The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 John Wear Archive
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: He Would be Canceled in Today’s America
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in February 1974. Credit: Wikimedia Commons.

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
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Something Here
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008) was one of the greatest literary and political figures of the 20th Century. For the first 25 years of his life, Solzhenitsyn was an ardent supporter of Vladimir Lenin’s Soviet Revolution. In fact, by 1938 Solzhenitsyn’s enthusiasm for Communism had grown to the point of obsession. As a youth, Solzhenitsyn even declared, “I would gladly give my life for Lenin.”[1]Thomas, D.M., Alexander Solzhenitsyn: A Century in His Life, New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998, pp. 13, 59, 75.

This article documents how Solzhenitsyn eventually became an outspoken critic of Soviet Communism, as well as his conclusion that Jews were primarily responsible for the Bolshevik Revolution.

Early Years

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was born into an environment of chaos and suffering that rivaled anything he experienced in his later life. His young father died six months before his birth in excruciating pain from wounds received in a hunting accident. His grief-stricken mother rejoined her family in a nearby summer resort, only to find herself in the middle of a vicious battle then raging between Reds and Whites in Russia’s Civil War. Lenin and his band of Bolsheviks were fighting ferociously to consolidate their power, and the whole of Russia was awash in blood.[2]Scammell, Michael, Solzhenitsyn: A Biography, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1984, p. 25.

Solzhenitsyn’s youth was one of hardship, privation and poverty. For the first 23 years of his life, Solzhenitsyn did not know the inside of a house; he lived in huts with no running water. These huts were constantly assailed by the cold, and there was never enough fuel to keep him warm. Food shortages were common, and after the starvation of the 1930s, ordinary food shortages were only a minor problem. Solzhenitsyn regarded all of these hardships as normal, since the poverty and hunger he experienced as a youth were widespread in the Soviet Union.[3]Ibid., pp. 73-74.
(Scammell, Michael, Solzhenitsyn: A Biography, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1984, p. 25.)

Solzhenitsyn at the Age of 12 joined the Young Pioneers, which was the junior auxiliary of the Communist Party’s youth movement, the Komsomol. Like most of his friends, Solzhenitsyn passed automatically from the Young Pioneers to the Komsomol in his 10th and final year at school. Earnest and intense by nature, Solzhenitsyn studied Marxism-Leninism with an enthusiasm and energy typical of his eager spirit. He later wrote about his interest in Communist Party doctrine: “I was absolutely sincerely enthralled by it over a period of several years.” Solzhenitsyn became a Marxist, a Leninist and a Communist.[4]Ibid., pp. 64, 87, 92.
(Scammell, Michael, Solzhenitsyn: A Biography, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1984, p. 25.)

Despite his interest in literature, Solzhenitsyn chose to study physics and mathematics when he entered Rostov State University. His secret ambition had been to go to Moscow and study literature. However, concern for his mother, who was suffering from tuberculosis and in very poor health, held him back. Solzhenitsyn was an outstanding student at the university, receiving top marks in all his examinations. He was awarded during his last year at the university one of the newly created Stalin scholarships for outstanding achievement. This scholarship carried a stipend two-and-a-half times greater than the usual grant.[5]Ibid., pp. 85-87, 106.
(Scammell, Michael, Solzhenitsyn: A Biography, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1984, p. 25.)

Solzhenitsyn seemed on the threshold of a brilliant career. As an outstanding student in physics and mathematics, he could look forward to the pick of the best jobs available. However, he opted for the modest post of a village schoolteacher, turning down the higher-paying jobs and glittering prizes that were within his reach. Bursting with enthusiasm and, above all, great literary talent, Solzhenitsyn was determined to pursue his dream of becoming a published writer.[6]Ibid., pp. 107-108.
(Scammell, Michael, Solzhenitsyn: A Biography, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1984, p. 25.)

War Service

Shortly after Germany invaded the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, Solzhenitsyn attempted to enlist in the Soviet military. However, his medical examination resulted in a classification of “limited fitness” due to an abdominal disability, the result of a groin disorder in infancy that had gone undetected. While his friends marched to war, Solzhenitsyn was dispatched to the Cossack settlement of Morozovsk to work as a school teacher.[7]Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 48-49.

By mid-October 1941, Moscow was threatened and the German advance seemed irresistible. Under these dire circumstances, all classifications of fitness were cast aside and Solzhenitsyn was drafted into the Soviet Army. Solzhenitsyn spent a half-year as a downtrodden soldier before being accepted into officer training school. He disliked officer training, saying “they trained us like young beasts so as to infuriate us to the point where we would later want to take it out on someone else.” However, Solzhenitsyn completed officer training and was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant in October 1942. He reached the rank of captain in June 1944.[8]Ibid., pp. 52-53.
(Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 48-49.)

Solzhenitsyn experienced his first combat in the summer of 1943 in battles at Kursk and Orel. He was awarded the Order of the Patriotic War, second class, for his part in the battle at Orel. Solzhenitsyn in 1944 found himself in the middle of some of the bloodiest battles on Germany’s eastern front. Inexorably, the Soviet Army advanced until it triumphantly crossed the Polish border. Solzhenitsyn was aghast at the brutalities the Soviet Army committed against captured Soviet citizens who had chosen to fight for the Germans. Experience was slowly making Solzhenitsyn question the Soviet communist system he had embraced as a youth.[9]Ibid., pp. 56-60.
(Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 48-49.)

Solzhenitsyn also abhorred the violence and atrocities committed by the Soviet Army when it reached Germany. In a hate-filled address, Stalin had told the Soviet troops to wreak vengeance on Germans for all that Russia had suffered during the war. Rape, pillage and plunder were all condoned by Stalin. Repelled by Stalin’s incitement to greed and cruelty, Solzhenitsyn lectured his men on the need to exercise moderation and restraint. However, Solzhenitsyn’s words fell on deaf ears. As the Soviet Army marched into Germany, it was Stalin’s vision that became reality.[10]Ibid., p. 61.
(Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 48-49.)

Solzhenitsyn described the entry of his regiment into East Prussia in January 1945: “For three weeks the war had been going on inside Germany and all of us knew very well that if the girls were German they could be raped and then shot. This was almost a combat distinction.”[11]Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr I., The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation (Vol. 1), New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1974, p. 21. Solzhenitsyn was a committed opponent of such atrocities, and vocally opposed the rape of German women.

Solzhenitsyn’s fortunes took a catastrophic turn when he received a telephone call from brigade headquarters on February 9, 1945. He was ordered to report at once to the brigadier-general’s office. Solzhenitsyn was arrested and sent to prison for derogatory comments he had made about Stalin in correspondence to a friend. He later said his arrest was a defining moment in his life, which was crucial “because it allowed me to understand Soviet reality in its entirety and not merely the one-sided view I had of it previous to the arrest.”[12]Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 68-70. Solzhenitsyn became an outspoken opponent of Marxism after his imprisonment in the Soviet Gulag.[13]Feuer, Kathryn (editor), Solzhenitsyn: A Collection of Critical Essays, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976, p. 110.

Imprisonment

Solzhenitsyn was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment and sent in August 1945 to Butyrka Prison in Moscow. He was soon transferred to the Krasnaya Presnya transit prison in Moscow, which was in the heart of the Soviet prison system. On August 14, 1945, Solzhenitsyn and 60 other political prisoners were transferred to Novy Ierusalim (New Jerusalem) 30 miles west of Moscow. It was at New Jerusalem that Solzhenitsyn got his first bitter taste of the physically exhausting and crushing labor regimen in the Soviet camps.[14]Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 83-84, 87, 90.

Solzhenitsyn was transferred out of New Jerusalem when it became a camp for German prisoners of war. He spent the next 10 months doing forced labor at Kaluga Gate in Moscow, and was then transferred back to Butyrka Prison for two months. Solzhenitsyn was temporarily saved from the hardships and drudgery of the forced-labor camps by his degree in mathematics and physics from Rostov University. He was recategorized as a “special-assignment prisoner,” and was sent to several special prison institutes, known as sharashkas, for scientific research.[15]Ibid., 91-95.
(Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 83-84, 87, 90.)

The relative comfort of being a special-assignment prisoner ended on May 19, 1950 when Solzhenitsyn was transferred back to Butyrka Prison. Solzhenitsyn then began a long and insufferable two-month journey across the Soviet Union to the Ekibastuz Labor Camp, deep in the semi-arid steppes of Kazakhstan. At Ekibastuz he experienced starvation rations, cruelty and bullying, and manual labor amidst the cold icy winds which slashed across the steppe. In addition to this incredible suffering, Solzhenitsyn was diagnosed on January 30, 1952 with cancer and admitted to the camp hospital.[16]Ibid., pp. 109-110, 112-113.
(Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 83-84, 87, 90.)

Solzhenitsyn eventually made a complete recovery after an operation to remove the cancer. His close encounter with death from cancer, combined with his experiences as a front-line soldier and his subsequent imprisonment, had helped Solzhenitsyn to recognize God. Solzhenitsyn later said: “When at the end of jail, on top of everything else, I was placed with cancer, then I was fully cleansed and came back to a deep awareness of God and a deep understanding of life.” Solzhenitsyn also resolved to tell the full truth about life in Stalin’s prison camps.[17]Ibid., pp. 105, 113, 118.
(Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 83-84, 87, 90.)

Solzhenitsyn was released from prison on February 13, 1953, four days after the official end of his sentence. He was hired in April 1953 as a teacher of math and science at a local school. Solzhenitsyn survived a second bout with cancer, and was declared politically rehabilitated following a session of the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR on February 6, 1956. Having been strengthened and purified by his time in prison and bouts with cancer, Solzhenitsyn was primed and ready to explode onto an unsuspecting literary world.[18]Ibid., pp. 124-131, 133-134.
(Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 83-84, 87, 90.)

Literary Success

Solzhenitsyn wrote a short novel titled One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich describing some of his labor-camp experiences. He didn’t risk showing this novel to any editors until after Nikita Khrushchev’s second de-Stalinization speech in the fall of 1961. Khrushchev, who apparently only superficially glanced at this book, approved its publication because he thought it could be used as an effective weapon against his Stalinist adversaries. Solzhenitsyn’s book became an international bestseller when it was published in November 1962. Many Russian readers wept over its pages, while foreigners were shocked by its stark revelations.[19]Scammel, Michael, The Solzhenitsyn Files: Secret Soviet Documents Reveal One Man’s Fight against the Monolith, Carol Stream, Ill.: 1995, p. xx.

Solzhenitsyn managed to publish two short stories immediately after his success with Ivan Denisovich. However, Khrushchev was overthrown in October 1964 in a palace coup that placed Leonid Brezhnev at the head of the Soviet Communist Party. Brezhnev began reversing Khrushchev’s reforms, and Solzhenitsyn had many of his manuscripts confiscated by the security services.[20]Ibid., pp. xx-xxii.
(Scammel, Michael, The Solzhenitsyn Files: Secret Soviet Documents Reveal One Man’s Fight against the Monolith, Carol Stream, Ill.: 1995, p. xx.)

