Jocko VS. Evil. The Gulag

As Dr. Peterson points out, one of the reasons for the chaos is that Pol Sci profs in the West tend to be “under the sway of Marxist thinking”. Not for nothing, Dr. Peterson is behind the new edition of The Gulag Archipelago.[56]The Gulag Archipelago. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. WITH A NEW FOREWORD BY JORDAN B. PETERSON

THE OFFICIALLY APPROVED ABRIDGEMENT OF THE GULAG ARCHIPELAGO VOLUMES I, II & III

https://www.penguin.co.uk/authors/1021095/aleksandr-...n.html
The latter is one of the 15 great world books he recommends, while two others belong to Solzhenitsyn’s favorite Dostoevsky.[57]Peterson’s 15 important books https://jordanbpeterson.com/books/book-list/

From Solzhenitsyn to Putin

Friedman is right that “the intellectual foundation” for Vladimir Putin’s Russia was, to a large extent, laid thanks to the influence that Solzhenitsyn exerted on the president. You can read more about that influence in my 2016 interview with Jonas Alexis carried by Veterans Today,[58]Krasnov and Alexis talk about Alexander Solzhenitsyn: Truth Can and Will Destroy the New World Order and Satanism. By Jonas E. Alexis -July 14, 2016

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/07/14/alexander-s...anism/
a site founded by former US military officers who are now critical of US foreign policy. In that Interview I mentioned that I had foreseen Russia’s return to its Christian roots in my 1991 book Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle of National Rebirth. In fact, the book was dedicated to the Millennium of Russian Baptism in 1988. At that time Soviet soldiers were forbidden even to wear a crucifix or any other religious symbol.

Now, if you watch the military parade on the 9th of May, Victory over Germany Day, you will see on Russian national TV how the commanding General Sergei Shoigu, Russia’s Defense Minister, crosses himself publicly before he enters the Red Square through the Kremlin Gate. If you did not see it, I am not surprised. The Big Media indulges in Putin-phobia to divert attention to the greatest event of the past 25 years, Russia’s spiritual rebirth, of which Putin and Shoigu are just two examples”.[59]Something truly amazing happened today. May 09, 2015

http://thesaker.is/something-truly-amazing-happened...today/

Of course, the process of Russia’s spiritual rebirth was very uneven during the Yeltsin era. After returning to Russia in 1994, Solzhenitsyn was at pain witnessing the loss of the country’s sovereignty after the neo-liberal “shock therapy” reforms were set in motion with the assistance of US government. That “assistance” was perhaps best described by professor Janine Wedel[60]Janine Wedel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janine_R._Wedel in her book 2001“Collision and Collusion: The Strange Case of Western Aid to Eastern Europe[61]Wedel, J. R. Wedel, J. R. Collision and Collusion: The Strange Case of Western Aid to Eastern Europe

Palgrave, 2001. https://www.amazon.com/Collision-Collusion-Strange-Western-Eastern/dp/0312238282
. In December 1998 Solzhenitsyn publicly repudiated Yeltsin’s “reforms” by refusing to accept the highest national award. As president of RAGA, on March 17, March 1999, I sent to President Clinton an Open Letter on the Russian Crisis demanding to stop interfering in Russian affairs. The letter was signed by over a hundred of prominent Americans and carried by Johnson’s Russia List,[62]Johnson’s Russia List, http://russialist.org/ For my letter see W. George Krasnow: Open Letter on the Russian Crisis. (Revised version). http://www.russialist.org/archives/3094.html an alternative site for unbiased information about Russia. Clinton’s reply was evasive but polite.

With Kevin Barrett: The USA and Russia trading places

In November 2017, I had a video interview with Dr. Kevin Barrett. He is not just a literary scholar familiar with the works of Mikhail Bakhtin but also a fellow dissident in the USA. He described me as a former Soviet dissident and defector[63]See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladislav_Krasnov See also his book Soviet Defectors: The KGB Wanted List (Hoover Institution Press Publication) https://www.amazon.com/Soviet-Defectors-Wanted-Insti...982329 who now “wonders whether Russia and the United States have switched places: Now it’s the USA that surveys its citizens, doesn’t tolerate dissenting voices, and insists on inflicting its mendacious official perspective on everyone, everywhere; while Russia has left Communism behind and emerged as a pluralistic nation, whose worst “crime” (according to the Masters of the Universe in Washington) is allowing Western dissidents to reach a larger audience via RT and Sputnik”.

The interviewer asked: Is the USA becoming monologic and totalitarian?[64]Vladislav “George” Krasnov: Is the USA becoming monologic and totalitarian? November 25, 2017 Kevin Barrett

Text is here https://kevinbarrett.heresycentral.is/2017/11/vladis...arian/ Below is the video with Krasnov: Is the USA becoming monologic and totalitarian? Kevin Barrett, Published on Dec 12, 2017. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVX8pEONbzQ
Yes, I replied, it appears that “Russia and the United States have switched places”. But, to be fair, the situation in the States is not yet totalitarian. But regrettably there are unmistakable proclivities toward more monologism in mass media and toward one or another form of totalitarian rule.

Chantal Delsol calls Solzhenitsyn “liberal conservative”

ORDER IT NOW

Recently, Chantal Delsol of France argued[65]Chantal Delsol, «Soljenitsyne n’est pas réactionnaire, c’est un conservateur libéral»

http://www.lefigaro.fr/vox/societe/2018/11/18/31003...al.php
that Solzhenitsyn is far from a reactionary, as some people called him in a derogatory rage. Delsol rather sees Solzhenitsyn as “liberal conservative”. According to Delsol, Solzhenitsyn has already played a salutary role for France as he gave “a vivid lesson for the history of France, for the younger generations. Let them never forget that abyss of lies into which our society fell: there was an impressive number of Frenchmen who glorified the Soviet regime, while dissidents like Solzhenitsyn lived in fear. Here, in France, everything was done to deny Soviet reality. I will never forget what false arguments my uncle, a French communist, was trying to make me believe that the GULAG Archipelago was written by the CIA.

As to Solzhenitsyn’s contribution to Western civilization, I remember reading some early articles of Professor Richard Tempest,[66]Richard Tempest, PhD. The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champlain. Presentation: “Solzhenitsyn contra Lenin”

https://www.northernvermont.edu/about/news-events/ev...erence
who also gave a paper “Solzhenitsyn contra Lenin” at our Vermont forum. In the early article he listed Solzhenitsyn in the same league with such European cultural heroes as Goethe, Schiller, Nietzsche and Byron.

As I have shown above, the Russian philosopher Kholmogorov is even more emphatic in stressing Solzhenitsyn’s global reach as well as the need for Western theorists to see the West’s limitations:

Solzhenitsyn’s legacy is not only a Russian, but a planetary political phenomenon. It was Solzhenitsyn who in his famous Harvard Speech warned the West that they were not alone on this planet, that civilizations described by Western historians and culture theorists are no mere decorative elements, and instead living worlds in themselves, that cannot have a Western measure imposed upon them. Russia, a unique civilization, is of these historical worlds… This very idea has constituted the bedrock of Russian foreign policy since Putin’s Munich Speech[67]Munich speech of Vladimir Putin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_speech_of_Vladi..._Putinin 2007.

The best summation of Kholmogorov’s article was made by one of The Unz Review attentive readers,AaronB :

A return to religion in some form, not necessarily Christianity, but an appreciation for the numinous and the supernatural that underlies all phenomena and the unseen bonds that unites everything (see quantum mechanics), a return to a moral vision and away from mere instrumentalism, a turn away from individualism and towards appreciation for communal life and the rebuilding of social capital in the form of a unifying culture and sense of shared destiny, identity, origin, and purpose, the renewed appreciation for the aesthetic world view, art, poetry, myth, and legend, and the reduction of logic and rationality to important but limited instruments and as not providing unique access to ultimate truth, based on Kant’s demonstration that logic consistently applied ends in absurdity and contradiction, and retaining scientific and technological development but reducing their importance and firmly subordination them to a scale of human values….[68]AaronB says: April 25, 2018 at 8:12 pm GMT • 200 Words @for-the-record

In a number of crucial respects Kholmogorov unwittingly reiterates Bakhtin’s arguments against the excessive rationalism of the age of Reason and Enlightenment while justifying the need for Dostoevsky’s polyphonic artistic strategy. It was way back in 1929 and then again in 1963 when Mikhail Bakhtin challenged “the monologic principle as the trademark of modern times.”

Ron Unz on the need to accept the whole of Solzhenitsyn

It is very ironic and bad for America that its mega media establishment turned a deaf ear to Solzhenitsyn’s genuinely liberal commandment to always pay attention to polyphony of different political persuasions and engage opponents in a friendly dialogue. “For decades most Americans would have ranked Nobel Laureate Alexander Solzhenitsyn as among the world’s greatest literary figures, and his Gulag Archipelago alone sold over 10 million copies,” says Ron Unz, the publisher of the most remarkable alternative web-journal The Unz Review.[69]RON UNZ • JULY 30, 2018, “American Pravda: The Nature of Anti-Semitism”.

http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-anti-semiti...y-ago/
But his last work (Two Hundred Years Together) was a massive two-volume account of the tragic 200 years of shared history between Russians and Jews, and despite its 2002 release in Russian and numerous other world languages, there has yet to be an authorized English translation, though various partial editions have circulated on the Internet in samizdat form[70]The Crucifixion of Russia: A new English translation of Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together

by Columbus Falco. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36499209-the-cru...russia . It includes a review by Jan Peczkis.
. This lack of a dialogue among Americans as a social arrangement is very deplorable indeed. No wonder the US government eschews a dialogue with Russia.

I think the man to whom America gave a refuge and freedom to write and who enjoined all of us “Do not live a lie” deserves that First Amendment to US Constitution is fully applies to all his work without exception.

Yuri Slezkine’s The Jewish Century

Even while American publishers were reluctant to publish Solzhenitsyn’s 2002 book on Russian-Jewish relations, Yuri Slezkine’s pioneering book “The Jewish Century,” published in 2004, largely confirms Solzhenitsyn’s contention that Jews played a very prominent role in the Bolshevik revolution. Professor Slezkine[71]Yuri Slezkine is a Russian-born professor of Russian history and Director of the Institute of Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. He is best known as the author of the book The Jewish Century (2004) and The House of Government: A Saga of The Russian Revolution (2017) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Slezkine is extremely ingenious in challenging us to think about a variation of religious patterns, geographic and historical circumstances that contribute to a variety of national responses to the challenge of modernity. One way or another, Slezkine boldly asserts that “The modern era is the Jewish era, and the twentieth century is the Jewish century“.[72]YuriSlezkine. “The Jewish Century” Princeton University Press (2004). https://press.princeton.edu/titles/7819.html

This is not the place to discuss his book, but it’s easy to agree with the publishers that this is “one of the most original and intellectually provocative books on Jewish culture for many years.” Slezkine brought the Jews out of the ghetto of exclusivity by conditionally dividing the whole of humanity into Apollonian people, named after Apollo, the Greek god of reason and the settled life, and the admirers of Hermes, the Greek god of craft, mediation, commerce and, it’s no secret, trickery. In the Roman Empire, Hermes expanded his territory under the name of Mercury. Slezkine’s book implicitly repudiates the Marxist denial of the importance of national character and specificity of each ethnic group in the overall history of mankind.

Because of the inherent dogmatism of pseudoscientific Marxism-Leninism, the topic of different national characters and types of behavior was renounced in the USSR as “reactionary” and contrary to the spirit of “proletarian internationalism.” But without this topic, one can hardly understand what happened in Russia in 1917. Certainly, the writings of Solzhenitsyn, as well as Slezkine’s, pave the way for further research of the subject and its objective evaluation on a global scale. Let me refer the reader to my earlier essay “Emperor Michael II in the Solzhenitsyn House” where I discuss this topic in some detail, including my disagreements with Solzhenitsyn.[73]Emperor Michael II in the Solzhenitsyn House – Author: Vladislav Krasnov. 7/16/2018

http://www.raga.org.prx.us.teleportyou.com/news/emp...rasnov

Spiritual Realism

Could not then art and literature, if exercised in Solzhenitsyn’s footsteps, offer a very real succor to the modern world?

When I was writing my Ph.D. dissertation on Solzhenitsyn, one of my favorite authors on the topic of how Westerners approach Russian literature was George Steiner,[74]Francis George Steiner,(born 1929)is a French-born American literary critic, essayist, philosopher, novelist, and educator. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Steinerespecially his volume Tolstoy or Dostoevsky.[75]Tolstoy or Dostoevsky: An Essay in the Old Criticism, by George Steiner (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Tolstoy-Dostoevsky-Essay-Crit...069170 Steiner pointed out that both writers “exercise upon our minds pressures and compulsions of such obvious force, they engage values so obviously germane to the major politics of our time, that we cannot, even if we should wish to do so, respond on purely literary grounds”. I think this is no less true of Solzhenitsyn.

But then Steiner tells how some White Russian émigré were thirsting of a “new religious idea: who believe that in a fusion between the thought of Tolstoy and that of Dostoevsky will be found the Symbol, the Union, to lead and revive.” I believe that such a fusion between Tolstoy and Dostoevsky manifested itself in the art of Solzhenitsyn: it has Tolstoy’s historical sweep and Dostoevsky’s psychological insights expressed through polyphony of its diverse ideological heroes. I have called this fusion spiritual realism.

People to People Diplomacy

On December 10, 2018, while I was writing this article, I made a break to attend the International Conference of Scholars to celebrate Solzhenitsyn’s Centenary in Moscow.[76]Александр Солженицын: взгляд из XXI века. 10 декабря в Доме Пашкова прошло торжественное открытие международной конференции «Александр Солженицын: взгляд из XXI века». https://www.rsl.ru/ru/events/afisha/conf/aleksandr-s...in-xxi It was a sign of time that it took place in The Russian State Library which several generations of Russians had known as The Lenin Library. Now the name of the first Soviet leader is chiefly confined to his Mausoleum on Red Square. Natalya Solzhenitsyn, the writer’s widow, was the first speaker. “Today we celebrate 100 years since Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was born. Tomorrow, on December 11th, the Second Century of his life will begin”. She was interrupted by a round of healthy applause.

