The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJohn Derbyshire Archive
“Nations Are the Wealth of Mankind”—Alexander Solzhenitsyn. That Includes the Historic American Nation.
🔊 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
List of Bookmarks

U.S. immigration policy is nested in the broader issue of our time: the struggle of settled Western nations with their distinctive national characters and familiar—familiar, I mean, to the citizens who comprise them—their familiar styles of managing their public affairs, the struggle of these nations to keep their nationhood intact against the ambitions ofglobalizing elites.

As it happens, there is a keynote quotation on precisely this topic that is particularly apt right now. Here at VDARE.com we have used this quotation, or bits of it, rather often, as it accords precisely with our own inclinations and our mission here. Cousin Peter, my boss here at VDARE.com, used it to rhetorical effect in his 1995 book Alien Nation. I used it in my planned 2016 address to Williams College, the address that college President Adam Falk [Email him] judged so dangerously inflammatory he banned me from his campus before I could deliver it.

The quotation I am talking about comes of course from Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Nobel Lecture, the lecture he sent to the Swedish Academy on accepting the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1970.

Since we have gotten such mileage out of the quotation already I might, under other circumstances, have forborne bringing it out yet again. It is, though, especially apt now: Tuesday, December 11th, was the centenary of Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s birth.

Here’s the quotation:

In recent times it has been fashionable to talk of the levelling of nations, of the disappearance of different races in the melting-pot of contemporary civilization. I do not agree with this opinion, but its discussion remains another question. Here it is merely fitting to say that the disappearance of nations would have impoverished us no less than if all men had become alike, with one personality and one face. Nations are the wealth of mankind, its collective personalities; the very least of them wears its own special colours and bears within itself a special facet of divine intention.

Now I see those words again, in fact, I am absolutely not going to apologize for bringing them forward for the umpteenth time at VDARE.com. Instead, I’m going to propose that schoolchildren all over the Western world be made to memorize them, as America kids are taught to memorize the Pledge of Allegiance…assuming they still are. If they aren’t, I’d rather not know.

Because one of those nations is what we here at VDARE.com call the Historic American Nation—America as it had evolvedbefore the disaster of the 1965 Immigration Act and the simultaneous abandonment of enforcement of laws against illegal immigration on our southern border.

ORDER IT NOW

As I’ve mentioned before, I binge-read my way through Soviet dissident literature forty years ago. Solzhenitsyn was of course on the list; but with all respect for his suffering and his achievement, and with all due thanks for that precious quotation, I can’t truthfully say I ever really warmed to him as a writer. His style seemed to me heavy and clumsy. That could be the translator’s fault, though; I was reading him in English. If any fluent readers of Russian are listening, I’ll be glad to air your opinion in a future podcast.

Which Soviet dissident writers did I warm to? Well, Bukovsky was most fun to read, as a person who I thought—the way you do when you engage with an author’s work—I would most enjoy meeting over dinner and drinks.

From a literary point of view, though—I mean, if I were being asked to place a money bet on who would still be read a hundred years from now—I liked Varlam Shalamov.

That comes with a warning: Shalamov is not fun to read. He is well over on the grim side of Soviet dissident literature, together with Solzhenitsyn’s early long poem Prussian Nights. These are works that should be read only by daylight.

And having just attended the Christmas party of the conservative high-culture magazine The New Criterion, I’m glad of the opportunity to put in a plug for that fine periodical, now in its 37th year of publication.

In the Books section of the November issue of The New Criterion, Andrew Stuttaford has a portmanteau review of four works of fiction, one of them a new translation of Shalamov’s Kolyma Stories.[Three dystopias & a disappearance,November 2018]

Stuttaford gives a full and fair short account of Shalamov and his work. He says, correctly, that there is almost nothing lyrical in Shalamov’s work. There is a little, though. I can still remember, forty years after reading it, a very lyrical description of the Siberian landscape, all the more striking for coming amid so much bleakness.

All honor and respect to these survivors of one of the most horrible despotisms the modern world has given us—one for which progressives and globalists are still cheering.

And before leaving this topic, I can’t resist asking the question Steve Sailer always asks when the name of Solzhenitsyn comes up: When will some publisher give us a full translation of his last book Two Hundred Years Together, which was a history of the relations between Russian Jews and Gentiles under both Tsarism and Communism?

Why has no publisher so far done so?