Solzhenitsyn managed to smuggle both volumes of his new novel, Cancer Ward, as well as some other books to the West. He forged an international reputation as Russia’s greatest living writer. Unfortunately, the new head of the KGB, Yuri Andropov, considered Solzhenitsyn to be a subversive. Andropov drafted a decree for the Politburo to deprive Solzhenitsyn of his citizenship and expel him from the Soviet Union. Consequently, when Solzhenitsyn won the 1970 Nobel Prize in Literature, Solzhenitsyn decided not to go to Stockholm to receive his prize because he feared he would be barred from returning to the Soviet Union.[21]Ibid., pp. xxv-xxvii.
(Scammel, Michael, The Solzhenitsyn Files: Secret Soviet Documents Reveal One Man’s Fight against the Monolith, Carol Stream, Ill.: 1995, p. xx.)

Solzhenitsyn continued to experience literary success, and he became a world-famous living symbol of the struggle for human rights in the face of state censorship. His historical novel August 1914, which was published in the West on June 11, 1971, denounced all Marxism as evil. Solzhenitsyn’s work was translated into 35 languages during 1972. When a copy of Solzhenitsyn’s book The Gulag Archipelago was discovered by Soviet authorities, Solzhenitsyn decided to publish it in the West as soon as possible. The Soviet authorities were enraged when the first volume of The Gulag Archipelago was published in Paris in December 1973. Solzhenitsyn had become a traitor in the eyes of the Soviet leaders.[22]Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 190, 194, 197, 202-203, 214.

Exile

On February 13, 1974, Solzhenitsyn was formally charged with treason and expelled from the Soviet Union. The United States, Great Britain and many other nations told Solzhenitsyn he would be welcome to reside in their countries if he wished. Solzhenitsyn chose Zurich, Switzerland as his initial place of residence. From Zurich, Solzhenitsyn traveled to Stockholm in December 1974 to finally collect his Nobel Prize in Literature.[23]Dunlop, John B., Hough, Richard S., Nicholson, Michael (editors), Solzhenitsyn in Exile: Critical Essays and Documentary Materials, Stanford, Cal.: Hoover Institute Press, 1985, pp. 24-25.

Solzhenitsyn moved to the United States two years later during the summer of 1976. He arrived in America at a time when Americans were struggling for an adequate response to a perceived Soviet threat. As a Nobel laureate and dissident, who had quite literally put his life on the line in a mesmerizing duel with Soviet authorities, Solzhenitsyn inevitably attracted the interest of influential Americans. He was asked by numerous prominent members of Congress, labor leaders, and members of the Western mass media to comment on democracy and American political life.[24]Ibid., pp. 25-26.
(Dunlop, John B., Hough, Richard S., Nicholson, Michael (editors), Solzhenitsyn in Exile: Critical Essays and Documentary Materials, Stanford, Cal.: Hoover Institute Press, 1985, pp. 24-25.)

In two separate speeches at AFL-CIO banquets, Solzhenitsyn alerted his audiences to the expanding communist menace. Solzhenitsyn stressed the unscientific and specious nature of Marxism-Leninism, as well as its lethal and aggressive nature. He warned that only firmness makes it possible to withstand the assaults of communist totalitarianism.[25]Ibid., pp. 30-32.
(Dunlop, John B., Hough, Richard S., Nicholson, Michael (editors), Solzhenitsyn in Exile: Critical Essays and Documentary Materials, Stanford, Cal.: Hoover Institute Press, 1985, pp. 24-25.)

Solzhenitsyn resided in south-central Vermont throughout 1977 and the first half of 1978 while working on a multi-volume historical novel. He unexpectedly was asked to deliver the commencement address at Harvard University on June 8, 1978. Solzhenitsyn accepted Harvard’s invitation, and in a televised address before 15,000-20,000 guests, he made some extremely frank and critical comments on the state of the West. Among other things, Solzhenitsyn criticized the Western media, which “miseducates” public opinion and fails to provide the in-depth analysis which society needs.[26]Ibid., pp. 37-38.
(Dunlop, John B., Hough, Richard S., Nicholson, Michael (editors), Solzhenitsyn in Exile: Critical Essays and Documentary Materials, Stanford, Cal.: Hoover Institute Press, 1985, pp. 24-25.)

Solzhenitsyn in his Harvard address also mentioned the striking decline in courage in the West. He said this decline in courage was particularly noticeable among the ruling and intellectual elites, which gave an impression of a loss of courage by the entire society. Solzhenitsyn said that while there were many courageous individuals in Western society, they had no determining influence on public life. Solzhenitsyn noted that from ancient times declining courage in a civilization had been the first symptom of its end.[27]Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr I., A World Split Apart: Commencement Address Delivered at Harvard University, New York: Harper & Row, 1978, pp. 9-11.

While rejecting socialism as an alternative to Western society, Solzhenitsyn also rejected the West as a model for the Soviet Union. Solzhenitsyn said that through deep suffering, his people had achieved a spiritual development of such intensity that the Western system in its present state did not look attractive. The insidious corruption of commercial advertising, TV stupor, intolerable music, and lack of spirituality in the West would not be attractive to the Soviet Union’s citizens.[28]Ibid., pp. 33-37.
(Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr I., A World Split Apart: Commencement Address Delivered at Harvard University, New York: Harper & Row, 1978, pp. 9-11.)
Solzhenitsyn had become disillusioned with what he considered was the spiritual vacuum of the materialistic West.

Solzhenitsyn had a deep-seated disdain for the Western media, which he revealed in his interview with Sixty Minutes. When asked to respond to an American commentator who had branded him “a freak, a monarchist, an anti-Semite, a crank, a has-been, not a hero,” Solzhenitsyn replied:

The Western press works in the following way: they don’t read my books. No one has ever given a single quotation from any of my books as a basis for these accusations. But every new journalist reads these opinions from other journalists. They have been just as spiteful to me in the American press as the Soviet press was before.[29]Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, p. 280.

Return Home

Although Solzhenitsyn had been kicked out of Russia, he always loved Russia and wanted to return to his native country. On August 16, 1990, Solzhenitsyn’s Russian citizenship was restored almost 17 years after it had been taken away from him. Solzhenitsyn returned to Russia on May 27, 1994, for the first time in more than 20 years.[30]Ibid., pp. 228, 265, 281.
(Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, p. 280.)

The Russia Solzhenitsyn returned home to was transforming from communism in poor and deteriorating circumstances. Western culture and multinational corporations were moving in, with Western restaurants such as McDonalds ubiquitous in the cities. Solzhenitsyn expressed his dismay at Russia’s cultural decline in a speech he made at Saratov University in 1995. Solzhenitsyn said: “We are still holding together as a single unified country, but our cultural space is in shreds.” Solzhenitsyn later said he would refrain from voting for either Yeltsin or his Communist opponent, as neither candidate was worthy of being elected.[31]Ibid., pp. 279, 284, 286-287.
(Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, p. 280.)

After extensive research, Solzhenitsyn realized that the Russian Revolution was primarily perpetrated by Jews, most of whom were imported into Russia from other countries. He said in 2002:David Duke says that Solzhenitsyn told him in a private conversation in 2002:

You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse.

The October Revolution was not what you call in America the “Russian Revolution.” It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history.

It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators.[32]Duke, David, The Secret behind Communism, Mandeville, La.: Free Speech Press, 2013, p. 11.

Solzhenitsyn wrote a two-volume nonfiction work titled Two Hundred Years Together. The first volume, published in 2001, was Russian-Jewish History 1795-1916 and ran to 512 pages. The second volume, which was published in 2002, was a 600-page investigation titled The Jews in the Soviet Union.[33]Walendy, Udo, “Nobel Prize Winner’s Writings Still Banned,” The Barnes Review, Vol. XIV, No. 5, Sept./Oct. 2008, p. 4. This second volume exposed the predominantly Jewish constitution of the Bolshevik Revolution. No English-language translation of this work has been commercially published, and the only version of it offered on Amazon is the original Russian, at $978 as of May 2021.

Solzhenitsyn lived out his final years in Russia. On June 5, 2007, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree conferring the State Prize of the Russian Federation upon Solzhenitsyn for his humanitarian work. Putin, who personally visited the writer at his home to give him the award, said about Solzhenitsyn: “His activities as a writer and public figure, his entire long, thorny life journey will remain for us a model of true devotion, selfless service to the people, motherland, the ideals of freedom, justice and humanism.” Solzhenitsyn died August 3, 2008 near Moscow at Age 89.[34]Ibid., p. 47.
(Walendy, Udo, “Nobel Prize Winner’s Writings Still Banned,” The Barnes Review, Vol. XIV, No. 5, Sept./Oct. 2008, p. 4.)

Conclusion

Solzhenitsyn had an intense sense of mission about his literary work. He felt it was his ethical duty to publicly expose the Soviet Union’s shocking and murderous gulag system. One of the particulars of Solzhenitsyn’s literary genius was his overwhelming willpower. French author Nikita Struve wrote:

But Solzhenitsyn’s fate, life and work are characterized above all by will. To survive four years at the front, live through the Soviet concentration camps, overcome serious illness, struggle to become a writer, gain a world reputation against inhuman odds, and finally unswervingly to follow his path—all this is a miracle of rare willpower.[35]Feuer, Kathryn (editor), Solzhenitsyn: A Collection of Critical Essays, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976, p. 82.

It is widely recognized that Solzhenitsyn had a major influence on the modern world. There is broad agreement that no other book contributed more directly and forcefully to the collapse of the Soviet Union than his book The Gulag Archipelago.[36]Ericson, Edward E., Solzhenitsyn and the Modern World, Washington, D.C.: Regnery Gateway, 1993, p. 332.

Solzhenitsyn’s suffering and literary genius enabled him to expose the evils of Soviet Communism. Dr. David Duke writes about Solzhenitsyn: “He was a victim of Bolshevism and through his literary genius he laid bare the most horrific killing machine in all of world history.”[37]Duke, David, The Secret behind Communism, Mandeville, La.: Free Speech Press, 2013, p. 259.

A version of this article was originally published in the March/April 2021 issue of The Barnes Review.

Endnotes

[1] Thomas, D.M., Alexander Solzhenitsyn: A Century in His Life, New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998, pp. 13, 59, 75.

[2] Scammell, Michael, Solzhenitsyn: A Biography, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1984, p. 25.

[3] Ibid., pp. 73-74.

[4] Ibid., pp. 64, 87, 92.

[5] Ibid., pp. 85-87, 106.

[6] Ibid., pp. 107-108.

[7] Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 48-49.

[8] Ibid., pp. 52-53.

[9] Ibid., pp. 56-60.

[10] Ibid., p. 61.

[11] Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr I., The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation (Vol. 1), New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1974, p. 21.

[12] Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 68-70.

[13] Feuer, Kathryn (editor), Solzhenitsyn: A Collection of Critical Essays, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976, p. 110.

[14] Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 83-84, 87, 90.

[15] Ibid., 91-95.

[16] Ibid., pp. 109-110, 112-113.