I firmly believe that Solzhenitsyn’s writing will bless and endow the 21st century in Russia. I also hope it will endow the United States. After all, the major part of his works was researched and produced in the USA. This obliges all his devotees in both countries, as well as in China and the rest of the world, to take seriously his call for “Repentance and Self-Limitation in the Life of Nations” he issued way back in 1973.[77] REPENTANCE AND SELF-LIMITATION IN THE LIFE OF NATIONS Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1973) *Selected excerpts: http://my.ilstu.edu/~jguegu/ALEKSANDRSOLZHENITSYN.pdf

Today, as never before, a Christian initiative is needed to counter the godless humanism that is destroying mankind. … We are too passive. … We do not carry our own religious will. … We seem to have forgotten that we have been entrusted with the great task of transforming the world. … We need new creative efforts, we need a new language. We must speak of what is beyond modernity, of what is eternally living and absolute in this world, of what is simultaneously both eternally old and eternally young. It must mean not only a breakthrough into eternity but the presence of eternity in our own time. … It must lead not to a reformation but to a transformation of Christian consciousness and life, and through it to a transformation of the world.

It is not an easy task. But, in the face of threat of war that might destroy all life on the Planet Earth, no task, no matter how hard, should be viewed as “unrealistic” or not worthy of trying. This is not just relevant but highly urgent for both the USA and Russia, the two leading nuclear powers, to hear for Solzhenitsyn’s call.

Margo Caulfield’s Letter to Russia

Let me conclude by pasting the letter that the people of Cavendish, Vermont, sent to the people of Russia, the letter that Natalya Solzhenitsyn shared with the audience in the Russian State Library conference on December 10, 2018.

To the People of Russia:

For 18 of the 20 years he was exiled from Russia, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and his family lived with us in Cavendish, Vermont. The Solzhenitsyns were then, as they are now, good neighbors, respected and valued members of our community.

While we are sad when residents choose to leave, we were glad that Solzhenitsyn was able to return to his “motherland,” as he predicted he would at our 1977 Cavendish Town Meeting. No matter how much our countryside may have reminded him of Russia, and allowed him the time to write, it would never compensate for the country he cared so deeply about.

Solzhenitsyn’s values were a good match for our Yankee way of life-hard work and the ability to speak freely and openly, yet also respectful of others and their privacy. While he learned from us how grass-roots democracy works, we in turn were reminded of the importance of providing sanctuary to those in need and the value of having courage and strong beliefs.

Upon his departure, Solzhenitsyn left the town not only autographed copies of his books, but more importantly, a homestead which allows his children to remain an integral and important part of our community. The lessons he instilled in his sons are shared with us as we work together to resolve the thorny issues of 21st-century life.

Every town needs a secret, such as the one we kept: “No directions to the Solzhenitsyn’s home,” as it united us for a common good. We still do not give out directions, but we do welcome visitors from around the world.

On this the 100th birthday of Solzhenitsyn, the people of Cavendish extend our best wishes to the people of his homeland.

On behalf of the people of Cavendish,

Margo Caulfield, Director, Cavendish Historical Society

Brendan McNamara, Cavendish Town Manager

As an act of People-to-People diplomacy, this letter has reaffirmed my faith in America which once gave me a refuge and hospitality but now appears to be less civil at home and more war-like abroad than it was when my Russia was in the grip of totalitarian Communism. Solzhenitsyn, more than anybody else, unites Russia and the USA in their urgent task and duty to secure a peaceful, free, fair, and harmonious global commonwealth in which every nation is a proud member.

Dr. Vladislav Krasnov (aka W George Krasnow), former professor and head of the Russian Department of the Monterey Institute of International Studies, who currently runs an Association of Americans for Friendship with Russia, RAGA (www.raga.org). He is the author of Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle of National Rebirth («Новая Россия: от коммунизма к национальному возрождению»)

Notes

[1] READING SOLZHENITSYN: AN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE. George Krasnow, PhD. Russian-American Goodwill Association (RAGA). Presentation: “If an artist imagines himself as a god…. A.I. Solzhenitsyn – on the role of a writer and art, and Russian national character in the imagination of the writer.”

https://www.northernvermont.edu/about/news-events/events/reading-solzhenitsyn-international-conference

[2] Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, Nobel Lecture given in 1974 for his 1970 award. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/literature/1970/solzhenitsyn/lecture/

[3] Vladislav Krasnov. Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky: A Study in the Polyphonic Novel , 1980. https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Dostoevsky-Study-Polyphonic-Novel/dp/0820304727

[4] “A World Split Apart” https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/alexandersolzhenitsynharvard.htm

[5] The Voice of America (VOA) reports about our Forum includes James Herold’s remarks https://www.golos-ameriki.ru/a/solzhenitsyn-100-anniversary/4582048.html

[6] Philosophers’ ships https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophers%27_ships

[7] Mikhail Bakhtin (1895-1975), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Bakhtin

[8] Pavel Licko, “Jedneho dna u Alexandra Isaevicha Soolzhenitsyna: Literarna tvorba a umelecke nazory,” Kulturny zhivot (Bratislava), March 31, 1967.

[9] Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics (Theory and History of Literature) by Mikhail Bakhtin. https://www.amazon.com/Problems-Dostoevskys-Poetics-History-Literature/dp/0816612285

[10] See the discussion of Bakhtin pp. 8-9 in Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky: A study in the polyphonic novel. 1980, By Vladislav. Krasnov,. https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Dostoevsky-study-polyphonic-novel/dp/

[11] Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle of National Rebirth, Boulder, CO, 1991. https://www.amazon.com/Russia-Beyond-Communism-Chronicle-CONTEMPORARY/dp/0813383617

[12] Marshall McLuhan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_medium_is_the_message

[13] Yevgeny Zamiatin (1884-1937), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yevgeny_Zamyatin

[14] On The Jewish Question. 1843. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/

[15] Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch01.htm

[16] Wladislaw Krasnow, Karl Marx as Frankenstein: Toward a Genealogy of Communism,” https://www.unz.com/print/ModernAge-1978q1-00072/ )

[17] Max Weber https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protestant_Ethic_and_the_Spirit_of_Capitalism ))

[18] Ronald Hingley, https://www.revolvy.com/page/Ronald-Hingley )

[19] The Russian Mind, a review https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/ronald-hingley/the-russian-mind/

[20] Krasnov’s article about Ronald Hingley’s The Russian Mind is available only in Russian.ВладиславКРАСНОВ, Русскийскладумаилизападноесостояниеумов? О книге Рональда Хингли «Русский склад ума». Опубликовано в журнале “Континент”, 1978, № 17 и потом снова Континент 2013, 152

Читать онлайн http://magazines.russ.ru/continent/2013/152/18k.html

[21] Wladislaw G. Krasnow, Richard Pipes’s Foreign Strategy: Anti-Soviet or Anti-Russian?” https://www.jstor.org/stable/i207433/ It was carried under my name Wladislaw G. Krasnow in The Russian Review, Vol. 38, No. 2 (Apr., 1979).Along with Pipes’s reply, it was later re-published in British “Encounter” magazine. Its Russian translation appeared in Russian expatriate magazine “Posev”, № 1, 1980.

[22] Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle of National Rebirth, Boulder, CO, 1991.

[23] Richard Grenier , Solzhenitsyn and Anti-Semitism.

https://www.nytimes.com/1985/11/13/books/solzhenitsyn-and-anti-semitism-a-new-debate.html 

[24] David Aikman and Solzhenitsyn, Time http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,958195,00.html

[25] Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle Of National Rebirth (C C R S SERIES ON CHANGE IN CONTEMPORARY SOVIET SOCIETY) 1st Edition By Vladislav Krasnov (Author), W. George Krasnow (Author)

[26] Letter to the Spviet Leaders https://www.amazon.com/Letter-leaders-Aleksandr-Isaevich-Solzhenit%CD%A1s%EF%B8%A1yn/dp/0060139137

[27] Mao-Tse-Tung, https://www.biography.com/people/mao-tse-tung-9398142

[28] Deng Xiaoping https://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/20/world/deng-xiaoping-a-political-wizard-who-put-china-on-the-capitalist-road.html

[29] Lech Wałęsa (born 1943) is a retired Polish politician and labour activist. He co-founded and headed Solidarity (Solidarność), the Soviet bloc’s first independent trade union, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1983, and served as President of Poland from 1990 to 1995. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lech_Wałęsa

[30] Václav Havel (1936 – 2011) was a Czech statesman, writer and former dissident, who served as the last President of Czechoslovakia from 1989 until the dissolution of Czechoslovakia in 1992 and then as the first President of the Czech Republic from 1993 to 2003. As a writer of Czech literature, he is known for his plays, essays, and memoirs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Václav_Havel

[31] Quoted as it appears in “Russia Beyond Communism”, p. 330.

[32] The nomenklatura (Russian: номенклату́ра Latin: nomenclatura) were a category of people within the Soviet Union and other Eastern Bloc countries who held various key administrative positions in the bureaucracy, running all spheres of those countries’ activity: government, industry, agriculture, education, etc., whose positions were granted only with approval by the communist party of each country or region. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomenklatura. The term was popularized in the West by the Soviet dissident Michael Voslenski, who in 1970 wrote a book titled Nomenklatura: The Soviet Ruling Class.

[33] The usual translation of the article is Rebuilding Russia. I prefer my translation, ‘How Can We Make Russia Livable’ because it is stylistically less authoritative and more inclusive as it invites the readers to a common effort aimed not at an ambitious, grandiose and remote goal but at assuring people’s needs.

[34] Алекса́ндр Севастья́нов (род. 11 апреля 1954 года, Москва) — российский политический деятель. Бывший сопредседатель Национально-державной партии России, лишённой регистрации в 2003 году[

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Севастьянов,_Александр_Никитич He blogs (in Russian) at http://sevastianov.ru/biografiya/index.html

[35] 2009-01-03 Александр Севастьянов , Солженицын: упущенный шанс? Он не сделал того, для чего был рождён. http://www.apn.ru/publications/article21208.htm

[36] See Egor Kholmogorov’s bio in Russian https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Холмогоров,_Егор_Станиславович

In English see ANATOLY KARLIN in Egor Kholmogorov: Russians in the 20th Century, Part I • MARCH 26, 2018 http://www.unz.com/akarlin/russians-in-20th-century-1/ See also his interview with Paul Robinson https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2017/11/18/interview-with-egor-kholmogorov

[37] Egor Kholmogorov : Alexander Solzhenitsyn – A Russian Prophet. ANATOLY KARLIN • APRIL 24, 2018

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/prophet-solzhenitsyn/

[38] Heinrich Böll (1917 – 1985) Germany’s foremost post-World War II writer was awarded the Georg Büchner Prize in 1967 and the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1972. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Böll

[39] Leroy Eldridge Cleaver (1935 –1998) was an American writer and political activist who became an early leader of the Black Panther Party. In 1968, he wrote Soul On Ice, a collection of essays that was praised by The New York Times Book Review as “brilliant and revealing”.In 1958, Cleaver was convicted of rape and assault and eventually served time. While in prison, he was given a copy of The Communist Manifesto. Cleaver was released on parole in 1966, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldridge_Cleaver

[40] Solzhenitsyn, the moral vision Hardcover – 1980. By Edward E Ericson https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Moral-Vision-Edward-Ericson/dp/0802835279#customerReviews In 1993 it was followed by Solzhenitsyn and the Modern World (Occasional Papers Book 2) Kindle Edition by Edward Ericson (Author), Russell Kirk (Introduction)

[41] CALVIN REMEMBERS ED ERICSON. May 02, 2017 | Lynn Rosendale

https://calvin.edu/news/archive/calvin-remembers-ed-ericson

[42] Review by Bradley P. Hayton https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Moral-Vision-Edward-Ericson/dp/0802835279#customerReviews

[43] Bradley P. Hayton https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Moral-Vision-Edward-Ericson/dp/0802835279#customerReviews

[44] Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: The Ascent from Ideology (20th Century Political Thinkers)

by Daniel J. Mahoney (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Aleksandr-Solzhenitsyn-Ideology-Political-Thinkers/dp/0742521133

[45] Robert Legvold’s review of Mahoney’s book https://www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/capsule-review/2002-01-01/aleksandr-solzhenitsyn-ascent-ideology

[46] Ignat Solzhenitsyn (born1972) is a Russian-American conductor and pianist. He is the conductor laureate of the Chamber Orchestra of Philadelphia and the principal guest conductor of the Moscow Symphony Orchestra. He is the son of Russian author Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignat_Solzhenitsyn

[47] Margo Caulfield, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: The Writer Who Changed History. February 2016

https://www.amazon.com/Aleksandr-Solzhenitsyn-Writer-Changed-History/dp/1530160855

[48] A Talk With Solzhenitsyn, The New York Times, May 11, 1980. By HILTON KRAMER https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/98/03/01/home/solz-interview.html?_r=3&oref=login&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

[49] Gleb Panfilov’s 2006 film series “The First Circle” (in Russian) https://tvkultura.ru/about/show/brand_id/3858/

[50] Quoted from Vladslav Krasnov, “Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky”, p. 121

https://www.amazon.com/Solzhenitsyn-Dostoevsky-Study-Polyphonic-Novel/dp/0820304727

[51] George Friedman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Friedman

[52] George Friedman, “Solzhenitsyn: Struggle for Russia’s Soul” on September 7, 2008. Remarkably I found his article on an Indian site http://www.vijayvaani.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?aid=14 Courtesy www.stratfor.com

[53] Jordan Bernt Peterson (born June 12, 1962) is a Canadian clinical psychologist and a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto. His main areas of study are in abnormal, social, and personality psychology, with a particular interest in the psychology of religious and ideological belief, and the improvement of personality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson See also his site https://jordanbpeterson.com/

[54] John Gretton “Jocko” Willink is an American podcaster, author, and retired United States Navy SEAL. He received the Silver Star and Bronze Star for his service in the Iraq War. Willink was commander of SEAL Team Three’s Task Unit Bruiser during the Battle of Ramadi. Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jocko_Willink

[55] Jocko Podcast 155 w/ Jordan Peterson: Jordan Peterson and Jocko VS. Evil. The Gulag

[56] The Gulag Archipelago. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. WITH A NEW FOREWORD BY JORDAN B. PETERSON