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Immigration, Solzhenitsyn 
Hide 26 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    Jews seem to believe this of the Jewish nation. They went to all the trouble of creating Israel.
    But Jews don’t seem to feel this way about goy nations. They exist merely to be turned into commercial centers and entertainment venues. And everyone is just an expendable ‘consumer’ with no deep identity.

    • Replies: @Patricus
  2. Hail says: • Website

    When will some publisher give us a full translation of his last book Two Hundred Years Together, which was a history of the relations between Russian Jews and Gentiles under both Tsarism and Communism?

    Why has no publisher so far done so?

    F. Roger Devlin has helpfully produced a pretty comprehensive, 18,000-word review of the 2002 French translation. It originally appeared in the Occidental Quarterly, Vol. 8, No. 3 (Fall 2008) and is now online in full. A couple of brief excerpts:

    – Vol. I: Solzhenitsyn on the Jews and Tsarist Russia

    [MORE]

    Deux siècles ensemble by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
    Volume 1: Juifs et Russes avant la révolution
    Paris: Fayard, 2002

    (Book Review by F. Roget Devlin, 2008)

    It appears now that the English-speaking world will have to wait some time yet for a translation of Two Hundred Years Together, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s two volume study of Russian-Jewish relations. Translations into both French and German have been available for five years, and Italian, Hungarian, Greek, Czech, and Latvian editions are in the works. But no publisher in America or Britain seems to want to bother with a book which has clearly generated an unusual degree of interest. Working from the French version, I will try to give readers of The Occidental Quarterly some idea what the book is and isn’t, of what it attempts to do and what it accomplishes.

    [Two Hundred Years Together] is merely an overview for a general audience of a vast historical panorama, and not the minutely researched life’s work of a professional historian. Virtually all the information it contains has been available elsewhere to any reader of Russian determined to find it. It is thus inaccurate to speak, as some have done, of Solzhenitsyn’s “revealing” the role of Jews in the Revolution.

    Two Hundred Years originated, in fact, as a kind of by-product of The Red Wheel, the author’s series of historical novels on late Imperial Russia and the Revolution. Solzhenitsyn’s wife Natalia Dmitrievna, in an interview for National Public Radio, explained:

    He didn’t intend to write this book at all. He was writing The Red Wheel. But anyone who is studying the history of the Russian Revolution will inevitably get an enormous amount of material about the role of the Jews, because it was great. Aleksandr Isaevich realized that if he put this material into The Red Wheel he would create the impression that he was blaming the Jews for the Russian Revolution, which he does not.”

    – Vol. II: Solzhenitsyn on the Jews and Soviet Russia

    Between 1948 and 1953, Jews were kicked out of the higher circles of production, administration, cultural and ideological activities en masse; access to a whole series of higher education establishments was limited or simply refused them. Responsible posts in the KGB, the organs of the Party and of the Army were closed to them. (p. 437)

    By the fall of 1952, Stalin was acting against the Jews openly. A show trial of an innocent group of Jewish doctors was inaugurated with great fanfare in January 1953. On February 9th, a bomb exploded outside the Soviet embassy in Tel-Aviv and the Soviet Union broke off relations with Israel.

    Then, suddenly, it was all over. Stalin suffered a debilitating stroke at the end of February and died on March 6, 1953.

    Solzhenitsyn devotes the last five chapters, totaling one hundred twenty pages, to the twenty years which followed Stalin’s death. The principal circumstance of interest during this period is the gradual withering of Jewish support for the government.

    At the end of the 1960s [says Solzhenitsyn] one observation which strengthened me in the conviction that the jig was up for the Communist regime was to what an extent the Jews had turned their backs on it. And without them, Bolshevik fanaticism—which was showing its age and ceasing even to be a fanaticism—was seized by a very Russian nonchalance and a peculiarly Brezhnevian inertia.” (p. 475)

  3. utu says:

    “I can’t truthfully say I ever really warmed to him as a writer. “

    It must have been because the cuck genius of JD anticipated Solzhenitsyn anti-Semitic outburst 40 years later.

  4. What about Bulgakov’s “Heart of a Dog.”

    https://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=heart+of+a+dog+by+mikhail+bulgakov&tag=googhydr-20&index=aps&hvadid=177104139348&hvpos=1t1&hvnetw=g&hvrand=7838894842887565805&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=t&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9013114&hvtargid=kwd-1430444811&ref=pd_sl_8qcp3au2we_b

    I indulged in a Russia literature-in-translation feast, too, loving it, but likewise wondering what I missed in terms of craft by reading it in translation, even when reading Russian classics that were translated by great scholars.