[17] Ibid., pp. 105, 113, 118.

[18] Ibid., pp. 124-131, 133-134.

[19] Scammel, Michael, The Solzhenitsyn Files: Secret Soviet Documents Reveal One Man’s Fight against the Monolith, Carol Stream, Ill.: 1995, p. xx.

[20] Ibid., pp. xx-xxii.

[21] Ibid., pp. xxv-xxvii.

[22] Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, pp. 190, 194, 197, 202-203, 214.

[23] Dunlop, John B., Hough, Richard S., Nicholson, Michael (editors), Solzhenitsyn in Exile: Critical Essays and Documentary Materials, Stanford, Cal.: Hoover Institute Press, 1985, pp. 24-25.

[24] Ibid., pp. 25-26.

[25] Ibid., pp. 30-32.

[26] Ibid., pp. 37-38.

[27] Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr I., A World Split Apart: Commencement Address Delivered at Harvard University, New York: Harper & Row, 1978, pp. 9-11.

[28] Ibid., pp. 33-37.

[29] Pearce, Joseph, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2001, p. 280.

[30] Ibid., pp. 228, 265, 281.

[31] Ibid., pp. 279, 284, 286-287.

[32] Duke, David, The Secret behind Communism, Mandeville, La.: Free Speech Press, 2013, p. 11.

[33] Walendy, Udo, “Nobel Prize Winner’s Writings Still Banned,” The Barnes Review, Vol. XIV, No. 5, Sept./Oct. 2008, p. 4.

[34] Ibid., p. 47.

[35] Feuer, Kathryn (editor), Solzhenitsyn: A Collection of Critical Essays, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976, p. 82.

[36] Ericson, Edward E., Solzhenitsyn and the Modern World, Washington, D.C.: Regnery Gateway, 1993, p. 332.

[37] Duke, David, The Secret behind Communism, Mandeville, La.: Free Speech Press, 2013, p. 259.

(Republished from Inconvenient History by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: History, Ideology • Tags: Communism, Solzhenitsyn, Soviet Union 
Hide 216 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. 789 says: • Website

    When Solzhenitsyn met the degenerates in Western Europe and America, he was shocked, his was disheartened, and his stomack turned.

  2. JimDandy says:

    Hasn’t he already been cancelled in Today’s America?

    • Agree: Aedib
    • Replies: @Cauchemar du Singe
  3. Schuetze says:

    Great article, thank you John Wear. Now we get to watch as the UR Putin/Stalin fanboi clowns dance and urinate all over Solzhenitsyn’s grave.

    Jews have been expelled from well over 100 countries in modern history. WWI was when they finally got their claws around the neck of the entire planet. The League of Nations were their first international bully club. Many conservative Americans of the era recognized the league for what it was. That is why Hitler simply rejected the league and dropped out. Stalin had to be thrown out by the league itself after he went rogue.

    After WWII the Jews shoved their next international bully club onto the planet, known as the UN. Soon after, the UN recognized Israel and the entire planet has become one giant cesspool of Judaic depravity and corruption ever since.

    Things have become so corrupted by the jews that now we have the plandemic, the jew-flu, the great reset, the food revolution and climate justice.

    The question is where can the planet expel the jews and their useful idiot Stalin fanbois to now?

  4. By capitalism. LOL.

  5. Richard B says:

    From the article:

    You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse.

    From Ron Unz’s Understanding WWII

    the inescapable conclusion is that in per capita terms Jews were the greatest mass-murderers of the twentieth century

    Looks like they’re about to do the same in the US in the 21st.

    Though, strictly speaking, it’s already underway and has been for a long time now;
    anti-white crime, the lethal combination of mass imigration + the welfare state (which is basically a wealth transfer), exporting jobs and economy to China and not just China, Wars for Israel, the opiod crisis, and more recently, Covid Lockdowns, George Floyd riots, a fake election, and Critical Race Theory, etc.

  6. SND says:

    When I click on images of Wear’s book Germany’s War, I get an Amazon page which claims the book is “not available.” It has obviously been banned. But when I go to Unz’s “Books banned by Amazon; order them here” page, it’s not there. Come on, Ron. Help us out.

    • Replies: @John Wear
    , @George True
  7. Thank you to the Author for an informative and interesting read. Mr. Solzhenitsyn had the (mis)fortune of seeing the perverse communist/atheist ideals flower into their true, diabolical form. Interestingly enough, he was smart enough to avoid the knee-jerk reaction of thinking that the west was “good”. The fact of the matter is that the enemy of my enemy is often an even WORSE enemy.

    As to WW2, being a civilian caught on the front of the war was a miserable fate, and the Germans certainly had their excesses. But the Soviets with their mass rape and slaughter and the US/UK with their fire bombing were undoubtedly worse. The allies killed more civilians bombing FRANCE than the Germans killed during the blitz. The world wars were won by the banksters, and the losers were the common man on both sides. Defending ourselves and our families is our God-given right and duty. War of aggression is evil.

  8. No shit. The (((west))) contains degenerates who are still obessed with shrunken jew coconuts and kabbalah necronomicon, who claim da natzees did Katyn.

    I say let the cleansing fire wash over the (((west))).

    • Agree: Alfred Muscaria
  9. @Schuetze

    The Tankie problem is much simpler than the kike question. Without the Holohoax, which functions for them just like muh racism for niggers, everything past the oder to China will go to their rightful places.

    Hell, it already kinda did. Look at the services the descendants of the victors are providing. I know of one the Turks and rich Arabs are particularly fond about.

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  10. Poor Solzhenitsyn! What’s not for USUKisrael to “cancel” him?
    He’s Russian, FFS!
    He was a Soviet Agent!
    He blamed Jews!

    The only thing he’s Not Guilty of is being a German National Socialist.

  11. Rasputin was not a Jew? The Czar had his peasants in poverty —with no opportunity moving forward.

  12. glib says:

    In my book, he already self-canceled due to the 60M baloney.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  13. For those of you who read French, you can download both tomes of 200 Years here:
    http://histoireebook.com/index.php?post/2012/02/28/Soljenitsyne-Alexandre-Deux-siecles-ensemble

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  14. Mikael_ says:
    @Schuetze

    Did you even read the entire article?

    How can you then equate Putin with Stalin, in your comment.

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  15. pbridge says:

    Plenty of room, under the ground.

  16. Dumbo says:

    America has become a force for evil in the world. Demonic maniacs have taken over. And they want the world. They will beat us all into submission with new plandemics, vacines, climate changes, shootings, 9/11s, wars, cyberattacks, food shortages, oxycontin, porn and transexual history hour.

  17. Seraphim says:

    He was ‘cancelled’ decades ago.

    • Replies: @Bill
  18. Every major claim of mass killings / genocide, such as Solzhenitsyn made against Stalin, has significant counter-point literature

    Solzhenitsyn – openly a fan of Spain’s Franco – is seen by some as a deceiving opportunist with fascist leanings. As noted above, his first ‘Stalin gulag’ book in 1962 was sponsored by Khrushchev himself … after Solzhenitsyn tasted fame and glory thanks to this, and saw the West full of ‘Stalin killed tens of millions’ stories, Solzhenitsyn got fabulously rich going along
    http://www.mariosousa.se/LiesconcerningthehistoryoftheSovietUnion.html

    Israel Shamir has published detailed material here on Unz, with sources saying the Soviet death figures are fake, with Soviet archives listing, e.g., about 10 million total arrested during thirty years of Stalin’s rule (The USA arrests 10 million people every single year these days!)
    https://www.unz.com/ishamir/red-zog/

    Canadian Douglas Tottle did a 1987 book denying the ‘Holodomor’, as based on a mish-mash of Hitler-Nazi propaganda plus Hearst media fanatic anti-Bolshevism; Tottle’s ‘Fraud, Famine, and Fascism: The Ukrainian Genocide Myth’, is free online here
    http://www.rationalrevolution.net/special/library/famine.htm

    Shamir has also published a remarkable essay arguing that the Cambodian Pol Pot genocide is a fake exaggerated narrative as well
    https://www.counterpunch.org/2012/09/18/pol-pot-revisited/

    Here’s a rejection of the Armenian genocide narrative by the Turkish foreign ministry
    http://www.mfa.gov.tr/the-armenian-allegation-of-genocide-the-issue-and-the-facts.en.mfa

    And here are ten prominent JEWS who have added to Holocaust denial claims

    (1) Joseph Ginzburg (1908-90) aka Joseph G. Burg, who personally interviewed Auschwitz survivors & had his books burned by postwar West Germany
    https://www.henrymakow.com/2017/09/Josef-Burg.html

    [MORE]

    (2) Guy Dommergue (1924-2013), full name Roger Guy Dommergue Polacco de Menasce, French anti-circumcision activist
    https://www.henrymakow.com/2014/09/Circumcision-Explains-Jewish-Psyche.html

    (3) Bobby Fischer (1943-2008), chess master & USA dissident
    http://www.renegadetribune.com/bobby-fischer-speaks-jews/

    (4) Jacob Cohen (born 1944), his earliest childhood in Morocco

    (5) Robert Litoff (born 1945), Connecticut-born Phi Beta Kappa in psychology
    http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=943

    (6) Gerard Menuhin (born 1948), son of the famous violinist
    https://www.henrymakow.com/2019/11/does-holocaust-denier-book.html

    (7) Nathanael Kapner (born 1950), convert to Orthodox Christianity & prominent web dissident
    http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=943

    (8) Norman Finkelstein (born 1954), Princeton PhD & author of ‘The Holocaust Industry’
    http://normanfinkelstein.com/2016/09/04/finkelstein-on-the-new-anti-semitism-and-the-holocaust-industry/

    (9) Ron Keeva Unz (born 1961), running the successful, California-based, conservative Unz Review
    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-holocaust-denial/

    (10) David Christopher Cole (born 1968), who as ‘David Stein’ made a 1992 video saying Auschwitz was significantly fake


    • Agree: Mulga Mumblebrain
    • Replies: @profnasty
    , @Bill
  19. idealogus says: • Website

    Great article, thank you John Wear.

    • Agree: Rurik
  20. From John Wear’s article:

    ‘Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators.’

    That’s all anyone needs to know about the world we live in.

  21. Anonymous[661] • Disclaimer says:

    Thanks for this article! I find myself often telling people who ask me the question “How did the world get to be so screwed up these days?” to go and read Solzhenitsyn. No writer I know of explored every nuance of the human soul versus totalitarianism with the depth, precision and simple beauty of their prose as Solzhenitsyn did.

    I’m not surprised that he has been virtually erased from the modern landscape by the same people who tortured, raped and slaughtered 66 million of his fellow Russians.

    Yet I still consider the prohibition of any published English version of “200 Hundred Years Together” as one of the more heinous cultural crimes of the last century.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  22. Smith says:

    I distinctly remember a Solz article some months ago, coupled this with the Surovov thread, is Ron Unz deliberately encouraging autists to have YET another NS Germany vs USSR again?