THE OFFICIALLY APPROVED ABRIDGEMENT OF THE GULAG ARCHIPELAGO VOLUMES I, II & III

https://www.penguin.co.uk/authors/1021095/aleksandr-solzhenitsyn.html

[57] Peterson’s 15 important books https://jordanbpeterson.com/books/book-list/

[58] Krasnov and Alexis talk about Alexander Solzhenitsyn: Truth Can and Will Destroy the New World Order and Satanism. By Jonas E. Alexis -July 14, 2016

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/07/14/alexander-solzhenitsyn-truth-can-and-will-destroy-the-new-world-order-and-satanism/

[59] Something truly amazing happened today. May 09, 2015

http://thesaker.is/something-truly-amazing-happened-today/

[60] Janine Wedel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janine_R._Wedel

[61] Wedel, J. R. Wedel, J. R. Collision and Collusion: The Strange Case of Western Aid to Eastern Europe

Palgrave, 2001. https://www.amazon.com/Collision-Collusion-Strange-Western-Eastern/dp/0312238282

[62] Johnson’s Russia List, http://russialist.org/ For my letter see W. George Krasnow: Open Letter on the Russian Crisis. (Revised version). http://www.russialist.org/archives/3094.html

[63] See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladislav_Krasnov See also his book Soviet Defectors: The KGB Wanted List (Hoover Institution Press Publication) https://www.amazon.com/Soviet-Defectors-Wanted-Institution-Publication/dp/0817982329

[64] Vladislav “George” Krasnov: Is the USA becoming monologic and totalitarian? November 25, 2017 Kevin Barrett

Text is here https://kevinbarrett.heresycentral.is/2017/11/vladislav-george-krasnov-is-the-usa-becoming-monologic-and-totalitarian/ Below is the video with Krasnov: Is the USA becoming monologic and totalitarian? Kevin Barrett, Published on Dec 12, 2017. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVX8pEONbzQ

[65] Chantal Delsol, «Soljenitsyne n’est pas réactionnaire, c’est un conservateur libéral»

http://www.lefigaro.fr/vox/societe/2018/11/18/31003-20181118ARTFIG00138-chantal-delsol-soljenitsyne-n-est-pas-reactionnaire-c-est-un-conservateur-liberal.php

[66] Richard Tempest, PhD. The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champlain. Presentation: “Solzhenitsyn contra Lenin”

https://www.northernvermont.edu/about/news-events/events/reading-solzhenitsyn-international-conference

[67] Munich speech of Vladimir Putin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_speech_of_Vladimir_Putin

[68] AaronB says: April 25, 2018 at 8:12 pm GMT • 200 Words @for-the-record

[69] RON UNZ • JULY 30, 2018, “American Pravda: The Nature of Anti-Semitism”.

http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-anti-semitism-a-century-ago/

[70] The Crucifixion of Russia: A new English translation of Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together

by Columbus Falco. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36499209-the-crucifixion-of-russia . It includes a review by Jan Peczkis.

[71] Yuri Slezkine is a Russian-born professor of Russian history and Director of the Institute of Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. He is best known as the author of the book The Jewish Century (2004) and The House of Government: A Saga of The Russian Revolution (2017) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Slezkine

[72] YuriSlezkine. “The Jewish Century” Princeton University Press (2004). https://press.princeton.edu/titles/7819.html

[73] Emperor Michael II in the Solzhenitsyn House – Author: Vladislav Krasnov. 7/16/2018

http://www.raga.org.prx.us.teleportyou.com/news/emperor-michael-ii-in-the-solzhenitsyn-house-author-vladislav-krasnov

[74] Francis George Steiner,(born 1929)is a French-born American literary critic, essayist, philosopher, novelist, and educator. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Steiner

[75] Tolstoy or Dostoevsky: An Essay in the Old Criticism, by George Steiner (Author) https://www.amazon.com/Tolstoy-Dostoevsky-Essay-Criticism-Second/dp/0300069170

[76] Александр Солженицын: взгляд из XXI века. 10 декабря в Доме Пашкова прошло торжественное открытие международной конференции «Александр Солженицын: взгляд из XXI века». https://www.rsl.ru/ru/events/afisha/conf/aleksandr-solzheniczyin-xxi

[77] REPENTANCE AND SELF-LIMITATION IN THE LIFE OF NATIONS Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1973) *Selected excerpts: http://my.ilstu.edu/~jguegu/ALEKSANDRSOLZHENITSYN.pdf

 
Hide 122 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. When I became a Christian in 1977, I was led by God’s Spirit to read all of Alexandr I. Solzhenitsyn’s works that were extant in English. Some others I discussed these with found The Gulag Archipelago tough going. My own thoughts were that if others had suffered these things,and that the writer had persevered in testifying to them, common humanity required that I at least read about them and not turn away.

    Folks often wondered why a young person in the west with neither personal experience of nor relatives under Soviet domination would become what they may have thought obsessed.

    The author above queries whether or not America and the former Soviet Union may have swapped roles. In one of his accounts Solzhenitsyn wrote that Beria reported to Stalin, while Stalin himself only reported to Satan. It has occurred to me that with the same power of the air that Mephistopheles told Faust kept him “merely well informed,” that whatever demons inhabited Russian environs to sustain the lusts they feed upon, many have lately found the climate in the West to be more congenial to their constitutions, and are therefore emigres. To quote Emerson, “things are in the saddle, and they ride mankind.”

    Therefore, I see God’s hand that a once-young north American should have been providentially taught, to eventually become a dissident, as part of the maturing of the human soul.

  2. RJJCDA says:

    On a political note, in his Nobel Lecture Solzhenitsyn clearly advocated a “diversity of nations,” but he considered the concept of “diversity within nations” to be absurd.

    For reasons of civilizational and biological survival, our species must practice demographic segmentation. The limits of positive diversity within a population probably is no more than a standard deviation, and judging by the east Asians, more likely half that.

    • Replies: @Fran Macadam
  3. utu says:

    Finally an intelligent and normal author on a Russian topic at UR. Why did it take that long? But watch out for the sovoc and butthurt Russian orcs coming from the environs of Sakers, Martyanovs, Shamirs and Karlins.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  4. Anonymous[100] • Disclaimer says:

    Krashnov.. has done an outstanding job with this article I particularly agree with his answer to the question: Have the roles of USA and the former Soviet Union swapped? but I would add the roles of the controlled societies has not changed.

    America is not the same as USA; they consist of two very different ideologies. The Lenin leadership of the JEWiSH takeover of Tsarist Russia resulted from a propaganda campaign with objection suppressed by Type II Media suppression..and Jewish led gangland Terrorism. The Russian people were not only not in control of, but were also un-aware that, their entire society had been locked into the Marx Jail. Today its the Nation of humans in American who are unaware of, the Jail the UsA has constructed around their society. Any rational study must separate the Oligarch personal and corporate controlled USA, and the Oligarchs that own it, from the Nation of Human-Americans locked up in Oligarch controlled, Jewish owned, USA.
    Rule by Totalitarian force expands when [pro-Marist] , globally invented intellectual .. (mostly Jewish orchestrated) propaganda.. and.. media establishments (mostly Jewish owned and mostly funded by tax deductible advertising revenues transfer funds from the human governed public to the Jewish owned Media.
    The transfer mechanism is monopoly endowed private corporate market power that extracts in its competition free pricing structure, sufficient advertising dollars to support the private media operating on the public networks. Jewish synchronized content is designed to protect the on-going shepherding of innocent societies [Khashoogi vs MBS] into the humanity butchering ideology of Marxism. Its as if the only way out of one of these fenced yards is through the butcher shop.

  5. Reading articles like this always make me wonder how it is possible that intellectuals so, in my opinion, overestimate the influence and importance of writers, such as here S.
    If I went today on the streets of my Dutch home town and ask say a 100 people if they’d ever heard of S, I would be surprised if more than five would answer yes.
    If one of these five would have heard of Gulags, or about bolsjewists, I’d be even more surprised.

    S book on jews in Russia, I just have and read the first part, caused, according to an article in our more or less leading newspaper NRC, ‘great irritation in the west’.
    Not with me, this article remained the only source for the asserted irritation.
    S knew quite well what he was writing, he postponed publication until he was with one foot in the grave.

    Yet, nowhere ever got the impression that the book had any impact in the Netherlands.
    Of course, as far as I know a Dutch translation does not exist.
    Never saw any mention of the book on Dutch tv.

    That Dutch jews did not and do not like the truth, who is surprised ?
    Jewish influence, control, of Dutch media is more than obvious to any interested person.
    That he wrote the truth, I’m convinced, with Mearsheimer and Walt on AIPAC the most extensively referenced book I ever read.

    What impact S had on Russians, I have no idea.
    Watch RT regularly, cannot remember S being mentioned there.

    • Replies: @lysias
  6. David says:

    I distinctly remember, though that doesn’t make it true, that when Solzhenitsyn was packing up to go home, he slagged Vermont youth as lazy and dull. I remember the literati around here were pretty upset. But I can’t find any of it on the ‘net. Anyone else remember what he said about Vermonters?

  7. @Fran Macadam

    ” that the writer had persevered in testifying to them, ”
    If I remember correctly the atomic bomb saved S.
    In all prisons and gulags anyone claiming to be a phycisist was released immediately, and brought to some research institute.
    This desperate search for me demonstrates how totaliatarian states waste talent, how freedom is necessary for becoming prosperous.
    This exactly is what Holland, the Dutch Republic, fought for.
    The present totalitarian movements in the west, censoring under the pretext of fake news, are ominous.

    • Replies: @Fran Macadam
  8. I tried to read this, but…gave up. Too long. I suspect the author, despite his Russian name, could be, at least, of German extraction.

    Because Germans are always unnecessarily wordy.

    Take Luther & his 95 theses, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninety-five_Theses

    Any normal Frenchman, Italian, Englishman, Dane, Spaniard, Slovak, …. would write 4-6 theses & that would be it. But a German couldn’t construct anything of normal length.

    Sorry Mr. Krasnov, I’m not into reading “Gulag Archipelago”, parts 4, 5, 6 …

  9. Durruti says:

    Eh!

    Entertaining article for the clinically bored.

    Much ado about nothing! [That’s original] I wrote that before Shakespeare – Haaaa!

    No mention of the Rothschilds, Zionism, Ethnic Cleansing of the Palestinians, Assassination of the Kennedys and the American Republic, or reruns of the Lawrence Welk Show.

    God Bless!

    Merry Christmas!

  10. The question is. Is Russia better now than it was in 1975? No. Much worse. Dying nation which is the shadow of former self. Nation that could be great and would have indeed buried USA by now but choked. Solzhenicin played his part in this tragedy being liar and traitor and confusor who confused lots of naive people of the Soviet generation who did not experience wonders of the Russia we lost. His pathetic attempts to look like Tolsoj cause only laughter. No wonder he was promoted first by Krushev, the man who was scared of stalin when he was,alive and was doing everything to smear him when he was dead. Here solzhenicin was a tool. A question would be, how did things go after they destroyed the very moral foundation that led USSR under stalin to success and unbelievable fits heights in Russian history. I believe outcomes speak louder that this crappy article lionizing enemy of the people and traitor solzhenicin.

  11. Giuseppe says:

    but he considered the concept of “diversity within nations” to be absurd.

    Then he must have considered Russia to be absurd, given its many nationalities. Somehow I think perhaps you have not quite got Solzhenitsyn’s thinking right, however.

    • Agree: Mikhail
  12. Anon[220] • Disclaimer says:

    Personally I find it hilarious this reading is going on in Vermont. It’s a state 97% or more white with the likes of Bernie Sanders and Peter Shumlin rising to the top of the political ranks.

    Peter Shumlin, the despicable jew and former governor, was found guilty of defrauding his mentally challenged neighbor out of a sizable portion of land. Shumlin knew the real challenges this man faced yet in his desire for More! More! he couldn’t resist his jewish ways. So he preyed on a legally defined idiot. Luckily townspeople came to his rescue. Shumlin was exposed and forced to give back the land.

    No need to write much about Bernie. We all know about him. However if anybody is aware of the latest news surrounding his wife, the other despicable half of this grotesque couple, please let us know. At last I know she was accused of lying about finances while serving as president of Champlain college. Lying so destructive the school couldn’t recover and was forced to close.

    Two jews of the type Solzhenitsyn warned us about. And more jews of the same vile character are living in the Green Mountain State. I think the mayor of Burlington is one of them. It used to be a great city but it’s become a place where minorities are worshipped and food stamps buys you produce at the farmers market. So many pathetic, white virtue signaling douchebags living in Burlington. Anyway, I’ll need to verify if the mayor is a jew or not.

    Vermont better be careful. It’s a beautiful state but if you keep electing jews and jew loving gentiles you’ll find your pretty place being overrun by all types of unimaginable happenings.

    Heed the words of Solzhenitsyn. Do your homework and never, ever vote for a jew. Don’t even do business with them.

    • Replies: @JLK
  13. Solzhenitsyns books revealed what the ungodly Zionist Bolsheviks/communists can do to a nation of they take over the government of a nation as in Russia where they had tens of millions murdered to further their satanic beliefs.

    Sadly these same Zionist Bolsheviks have taken over the government of the U.S. and it is just a matter of time before they open up the camps and slaughter houses here in America!

    Some will say it can not happen here, that remains to be seen, once they get our guns , the slaughter houses will be opened and every day the confiscation of our guns becomes closer and closer! The false flag shootings every year are the work of the Bolshevik Zionist controlled deep state for the exact purpose of gun control, we need to wake up before it is too late!

    • Replies: @Durruti
  14. @Sergey Krieger

    ” The question is. Is Russia better now than it was in 1975? No. Much worse. Dying nation which is the shadow of former self. ”
    I never was in Russia, but in 1965 I was in Tsjechoslovakia, now fallen apart.
    Anyhow, Prague at the time was a poor and sad city.
    Quite a difference with present Moscow, as I regularly see it on tv.
    What is dying in Russia, I wonder.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  15. Durruti says:
    @DESERT FOX

    Sadly these same Zionist Bolsheviks have taken over the government of the U.S. and it is just a matter of time before they open up the camps and slaughter houses here in America!

    The Zionist puppet Government of the United States operates, NOW, in 2018, the Largest Gulag on the planet. Upwards of 3 million prisoners inhabit America’s Gulag. Approximately half of all prisoners are imprisoned for drug/alcohol related non-violent crimes.