    After studying visual art—along with reading lots of criticism, including the modernist critics—I realized that I had a formalist view of art. Even though I respected traditional Western art more in some ways, mostly due to admiring the added technical difficulty of juggling composition, color, tone and other formal elements while also creating convincing, illusionistic form, the formalists were right: narrative content is the last thing on the minds of the visual-art masters.

    They cannot acheive that level of formal command while trying to deliver a political, philosophical or religious sermon to the viewer. One way you come to that view is through the humbling-cubed attempt to actually do high-level artwork. Many arrogant people contributing to the trashing of the carefully-crafted, high-Western culture might benefit from that humbling experience, including many haughty young people who are rock-solid certain that everything created by the dead, White, mostly male, cultural icons of the West is nothing but a deluded pile of unsophisticated, racist / sexist rants.

    One of the reasons for the success of those pursuing a genocide on predominately white, predominately Christian cultures, if not on the people themselves at this point, might be the debunking cult that arose among the 20th century intelligentsia. The debunkers are hell-bent on removing hierarchy in the arts and letters, wanting to equate pop culture with high culture in many cases and mass production over craft in the applied arts in some cases.

    It is so much easier to avoid a humbling experience when taking a verbal hatchet to a work of fine art than to create one, experiencing all the failure in that pursuit, and, in truth, some types of fine art are harder than other types. It is harder to get anywhere near the vicinity of a true fine-art creation in some mediums and some styles.

    The technical difficulty is unequal, and other things that you need to master, simultaneously, are unequal in diffulty, too.

    The hierarchy is there for a reason.

    It is also easier to mock and ridicule the fine, traditional, applied arts, pelting them with $2-to-$5-dollar words, depending on whether you went to public or private college. It pumps up a budding, intellectual ego, even though the debunking often springs from trendiness and time-centered group-think.

    Some people try to blame the Jews for everything bad that happens in Western countries, including this debunking-culture-on-steroids in the arts, even though Western Jews are one of the primary minoritiy groups that helped to build Western culture, making the high-Western cultural oeuvre much stronger, not just the debunking-cult wing, either. They are especially strong in writing. Where would American literature be without them?

    Part of the problem is that White Christians cannot express admiration for the highest achievements in Western culture anymore without falling all over themselves, tryimg to be egalitarian, whether by trashing Western fine art via debunking it or by glorifying the lesser creations of minority groups. A few individuals in all of the minority groups have made major contributions to the finest parts of Western culture, but since white Christians were the majority for so long, more white Christians put the true fine art on the table. And more of them are male, because in the past, women did the work of raising their own kids, rather than pushing that work off on $9-per-hour NannyCam-surveilled babysitters, $10-per-hour daycare workers and their elderly parents.

    Would the Japanese feel compelled to sing the praises of lesser, white-Christain, original printmakers and women, working in the Japanese style, but producing minor work? Would they feel compelled to even put purely commercial works on a pedestal, the stuff that mostly will not stand the test of time? Would they downplay the best products of their visual culture just to prove that the dead, Japanese-privileged males who crafted most of their traditional fine art were racist?

    Are they subject to nutty Western influence?

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Emblematic
    , @peterike
    , @Anon
  5. utu says:
    @Endgame Napoleon

    Where would American literature be without them?. – It would be fine. Nobody would even notice.

  6. Stick says:

    Simple – Jews don’t like to be reminded how their cattle got away.

  7. @Endgame Napoleon

    “… even though Western Jews are one of the primary minoritiy groups that helped to build Western culture.”

    You made me chortle.

  8. peterike says:
    @Endgame Napoleon

    though Western Jews are one of the primary minoritiy groups that helped to build Western culture, making the high-Western cultural oeuvre much stronger, not just the debunking-cult wing, either. They are especially strong in writing. Where would American literature be without them?

    In fiction and poetry, you wouldn’t even know they were gone. There is no first rate Jewish American writer in either poetry or fiction (including the vastly over rated Philip Roth). The American canon is vast and largely un-read for the most part, and every time someone like Philip Roth gets assigned in a college classroom, it means a better writer like John O’Hara is not getting assigned.