  23. The title of this excellent article is misleading given that Solzhenitsyn has already been cancelled. I wrote extensively about this in my old blog, the one that was banished by Google. Given that he was a staggeringly successful Nobel Prize-winning author whose books sold by the million you’d imagine publishers would have fought tooth and nail for the rights to his works. Yet after 200 Years Together he became a non-person. As John Wear has noted this work hasn’t been formally published in the “Free World” (except at prohibitive cost) nor translated into English other than by voluntary effort.

  24. Why can’t someone, somewhere publish a decent English translation of Two Hundred Years Together?

    • Agree: Garliv
    • Replies: @Salacia
    , @Wizard of Oz
  25. moi says:
    @789

    While the Declaration of Independence, the US constitution and the civil war have political significance for America, far more important is the history that defines the American psyche, namely our history of the genocide of the native peoples, slavery and theft of land from Mexico. Once you appreciate that, you know why we are what we are.

    • LOL: profnasty
    • Troll: Richard B
  26. gent says:

    He was already cancelled in yesterday’s America, otherwise there’d be an official translation of 200 Years Together.

    • Agree: Old and Grumpy
  27. Solzhenitsyn was a man of incredible courage and a true literary genius. Unlike modern ”intellectuals” he actually spoke truth to power rather than suck up to it.

    He prophesized the downfall of the Soviet Union and the downfall of American liberal capitalism. Let’s hope he was correct.

    Both Capitalism and Communism are materialistic Jewish ideologies that justify and normalize enslavement of the population by a small elite.

    In capitalism, its the wise bankers such as Rothschild and Warburg. In capitalism the banks act as a sort of central planning committee, controlling the rate and area of development by regulating the flow of capital. If they want something to grow, they ease credit for it, if they want something to fail, they deprive it of credit.

    Today all Fortune 500 companies are de facto owned by just four large banks: Blackrock, Vanguard, State Street and JP Morgan.

    Capitalism allows the masters to hide in the shadows behind a veil of puppet politicians and technocratic CEOs.

    In communism, the Jewish tyranny is much overt as the Trotsky, Kaganovich, Zinoviev and Kamenevs of the world sit in the politburo and central planning committee and preside over the exploitation of the goyim.

    Ultimately, both these ideologies are doomed to fail because at heart they are parasitic. They can grow the material wealth of a nation for a while before reaching a saturation point and then going into decline.

    They deny the truth, the good and beautiful, and natural law in favor of greater economic efficiency and a reign of quantity. Ultimately, both these systems produce dead cultures that lack the will to reproduce itself or innovate any further and thus are doomed to fail.

    Every liberal capitalist society has low birth rates and are declining even further. This system cannot last. There will be pain but the Jewish shtetl will fall.

    • Agree: Cauchemar du Singe
    • Thanks: profnasty, GMC, Alfred Muscaria
  28. John Wear says:
    @SND

    Amazon has not had my book available for sale for a long time. Amazon appears to be in the process of banning it. You can order “Germany’s War” from The Barnes Review at https://barnesreview.org/product/germanys-war/.

    • Thanks: Rich
  29. Dr. X says:

    Solzhenitsyn “only” got eight years in gulag. FedGov is presently threatening the tattooed buffalo horn nut with 25 years for entering Pelosi’s “sacred” Capitol during the Trump protest.

    Grok that…

  30. Thank you, John Wear, for this tribute to one of humanity’s greatest heroes.

    Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn is a gigantic figure even after his death, not only his outstanding scholarship but his example of what it is/should be to be a man. Something that jewish-inspired sodomy and their whole range of sick shit does not wish you to consider.

    President Putin’s words were/are correct.
    Russian people/culture almost destroyed by the virulent parasite after their Ritual Murder of tsar Nicholas II/family/retainers, just as is happening in “the west”.

    The words below also come from the same viewpoint, and remind me that just as ~3,5 million Russians fought against judeo-bolshevism in WW2 and heroes like Gen Pyotr Wrangel would certainly have joined Op Barbarossa that we are fools as long as we continue to be divided into petty competing groups by that same virulent parasite.

    One could not understand this war if one did not always keep in mind the fact that International Jewry stands behind all the unnatural forces that our united enemies use to attempt to deceive the world and keep humanity in the dark.

    https://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/goeb64.htm

  31. Seems to me that Solzhenitsyn was idealist that he never realized that politics everywhere is dirty business.
    Nobody realizes that Under Czars the Saturday was a holiday what indicates that under Czars Jews did have a tremendous power.

  32. John Wear says:
    @Irish Savant

    You make a good point. It might be more accurate to say that Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn has been partially cancelled in today’s America. Solzhenitsyn’s books are all readily available on Amazon except for “200 Years Together”. This later book is threatening to the establishment, whereas Solzhenitsyn’s books on the Gulag and other topics do not threaten our establishment.

  33. The first observation is that the Soviets did not destroy education…the kid living in a cold hut went to study math and physics at University….not pronoun alienation…..

  34. Rich says:
    @moi

    You have been miseducated. There was no genocide of the American Indians. Some intermarried, many collaborated and were allies of the European settlers and even the fiercest opponents of American expansion were allowed to live on reservations where they could continue to preserve their cultures. There are more American Indians alive today than at the founding of Jamestown, hardly “genocide”.

    I’m going to let you in on a secret, it was White men, fighting for the US military, that freed the slaves and only a very tiny number of Americans ever owned a slave.

    The Mexicans stole the land from the Spanish Crown a few short years before the Americans liberated it. Is it a theft if the mostly empty land, tormented by hostile, savage Indians is freed and made to prosper? I don’t think so.

    • Agree: Old and Grumpy
    • Replies: @WagnersTuba
    , @Traddles
  35. awry says:

    You are aware that Russia is guilty of all of these too, right?
    Russia expanded its territory average by an area equivalent of Norway for 150 years. You think that was all peaceful? It involved a little genocide of native Siberian savages, just like the Americans genocided their Siberian savages called “Indians”. Also they “stole land” from Mongols, Tatars, etc.
    Not mentioning the Causasus.
    Slavery ended in the US approximately at the same time when Russia ended serfdom.

  36. Schuetze says:
    @Mikael_

    You need to go through some old Saker articles or even this recent Guyenot article and read the comments. The obvious fact is that the more and the bigger dick missiles that Russia has, the more Putin fanbois justify Stalin’s genocide of Europe in American Terms: Might Makes Right. Quite simply put, Putin and Stalin fanbois converge on UR.

    But there is also the simple fact that not only does Putin refuse to acknowledge the magnitude of the war crimes the Red Army, he has continually encouraged Russian Patriotism through the glorification of their “Great Patriotic War”.

    The very article about the life of Solzhenitsyn illustrates precisely how it was the Russians themselves who were the greatest victims of Stalin and the judeo-bolsheviks. Compared to the Talmudic hell that the Jews had subjected Russia to, Germany was really offering escape and even freedom. Just try to get a Putin fanboy commenting on this thread to acknowledge this simple fact.

    • Replies: @Mikael_
  37. Schuetze says:
    @HeebHunter

    Do you have a solution to the problem that does not require that European civilization plumbs the depths of Jewish depravity?

    Hitler tried, but in the end the Jews projected all their own perversions and sadism back onto him and Germany. In retrospect, and with passage of time, it appears more and more that Hitlers biggest sin was that he did not in fact commit the holocaust…

    • Thanks: Emslander
    • LOL: InnerCynic
  38. HT says:

    In his speech at Harvard he warned the West of what was coming if they did not reclaim their heritage and Christian culture. He knew where we were headed. Of course he was right on the money and his warnings were scoffed at by the elites and intelligentsia. Now our country and culture is lost and gone forever because we did not realize what a treasure we had. The Jewish rats of the Frankfurt School are having the last laugh. Now we worship George Floyd and are being swallowed by Leftism and the violent Negro culture as the Jews who control our institutions get wealthier while we die.

    • Replies: @lysias
  39. Schuetze says:
    @Dr. X

    Christian Rakovsky in his confessions, written in the book Red Symphony, during his interrogation in 1938 by Stalin’s sadistic jews, described how it works:

    “If one day you were to be present at some future revolution then do not miss the opportunity of observing the gestures of surprise and the expression of stupidity on the face of some freemason at the moment when he realises that he must die at the hands of the revolutionaries. How he screams and wants that one should value his services to the revolution! It is a sight at which one can die … but of laughter.“”

    Simply replace “freemason” with “the tattooed buffalo horn nut”. He is just another stupid tool for the Jewish racial supremacists, like all all the useful idiot jacobins who lost their heads in the French Revolution.

    In this very article John Wear illustrates how Solzhenitsyn was just another tool for these very same jews. Solzhenitsyn came out alive, barely. Perhaps “the tattooed buffalo horn nut” will too, and perhaps just like Solzhenitsyn he will end up with a very profound knowledge about the nature of Jewish Power.

  40. gotmituns says:

    Solzhenitsyn was a great writer but these days, so many people are such shitbirds, they’d never open a book in the first place. So, the entire article is moot.

    • Replies: @RestiveUs
  41. profnasty says:
    @brabantian

    This is a great collection of important questions. History truly is a science. Unfortunately, for most people, it is carved into stone hearts.

  42. AndrewR says:
    @Schuetze

    Even if he had killed all the Polish and German Jews, or even all the ones in the USSR, the ones in the UK, US and France would still be here subverting like they do.

  43. Solzhenitsyn’s prophecy is being verified before our eyes.

    “Solzhenitsyn said that while there were many courageous individuals in Western society, they had no determining influence on public life. Solzhenitsyn noted that from ancient times declining courage in a civilization had been the first symptom of its end.”

    The supreme court declining to defend voting integrity. The weak-kneed buckling before the threat of social ostracism.

    • Agree: Cauchemar du Singe
    • Replies: @Arthur MacBride
  44. anarchyst says:
    @Richard B

    Let’s not forget the “jab”– poison mRNA injections that are being pushed on the world population…

    • Agree: Richard B
  45. Solzhenitsyn’s book The Gulag Archipelago describes what is going on right here in America and in both cases ie Russia and America it is caused by the zionist one world government new world order.

    Zionists are wreckers and destroyers of humanity and nations, it is what they do, it is in their DNA and nothing we goyim can do will satisfy their drive for their new world order.

  46. @SND

    @SND : Yes, I discovered the same thing. Amazon is saying the book is “not available”. So I thought, no problem, I will order the Kindle version. And when I clicked on that, it said “Not available – under review”. So yes, Amazon is obviously banning the book if they will not even allow someone to download the Kindle version.

  47. @Dr. X

    The Great Horned One should get off lightly compared to the other guy who sat in Pelosi’s chair and put his feet up on her desk.

    Or compared to Ashli Babbett, who was executed on the spot for attempting to climb through a broken window.

    Any word on Miss Nancy’s missing laptop? Now that is a mystery and could well explain the whole whole Dem reaction to Jan. 6.