    America’s prison system is Draconian, mostly unnecessary, and forces unnatural sex and violence habits on the inmates, (and in the long run, on America’s population at large). The Prison Establishment is run for Profit, (as was, to a lesser degree, the Russian Gulag).

    No other nation approaches the American prisons – in numbers jailed, or proportion of population behind bars. I might add that the worst criminals, run the government, and its prison apparatus. But you already know this.

    Additionally: There are concentration camps in the US – already in existence, waiting to be filled, and Zionist Israeli teachers for our Police.

    Now that I have depressed the few of you who have been foolish enough to read this comment: – –

    Merry Christmas!

    God Bless!

    Restore the Republic!

    • Agree: DESERT FOX
  16. Durruti says:
    @Sergey Krieger

    If the Soviet Union, and its leaders were so good, how do you explain the give away of Russia in 1990?

    very moral foundation that led USSR under stalin to success and unbelievable fits heights in Russian history.

    How do you explain the decline from the “heights in Russian history?”

    I suggest Trotsky’s “The Revolution Betrayed” as a place to begin.

    https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=trotsky+the+revolution+betrayed&qpvt=trotsky+the+revolution+betrayed&FORM=IGRE

    One does not have to be a partisan of Trotsky to examine his critique of Stalin, and the Bolshevik Government. Surely, what happened in 1990, when the Marxist effort COLLAPSED, demands some blame be placed on the Soviet leaders (who agreed to the collapse).

    As part of the collapse, the Grandson of American Communist Party Leader Earl Browder, Bill Browder, enriched himself to hundreds of Million$ of Russian Property.

    https://ahtribune.com/politics/2285-bill-browder.html

    The “moral foundation” was quite missing from the Marxist experiment.

    Yes, Russia today is a different place, and we wish it, and America, and France, and Palestine, and all the world’s nations, a good present, and a happier future.

    Durruti

  17. Hail says: • Website

    I wrote this essay in 1976-1977, when the United States were swamped with thousands of Jewish immigrants fleeing from the USSR after a special deal between Brezhnev and Kissinger was made to allow Soviet Jews to emigrate “for family re-unification.” I saw this as a further irony of the Marxist dystopia transplanted in Russia. Because of his own Jewish background, was it not likely that Marx himself, had he lived in the country of his dream, would seek an exit visa? To Israel?

    What a tempting thought.

    If a Jewish state had existed in the mid 19th century, would Marx have simply emigrated there, rather than spend decades attempting to deconstruct the the White-Christian West from within?

  18. Che Guava says:

    This is a good article, and one that I will fully read tomorrow.

    A few points.

    Was not the turning point for Solzhetsin his unjust arrest (doubtless by an due to the Jewish political commisars whose power was yet to be curbed at that early stage of the war) and subsequent experiences?

    Sure, Kruschev allowing publication of a very good book was important, but it was not the turning point for Solzhenitsyn.

    I would appreciate replies on my next two, and closing points, but only from people with knowledge.

    Earlier today or late last night, I read that there was no humour in the USSR. The items below are not intended as comprehensive, I am sure there are many others, e.g. at worker’s clubs in their heyday after Stalin had (until his death) destroyed the jewish Bolsheviks, there must have many stand-up comics (it would be of interest to hear from people who know of it, maybe only club members doing a short and shy set).

    I was parly thinking of Krokodil, sure state-controlled, but from what I have seen, wryly funny at times.

    Circus clowns, too. Far more, I would guess, in everyday life,

    The more important offering, and the one on which I would really like to hear from others, but only those with interesting perspectives, the novel attributed to Mikhail Bulgakov.

    The Master and Margarita.

    For those who love dark humour, as I do, it is a masterpiece.

    However, the ms. was destroyed, and recreated by his former wife. It is an interesting question.

    • Replies: @lysias
  19. When are we going to be able to read an english translation of “200 Years Together”?

    I’m not talking about the numerous partial translations online of dubious quality, I want to purchase a published, bound copy which has been properly translated.

    • Replies: @lysias
    , @nickels
  20. lysias says:
    @jilles dykstra

    There’s a translation of 200 Years Together into German. I happen to possess a copy. Can’t Dutch people read German with ease?

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  21. @Sergey Krieger

    You would not have been scared of Stalin, now would you, Mr Krieger. How is that?

  22. lysias says:
    @Che Guava

    Solzhenitsyn was arrested in February 1945, not early in the war.

  23. lysias says:
    @I Wantmore

    What’s amazing is that they were able to stop publication not just in the U.S., but in all countries that publish books in English. I wonder why Russia doesn’t publish an English translation.

    • Replies: @M Edward
  24. Vermont is the right place to hold this conference. Solzhenitsyn’s relevance in Vermont is exactly what he deserves. The Moon would be even more appropriate, but the logistics would be harder.

    When I was very young, I read “One day in life of Ivan Denisovich” and was impressed. It is forgivable, as I never was in Stalin’s camps (I was born years after Stalin’s death) or in any Russian prison. Later I read Shalamov’s “Kolyma tales” and figured that Solzhenitsyn never was in those camps, either. Checking his biography (real one, not the fake he liked to advertise) I found that he spent his time exclusively in VIP camps, not where normal prisoners were held. This gave credibility to rumors that he actually was an NKVD (later KGB) informer posing as a political prisoner.

    Solzhenitsyn liked to tell people how eager he was to get to the front during USSR war with Nazi Germany. Many other Russian writers who actually fought at the front (Baklanov is one of those) rightly pointed out that there was nothing easier at the time: recruitment officers even allowed 17-year-olds to sign up, overlooking their age. Every soldier or officer already in the army was transferred to the front upon a simple request. Yet before his imprisonment Solzhenitsyn consistently moved farther and farther away from the real front where bullets and shells fly. One cannot help wondering why.

    Then I read his “Archipelago” and “August 1914” and understood why: he was a liar, there was very little truth in anything he ever said or wrote. All his “discoveries” were debunked by honest historians working in now open archives. All his numbers were made up, most of his stories were invented, or in some cases the truth was twisted beyond recognition.

    On top of that, he was a pompous ass. He clearly tried to emulate Tolstoy in his novels. The result was ridiculous. Russian literature has a lot of towering giants, and unless you are one of those, the comparison is unflattering. As Dostoyevsky rightly said in “Demons”, it is tough to be a middling talent in Russian literature. If Tolstoy was a literary elephant, Solzhenitsyn was a literary gnat at best.

    He may have been the greatest writer living in Vermont, but that’s the extent of his “greatness”.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    , @Anon
  25. nickels says:
    @I Wantmore

    I purchased a Russian copy of 200 Years to read, as I am slowly learning that language.
    However, as Russians know (and I did not), reading Солженицын is a bit like chewing lead-his writing is quite ponderous and unbeautiful.

    I’ve turned to Ivan Ilyin, Dostoevsky and others who write quite more beautifully, at least for learning.

    Agree, tho, it would be nice to have a palatable and complete English hard copy.

  26. Anonymous[113] • Disclaimer says:

    After trying to decipher “what is simultaneously both eternally old and eternally young” I decided I’d rather slam my fingers in a door again and again and again rather than read more Solzhenitsyn.

    • LOL: Bombercommand
  27. Mikhail says: • Website
    @utu

    George Krasnov is a politically incorrect, first rate intellectual and academic scholar. The late Vladimir Belaeff was another such source.

    Those relying too heavily on the establishment Johnson’s Russia List, don’t know George as well as the Kremlin Stooge , Awful Avalanche and some of the other JRL court appointed Russia friendly regulars, who aren’t always the best of sources.

    Regarding a matter raised in the above article, Richard Pipes did have a positive side from a pro-Russian/anti-Communist perspective, as noted in this piece:

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/25062018-remembering-richard-pipes-oped/

  28. Mikhail says: • Website
    @jilles dykstra

    ” The question is. Is Russia better now than it was in 1975? No. Much worse. Dying nation which is the shadow of former self. ”
    I never was in Russia, but in 1965 I was in Tsjechoslovakia, now fallen apart.
    Anyhow, Prague at the time was a poor and sad city.
    Quite a difference with present Moscow, as I regularly see it on tv.
    What is dying in Russia, I wonder.

    Moscow looks considerably more livelier than what it was in 1965.

  29. @lysias

    I’ve got the German translation of the first book.
    No, German and Dutch are quite different.
    Few Dutch speak German nowadays, compulsory German at gymnasia stopped around 1960

  30. @Sergey Krieger

    First, a disclaimer: I don’t live in Russia since 1991, I only visit it from time to time.

    I disagree. I was in Russia this September, spent several days in Moscow. It looks and feels much better than in Soviet times. Everything is renovated, the roads are good, decorations, particularly on pedestrian streets (we did not have those in the USSR) are impressively beautiful, eateries in any price range are everywhere. In terms of general impressiveness, only Rome can compare with Moscow; in terms of scale, only New York. All those Parises, Londons, Berlins, Madrids and the like don’t even come close. It was best expressed by one of the British fans who was there for the Mundial this year: “I expected to see a third-world city, but saw a capital of the world”.

    I visited two provincial cities (both regional capitals) and saw a lot of improvement over Soviet period. I drove in a rental car between them (there was no car rent in the USSR) and was impressed by the state of main roads. Side roads are worse, but still better than in Soviet period. One has to take into account the scale: many fields I drove by (all growing things) were greater than quite a few European countries. There are little hotels and eateries along main roads, something unheard of in the USSR. The food everywhere is not just much better than in the US (that would be too easy), but really good.

    I was in Tarhany (a place where Lermontov’s grandmother lived and where he grew up) and Boldino (a place where Pushkin spent several months and wrote quite a few of his famous poems). Both places were in excellent repair and full of Russian tourists. What’s more, all these people came there voluntarily, not in organized groups like in the USSR.

    Before that I visited Crimea in 2015 and also was impressed. Simferopol airport became huge and very efficient (now you fly in from Moscow to avoid Ukrainian madhouse). I rented a car with automatic transmission (unheard of in the USSR) and the company wanted to be paid in rubles, not US $. All main roads were being reconstructed or repaired, although side roads remained in their Ukrainian state. Police did not take bribes: I was stopped for driving with my headlights off (it turned out, you must have them on in Russia even during the day), and the policeman gave me a warning by didn’t even hint at a bribe. This is in sharp contrast to their Ukrainian colleagues: I used to visit my family in Lugansk by flying to Donetsk from Munich and then being driven in a car, so I know first-hand the awful state of Ukrainian roads and the appalling venality of Ukrainian police.

    Fact is, Russia shook off a lot of parasites, “brotherly” Soviet republics as well as “brotherly” socialist countries. It acquired new parasites, oligarchs, but apparently they don’t suck as much blood out of Russia as those previous leaches.

    So, overall my impression is that Russia is doing much better than it did in the old Soviet Union.

    • Replies: @Serge Krieger
  31. @AnonFromTN

    I wonder if your negative opionion of S is caused by the excellent book
    Alexander Solschenizyn, ´Die russisch- jüdische Geschichte 1795- 1916, >> Zweihundert Jahre zusammen <<´, Moskau 2001, München 2002
    Jewry dislikes the book, it seems.
    If they do, I can understand them.

    Nobody likes books that describe that his people were very disloyal, resisted assimilation during a hundred years, then grabbed power, murdered the tsarist family, plus god knows how many ordinary Russians.
    How tsarist Russia would have developed, had not the around 1800 Polish division concentrated most of the world's jews, some five million, in tsarist Russia, who knows.
    Count Witte (or Von Plehve, forgot), around 1900, said to Herzl 'that he would gladly drown five million jews in the Black Sea, but it was not possible.

    A bomb explosion at the Warsaw railway station in 1905 (?) killed either Witte or Von Plehve.

    As to S's Gulag book, long time ago that I read it, but there is no doubt that he was in a relatively good camp, with other scientists.
    They gave lectures to one another.
    Quite different camp than what
    Colin Thubron, ‘In Siberia’, Londen, 1999
    describes.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    , @Seraphim
  32. @jilles dykstra

    No, that’s not my reason. I simply detest frauds of all stripes, Jewish and Gentile alike, and that’s what S is. However, blaming Jews for everything (like some people here do) is the last refuge of the scoundrels: if you have no talents or smarts to distinguish you from your cleaning lady, that’s the easiest way to gain some popularity. Besides, S wrote his ostensibly anti-Jewish book after the Jews were purged from power by the Soviet regime, so in that regard he actually was in total agreement with Brezhnev and his court. Hardly something to be proud of. His pettishness suggests the root of his problem was that he coveted a lady, but she chose some Jewish guy instead. Looks like a man scorned isn’t any better than a woman scorned.

  33. JLK says:
    @Anon

    No need to write much about Bernie. We all know about him. However if anybody is aware of the latest news surrounding his wife, the other despicable half of this grotesque couple, please let us know. At last I know she was accused of lying about finances while serving as president of Champlain college. Lying so destructive the school couldn’t recover and was forced to close. Two jews of the type Solzhenitsyn warned us about.

    Sanders’ wife is Irish-American.

  34. Anon[247] • Disclaimer says:

    Reading is antisemitic.

  35. Anon[247] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnonFromTN

    Straw-man associations are not an argument, but are typical of Jewish arguments.

    No one does nor needs to blame Jews for “everything”.

    What we can absolutely blame and convict Jews on is more than enough to warrant everything suggested here to neutralize the problem. Luckily, Israel is available for habitation. Accept the generosity of its existence.

    This isn’t even a conversation anymore. This “dialogue” only represents the same age-old denials we’ve always heard while Jews continue to pour the gasoline and light the matches. At this point, its hard to even take it seriously as a time-buying exercise. Its more akin to pure insult. Your silence would be better for you.

  36. RJJCDA says:

    Sorry, phone rang while I was editing.

    I am old enough to remember a study decades ago of Philadelphia schools that when the minority population of students reached about 22-23%, violence between the majority and minority groups became relatively common. Apparently, when a minority reached that level they felt socially strong enough to challenge.

    If the human species were ALL mixed to create a virtual mono bio-genome, and a pandemic broke out, the species of man could be exterminated. There would be no outlying group genomes to survive.That is why demographic segmentation is good and necessary for our species. And the logic also applies to cultures/nations.

  37. Anon[383] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnonFromTN

    Then I read his “Archipelago” and “August 1914” and understood why: he was a liar, there was very little truth in anything he ever said or wrote. All his “discoveries” were debunked by honest historians working in now open archives. All his numbers were made up, most of his stories were invented, or in some cases the truth was twisted beyond recognition.