    Jews would be little missed in art. What, Rothko? Ben Shahn? So what. And in architecture their absence would be of vast benefit to the nation, as the cities of America are strewn with ghastly, (deliberately) hostile Jewish creations.

    Where Jews are exceedingly prominent, however, is in criticism, and it from this perch that they have done untold harm to our culture by crafting excuses for the worst garbage. Let’s not even discuss popular culture, where Jews have been an absolute corrosive.

    Their main area of genuine achievement is in medicine and science. There the loses would be felt.

    • Agree: Bill Jones
    • Replies: @Jeffrey S.
  9. Derbyshire, you’re still scribbling your illogical, hypocritical nonsense. You babble about Western nations, yet you have done nothing to contribute to their preservation. You have only contributed destruction and degeneracy to the West, i.e., yourself and your Chinese family.

    You have to move to your yellowtopia.

    • Troll: Hail, Cloudbuster
  10. Patricus says:
    @Anon

    When you write “Jews seem to believe this of the Jewish nation”. , or “Jews don’t seem to feel this way about goy nations”., are you suggesting that all Jews think the same way on any subject? Those I have met vary quite a lot. Some are Zionists, anti-Zionist, religious, atheist. They might be more varied in their outlooks than most other people. Some may be crass, others pious. In half a dozen decades no “Jewish block” has shown itself to me. I also question the Jewish control of all things. Who squanders their time trying to figure out what Jews want or think? Ultimately they are a tiny minority. No offense intended toward Jews.

    Do yourself a favor and forget about Jews. You won’t even notice the difference. They are insignificant like so many other trace groups.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Hail
    , @apollonian
  11. anon[355] • Disclaimer says:
    @Patricus

    In fact Jews have played a key role in the demographic upheavals besieging the west.

  12. Hail says: • Website
    @Patricus

    They are insignificant

    If only you’d been around to explain this to Mr. Solzhenitsyn in time.

    He could have saved much effort and just condensed Two Hundred Years Together into one sentence: “Dear Readers, I know some crazies out there say Jews have had this or that influence, but in fact they are insignificant; xoxox, Yours, Solzhy.”

    • LOL: dvorak
    • Replies: @apollonian
    , @Patricus
  13. @Hail

    What?–so do u say satanism is insignificant? Jews are the leading satanists, sucker–get a clue. See Talmudical.BlogSpot.com, RevisionistReview.BlogSpot.com, and Come-and-hear.com

  14. @Patricus

    Good grief but u’re a Jew-friendly flack for them, aren’t u?–aside fm just an outright liar–u’re probably Jew urself. Isn’t a Jew a Talmudist and/or related thereto, hence necessarily sympathetic to such Talmud? See Talmudical.BlogSpot.com, RevisionistReview.BlogSpot.com, and Come-and-hear.com; learn about their lovely Talmud, ignorant fool.

  15. Patricus says:
    @Hail

    Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together was a great book. He wasn’t anti-Semitic but he called a spade a spade. He surrounded himself with Jewish friends throughout his life. I thought his book was philo-Semitic taken as a whole. I did get pissed off to see the redacted version on Amazon.com, and they wanted to charge money for that. No more Amazon purchases by me.

    • Replies: @Hail
  16. Anon[418] • Disclaimer says:
    @Endgame Napoleon

    Some people try to blame the Jews for everything bad that happens in Western countries, including this debunking-culture-on-steroids in the arts,

    Nice eighth grade prose and hyperbole.

    You are obviously speaking out of school. We don’t nee to blame them “for everything”. What we can definitively blame them for is more than enough to convict and be righteous in wishing that their presence and memory be forever erased. Their arts contributions be damned.

    even though Western Jews are one of the primary minoritiy groups that helped to build Western culture, making the high-Western cultural oeuvre much stronger, not just the debunking-cult wing, either. They are especially strong in writing. Where would American literature be without them?

    See above. You know nothing substantial about them, to include their present group crimes let alone their history. Be gone with your irrelevant apologetics.

    • Replies: @apollonian
  17. Hail says: • Website
    @Patricus

    the redacted version on Amazon.com

    What does this refer to? There is a redacted English translation out there?

    • Replies: @Patricus
  18. @peterike

    I would quibble with your take on Roth, but can appreciate that opinions vary (I would also rate Bellow as the greatest of all Jewish-American novelists, but that might be because I’m such a Chicago partisan!)