  48. @Rich

    One could also add that the regime of antebellum slavery was mild, relative to that of the Caribbean and Brazilian sugar plantations, Africa, serfdom in Russia and the industrial regimes in New England and northern England. The notion that it was some hell on earth of never ceasing brutality, rape, torture, families being divided and so on is a creation of the (((forces))) that came to power in the wake of WW2 and especially beginning in the Sixties. I refer you to the thirty-odd volumes of “slave narratives” collected by during the thirties. A majority (some 80%) speak positively of life on the plantation.

    It’s not correct to say that King Linkum and his mercenary (for real; recruiting agents were sent to Ireland and Germany) army fought to “free the slaves.” It was to establish the dominance of industrial and financial capital over the rest of the “union” and confine blacks to the South. What the “holy crusade” did was reduce everyone in the South, white and black, to the same low economic level.

    • Replies: @Rich
  49. awry says:
    @moi

    Sorry, I replied to you above (comment 35), but lost the reply link because the comp crashed in the meantime.

  50. Emslander says:

    Thank you for this article.

    I credit the reading of two or three great books in my 74 years as the core of my disposition toward the rest of existence, both material and spiritual. One of them is the Gulag Archipelago. I think I read all three volumes in a reading marathon, interrupted only by work and the other duties of a father of five children under 13 years of age, in about a week.

    That book by the Great Russian isn’t just literature. It’s a tour de force . If young people ever read books again, it will be the secular equivalent of the New Testament for an exposition of human behavior at its most cruel and at its most glorious.

  51. Kibol says:

    I thank God for wisdom. To the doubting ones, listen to Rabi Yosef ben Porat on Where was God during Holocaust

  52. Marckus says:

    Forget about Alex. He is small fry ! We have bigger fish to skewer.

    These days with Dr Seus being cancelled you just know that Bugs Bunny (too white= privilege), Mickey (too black= racist), Sylvester (black= profiling) and the Key Stone cops (defund the Police) are on the roster.

    We are at the stage where you can be cancelled for scratching your balls and squeezing out a fart. The woke or really unwoke and descending into a new Guinness record ie negative IQ.

  53. @beavertales

    That is a crucial quote.

    If the (Frankfurt School) ruling body promotes “gay” parades, cowardice, St Floyd, “equality” and Alzheimer Joe/the Camel something is wrong …

    Not only wrong, they are laughing in your face …
    Their “government” placemen taking the 30 Shekels know it.
    Even as they stand to applaud Bibi they know it.

  54. @Irish Savant

    The title of this excellent article is misleading given that Solzhenitsyn has already been cancelled. I wrote extensively about this in my old blog, the one that was banished by Google. Given that he was a staggeringly successful Nobel Prize-winning author whose books sold by the million you’d imagine publishers would have fought tooth and nail for the rights to his works. Yet after 200 Years Together he became a non-person. As John Wear has noted this work hasn’t been formally published in the “Free World” (except at prohibitive cost) nor translated into English other than by voluntary effort.

    Martin Luther has been cancelled also. One would think that the “father” of Protestantism would have his works widely disseminated but no.

    • Thanks: GMC
    • Replies: @Cauchemar du Singe
  55. Greg S. says:
    @Caspar Von Everec

    You are mostly correct, except that you cannot honestly call what’s being practiced in the western world “capitalism.” It’s strayed so far that it’s nothing of the sort anymore. Today’s headline “Biden Unveils $6 Trillion Budget That Will Raise Federal Spending To Highest Post-WW2 Level.” Does that sound like “capitalism” to anyone? We have a corrupt system of money printing combined with corporate racketeering and monopolies, where corporations control the politicians for their own benefit (the precise opposite of free market capitalism). If anything, our system resembles the USSR more and more with each passing year.

    I’m not sure what the ‘perfect’ system is, and usually the ones touting those ‘perfect’ systems are leftists who’s ideas always end up with ‘death camps,’ because in the end they always blame the people for imperfectly carrying out their perfect ideas.

  56. These days with Dr Seus being cancelled you just know that Bugs Bunny (too white= privilege),

    Jewish privilege. Seuss might not have been born Jewish but he made up for that big time. I would be happy to throw every Seuss book on to a good ol’ fashioned burn pile. Had he lived 30 more years he would be doing tranny cartoons.

  57. GMC says:

    As I debate Solzenezkyn’s writings/life’s stories with my Soviet wife { who is no fan } but did go to universities in Odecca, we have a mutual desire to at least listen to each others side. Of course she is in her element / home turf and I’m an outsider, but I have a slight advantage, because I use the internet and books to teach me about Russian history and beyond – and I’m researching todays facts, not associated with the books that she read and I read – in our far apart , schools. Sabe’ Which were probably written by the same – tribe. I told her Solzenezkyn, might not be as popular in Russia as he should be, but he has Opened a Story, that without a doubt , coincides perfectly what has happened to both countries – Soviet Union and the USA. I’m not sure how the majority of the Russian Federation, Ukraine or others , associates with Sasha S , but I know President Putin read his work. Solzenezkyn has been my go to contemporary Eastern writer, in my lifetime.

    • Replies: @beavertales
  58. @moi

    Ah yes, those gentle peace-loving Commanches, Apaches and Mayans, their democratic idyll shattered by the savages from Europe.

  59. @Caspar Von Everec

    I can’t understand why “they” allow State Street, which many deem to be the biggest of them all, to be run by Irish-Americans. Downright anti-Semitic in my book. It’s anudda’ Shoah I tell ya.

  60. It is a curious but not entirely surprising fact that Solzhenitsyn’s latest book has not been published in English, and perhaps further evidence that the ‘media is in the hands of the perpetrators’.

    What we need in the meanwhile is a good in-depth review of it from a Russian-English speaker or speaker of any of the other languages it has been published into. Mr. Unz, perhaps you could solicit such a review for this website?

    • Agree: InnerCynic
    • Replies: @InnerCynic
  61. Rich says:
    @WagnersTuba

    I’m no fan of Lincoln’s and I believe he should’ve allowed the Southern states to secede, but his was the American army, whether he hired a few mercenaries or not. And whether the War Between the States was about tariffs, taxes or slavery, in the end it was a White army, fighting under the American flag, that liberated black slaves. All blacks in America should take a knee for their White liberators and should probably pay reparations to any descendants of the Union Army who fought in the war that freed them.

    • Replies: @InnerCynic
  62. anonymous[202] • Disclaimer says:

    An anecdote: 1985. Dark Winter night, in the Brobdingnagian Barnes & Noble on 5th avenue. After casting about for a copy of Gulag Archipelago, I finally went to the front desk, asking where it might be. The proto-soyboi behind the counter sniffed derisively: “have you tried the fiction section?”

  63. @Irish Savant

    Ah yes, those gentle peace-loving Commanches, Apaches and Mayans, their democratic idyll shattered by the savages from Europe.

    Mayans were gone by the time the Spanish arrived. Aztecs had taken over. There is a really great podcast on the Fall of Civilizations podcast channel on Youtube. Highly recommend it.

  64. moi says:
    @Irish Savant

    You’re dwelling in the past. Let’s instead talk about peace loving Americans who just want to bring democracy, women/lgbtqi rights to all peoples. LOL!

    • Troll: 36 ulster
  65. @Irish Savant

    I have to laugh when people bitch about “genocide” with regards to the Indians who had nary a care in the world about wiping out fellow injuns just for the hell of it. Seriously… just how far back do you have to go in time in order to right the wrongs perpetrated by one group against another? I’d dare say you’d have to go all the way to the beginning

    • Replies: @Rdm
  66. @The_seventh_shape

    Indeed. I’d say that a proper translation should be done because it’s being deliberately “disappeared”.

  67. @Schuetze

    You hit the nail right on the head, Schuetze. I always look forward to reading your comments.

    • Thanks: Schuetze
  68. anonymous[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Yet I still consider the prohibition of any published English version of “200 Hundred Years Together” as one of the more heinous cultural crimes of the last century.

    Some consider that to be proof of guilt.

  69. Richard B says:
    @moi

    Congratulations moi! You’re ten of the most boring trolls on the www.

    • Replies: @moi
  70. @Rich

    Good luck in finding someone intelligent enough to understand that what they have today was the result of a great cost. It’s too easy to complain and blame someone else for being a lazy ignorant fool. Hence why being a fool is celebrated on social media… the never ending self fulfilling cycle of idiocy.

    • Agree: Rich
  71. moi says:
    @Richard B

    10? I’m Numero Uno!!!

  72. @GMC

    The only native Russian I’ve ever spoken to about Solzhenitsyn implied that his writings are controversial in the homeland.

    Perhaps vodka would be useful to flesh out the meaning of that.

    • Replies: @GMC
  73. Mikael_ says:
    @Schuetze

    I think you need to write your comments in a bit more clear style.

    But it seems we agree in principle: I also have a very low opinion of those folks who only started liking Putin after March 2018.

    the simple fact that not only does Putin refuse to acknowledge the magnitude of the war crimes the Red Army

    losing the comparison to… who exactly?
    I cannot recall a single country ever that acknowledged the magnitude of their previous war crimes, by their own volition.

    • Thanks: stevennonemaker88
    • Replies: @Schuetze
    , @Thomasina
  74. @Schuetze

    My dad, ex USAF, used to joke with my German mom that “Hitler didn’t get them all” when he wanted to irritate her about her penchant for pinching pennies. As a kid I didn’t get it but later I saw how he was ribbing her sorely.

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  75. AReply says:

    Paging Dr. Duke — No not Doonesbury’s Dr. Unvle Duke, but that other Dr. Duke:

    //David Ernest Duke (born July 1, 1950) is an American neo-Nazi, antisemitic conspiracy theorist, far-right politician, convicted felon, and former grand wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.//

    [MORE]

    ‘Doctor’ Duke, as in has a PhD from the Interregional Academy of Personnel Management
    (I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP)

    le Grande ze Dragoon Dr. Duke!

    John Wear is writing cryptofascist bullshit, which tends to be rejected by mainstream publishers. Amazon prolly has a mandate to blackball this shit, which might seem wrong from pov of a free society, but when was America ever free haha. Anyway on purity principles you can’t argue that it’s unfair that a few books are squelched when they are written by those arguing for silencing an entire creed with on stars on their bellies.

    Thank god for Ron Unz, daring to help Wear vomit into the blogosphere under the principle of vomit-is-tasty-pls-everyone-enjoy-some-more!

    Dear John Wear, a list of citations does not imbue a spew with authority, integrity, honor or even intrlligence. It’s not even clever.

    But thank god for Unz ensuring all voices are heard! Freedumb, the truth will emerge!

    Meanwhile, more beautiful white lives expressing themselves freely:

    Who Is Samuel Cassidy, Gunman In San Jose Mass Shooting At VTA Rail Yard?
    https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2021/05/27/samuel-cassidy-gunman-vta-rail-yard-san-jose/

    Was he driven to it by the brutes, by some dirty kike? Inquiring minds must know…

    Uncle Duke
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncle_Duke

    • Replies: @John Wear
    , @Robert Dolan
  76. EugeneGur says:
    @Caspar Von Everec

    Solzhenitsyn was a man of incredible courage and a true literary genius. Unlike modern ”intellectuals” he actually spoke truth to power rather than suck up to it.