    Yes, (((honest historians))).

    Those are similar to the Jewish concept of the (((expert))), correct? Always asking “IGFTJ” or otherwise unwilling to state what is not good for the Jews due to fear of job loss?

    Stating what is good for the Jews being the de facto qualification of “honesty” and “expert” status, correct?

    Always magically appearing with late-protests, buoyed by the Jewish press, when something becomes obviously not good for the Jews?

    Its sounds like you are perfectly describing Elie Wiesel. Given that, Solzhenitsyn hardly matters in the final essential argument.

    Wiesel’s fraud remains exposed, circus-level ridiculous, and unanswered because there is no possibility of a valid apology for it.

    If Wiesel is a fraud, which he unequivocally is, then Solzhenitsyn is validated in the light of whatever is opposite to the massive and proven Jewish lie.

    That is if we were to assume that your Jewish propaganda, which is hostile to anything not good for the Jews, has any objective validity.

    If your critique is valid, then why doesn’t the Jewish publishing industry print 200 Years Together and let the world decide? Your censorship also damns your credibility. The truth does not fear the light.

    Jewish perspectives universally rely on censorship / darkness. Anti-Jewish perspectives universally survive in spite of the best censorship efforts. The former effort reflects a need to prevent knowledge to survive. The latter effort reflects the evergreen nature of truth.

  38. @Anon

    Sorry to disappoint, but in my book Israel is a disgusting entity in many ways. First, it’s a religion-based country, which is an abomination. Second, it recently proclaimed itself a tribe-based country, which is another abomination. Third, it’s an apartheid society. Fourth, in terms of aggressiveness it is second only to the US.

    Putting blame on the basis of nationality or tribe is just as much an abomination as Israeli policies. That’s exactly what they do. Personally, I see no difference between Jewish and Gentile billionaires, CEOs and CFOs or large corporations, including MIC, US politicians and media personalities serving these elites, or various nonentities “leading” vassal states. If you see that difference, please enlighten the readers of this site (BTW, run by a Jew who does not fit your narrative).

    • Replies: @Anon
  39. @AnonFromTN

    Solzhenitsyn does not blame Jews for everything. However, it is a religion based upon Dualism, which exists to self-divinize, which makes it a form of Satanism. It is perfectly natural that non-Satanists do not like Satanists. They just can’t help themselves. Christian charity cannot go that far. And even Satanists do not really like each other, but are simply forced together by circumstance. So, that like a dog that kills sheep, it is not good for anyone, not even for itself.
    Your arguments are subjective, which is the inevitable prison of the ego to which Dualism condemns its devotees. They are also completely dishonest. To say as you do, that Solzhenitsyn wanted a woman, and she wanted a Jew and that made him dislike Jews, is the voice of someone who finds himself in the bottomless pit. You can get out, but you would have to repudiate what you are, wouldn’t you? You detest frauds, do you?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  40. His Jewish problem

    I don’t think Solzhenitsyn was too critical- on the contrary, I’d say he was too soft on them. His chief weakness lies in seeing them as a monolithic community. Were he more nuanced, he would have noted that many Russian Jews are actually Russians of (partly) Jewish ancestry & not Jews anymore. Another group would consist of Jewish “Soviets”, a quasi-ideological group with no real national loyalties, except for a Bolshevik-style internationalism. The most important group would be real Jews, individuals possessing authentic Jewish culture & identity. And Solzhenitsyn was trekking through vast Russian Jewish encyclopedia, picking interesting, but frequently bizarre & insignificant anecdotes or percentages.

    In my opinion, Solzhenitsyn did not possess analytical mind, he wrote as a Christian essentialist who, although writing primarily on history, somehow forgot: individuals, peoples…change. Russians, Ukrainians, Letts, Jews in 1920. had been rather different groups from those in 1960. He is myopic on many themes: for instance, he’d like that Jews & Russians confess their respective sins, repent & achieve catharsis, even atonement with God. But- most of them are not believers, so what kind of advice is that ?

    I would repeat: Jews had been, especially earlier, but even until the end of USSR, more “foreign” than they were in central Europe- here is a quote that illustrates incisively what I mean: “And here is another very thoughtful testimonial (1975): “The efforts spent over the last hundred years by Jewish intellectuals to reincarnate themselves into the Russian national form were truly titanic. Yet it did not give them balance of mind; on the contrary, it rather made them to feel the bitterness of their bi-national existence more acutely.”

    And “they have an answer to the tragic question of Aleksandr Blok: `My Russia, my life, are we to drudge through life together?´ To that question, to which a Russian as a rule gives an unambiguous answer, a member of Russian-Jewish intelligentsia used to reply (sometimes after self-reflection): `No, not together. For the time being, yes, side by side, but not together´… A duty is no substitute for Motherland.”

    Speaking of Jews- I’ve re-read Solzhenitsyn’s THYT. Any new cognition ? Something I’ve overlooked ? Not quite, just a few accents:

    1) perhaps the strongest animus towards them comes from their over-representation in the 3rd echelon, so to speak, in the NKVD repression apparatus (mostly interrogators, not executors) & political police. That was the level of county or city (the highest politics & the 2nd layer were mostly covered by Gentiles). Many deracinated young Jews had fanatically identified with Millenarian Bolshevism & had been overzealous sectarians of a new merciless Utopia. Without religious constraints, seething for revenge against Czar, “rootless”, Russophone, urban, socially mobile – they were reliable props for the new totalitarian society,

    2) on creative & intellectual levels, they were not as prominent as I’d thought: they were ostentatiously everywhere, but their visibility was enhanced because before 1917. they’d been nowhere. Highly prominent in scientific and engineering fields, a few names in film & much less in literature (Babel’, Mandelshtam), Vertov & Eisenstein in film. Just, permanent literature was dominated by Russians: Leonov, Bulgakov, Blok, Akhmetova, Mayakovsky, Yesenin, Sholokhov, Olesha, Pasternak (a converted Christian), Platonov, Zamyatin, Tsvetaeva, ..

    3) their disillusionment with USSR came during Khrushchev era (the Doctors’ plot that darkened Stalin’s last year was glossed over) & national euphoria in 1967 Israel’s 6 days war. Their intermarriage rate was ca. 50% and there were 2.3 million of them during 1960s. It seems that apocalyptic fervor had sizzled & the drab realities of Soviet life, combined with a pro-Arab Soviet policy & American meddling produced first, mostly reluctant refuseniks. Then, during 1970s, their national re-awakening surprised everyone (including themselves) & Brezhnev was letting ~ 30,000 of them annually to move out. Funny, until Yom Kippur war in 1973., more than 95% of them went into Israel; after the war, enthusiasm was, eh, “curbed”- 5-10% to Israel, most of the rest to the Europe or the US. After the collapse of the USSR they, “pure” and mixed both, avalanched into Israel, and now there are less than 400,000 of them in Russia.

    As a coda, I would say: this is a book packed with too many details, but it gains its massive impact by the very voluminousness; there is always a sense that these people, Jews, are essential aliens who, most of them, would like to assimilate, but always one or another incident pops up that keeps Jewish identity alive (propaganda, Holocaust, Israel, Soviet foreign policy,..). One gets the impression they were fascinated more by the apocalyptic promise than by the real, historical country- something very different from Germany and Austria where, were it not for Hitler, they’d be swallowed by assimilation in Hoch Deutsche Kultur. But, since Russians are also a Messianist people- you can’t have two competing messiahs for the same cause. And during 1960s, it became evident that Communist Kingdom of Heaven was not in sight.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  41. @Anon

    Wow! Just wow! Poor people familiar with logic would be appalled. I don’t think these ravings deserve an answer, so I won’t bother.

    On the other hand, this might be a hasbara troll trying to show that anyone criticizing Holocaust narrative (which might be false and certainly is grossly overused by interested parties) is either a moron or stark staring mad. Then I must disappoint you, hasbara troll: I work in real science, so I expect evidence for everything, including the Holocaust story. I know already that a lot of claims, including but not limited to Solzhenitsyn’s writing, do not pass the smell test.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Anon
  42. @ploni almoni

    Could you explain what you were trying to say in plain English? Or, if it is based on some system of beliefs of an obscure sect, could you provide a link explaining this system?

    Also, when you say that my arguments are subjective, do you imply that yours are objective? That I am a subject, whereas you are an object? Or am I missing something?

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @Voltara
  43. @AnonFromTN

    Come on. Anyone thinks that were USSR stays intact everything would remain same? I came to Tashkent in 1976. By 1985 all the clay houses around our district were levelled and modern high rise apartment building were built. The whole subway system was built and so forth. On the other hand. Apartments in those buildings are not free, neither is education, healthcare, now retirement is under attack. I am not talking about appearances. Somehow with all these improvements demographic situation is not so good. I have not been in Moscow since 1996 and in Russia or anywhere in the former USSR, so I do not know how it looks. But I am talking about things beyond modern appearances. USSR was building and changing too.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  44. Solzhenitsyn was an apocalyptic prophet that the American public cares little about. The American public is semi-illiterate overall and historically and scientifically illiterate on most things. The USA world view is always seen through the eyes of the rogue terrorist state Israel by their control of all media including print, internet and television.

    As someone has already stated it would be difficult to find one person in a hundred who knew who Solzhenitsyn was let alone understand his writings. This falls right in line with the Communist’s willingness to control and to destroy all history and all things that they object to. It’s happening everyday in every place in the country. Add hundreds of millions of illegals who come here and hate our history and wish to destroy the Western mindset and realize these fucks have won. Only people who are patriotic and have a nationalistic appreciation of America could stop the fall and they have been beaten into the ground. The{{{ Media}}}spit on Solzhenitsyn’s grave because the Magic Jews are in control of everything and they know what trouble it would bring if people actually read what Solzhenitsyn wrote about the Jews and their destruction of the S.Union.

  45. @Serge Krieger

    I know for a fact that apartments in Moscow are relatively expensive (my two cousins and their families live there), but Moscow salaries allow people to pay for them and still have enough for a decent life. In provincial towns apartments cost 2-3 times less, but the salaries are also much lower. There still is some free healthcare in Russia: my wife broke her arm a couple of year ago in Penza, naturally, having no Russian insurance. Emergency doctor set the bones right (later Vanderbilt surgeon said that nothing else needs to be done) and the issue of pay was never raised. That’s in sharp contrast to the US, where even in the ER they ask first what insurance do you have and how will you pay whatever insurance does not cover, and only then ask what your problem is. Education is partially free: there are free slots for those who got good scores (and good entrance exam grades in places that were allowed to conduct them, like MSU), but the rest of the slots (about 50% in most places) are for those who pay. That recent attack on pensions is a disgrace, but they still will get pensions earlier after the reform than we in the US now.

    The main difference is that everything is not bad when you have a job, but life becomes much worse when you don’t. In the USSR everyone had a job, whereas now there is unemployment (hard to tell how much, as official figures are just as deceptive as in the US). What I am saying is that things changed in different direction, some got worse, some got better. That’s life: every coin has two sides.

    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
  46. @Bardon Kaldian

    You must speak or at least read Russian to know so many names in Russian literature. Your analysis of the Jewish problem of Solzh is fairly good, although incomplete. His pettishness suggests that he had some personal ax to grind.

    You are right that Jewish contribution to Russian culture was grossly overestimated, likely by the Jews. The greatest Russian writers (Bulgakov, Sholokhov) and poets (Mayakovsky, Esenin, Blok, Tsvetayeva) of the twentieth century were not Jewish. Among names worth mentioning only Mandelsham and Pasternak were ethnically Jewish.

    In my book, the best novel explaining Bolshevik revolution and what followed is Platonov’s Kotlovan (translated as “The foundation pit” into English, although I can’t imagine how one can adequately translate his prose). The other side was brilliantly covered by Bulgakov’s “Master and Margarita” (I think one can translate that, but with plentiful comments for the people unfamiliar with Russian literature and realities). It is hard to compare them, as both were geniuses, each in his own way. As a writer, Solzh was a pygmy compared to either of them or the rest of the people you named.

  47. @Anonymous

    By blaming the revolution on Jews, you are actually racially insulting whites (assuming whites are too stupid and lazy to pull off an audacious takeover without being directed by smarter, more enterprising Jews). Lenin wasn’t a Jew. He was a white urbanite who managed to persuade angry and hungry urban white soldiers, sailors, and factory workers to support him. The brave soldiers and determined sailors that took over St Petersburg and Moscow were also white gentiles. The Reds won the following civil war because they controlled the big cities and the lines of transport and communication.

    It’s the same story today in the West. Liberal white urbanites control the culture because they control the big cities, and are able to suppress the geographically scattered conservatives and nationalists. However, things are beginning to unravel. The Internet is undermining big city liberal media, white flight is concentrating, rather than scattering, social conservatives. And the newcomers from the third world are failing to generate sufficient tax revenue to support the crumbling infrastructure of the neoliberal FIRE cities.

    Jews do not, and have not played a decisive role in the economic and cultural war between urban and provincial whites. It would have still played out without them.

  48. @unpc downunder

    ” By blaming the revolution on Jews, you are actually racially insulting whites ”
    What the problem is of racially insulting whites by telling the truth, I cannot understand.
    Facts are facts.
    But if you knew anything about Russian society under the tsars you’d understand that only Russian jews could spread communism.
    The Russian aristocracy and civil servants did not do it, the other non jewish Russians were illiterate.
    Any jew was literate, many jewish organisations existed.

  49. @Anon

    ” Wiesel’s fraud remains exposed, circus-level ridiculous, and unanswered because there is no possibility of a valid apology for it. ”
    What fraud ?
    It is relatively recent that I read his first book
    Elie Wiesel, ‘La Nuit’, 1958, 2007
    I was flabbergasted how truthful he describes the Auschwitz camps with autonomous camp management.
    Not much difference with holocaust denier
    Paul Rassinier, ´Was ist Wahrheit ?, Die Juden und das Dritte Reich´, Leoni am Starnberger See, 7th printing, 1981 (Le véritable procès Eichmann ou les vainqueurs incorrigibles, 1963; The Real Eichmann Trial or the Incorrigible Victors. ISBN: 0911038485, 1983)

    • Replies: @Anon
  50. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnonFromTN

    On the other hand, this might be a hasbara troll

    I am a river to my people.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  51. @AnonFromTN

    The author of this essay, Krasnov, has covered so many topics it is impossible to address them all (or even a part of it). I fully agree with some of them & disagree with others.