    I think you also forget the important contribution of Jewish-Americans to music — classical and pop. Gershwin comes to mind but also the great Broadway songwriters like Berlin, Hammerstein, Hart and Cahn.

    Finally, while there are no doubt left-wing Jewish critics who had a baleful influence on American letters, my own experience is with conservative critics like Joseph Epstein (he is also a wonderful essayist) who helped me appreciate an author like Henry James.

  19. @Anon

    …Western Jews are one of the primary minoritiy groups that helped to build Western culture…

    U’re brilliant, we see, but could u be more specific?–exactly WHAT did Jews do to helping “build Western culture”?–tell us, list them–u don’t have to say too many, hoh ohoh oho, just a few of the principle items. We’re waiting, ho ho ho ho

  20. Philip Roth wrote a book called “The Plot Against America,” and when I saw the title I thought, At last! One of them is FINALLY admitting it! But then it turned out to just be some whiny gibberish about Charles Lindbergh.

    A quick survey of American (which is to say white Christian) literature reveals classics about whaling, the moral crisis of slavery, Americans dealing with inscrutable Europeans, the spiritual corrosion of the pursuit of wealth, the inner lives of poor, illiterate sharecroppers, the moral struggles of men in times of war, the spiritual musings of serial killers, the development of the V-2 rocket, and the most unnerving horror stories ever written.

    A quick survey of American-Jewish literature reveals books about Jews, being Jewish, the problems of Jewishness, struggling with anti-semitism, weird Jewish sexual hangups, and what it’s like to be Jewish.

    I’ll take William Carlos Williams and a chocolate milkshake to go, thanks.

  21. Truth says:

    Who forced you to leave England, and mar two subsequent countries with your presence?

    • Troll: Hail
  22. When will some publisher give us a full translation of his last book Two Hundred Years Together

    An English translation of the complete book can be downloaded here.

  23. And before leaving this topic, I can’t resist asking the question Steve Sailer always asks when the name of Solzhenitsyn comes up: When will some publisher give us a full translation of his last book Two Hundred Years Together, which was a history of the relations between Russian Jews and Gentiles under both Tsarism and Communism?

    Why has no publisher so far done so?

    This is a good question & I don’t know the answer. I’ve read this book and most of it is a slog, except for a few enlightening passages. For Judeo-conspiracy aficionados, all I can say is: this work is simply not anti-Jewish in any meaningful sense of the word. It has been translated in French, German, Czech, Serbian, Italian & perhaps a few other languages.

    Official English translation would be most welcome if only for the purpose of getting annoying Jewish conspiracy lunatics read it & shut up.

  24. Patricus says:
    @Hail

    Yes Hail. Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together is about the period when Jews lived in Russia, or part of Russia, until he wrote his book in the 1990s. He is critical of Jews to some extent, although he isn’t anti-Semitic (in my opinion). Someone influenced book publishers in the English speaking world to censor the book. Ten chapters are deleted. These chapters are critical of Jews for various reasons. I didn’t think he was over critical. Some of the things he noted: Jews adamantly resisted assimilation; Jews were over represented in organizations such as Cheka; and so on. Stalin used Bolshevik Jews to oppress Russian and Ukranian peasants. When that job was done Stalin turned on the Jews.

    The full version can be found with a diligent search. Archives.org has one unredacted version (and four redacted versions). These are pdf files and free.

    It was quite a shock to me that a book seller would censor literature. It isn’t the government. These are private corporations censoring books. Some say Jewish interests pressured the companies but I never saw a reasonable proof of that assertion.

  25. @Patricus

    Stalin having created Israel with his USSR, seeing Israel switch sides to the US armament technology, turned on Israel, not the Jews. He still kept Kaganovich close to him. And it was Kaganovich who assassinated Stalin, according to “Wolf of the Kremlin” by Kaganovich relative Stuart Kahan.

  26. RWS says:

    I’m neither Russian nor privy to insiders’ information regarding Soviet rule, but I have read in seemingly reliable sources that both Stuart Kahan (who may not be close kin to L. M. Kaganovich, after all) and his book have been thoroughly discredited. To the point, here: Kaganovich did remain close to Stalin, but he had no hand in Stalin’s death.

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 John Derbyshire Comments via RSS