    Actually, he was none of these things. As a writer, he was mediocre at best. He thought himself equal to Leo Tolstoy (nobody is) but his grand opus, Red Wheel, is such boring crap.

    As to the courage, how much courage does it take to serve as a FGB informer in prison? This is a well proven fact of his biography. Besides, this is a good indication that he got himself arrested on purpose to save his ass from the front lines.

    Speaking the truth – most of what he said was a lie. Many people he spoke to about their experiences who trusted his later accused his of misrepresenting their words. His numbers are way off. he did a lot of other really mean things. He was a miserable human being in all respects.

    • Disagree: PJ London, Arthur MacBride
  77. Schuetze says:
    @Mikael_

    “losing the comparison to… who exactly?”

    Rand Paul? Ron Paul? Tulsi Gabbard? And lets face it, the US Army did not even come close to the depravity and blood lust of the Red Rapist Army. Just look at the works of Solzhenitsyn, the subject of this article.

    • Replies: @Alfred Muscaria
    , @Mikael_
  78. Schuetze says:
    @InnerCynic

    When the number of holocaust “death camp” survivors is greater than the number of claimed victims, you know that the Holocaust is just another money changer pyramid scheme. The real icing on the cake is the number of Jews who survived multiple transfers between “death camps”. Anne Frank comes to mind. But even Ellie Weisel survived multiple stays at “death camps” before he fled from the Red Russian Rapist Army under the protection of the retreating SS.

  79. Schuetze says:
    @EugeneGur

    “As a writer, he was mediocre at best. “

    The Stalin Fanboi brigade has arrived, and EugeneGur is leading the charge. Likely he is drunk on American Lend Lease Vodka and searching for cowering Deutsche Jungfrauen like the rest of the entire Red Rapist Army was, including the Jewish blocking units.

  80. @EugeneGur

    Can you provide sources for any of these assertions? I’m not trying to flame you, I am legitimately interested, as they would suggest that the (((Bolsheviks))) were not at all bad people and we should appreciate their defeat of Hitler.

  81. If Putin said he was that great then why wouldn’t Putin republish his work translated in different languages, put it on a website for free download? Something doesn’t add up if in May 2021 you have to pay $900+ to buy a book from Amazon that has not even been translated in English. Isn’t it weird that Russians can get every book you can imagine for free in pdf form except their own heroes’ books.

    • Agree: Schuetze
  82. Miro23 says:

    Putin, who personally visited the writer at his home to give him the award, said about Solzhenitsyn: “His activities as a writer and public figure, his entire long, thorny life journey will remain for us a model of true devotion, selfless service to the people, motherland, the ideals of freedom, justice and humanism.” Solzhenitsyn died August 3, 2008 near Moscow at Age 89.

    Putin didn’t have to do that. For me, that makes him a good guy.

  83. @Irish Savant

    The natives where far from monolithic. The “noble savage” ideal is historically incorrect and foolish. At the same time, there WHERE major abuses and in some cases genocide against the natives. When the Spanish landed in the caribbean, they found a simple, peaceful (according to columbus himself) population of arawak natives:

    “They traded with us and gave us everything they had, with good will … they took great delight in pleasing us … They are very gentle and without knowledge of what is evil; nor do they murder or steal…Your highness may believe that in all the world there can be no better people … They love their neighbours as themselves, and they have the sweetest talk in the world, and are gentle and always laughing.”

    OF course, this sounds like a somewhat “silver tongued” summation. But they were a far cry from other groups like the Aztecs. Within less than 20 years, the population had fallen by over 90%.

    As to the Mayans, the neat thing about them is they are one of the only native groups that still exists. My wife is a Poqomchiʼ from Alta Verapaz. The department is named that because it was never conquered by the Spanish; but was integrated peacefully through the efforts of Catholic missionaries. Most of the Mayas speak a minimum of two languages; my wife speaks three languages fluently. They actually were and are pretty peaceful people, a far cry from the Iroquois or other feared groups.

    The native Americans varied hugely tribe to tribe and person to person, just like all humans. Many were brutal and cruel, many were not. innocents on both sides died in the wars. Painting either the whites OR the natives as monolithic and good or bad is a fools errand.

    The town where we are building on inhereted land: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofWIvfiUtLg

    • Thanks: GMC
  84. “You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse.

    The October Revolution was not what you call in America the “Russian Revolution.” It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history.

    It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators.[32]”

    WHAT AN INDICTMENT!

  85. lysias says:
    @HT

    I actually saw Solzhenitsyn deliver his Harvard address (even though I did not hear him). I happened to be in the Harvard Classics Department in Boylston Hall, which gave a view of what was happening in Harvard Yard.

    I heard Harvard reactions to what he had said. Boy, was it unpopular there!

  86. Cowboy says:

    Let’s not forget jew shamir who writes in a recent piece:

    Stalin was adequate to the historical process that gave birth to him.
    It was not he who gave birth to this process, but he put his stamp on it, giving him his name and his psychology. This was his strength and his greatness.

  87. Nancy says:
    @Schuetze

    It would seem that the only possible (if not probable) solution would be for a sizable percent of the ‘termites’ to see the error of their ways and start subverting the ‘club’….. they may be the only ones with sufficient ‘genetic talent’ to have a lasting effect. Although, it seems the younger generations aren’t swallowing quite as much kool aid … and ADL etc are a tad worried…. Finkelstein, Atzmon, Freedman, Shahak et al.

  88. Ron Unz says:
    @EugeneGur

    Actually, he was none of these things. As a writer, he was mediocre at best. He thought himself equal to Leo Tolstoy (nobody is) but his grand opus, Red Wheel, is such boring crap.

    As to the courage, how much courage does it take to serve as a FGB informer in prison? This is a well proven fact of his biography. Besides, this is a good indication that he got himself arrested on purpose to save his ass from the front lines.

    Speaking the truth – most of what he said was a lie. Many people he spoke to about their experiences who trusted his later accused his of misrepresenting their words. His numbers are way off. he did a lot of other really mean things. He was a miserable human being in all respects.

    Every time there’s something about Solzhenitsyn, all the diehard Soviet Solzhenitsyn-haters show up, spouting nonsense, denouncing him as a vile traitor and everything else.

    So here were are a couple of my responses from 2019:

    Well, here’s simple question for all of you…

    I’ve always had a very positive impression of Solzhenitsyn and his Gulag Archipelago seemed quite realistic and persuasive to me. But what do I know? I’m not Russian, I can’t read Russian, and I don’t have access to the Soviet archives.

    However, consider Vladimir Putin. He is Russian, he reads Russian, and he has better access to the Soviet archives than anyone else in the world.

    All of you claim that Solzhenitsyn was a totally lying traitor to Russia and a fraud, while Gulag was an utterly dishonest fabrication. Okay. But then why would Putin have given Solzhenitsyn such a big public funeral when he died a decade ago, paid his personal respects to him while he was lying in state, and ordered that Gulag be made a required text in all Russian high schools?

    https://www.unz.com/scohen/why-are-we-in-ukraine/?showcomments#comment-3562507

    Putin certainly isn’t perfect. But it seems to me that based on where Russia stood when he came to power and what he’s managed to achieve over the last two decades, you could make a reasonable case that he’s the best leader Russia has had during the last one hundred years. Depending upon how you rate some of the old 19th century Czars, maybe even the last 200 years. He’s clearly very intelligent, much more honest than most leaders, and certainly has better access to the true Russian history of the 20th century than do any of us.

    You say that Solzhenitsyn was a vile anti-Russian traitor, a pawn of the CIA, and a supporter of the Nazis, while his Gulag books were filled with anti-Russian lies aimed at attacking Russia. Okay.

    But Putin awarded Solzhenitsyn Russia’s highest national honor, praised him lavishly, and ordered that Gulag be made required reading in all Russian high schools.

    You must see why I remain somewhat skeptical of your claims…

    https://www.unz.com/scohen/why-are-we-in-ukraine/?showcomments#comment-3565545

    • Agree: Truth Vigilante
    • Replies: @Schuetze
  89. https://www.bitchute.com/video/_btyr9wQKAI/

    The legal system exists to prevent mob justice and lynching. But the legal system is now just an official form of lynching by the state. The rule is “blacks and ‘leftists’ can attack you, but you better not fight back.” If you do, you will be legally lynched or lawnched.

    It was worse in the case of Chauvin whose only guilt was doing his job in a blue city where yuppies hired people like him to protect them from blacks.

    Derek Chauvin certainly got legally lynched or lawnched. Floyd died of drug overdose, but Chauvin happened to be there, and he got the blame because the Jewish-run narrative declared it to be so. And gutless Gutlfeld of Fox news and other such cucks cheered the verdict(arrived under duress) out of fright for more riots.

    By the way, how about banning the Assault Media?


  90. Schuetze says:
    @Ron Unz

    The problem here is that Putin is trying to have it both ways. On the one hand, he gives Solzhenitsyn honors, on the other he is rehabilitating Stalin while trying to resurrect the Red Army and the “great patriotic war”. On top of that we have the endless Russian posturing and warmongering over their hypersonic missiles, torpedoes, submarine fleet, tanks, kalashnikovs, and you name it.

    I also notice that your comments were written on Steve Cohen threads, and Cohen was one of the worst white washers of Jewish war crimes of the 20th century.

    Putin also loves donning his little hat and kissing the wailing wall, while shedding crocodile tears about the holohoax.

    Perhaps Russian sycophants like EugeneGur fall for this Putin act, but there is no need for Americans, or Europeans, to accept this new Russian historical revisionism where the Red Army is portrayed as European liberators while all of their war crimes, and all of the war crimes perpetrated on the unfortunate Russian soldiers in the Red Army by the Judeo-Bolshevics, are swept under the rug.

    • Agree: CelestiaQuesta
    • Replies: @Rogue
  91. Wrap your brain around the concept of being sent to the gulag, actively persecuted afterward, stripped of your citizenship, and after all that, still not be willing to leave that country because you might not be allowed re-entry.

  92. What we have now is

    Idology(idolatry-as-ideology) vs Reality.

    Truth is blacks kill blacks, and cops have been saving black lives over the years by coming between blacks and blacks. Without presence of cops, blacks kill more blacks and nonblacks as well. That is the Reality.

    [MORE]

    But in 2020, Jews really needed black support and ran with the super-idology of noble sacred black bodies being murdered by ‘racist’ whites in Trump’s America. As with Covid, Trump was caught between a rock and a hard place, or Scylla and Charybdis. On Covid, if Trump went with the lockdown, his economy would be ruined. But if he opposed the lockdown, the Jewish media would say he’s responsible for MASS MURDER.
    As for the black issue, if Trump sided with the cops, he would lose whatever gains he made with the blacks. But if he praised Floyd to high heaven, he would lose some of his base, and indeed he lost some white male vote in 2020 that sick of Trump’s negrolatry. So, BLM was useful to Jews in 2020.