    As for Solzhenitsyn, he is, in my opinion, a major 20th C non-modernist novelist in the classical realist tradition (in his early two novels) who spoiled his work with some instances of inverted Socialist realism. He is not a great writer, but is visibly above mediocrity. I don’t see that his treatment of Jews is petty or vindictive in any work, including THYT.

    Regarding his political works- they are chaotic & impossible to categorize. They are mixture of literary quasi-documentary, prophecy, philosophy of history & national, Jobean lamentatation. His central world-view, which is a variant of Christian historiosophy, is, I think, not even wrong. Here, in this aspect of his writing, he is a cartoonish epigone of major thinkers, from St. Augustine to Toynbee.

  52. Seraphim says:
    @jilles dykstra

    You may be sure that’s the only reason, but nobody would admit that. As nobody would be able to contradict him they revert to character assassination.

    • Replies: @utu
  53. annamaria says:
    @AnonFromTN

    “Or am I missing something?”

    You do. You are missing a respect for a remarkable person. (By extrapolation, it is logical to suggest that you are not fond of Bakhtin and Berdyaev as well).

    Also, you seem not to care about the ongoing ban on the important historical document created by A. I. Solzhenitsyn. The ban alone (a sign of disrespect for the First Amendment) should have made you pause and think about your “righteous” indignation towards Solzhenitsyn and his documentary that makes the worst kind of zionists livid.

    And it s not for nothing that the article reminds the readers about the fragility of mechanistically logical approach to human society.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @AnonFromTN
  54. utu says:
    @Seraphim

    It started with the Harvard speech but it turned out good for Solzhenitsyn because he could devote to work while in isolation in Vermont without being tempted by appearances in media and at universities. But obviously now the chief reason is Jews, Jews and Jews because he wrote 200YT.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  55. utu says:
    @annamaria

    You are wasting time with this Tennessee unreformed Sovok.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  56. @annamaria

    As one of Russian jokes puts it, I’d prefer cutlets separately and flies separately.

    First, translation of THYT. Personally, I am all for making it freely available to English speakers. After all, there are English translations of the “Protocols of the elders of Zion”, “Mein Kampf”, and many other real and fake texts some people like to cite against Jews. The fact that the translation is not available reflects badly on the publishing industry and those who control it. Unfortunately, there is widespread censorship in the US and the rest of self-appointed “free world”. The only effective antidote to censorship is Internet. You are welcome to translate THYT yourself, if you speak both languages, and post the translation on the web.

    Second, Jews in Russian history. Jews are blamed for the Bolshevik revolution and creation of the Soviet Union. It follows that, at least in the eyes of the people who blame Jews for this, the USSR was bad. Hence, whoever ruined it must be good. Yet in the same breath the same crowd blames Jews for the destruction of the USSR. It follows that the USSR was good, and whoever was instrumental in its creation should be praised. So, which is it? You can’t have it both ways.

    Third, “remarkable person”. Unlike many “experts” here, I lived for 33 years in the USSR. So, I have first-hand knowledge. Again, unlike many “experts” here, I am fluent in Russian (as well as Ukrainian and English, if you are curious). So, I read Solzh in the language he wrote, not in translation. I am also well acquainted with Russian literature, both prose and poetry, unlike those who know it only through translations. So, I can put Solzh into proper context. As a writer, he does not look good. He is not in the top ten, not even in the top 100. His pretentiousness actually puts him below top 500.

    Fourth, historic truth. Archives have now been open for many years, and many historians worked with them, studying real documents. There are lots of those documents: Soviet regime was as obsessively bureaucratic as Nazi regime in Germany. All of these historians (BTW, mostly Russians, with a sprinkling of Ukrainians, Tatars, etc.) find Solzh’s numbers totally wrong and most of Solzh’s “true” stories demonstrably untrue. I have no reason to believe him more than those historians. Actually, the fact that he consistently lied about his desire to get to the front, and that he spent his prison time exclusively in VIP camps further undermines his credibility. I never was in Stalin’s camps, but I find Shalamov’s description of them credible (it is supported by the published memoirs of other survivors who don’t happen to have Shalamov’s literary talent), whereas Solzh’s description is fake. Thus, based on available evidence I call him a liar.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    , @JLK
  57. @utu

    Name calling is a sure sign of the lack of substantive arguments. Thanks for the confession!

  58. @AnonFromTN

    Yet in the same breath the same crowd blames Jews for the destruction of the USSR

    Never saw such a blame, and cannot imagine how anyone could blame jews for the end o the USSR.
    The USSR collapsed because a centrally controlled economy is unable to produce and deliver the consumer goods the consumers wants.

  59. @jilles dykstra

    A lot of people in Russia now do that, arguing that many of the oligarchs are Jews. Personally, I don’t see why ethnically Russian, Tatar, German, Georgian, or Azeri oligarchs are any better than Jewish ones – all of them are thieves and murderers, regardless of nationality. In fact, Solzh also blamed Jews for the demise of the USSR.

    By the way, from my inside perspective the USSR collapsed not because of the faults of the centrally planned economy (which were numerous), but because the party elites wanted to steal more than the Soviet system allowed. And, lo and behold, after 1991 they did. As many Russians have realized later, people rewrite history for the purpose of rewriting property titles. Too late now, the train has already left the station.

  60. @AnonFromTN

    The other side was brilliantly covered by Bulgakov’s “Master and Margarita”

    1. Beg and White Guard above all. IMHO.
    2. Road to Calvary by Tolstoy.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  61. @jilles dykstra

    No, it collapsed because the top wanted to steal everything and join the west. It was destabilizing campaign led by the very top of the Soviet communist party leadership. Soviet people were not consumers like you. We were citizens.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  62. @AnonFromTN

    It takes time to cook the meat through. But the trend is unmistakable. I heard there was some noise from some olygarh about resinstituting 60 hours week. So, under this regime it is matter of when, not if when population will be reduced to slavish condition. I sense that we live in times, crushial times, when the whole system is going to blow. I mean the whole world system that we know. Note, but USSR was self sustainable society. None of current major countries are. Hence ballooning debt everywhere including China.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  63. @Andrei Martyanov

    I feel that Beg and White Guard described the process, whereas Master described the result (in a more nuanced way than “Heart of a Dog”). BTW, Ukies hate Bulgakov for White Guard. I guess, it’s too realistic for their comfort.

  64. @Sergey Krieger

    Much of Chinese debt is an accounting gimmick: sate-owned banks owe to the state.

    No doubt Russian oligarchs would much rather have slaves than free workers. Ditto for American and all other oligarchs. But their dreams won’t come true. If they persist, they would be hung on lampposts, like their predecessors in 1917. The lucky ones would simply run away, again, like in early twentieth century. That’s why many keep the bulk of their money abroad. They will come to a nasty surprise when their money is be stolen by Western thieves, like Ghaddafi billions.

    Also, due to chronic problems in agriculture the USSR imported a lot of grain. Now Russia became #1 grain exporter in the world. Not to mention scientific equipment that I know best: in basic biochemistry and cell biology we used almost exclusively imported equipment because nothing was produced domestically. This is still the case, as Russian state does not pay any attention to the biomedical science. Very myopic of them: Russia does not have workforce prepared to toil for a pittance, and does not have enough per capita natural resources, like Qatar. So, the only thing that can give the country any kind of decent future is science and high tech. This is also true for the US. The US elites are totally blind to that, just like their Russian fellow thieves.

    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
  65. @Sergey Krieger

    Sure.
    Therefore smuggling jeans to the other side of the Iron Curtain was so profitable.

  66. @jilles dykstra

    Jeans in the USSR were not just pants, but a status symbol, like Rolex in the West. In any society something that’s rare becomes a status symbol. Jeans were sold in late USSR for ~ 100 rubles, whereas normal pants (freely available) were anywhere between 5 and 15 rubles. Now I can buy blue jeans in the US for $15-25, whereas pants I used to pay 5-15 rubles for are more expensive than jeans. Chewing gum (that was not produced in the USSR) also sold for a lot more than it’s worth, again as a status symbol. That’s why smuggling was so profitable. So was bringing silver into the USSR: it was overpriced there (relative to gold) because is was rare. Many semi-precious and precious natural stones, fairly cheap in Russia because of their abundance, sell for many times their worth in the US. Simple supply and demand.

  67. @AnonFromTN

    My father da ndmother in law when visiting said that products, be it milk produce, sausages, vegetables are not as tasty or good quality as during Soviet times. I think Russia is importing a lot more now and producing a lot less than during Soviet times. Improvements in few spheres do not compensate for what was lost. I suspect with damaged school education it is matter of time when damage spreads to higher education. Yes, science is future. I still believe communist socialist society which is going for the stars and not profit is better for scientific progress.

    • Agree: Che Guava
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  68. @jilles dykstra

    Smuggling is always profitable. Is there no smuggling into western countries? I prefer Jean’s compared to what is smuggled into capitalistic countries. I got my first Jean’s Us pop in 1982 as gift for succesful finishing 8th grade. Never liked gum. I am not a cow. And never cared much about Jean’s or anything western. My biggest joy was reading and hanging with my friends.

  69. Che Guava says:
    @Anon

    I am a river to my people.

    Does that mean you are an exuberant public urinator?

    • Replies: @Anon
  70. Anon[364] • Disclaimer says:
    @Che Guava

    Is that what the Steele Dossier says?

  71. @Sergey Krieger

    In my recent experience (September 2018) food was really good in provincial cities, and fairly good in Moscow. I don’t mean better than in the US, that would be too easy, but really good. Better than in Spain and Italy, where I also was this year. Locals say that it used to be much worse when food was imported, but now it is mostly grown in Russia. In supermarkets people do avoid imports, looking for domestic food. You can buy lots of great stuff in supermarkets, even semga (for English speakers, this is cold smoked baby salmon), that used to be rare in the USSR, not to mention all sorts of meats and veggies. Looks like “sanctions” were a huge boon for Russian agriculture. Talk of unintended consequences.

    Best wine is imported, though, but Russia never was a wine country. The choice of wines and liquors in provincial cities is better than in Nashville. Don’t know about Moscow, did not have a chance to visit stores there. But good eateries in any price range are everywhere, including those with national food from former “brothers”.

    In Soviet times food was natural, but the best was in local markets, not in stores. Judging by the taste, it is natural now. Most packaged foods follow the European rule that if there are more than five ingredients, it is not edible (in contrast to the US packaged food, where the list of ingredients reads like a chemical catalogue).

    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
  72. AP says:
    @AnonFromTN

    The other side was brilliantly covered by Bulgakov’s “Master and Margarita”

    The best novel about Soviet society and the people it produced was Dog’s Heart. Donbas is an entire region populated by Sharikovs.

  73. Seraphim says:
    @utu

    It started when he started to talk about taboo inconvenient subjects, subject to censorship.
    When he revealed the role played by a Naftaly Frenkel, a Matvei Berman, and their ilk in the creation and management of the ‘Prison Industry’ that was the GULAG. When he said that those people did not love Russians.
    When he reminded the role played by an Alexander Parvus (Israel Lazarevich Gelfand) and his sponsors, the German-American Jewish bankers, in the International Revolution. When he pointed out that the Lenin-Trotsky gang was as murderous as Stalin (who, as ‘everybody’ knew, was a counterrevolutionary, a ‘fascist’ and secret anti-semite), if not more.
    Long before ‘200 years’, which actually doesn’t even goes far enough.
    And now you see ‘Putler’ praising Solzhenitsyn… The Antifa is up in arms.

  74. Anon[318] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnonFromTN

    Wow! Just wow! Poor people familiar with logic would be appalled. I don’t think these ravings deserve an answer, so I won’t bother.

    I work in real science, so I expect evidence for everything, including the Holocaust story. I know already that a lot of claims, including but not limited to Solzhenitsyn’s writing, do not pass the smell test.

    Strange. The avoidant and empty sum of your reply does not reflect the typical answer of someone who would either work in “real science” nor know how to converse in “logic” if compelled to do so at gunpoint.

    Do you work as a janitor in a lab? I’ll look forward to a single believable aspect of your future response that would indicate that you are trained to evaluate research and respond like someone trained to do so.

    “I won’t bother to respond” and “smell test” coupled with ad hominem attacks is closer to the vocabulary of aged unemployed caretakers of cats.

    My prior assertions stand.

  75. Anon[155] • Disclaimer says:
    @jilles dykstra

    How do you know how “truthful” he describes the camps unless you were there or were familiar with any critical accounting of how those camps operated? Did the book feel “truth-y” to you?

    The rest of your reply is barely intelligible mix of lack of punctuation, lack of formatting, and foreign language gibberish with no further context offered.

    What fraud ?

    Wiesel’s book is riddled with factual impossibility:

    http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/the-evidence/wiesels-writings/the-shadowy-origins-of-night-i/
    http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/the-evidence/wiesels-writings/the-shadowy-origins-of-night-ii/
    http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/the-evidence/wiesels-writings/the-shadowy-origins-of-night-iii/

    Elie Wiesel’s florid and fantastical fiction was the over-wrought work of your typical lying Holocaust huckster and rabidly ethno-nationalist Jewish person.

    Wiesel’s motivations satisfy the foremost driving question in Jewish morality: IIGFTJ?

    If it is, then no lie nor action is off limits.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  76. Anon[104] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnonFromTN

    Sorry to disappoint, but in my book Israel is a disgusting entity in many ways. First, it’s a religion-based country, which is an abomination. Second, it recently proclaimed itself a tribe-based country, which is another abomination. Third, it’s an apartheid society. Fourth, in terms of aggressiveness it is second only to the US.

    Putting blame on the basis of nationality or tribe is just as much an abomination as Israeli policies.

    You are politically and morally incoherent. I appreciate the update.

    (BTW, run by a Jew who does not fit your narrative).

    If Ron Unz associates himself with the Jewish belief system or national interests, in all of its documented splendor, then we might have something to talk about. If he does not, then my contention is that holding him accountable for it upon disavowal would be a racism too far. For one, that logic would have us holding millions of non-Jews accountable as well.

    There are plenty of people who are more or less racially equivalent to Jews that we do not hold to be accountable as Jews because they do not act as such. Armenians (and all non-Jewish people of the Armenoid type) first come to mind.

    Ron acting as a Jew would be monumentally incongruent with his writing. I’m giving him a strong benefit of the doubt unless otherwise corrected by him.

    Personally, I see no difference between Jewish and Gentile billionaires, CEOs and CFOs or large corporations, including MIC, US politicians and media personalities serving these elites, or various nonentities “leading” vassal states. If you see that difference, please enlighten the readers of this site

    Readers of this website do not need to be “enlightened” by me because it isn’t my views that unusual, but instead it is your lack of acknowledgement of the fairly recent article series here that more than answers your question. In light of that, it is you that seems to need to be enlightened.

    Jewish people are driven by an eschatological promise that they made to themselves for an eventual world in which Jews do not work but instead have dominion over a world in which the rest of it pays them a tax that supports them. In this world, they will own all of the land and most of the money. In this world, gentiles will have no day of rest. Read the “Old Testament” to be baseline informed and relevant in this conversation.

    A less pained description is that they want a world in which they act as judges and slave-masters over non-Jews. Their religion is that of the supremacist slaver.

    Eradication of national borders and armies is necessary to bring this goal into reality.

    This is not controversial. This is their explicit, mainstream belief system. They act as a group to bring this about, with an absolute deadline of about 250 years from now.

    That is how wealthy Jews differ from wealthy gentiles. You cannot successfully spin this to be otherwise.

  77. JLK says:
    @AnonFromTN

    First, translation of THYT. Personally, I am all for making it freely available to English speakers. After all, there are English translations of the “Protocols of the elders of Zion”, “Mein Kampf”, and many other real and fake texts some people like to cite against Jews. The fact that the translation is not available reflects badly on the publishing industry and those who control it.

    After thinking about this for a while, it dawned on me that this might have been an intelligence agency job rather than a private boycott.

    Solzhenitsyn’s usefulness to the CIA and MI6 pretty much ended with the collapse of the USSR, and THYT (2001) was diametrically opposed to the version of “history” they were about to spin in order to support the new scheme of geopolitics.

    Translations are on the web. I read it and didn’t think it was one-sided at all. Parts of it may have been inconvenient. For example, Solzhenitsyn gave examples how Ukrainians (our current allies) were eager to help Nazis round up and shoot Jews, while Byelorussians and Russians (the current enemies) for the most part protested and tried to protect them. Can’t have that. They also no doubt prefer to maintain the “Fiddler on the Roof” narrative and don’t want the Ukrainian/Solzhenitsyn version of shtetl history leaking back into the West.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  78. @JLK

    You may be right about the mechanism of this censorship and its motivation. CIA and MI6 serve the globalist elites well. Not to mention that elite Jews don’t give a hoot about ethnic Jews, just like elites of any nationality don’t give a hoot about their compatriots. They care only for themselves and their own wealth and power. Western elites don’t want any kind of truth to leak to the masses, as their narrative is usually false through and through.

    A lot of commenters here clamored for the English translation of THYT and bemoaned its absence. Please provide a link to it, let the people read what they want.

    • Replies: @JLK
  79. An excellent, informative article by Dr. Krasnov. It would be ideal if the Unz review included more of his articles.

  80. JLK says:
    @AnonFromTN

    A lot of commenters here clamored for the English translation of THYT and bemoaned its absence. Please provide a link to it, let the people read what they want.

    The one I read was in a blog format, with each chapter a separate post. I couldn’t relocate it, but here is another site (a little more awkward to read):

    http://www.renegadetribune.com/finally-a-complete-english-version-of-solzhenitsyns-200-years-together/

  81. Ivan says:
    @Sergey Krieger

    Obviously you don’t care about the moral points raised by Solzhenitsyn. But consider this: the main reason why Russia had a demographic collapse, was due to boredom, ennui and the prevalence of abortion during the Communist years. Abortion is a sacrament for all those opposed to Christianity in its transcendental form , though those who avail of it may not be aware of it themselves. So even in your terms; national might, reproductive success and the rest, Solzhenitsyn’s prescriptions would have made Russia a mightier nation.

  82. @Ivan

    the main reason why Russia had a demographic collapse, was due to boredom, ennui and the prevalence of abortion during the Communist years.

    What planet do you live you on? Here on Earth the population of the USSR “during Communist years” kept growing:
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12346298
    However, as soon a “democracy” of the 1990-s came, Russian population shrank dangerously, and then rebounded under Putin, when “democracy” was curtailed, and some of the most arrogant thieves ran away:
    https://tradingeconomics.com/russia/population
    Tell us more about your planet, I am curious.

  83. @AnonFromTN

    Talmudism: Foremost Satanism, Criminality

    However, blaming Jews for everything (like some people here do) is the last refuge of the scoundrels….

    Regarding Jews, it’s simply matter of sociology and grasping the philosophy of their filthy religion and Talmud, which Talmud is war against humanity, God, reason, truth, etc.–and hence, especially against Christianity, worship of TRUTH–Christ (= truth, Gosp. JOHN 14:6).

    Thus Christianity preaches a philosophy of necessary existence of OBJECTIVE reality, necessary basis, criterion for such TRUTH (= Christ). Christ and Christianity thus oppose Jews and Talmud, Jews foremost LIARS, sons of satan (Gosp. JOHN 8:44).

    As Christianity preaches OBJECTIVITY, Talmud preaches extreme SUBJECTIVISM, idea that reality is created by mentality/consciousness, making subject God, the creator–satanism, pure and simple. See Talmudical.blogspot.com, RevisionistReview.blogspot.com, and Come-and-hear.com for best expo.

    Jews then are FOREMOST satanists as they’re COLLECTIVISTIC subjectivists and satanists, most sublime group-thinkers, most dedicated, organized, and cohesive, thus Jews naturally dominating all the gentile subjectivists/satanists, even though Jews are vastly out-numbered. The satanists all put together then intimidate and dominate the rest of humanity.

    Thus Jews naturally and logically dominate all organized crime, including then random, un-organized criminals as among gentiles. Jews control and direct the central-banking (see Mises.org for expo; use their search engine) criminal enterprise, literally legalized counterfeiting, which is the topmost criminal activity, controlling all/any other such organized crime.

    Remove Jews (which seems to be necessary for survival of humanity) and u’ve cut proverbial “head” off the criminal snake.

    Sure there will always remain the isolated, un-organized, random criminals as among the goyim, but when speaking of the organized criminals it is absolutely correct, accurate, pertinent, and necessary to speak of the Jews–WHO WORSHIP criminality, murder, and satanism, making themselves God, etc.–Talmudism. Any gentile worshipping such criminality would simply become a Jew.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  84. @apollonian

    A few facts:

    1. Current Earth population is almost 7.7 billion (http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/)

    2. Christians constitute less than a third of world population (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_population_growth)

    3. Christianity appeared about 2,000 years ago. Thus, during most of recorded human history (and over millennia of unrecorded human history before that) Christianity did not exist.

    I’ll just stop here. Sapienti sat.

    • Replies: @Anon
  85. @Anon

    There is great thing about truth, it is consistent.
    My books on persecutions of jews in WWII are nearly forty.
    I never bothered to see how many websites on the subject I visited.
    Then there were internet discussions, on fora, in private.

    So, in my usual immodest opinion, there is not much about WWII persecutions I do not know.
    As I had contempt for Wiesel, even Finkelstein found him a despicable man, Wiesel’s book, his first, about his Auschwitz experiences, I just read recently.
    I was flabbergasted how his descriptions are similar to for example holocaust denier Rassinier.

    But yes, one must have some knowledge to see this, it is the same with
    Eugen Kogon, ‘Der SS-Staat, Das System der deutschen Konzentrationslager’, 1974, München
    Kogon also, it was not his intention, confirms that the autonomous camp management lived well in the camps.
    Kogon himself was part of this management, he was in a camp from 1938 until 1945.

  86. annamaria says:

    Bill Browder, a darling of the US Congress and a progeny of the American First Communist, is accused of criminal conspiracy:

    https://www.rt.com/russia/447158-browder-arrest-russia-criminal-network/

    Russian investigators stated that it was “highly likely” that Browder was the one, who actually ordered the killing of Magnitsky in 2009. There were grounds to believe that the ill-fated attorney and three other people, who were aware of fraudster’s activities and mysteriously died as the probe against him unfolded, were poisoned by a rare water-soluble compound of aluminum.

    Similar to Solzhenitsyn’ documentary “Two Hundred Years Together,” Nekrasov’ documentary “Magnitsky Act” presents too many inconvenient truths for the zionized western legislators to adhere to the First Amendment.

  87. Anon[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnonFromTN

    Sorry AnonFromTen, none of your points are self evident and its not for their innate wisdom. Its because of your lack of ability to make them combined with your lack of proficiency with logic and a healthy dash of bullshit.

    You consistently make poor points while attaching a logical fallacy to the end that intends to de facto invalidate any point or person that disagrees.

    Examples: you state that “I work in science” as an appeal to your supposed authority, while following up with fallacious rhetoric only worthy of a hyperbolic high school child and that a scientist would never be caught dead stating. Here, you rattle off some inane non-points in regard to Christianity and then state that your point is implied. I’ll eat a live chicken if you can relate one deeper theological aspect of Christianity that extends to the religions that preceeded it (thus attaching it to a historical continuity and proving that you have any idea of what you are talking about).

    You’re simply a bullshit artist, who relies on openly fallacious when not simply content-free points, who is trying to get along for as long as he can here before widely derided as not worth paying attention to. You’ve quickly reached that status.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  88. @Anon

    I’ll eat a live chicken if you can relate one deeper theological aspect of Christianity that extends to the religions that preceeded it

    1. Christians consider Jewish fairy tales a sacred book (Old Testament).
    2. Christians adopted Jewish creation myth and much more from that source.
    3. Moses, Abraham, Isaak, and Jacob were Jews.
    4. John the Baptist was a Jew.
    5. Christ was a Jew (at least Virgin Mary was a Jew), ostensibly predicted in Jewish fairy tales of Old Testament. Josef was also a Jew.
    6. All apostles were Jews.
    7. There are hundreds of branches, sub-branches, sects, and sub-sects in Christianity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_by_number_of_members).

    Bon Appétit!

    What’s more, all major religions are guilty of mass murder (except maybe Buddhism, if we exclude violent Tibetan branch and some others). I know very few religions that did not commit numerous crimes and therefore can claim moral high ground with straight face, all of them minor, like Bahá’í Faith.

    BTW, check your spellchecker, “preceded” in you post was spelled wrong.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  89. Seraphim says:
    @AnonFromTN

    No religion is more guilty of mass murder than the religion of Atheism.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  90. @Ivan

    You must be thankful that solzhenicin did not become general secretary or Russia president. Ne oskydeet zenlya rysskaya na balabolov. In 80s they actually came to power with lots of ideas. I remember on ancient Soviet Around the laughter show there was a joke. If one gets some ideas, get himself duck or herring and f**ck her brains out. It was morochit golovy but I cannot translate any better.

  91. @AnonFromTN

    That was in 2015-2016. We were planning to visit Russia next summer but seems we have to wait another year. Need to taste and check myself. They live in Chelyabinsk region. In Soviet times where I lived there was no semga in stores. Better produce was on the markets but all food in state stores was cheap. If we wanted something that was not in stores we went to Alaiskii or Farhasdkii markets in Tashkent, or Ozerka in dnepropetrovsk. I read lots of complaints in Russian blogs similar to what parents say. Basically sausages that have little meat in them or cheese milk produce with palm oil. I also wonder if everybody can afford what is high quality produce over there and is that availability caused by high prices and with Soviet level prices same thing of disappearance from stores would happen. I think there is more important issues than those. Europe is full of conveniences and nice food and yet it is dying. Russia is far from being out of the woods demographically. It is still in down trend. The question would be why if things are so shiny people fail or simply cannot afford mere 2 kids on average…

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  92. @Seraphim

    That’s debatable. Atheism is a relatively new phenomenon, whereas mass murder is as old as humanity, maybe even older.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  93. @Sergey Krieger

    Sure, nothing can be better than personal experience. Try it for yourself. BTW, food in Europe significantly deteriorated in the last 10-15 years. Say, we were in Spain recently, and the choice of fruits and veggies this year was pathetic, much worse than ~7 years ago when we were there the first time. In Italy, though, fruits and veggies were good. Maybe that’s because Italians flout stupid EU rules, whereas Spaniards follow them.

    I’ve heard about palm oil in cheese. The cheeses I tried in Russia (maybe two or three varieties) were good, but unremarkable. French and Italian cheeses are better, unless you like them bland, like Finnish cheeses. Smoked fish in a regular supermarket in Penza was amazing, even better than you can get in Nashville in a Russian store for ten times higher price (where all our Germans shop, too – we have the same ideas about bread and sausage, so don’t eat American crap).

    Kids in Russia are now a very expensive proposition, almost like in the US (in relative terms). People choose not to burden themselves unnecessarily. I found that Russian tradition of complaining remained intact from the Soviet times, so what they say is not necessarily quite true.

  94. @unpc downunder

    Lenin’s sister wrote a letter to Stalin saying it was time to let Lenin’s Jewishness be known. Stalin did not agree. The letter is in the archives. Have you ever heard of Crypto-Jews? Marranos? Farnkists? Conversos? Sure you have. I do not have to tell you. You know all too well.

    • Replies: @AP
  95. AP says:
    @ploni almoni

    Lenin had a single Jewish grandparent. If Lenin was a Jew then Barack and Michelle Obama’s kids are white.

  96. @jilles dykstra

    In Solzhenitsyn’s First Circle, those with scientific training were brought together to work on special projects the Stalin regime craved to implement, but they weren’t released. They were now consigned to the first level of the GULAG hell, still prisoner slaves.

    The project described was Stalin’s wet dream of mass electronic surveillance, never successfully implemented by a government over its own people, until the United States did it secretly against its own people.

  97. Seraphim says:
    @AnonFromTN

    Well, it did catch up in a remarkable short time. Besides, don’t atheists pretend that ‘atheism’ is the ‘natural’ state of ‘humankind’?

    • Replies: @AP
    , @AnonFromTN
  98. AP says:
    @Seraphim

    Atheism has had about the same mass murder rate as savage pre-agricultural tribal societies, much higher than Christian ones, so in a sense atheism has returned people to their “natural state.”