    Jews also find negrolatry useful in perpetuating ‘white guilt’. Jews know that whites really feel guilt for what is deemed superior and don’t feel much sympathy for ‘losers’. It’s part of American DNA. Winners vs Losers, as Patton said. “Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser.” Even American ‘social justice’ that ostensibly cares about the ‘losers’ is geared toward favoring the winners. After all, why do Americans care so much about Jews as holy holocaust people but care NOTHING about Palestinians? Jews are rich and successful, winners. Palestinians are poor and backward, losers. Same with blacks. The reason why whites feel special thing for blacks is because blacks won so much in what Americans are about most: Sports and Pop Music, and with pornification of pop culture and sexting via smartphones(from a young age), sex. In other words, if Jews try to bait white guilt about most groups, whites wouldn’t much care. Brown natives of the Americas suffered a great deal but the white attitude toward them is ‘mow my lawn’ and ‘pick my lettuce’ and ‘change my kid’s diapers’.

    Indeed, it’s interesting that American Indians got more respect in the past despite their harm to whites. Back then, blacks were slaves while Indians were savages. A white man was far more likely to get killed by a savage red man than by a slavish black man. So, even though there was much white fear and hatred of Indians, there was also a good deal of grudging respect for Indians as warriors and hunters and badass killers.
    In contrast, blacks were cotton-picking shuffling toms. But over the years, Indians went from savages to ‘slaves’. Once proud warriors riding wild and free over the prairies, they eventually became ‘slaves’ in reservations, defeated and docile. Meanwhile, blacks went from slaves to ‘savages’. In time, they became wild and free, feral and aggressive, winning in sports and taking over streets and acting as they done please.
    And oddly enough, white respect went from Indians(who went from savage to ‘slave’) to blacks(who went from slave to ‘savage’, or neo-savage). Especially since the 60s, blacks have been acting like how Indians used to act: attacking whites, whooping & hollering, and taking trophies of white women. Watching all this black dominance in sports and rap music, whites have become accustomed to seeing blacks as the superior race. Thus, ‘social justice’ American style is just another form of winners uber alles. It isn’t really about favoring the underdog but honoring the new top dog. Blacks fail in many areas but succeed in what matters most to Americans. Americans feel, “If blacks are tops in the coolest fields, it’s only right and just that they should be best in everything else.” The fact that blacks aren’t good in everything seems an injustice on this ground.

    Jews know this about white psychology, and this is why Negrolatry is key to ‘white guilt’, without which it’d be difficult for Jews to control whites. Stuff like BLM wouldn’t have gotten far without Jewish media and deep state pulling strings. Unlike past riots, the deep state encouraged more rioting and looting. Just when blacks were burning and rioting, the authorities were ordered to paint BLM signs on streets and fly BLM banners(along with homo banners). Just like globo-homo wouldn’t have gotten so big without Jewish power and deep state, same with BLM. Jews lead, goyim follow, especially because white goyim have lost their cultures, customs, traditions, and values over the years. All that the goyim have left is fads and fashions, cultural or ‘intellectual’, that are controlled by Jews.
    The main Jewish priority is to control whites and subdue them into obeisance, without which Jewish Supremacism cannot be perpetuated. Jews use blacks to do this. Jews use black body to intimidate and subdue the white body. Jews tell white boys and girls that black bodies are more muscled, bigger-donged, and more booty-licious, and this fills white girls with jungle fever and white boys with sappy cuckery. Movies like GET OUT spread such notion. But Jews also use black souls to berate white souls. Blacks have sun-souls while whites have ice-souls, and the cold frigid evil white soul must be warmed and redeemed by the sunny black soul. George Floyd was useful as both black body and black soul. He was a big man, powerfully built. But he was also in a state of debilitation as he swallowed lethal dose of fentanyl. So, despite his bigness, he seemed powerless and (hep me! hep me!) helpless under the knees of four police officers. But it’s been in the works with movies like 12 YRS A SLAVE, THE HELP, BUTLER, DJANGO UNLEASHED, BLACK PANTHER, and etc. The very Jews who crush Palestinians and kill countless Arabs in the Middle East put on moral airs in the West by promoting Noble Negro myths.

    Such is the ‘idology’ of the Negro as used by Jews to control whites. But it’s utterly at odds with Reality. In truth, Jews got the power because they are smarter. Also, they abuse their power because they are supremacist and nasty, filled with vicious contempt for goyim. And they will every dirty trick in the book to get what they want, as evinced in the madness of 2020.
    And blacks are that way due to evolution in hot Africa alongside crocodiles, hyenas, lions, wild dogs, leopards, hippos, buffalos, elephants, gorillas, baboons, and etc. Blacks drove the animals crazy and vice versa. Negroes chucked spears at hippos, and hippos ran after Negroes to stomp and chomp them to death. So, animals in Africa are more aggressive, and Negroes got tougher and more aggressive. That’s why blacks be the way they be.
    And so, blacks act like predators in the modern world alongside other races. They look upon other races like how a hyena or a leopard eyes a prey animal. Such is the reality, but whites cannot face the truth for four reasons.

    1. Jews control the media & academia and push the ‘white guilt’ narrative.

    2. Christian tradition among whites focus on guilt and redemption and get some kind of masochistic delight in self-flagellating holier-than-thou virtue-signaling.

    3. Jungle fever and Afrophilia due to sports, music, and sex makes whites blind to the dangers posed by Negroes. Even with blacks burning down cities, white women go with Negroes and have Negro kids.

    4. White male pride has been loathe to admit white guys got their asses handed to them by blacks in sports, schools, and in the streets. Even HBD types prefer to discuss IQ(where whites are superior) than in PQ(physical quotient) where blacks have the advantage. So much could have been different after Jack Johnson beat up all the white guys IF white men had been honest about the black threat and acted accordingly. But nope, white male pride couldn’t face up to it.

    In the war between Idology and Reality, which will win? Of course, in the long run, Reality always wins, but that doesn’t mean your side will win because it accepts reality for what it is. After all, the HBD argument won in Detroit. HBD says blacks are naturally prone to criminality and various pathologies, and the fate of Detroit is a testament to that argument. But still, even if HBD has been validated, blacks took over and ruined the city. Even when Reality wins, it won’t necessarily save your side. Suppose you speak the truth, “Heroin will ruin your health and lead to early death.” Suppose the heroin user says, “Bull! Heroin is great and makes me feel good. It does me no harm.” In time, you will be proven right. The heroin user’s health goes down the tube, and he ends up dead at a young age. You were right, but he still wasn’t saved. Reality validated you but still took a life. Likewise, HBD can be right as observation but still lose out as solution IF most people decide not to heed its warnings.

    Of course, there are cases where both Idology and Reality can win. China is one example. In reality, Mao was a frightening figure. He not only unleashed the Great Leap Forward that killed tens of millions of lives but the Cultural Revolution that ravaged the entire nation. So, despite all the Mao-worship by the Red Guards, the Reality was Maoism Sucks!
    And after Mao died, China embarked on program attuned to Reality. Market-guided economy, a degree of pluralism, more rational foreign policy, pragmatism, the prizing of expertise over ideological fervor, and etc. On that score, Reality won out. And yet, the ‘idology’ of Mao remains as a unifying and justifying symbol of New China and its government. Mao is still the top icon in a nation that acts in accordance to reality.

    • Replies: @Traddles
  93. John Wear says:
    @AReply

    You are correct that David Duke was a Grand Wizard of the KKK in the 1970s. Everyone who joined his branch of the KKK had to pledge nonviolence and be a law-abiding citizen. Duke was attempting to reform the KKK. There is nothing wrong with that.

    I recommend you read David Duke’s book “Jewish Supremacism” some time. It is a really good book. For your information, Duke spent a lot of time with Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in 2002 while Duke was in Russia. They conducted research in the Soviet archives together. Solzhenitsyn would not have spent so much time with David Duke if Duke was the horrible person that you and the mass media try to make him out to be.

  94. It’s obvious why (((technopolies/monopolies))) are banning/censoring speech/books/media that exposes past historical crimes by the tribe. The more people wake up to the lies and coverup, the more we become a force to reckon with.
    You can hear it in the halls of Congress, Senate, White House and the fourth branch of government, (the forth branch being (((Race/Diversity/Gender Inclusion))), “white Supremacists are the greatest domestic terrorists threat in America”.
    They will soon regret creating what never existed before.

    • Agree: Nancy
  95. @AReply

    Go to hell, filth.

    Duke speaks the truth….and you can’t refute it.

    • Replies: @John Wear
    , @Robert Dolan
  96. Speaking of AS’s rejection of “communism” and (then failing, now failed) western “capitalism” perhaps might lead one to consider an alternative — Fascism.

    Allied to and compatible with National-Socialism, Fascism is based in philosophic thought that stresses Unity (Harmony if you will), Law (or Authority) and Duty.
    Also included is the Hero principle (part of Duty really).

    It provides a humane and valid government for the well-being of citizens, in contrast to the Jewish- freemason systems of hyena Capitalism/”Communism”. As well as a practical system, Fascism is essentially a spiritual movement.

    That this system has been/is so vilified by the Usual Suspects might lead the thoughtful to a sober enquiry of it.
    Just a couple of links, both headed “The Philosophy of Fascism”.

    1) Book of that title by Mario Palmieri, recently re-issued as facsimile, also free online —

    Fascism maintains namely: the principle of Unity, the principle of Authority and the principle of Duty, Palmieri writes. This is exactly also Republicanism, but the latter with inclusion of Equality and Liberty (atleast in theory), which Palmieri critiques.

    https://theamericanminvra.com/2019/02/19/the-romaness-of-fascism-palmieri-and-mussolini-on-mazzini-dante-and-the-mission-and-influences-of-fascism/

    2) A talk by British Fascist Sir Oswald Mosley given to the English Speaking Union on 22 March 1933, about three years before Palmieri’s book came out.
    For example on Unity/Harmony —

    I am not—as you will see later—myself stating the case against Christianity, because I am going to show you how I believe the Nietzschean and the Christian doctrines are capable of synthesis.

    https://www.oswaldmosley.com/the-philosophy-of-fascism/

    There are others maybe more authoritative, Benito Mussolini, Giovanni Gentile, George Orwell … easily found online …
    Maybe worth enquiry …

  97. John Wear says:
    @Robert Dolan

    I agree with you that David Duke is a true scholar who speaks the truth. He has been unfairly maligned by the mass media and many other people.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  98. @Schuetze

    I notice on most every Jewish writers book, a dedication.
    “This book is dedicated to the memory of my mother, my father, my brother, my sister and some 6,000,000 members of my extended family — all swept away in the flood of our times during the Nazi period.”

  99. @Schuetze

    Rand Paul? Ron Paul? Tulsi Gabbard? And lets face it, the US Army did not even come close to the depravity and blood lust of the Red Rapist Army. Just look at the works of Solzhenitsyn, the subject of this article.

    The Red Army was slaughtering entire villages as the Germans retreated. I also think the amount of aid Roosevelt gave the Red Army is vastly understated. Might as well have been Americans slaughtering and raping Ukrainian peasants. Now the grandchildren of the Red Army completely control the US and EU. Not a good position boomers are leaving us in.