  99. @Seraphim

    I don’t know about atheists. Judging by human history, the “natural” state is the belief in various supernatural spirits inhabiting every tree, house, animal, etc. At least that state of affairs lasted millennia, whereas the first monotheistic faith (Jewish, in fact) emerged ~3,000 years ago, then gave birth to its variants, Christianity about 2,000 years ago and Islam about 1,300 years ago. Since then the original Abrahamic faith, as well as both of its offshoots separated into numerous warring branches and sects. Most undignified, if you ask me.

  100. @unpc downunder

    Lenin wasn’t a Jew.

    Fact check: False

  101. @Anon

    Straw-man associations are not an argument, but are typical of Jewish arguments.

    The way that he immediately dismisses/ skips over the facts of the case, in favor of feeble attempts at distraction, and random speculation about Solzhenitsyn’s motives, is indeed typical.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  102. @James Forrestal

    Standard strategy: if you can’t refute an argument, call it “Jewish”. Boring.

  103. @Fran Macadam

    Thank you, my friend, for being attentive. If you want to learn more, you might click on my articles below, especially the first one, providentially provided by the Ron Unz archive.
    Karl Marx as Frankenstein: Toward a Genealogy of Communism
    WLADISLAW KRASNOW (aka Vladislav Krasnov)
    https://www.unz.com/print/ModernAge-1978q1-00072/

    Richard Pipes’s Foreign Strategy: Anti-Soviet or Anti-Russian? By Wladislaw G. Krasnow
    Vol. 38, No. 2, Apr., 1979 of The Russian Review on JSTOR
    https://www.jstor.org/stable/i207433

    Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle Of National Rebirth/by Vladislav Krasnov, 1991/ https://www.amazon.com/Russia-Beyond-Communism-Chronicle-CONTEMPORARY/dp/0813383617

    Krasnov, Vladislav. “The resumption of history (after a Marxist detour).”
    Modern Age 1991, Fall, 34:1, 53-60
    http://www.mmisi.org/ma/34_01/krasnov.pdf
    Modern Age link
    http://www.isi.org/journals/archive/issue.aspx?id=78315289-2703-468e-ae69-cf84561aff84

    Also see the site http://www.raga.org or write to: [email protected] Happy Holidays!

  104. @Anonymous

    Thank you, Anonymous[100], for your generosity. However, since you misspelled my name, I will list a number of my articles on more or less same topic where my Russian name appears in different transcription but none under <>

    Remarkably, The Unz Review was provident enough to retrieve the first one (of 1978) for its archive
    Karl Marx as Frankenstein: Toward a Genealogy of Communism
    WLADISLAW KRASNOW (aka Vladislav Krasnov)
    https://www.unz.com/print/ModernAge-1978q1-00072/

    Richard Pipes’s Foreign Strategy: Anti-Soviet or Anti-Russian? By Wladislaw G. Krasnow
    Vol. 38, No. 2, Apr., 1979 of The Russian Review on JSTOR
    https://www.jstor.org/stable/i207433

    Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle Of National Rebirth/by Vladislav Krasnov, 1991/ https://www.amazon.com/Russia-Beyond-Communism-Chronicle-CONTEMPORARY/dp/0813383617
    The book was written before the collapse of the USSR which I anticipated. Russia would then have to fall back on its national (not necessarily “nationalist”) identity, including, but not limited, to Orthodox Christianity and its special stature between the East and the West. It consists of a polyphony of Soviet and emigre authors arguing that Russia must go “beyond Communism”. Toward the book’s end the role of Jews in the 1917 revolution is discussed with the use of Western sources.

    Krasnov, Vladislav. “The resumption of history (after a Marxist detour).”
    Modern Age 1991, Fall, 34:1, 53-60
    http://www.mmisi.org/ma/34_01/krasnov.pdf
    Modern Age link
    http://www.isi.org/journals/archive/issue.aspx?id=78315289-2703-468e-ae69-cf84561aff84

    I think my effort has been consistent over the years. In the article under review I may have footnoted the above items, but here you have them all together. Happy Holidays!

    Please take a look at http://www.raga.org and write for its Forum section or write to: [email protected]

  105. Ruprecht says:

    Speaking of Solzhenitsyn, this eulogy for Andre Glucksmann, by the New York Times of all papers, speaks about the role Solzhenitsyn played in finally turning Glucksmann against Marxism. A good read:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/12/world/europe/andre-glucksmann-french-philosopher-who-renounced-marxism-dies-at-78.html

    • Replies: @Vladislav Krasnov
  106. @Ruprecht

    Thank you, Ruprecht, for underscoring my point: Solzhenitsyn was the major intellectual force that undermined Communism inside the USSR and Soviet block, as well as enfeebled Communism’s intellectual fellow travelers in the West. Let me quote from the article you gave the link of:

    The turning point came with the publication of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s “The Gulag Archipelago,” a work that transformed him into an implacable enemy of the Soviet Union and all ideologies.
    In 1975, in “The Cook and the Cannibal,” Mr. Glucksmann subjected Marxism to a scalding critique. Two years later, he broadened his attack in his most influential work, “The Master Thinkers,” which drew a direct line from the philosophies of Marx, Hegel, Fichte and Nietzsche to the enormities of Nazism and Soviet Communism. It was they, he wrote in his conclusion, who “erected the mental apparatus which is indispensable for launching the grand final solutions of the 20th century.” …Their apostasy sent shock waves through French intellectual life, and onward to Moscow, which depended on the cachet afforded by Jean-Paul Sartre and other leftist philosophers.
    “It was André Glucksmann who dealt the decisive blow to Communism in France,” Mr. Bruckner told French radio on Tuesday.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/12/world/europe/andre-glucksmann-french-philosopher-who-renounced-marxism-dies-at-78.html

    From other sources I know that a poll of French Communist party members revealed (at around 1976) that the majority believed in Solzhenitsyn’s story about the GULAG.
    Solzhenitsyn was the liberator of the West from its illusions about Communism no less than Lech Walesa of Poland or Vaclav Havel of Czechoslovakia were.

    • Replies: @Ruprecht
    , @AnonFromTN
  107. Anon[309] • Disclaimer says:

    . It is merely given to the artist to sense more keenly than others the harmony of the world.

    Not much, still slightly surprised that the great Russian didn’t say “harmony and disharmony. Mirth, and ache.” 99 or, optimistically, 90, parts of ache for every one, or optimistically 10, of mirth.
    Sensitivity is the ability to feel mirth, and ache, yet if we reduce its definition to the ability to suffer that’s still a grossly complete definition.

    Intelligence gives further elaboration, and a material communicable form to sensitivity’s perceptions and elaboration of its perceptions.
    The intelligent-only detect no more than the logical structure, and superficial meaning, of artworks. They are by far the most common type, therefore critics, reviews, forum discussions on art, are surface- and technicality-bound due to this.

    That is amplified by the fact that reviews, forum discussions, critic essays, are socially-based… contexts and expressions: even the non-superficial and aware are careful to not trespass the narrow perimeter of what is superficial enough that it rise not anxiety, envy, or both in the public.

    The highly sensitive and normally intelligent catch the deeper meaning or art works, and the absence of one as well. These types have a sharp perception of sincerity, and the difference between pure art and interested opportunistic “art” (which the type above is very prone to miss altogether almkst by definition).
    They can neither make art themselves, nor catch the “how” the artwork they enjoyed was made and functions (technicality escapes them). They can’t much of put into learned words and concrete speak their perceptions, which are pre-verbal in nature.

    When very high intelligence and very high ensitivity meet within one mind, (which is very unnatural), we have a great critic, or a significant artist.

    The safest cue to an artist or artwork be genuine is their avoidance of the culture wars of their time and environment, their refusal to make a show of siding with the momentary culture wars winning “values” and untruths, or altogether indifference to said wars as well as the rewards bestowed upon “artists” who exhibit conformism.
    This is why, most often, the best art makers and thinkers rise to be known posthumously (if ever).
    This is why, just to make an example, a Jung can never be known as widely as a Freud, and is fated to, at the same time, be the target of more, and more unfair, criticisms and attacks.

    This is why a large swath of Solzhenitsyn’s work is glossed over — or defamed while avoiding a fair appraisal of it.
    However, the genuine artist, psychoanalyst, or philosopher doesn’t mind lack of recognition, or ill-intentioned unfair criticism; not that much anyway.

  108. Anon[309] • Disclaimer says:

    (Wonder where does the current “political correctness” come from?)

    Correctness always means obedience. The crux of the matter being, however, that the near totality of humans crave an authority to defer and obey to, as a result of the fact, I think, that we are a social species and social species’ top inclination isn’t exactly psychological inner-direction.
    They not only want to obey/defer/follow. They want that everyone else within their field of sight do the same: freedom and autonomy are disliked to the point that seeing them i. someone else is threatening to peace of mind.
    To conform, as a both transitive and intransitive verb.

    That is why you’ll never have anything like a 60-40 balance between, for instance, two worldviews or belief systems: whenever one reaches a 60-40 prevalence that will shortly have become a 90-10 one.
    There appeared a column in the Unz Review recently where 90-10 (cultural, psychological, political) scenarios where heralded as optimal, and their manifestation in the West hoped for.

    This is the meaning of “correctness” and its Greek name “orthodoxy”: I want to do what the majority does. I want to feel I am the best, and the rightest, and free from doubt: therefore I want said majority to be the totality. What isn’t aligned with what I want is bad and wrong.
    This is root human psychology, thus found everywhere (in many different forms).

    • Replies: @Anon
  109. Anon[309] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    “Troll” “controversial” “narcissist” are some of the most revealing terms of wide use to bad-mouth who falls in the 10% (sometimes less).

    “Consensus” amd “community” terms of current wide use to praise outer-directness (or the display of it: one can never be sure what is what, where there are social rewards and costs).

    For instance when a country doesn’t obey another one (the USA, commonly), you’ll learn from the media that the former country is challenging the “international consensus” or “international community”.

  110. Ruprecht says:
    @Vladislav Krasnov

    @Vladislav Krasnov

    “Solzhenitsyn was the liberator of the West from its illusions about Communism no less than Lech Walesa of Poland or Vaclav Havel of Czechoslovakia were.”

    These people may have, as you say, overturned Western intellectuals’ love for the Soviet Union (at least out loud), but Marxism is alive and well throughout the West. Liberal Arts faculties, from Berlin to Berkeley are becoming one-party states of far-left thought, with roots deeply mired in Marxism.

    I would prefer it were not so, but it is.

    • Replies: @Vladislav Krasnov
  111. @Vladislav Krasnov

    Thanks for blurting that out!

    The comparison of Solzh with Walesa and Havel is very revealing.

    Walesa was likely a secret service informer in “communist” times (https://www.dw.com/en/former-polish-president-walesa-did-help-secret-police-experts-say/a-37344633).

    Havel shamelessly profited by “restitution” (see https://www.counterpunch.org/2015/03/27/the-czech-republic-and-the-fine-art-of-collaboration/ ).

    Last, but not least: polls. There is a good joke about them:
    Sociological studies showed that an average length of a dick in Shitville is 15 cm, whereas in neighboring Dungville it is 25 cm. The first number was obtained by measurements, the second by polling.

    • Replies: @atlantis_dweller
  112. @AnonFromTN

    What do you mean by “dick”? A doodad, perhaps?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  113. @Ruprecht

    I tend to agree with Ruprecht that “Marxism is alive and well throughout the West. Liberal Arts faculties, from Berlin to Berkeley are becoming one-party states of far-left thought, with roots deeply mired in Marxism”. Perhaps, you exaggerate a bit to challenge people to think.

    Even before the collapse of the USSR in 1991, George Will, a very attentive and eloquent columnist at The Washington Post, quipped that there were more Marxists at Harvard alone than in the entire USSR. It was no doubt an exaggeration but he got his point. At that time I was writing “Russia Beyond Communism: A Chronicle of National Rebirth” and knew it was hard to find genuine Russian Intellectuals of true Marxist convictions who proposed a cogent argument for staying on the Communist path.

    Nonetheless, it would be wrong to conclude that Marx was buried in Russia along with the 73-years long Communist Utopia built in his name. While few people now want to return to Communism and President Putin has repeatedly denounced both Lenin and Stalin, Karl Marx, the chief progenitor of their wrong-headed ideology, remains untouched. Why? It is hard to know for, unlike the Nuremberg trials for the Nazis or the Truth and Reconciliation for the South African Apartheid government, there was no official accounting for the terrific crimes of Communism.

    Why again? I can only speculate that it has to do with the highly complex and contradictory psycho-intellectual makeup of Marx himself. He appears to be a self-hating Jews who appeals to proud Jewish “internationalist” intellectuals many of whom sustain the intellectual and media Establishment in both Russia and the West.

    As far as the USA is concerned, Ron Unz’s articles, especially, on the Racial discrimination at Harvard (http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-racial-discrimination-at-harvard/) may shed the light. I also touched upon this issue by suggesting that Marx should have been analysed, if not cured, on Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalytical couch. See “Karl Marx as Frankenstein” (https://www.unz.com/print/ModernAge-1978q1-00072/) and “Emperor Michael II in the Solzhenitsyn House” (http://www.raga.org.prx.us.teleportyou.com/news/emperor-michael-ii-in-the-solzhenitsyn-house-author-vladislav-krasnov).

    Read also John Cuddihy’s “Ordeal of Civility: Freud, Marx, Levi-Strauss, and the Jewish Struggle With Modernity”. It seems like the Jewish issue is neither purely Jewish nor Gentile, neither Semitic nor Anti-Semitic but existential. Thank you, Ruprecht, for steering a civilized debate. Happy New Year to you and all TUR followers!

    • Replies: @Voltara
  114. Richard B says:
    @Sergey Krieger

    Pathetic JIDF Troll looking for attention. The 60+million just a statistic. What a bore.

  115. Voltara says:
    @AnonFromTN

    It’s clear if you wish to hear. Or you could read the Gospels. It’s all about Jesus demonstrating how Jewish self-exaltation is an affront to spiritual development.

  116. Voltara says:
    @Vladislav Krasnov

    They may label themselves “Marxists” but in truth they are just garden variety elitists. The sort that afflict every human society. They produce nothing which can be valued by a market so they demand a system where they can (highly) value their own output. Marxism is one of the labels they apply to make it sound like their self interest has a philosophical basis

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Vladislav Krasnov Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?