  100. @Robert Dolan

    Duke actually spent time with the great Solzhenitsyn.

    • Replies: @Agnon Peregrinian
  101. RestiveUs says:
    @gotmituns

    That’s a shame, too, because you can recognize so many parallels to what he writes about in “Gulag” with the direction the US is headed.

    • Agree: Robert Dolan
  102. Bill says:
    @Seraphim

    Yes. His Harvard speech basically lost him the support of the entire mainstream. And that was in 1978.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  103. Bill says:
    @brabantian

    Solzhenitsyn – openly a fan of Spain’s Franco –

    Being openly a fan of Franco is hardly an indictment. I understand disliking Franco because he didn’t kill nearly enough commies when he had the chance, but I kind of doubt that’s where you’re coming from.

    • Agree: Rogue
    • Troll: Mulga Mumblebrain
  104. Ron Unz says:
    @John Wear

    I’ve sometimes seen this alleged Solzhenitsyn quote floating around on the Internet:

    You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse.

    While it didn’t seem totally implausible, I was never sure how reliable it was. You quote it from a David Duke book. What is Duke’s own reference for it, or did he claim to have just gotten it directly in person?

  105. John Wear says:
    @Ron Unz

    David Duke claims to have gotten these words directly from Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. On page 11 of his book “The Secret behind Communism”, Duke writes about this quote: “These were startling words, spoken to me by the famous Russian writer and philosopher Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn when I had the privilege of meeting him in Moscow in 2002.”

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  106. Salacia says:
    @Schuetze

    I’m not going to go into my views on the second world war here, but I’ve been pondering for some time now that a lot of the alleged anti-jewish abuse is just their projection, but I rarely see this idea being discussed anywhere.

    On the subject of the Red Army, ‘enemy’ women were obvious target, but I’d guess the rest wasn’t too happy about being ‘liberated’ by them either. Everyone with a vagina was fair game and when genitals couldn’t work anymore, bottles and guns were always handy. Rapist Army should truly be the official and only title to be bestowed upon them.

    • Thanks: Schuetze
    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  107. @Ron Unz

    The quote is from a book David Duke published in 2013, but Solzhenitsyn died in 2008. It would be hearsay even if Duke published it before 2008, but quotes attributed to dead people are often false.

    • Disagree: Robert Dolan
  108. TheJester says:
    @Irish Savant

    I have a PDF copy of Solzhenitsyn’s “Two Hundred Years Together”. I can’t recall where I got it. But the point is that it is available as “Samizdat” literature on the Internet.

    It is a pity that this is how degenerate we have become in the West … that we have to secret documents exposing the truth among ourselves as if we lived in the most degenerate period of Bolshevik terror to avoid being doxxed and canceled.

  109. @JimDandy

    As soon as he named the jew the Western, mostly USA (((media))) canceled him.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
  110. @Schuetze

    Answer: Into that newly active volcano in Iceland.

    • LOL: Schuetze
  111. @Salacia

    Most ‘antisemitic’ incidents, particularly after a ritual Zionazi child-murder spree, are lies, the reactions of others when confronted by hissing and spitting Zionazi thugs, or people looking sideways at a Jew. One of the examples of Corbyn’s ‘antisemitism’ was that he pronounced Epstein as ‘Epstine’. Real Judeophobia continues at low levels, despite all Zionazi crime.

    • Troll: Marckus
    • Replies: @Schuetze
    , @Marckus
  112. @Niebelheim

    It seems utterly absurd that money for that can’t be obtained from Iran, Indonesia, or some other Muslim source.

    Why not? Does anyone know?

  113. Thomasina says:
    @Mikael_

    What happened to the poor German people by the Red Army was unbelievably savage. It makes my blood boil every time I think about it. But maybe expecting Putin – and Putin alone – to acknowledge the war crimes is expecting too much. Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt should have done the apologizing at the time. Of course, they weren’t going to do that, seeing as thousands of their own boys (and they were boys) had just died for nothing. Well, not for nothing, but to maintain the banking system.

    What’s Putin supposed to do? Come out and vilify his country and countrymen when no other country would do the same? Do you think Biden is going to come out and tell the American people that Roosevelt knew that Pearl Harbor was coming? Will Boris Johnson tell of the evils of Churchill? Will he tell the British people that Hitler pretty much begged Churchill to end the war?

    Putin keeps his mouth shut because that’s all he can do. He’s trying to instill pride in his country and bring back the church. I don’t blame Putin. He’s trying desperately to keep the West out of his country.

    • Thanks: GMC
  114. A quote from AS that I often ponder is the one from the Gulag Archipeligo where he said something to the effect that if people had known how bad it was going to get they would have risen up and fought back to stop it.

    As to Duke’s quotes from AS, I would think they are solid. Duke spent time with AS and they had long discussions regarding Jewish influence and Bolshevism.

    I read Gulag a long time ago but it had a profound effect on me…..the absolute horror and insanity of communist rule…..people “disappeared” in the middle of the night…..no trial, no defense…..this is what the Jan.6th protesters are facing NOW….the very same jewish insanity…..and just like the Russians we are doing nothing to stop it.

  115. Seraphim says:
    @Bill

    And then comes ‘Two hundred years together’! Even the ones who wanted, against all odds, to keep his image of the sworn opponent of ‘Stalinism’ couldn’t stomach it.

  116. Rogue says:
    @Schuetze

    Victorious countries are never keen to speak about their own armies war crimes.

    Not just true of Russia.

    Navel gazing by any country about it’s war crimes is also quite unhealthy in my opinion. A sign of a defeated and demoralized people.

    As for Russia celebrating the “Great Patriotic War” this obviously has quasi-religious overtones but, again, is not unique to Russia.

    The annual Cenotaph memorial, and red poppy wearing in Britain, is much the same kind of quasi-religious thing.

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  117. Ron Unz says:
    @John Wear

    David Duke claims to have gotten these words directly from Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

    That’s what I half-suspected.

    Obviously, each of us has to make his own decision, but I think it’s extremely ill-advised to casually cite such an inflammatory quote by Solzhenitsyn simply upon the basis of David Duke’s claim that the former had once said it in a private conversation, especially since that claim was made years after Solzhenitzyn’s death.

    If you must use it, you could say something like “David Duke has claimed that in a private conversation before the great writer’s death, Solzhenitsyn had said: XXX.”

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Schuetze
    , @John Wear
  118. @789

    “stomacH”
    Just trying to help.

  119. @Robert Dolan

    Not that I think you are wrong but citations please.

  120. “Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: He Would be Canceled in Today’s America”

    Haha. Yea sure dude. Madeline Albright, Henry Kissinger, Zbig, Dulles Bros, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush Family, George Kennan would too I guess?

    Don’t let that “woke” mask fool you bruh. The empire and the elites haven’t changed a bit. Just a lame Hollywood tier re-branding is all.

    Meanwhile in “Today’s America”

    https://www.mintpressnews.com/us-votes-against-un-resolution-condemning-nazis-labels-it-russian-disinformation/273728/#.X90icnDsVuI.twitter

    https://thegrayzone.com/2021/05/26/belarus-roman-protasevich-plane-nazis-ukraine/

    https://newcoldwar.org/covid-19-deaths-to-be-counted-as-victims-of-communism-in-propaganda-push/

    https://thegrayzone.com/2018/04/07/the-us-is-arming-and-assisting-neo-nazis-in-ukraine-while-congress-debates-prohibition/

    Not much has changed beyond the “woke” rhetoric.

    Solzhenitsyn = opinion discarded!

    https://www.stalkerzone.org/letter-from-vasily-chuikov-to-solzhenitsyn-about-the-book-gulag-archipelago/

    muh gulag!

    https://www.greanvillepost.com/2018/10/09/the-truth-about-the-soviet-gulag-surprisingly-revealed-by-the-cia/

    muh rape! sorry, but these things are bound to happen on all sides, war is hell. Stalin did nothing wrong!

    https://anti-imperialist-action-ireland.com/blog/2021/04/30/some-considerations-for-the-rape-of-berlin-alleged-to-spoil-celebrations-of-may-day/

    This is who your “woke” Wall St & CIA still is today:

    https://ourhiddenhistory.org/entry/sullivan-cromwell-capitalism-intelligence-fascism-hugo-turner-our-hidden-history-interview

    If WW2 occurred today, guarantee you the US and majority of Europe would no doubt back the fascists.

  121. LeoB says:

    while most of the info is in general correct, this quote is fake:

    He said in 2002:

    You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse.
    [etc]

    these are not words of Solzhenitsyn. these are words of David Duke, which he attributes to Solzhenitsyn. which is correctly mentioned in the reference [32]: Duke, David, The Secret behind Communism

    it’s not a good idea to put David Duke’s words into Solzhenitsyn’s mouth.

    • Agree: lavoisier
    • Replies: @John Wear
  122. Patriots call the maggots ‘cucks’. The maggots call themselves ‘woke’.

    How about cuck + woke = wuck?

    Just call them ‘wucks’. If it wucks like a cuck, it is a cuck, which is a wuck.

    Stupid wuckers.

  123. Thank you for your excellent article. His ill feelings about the western (specifically US) media have come true today! It is obvious that Solzhenitsyn would have hated the degenerative media like FB with all his passions has he had lived a little longer to experience it!

  124. John Wear says:
    @LeoB

    How do you know that David Duke is falsely attributing this quote to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn?

    • Replies: @Spender_CGB
    , @LeoB
  125. Schuetze says:
    @Rogue

    V-Day in May is the Russian equivalent to the “red poppy wearing in Britain”. Whereas Britain contemplates the loss of an entire generation to a pointless war (at least for goyim), Russians slobber all over weapons of mass destruction that quite possibly could be used to destroy the entire planet. I see no comparison.

    • Replies: @Rogue
  126. Schuetze says:
    @Ron Unz

    In light of the manner that Jews have cancelled David Duke, your idea of qualifying the quote with “David Duke claimed” not only cancels the statement, it is also cowing to Jewish Power.

    How about “Jewish Power tried to kill Solzhenitsyn for over 60 years, and it is still trying to nullify this famous quote”.

    • Agree: John Wear
  127. GMC says:
    @beavertales

    LOL Good one B T. I’m guessing that, as in many countries, people go along with what other people tell them, because they haven’t read/researched what is being discussed. And instead of looking stupid , people just go along with the status quo. Maybe. I know some people will just come out and say – I haven’t read his books or say I don’t read his books. – period.
    Us alternative folks want to know the Pravda { and powerful medicine it is } but there are Tooo many that don’t want to know , or are too set in there Programmed ways, to even open up their mind.
    I’m more a moonshine drinker than vodka – over here. Every now and then I’ll try some home stilled and some folks even add some spice to their brew – surprisingly tasty , too. lol

  128. JimDandy says:
    @Cauchemar du Singe

    That’s what I thought. Wouldn’t even translate some of his books.

  129. Schuetze says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    lol. The Climate Nazi opines on ZioNazis.

    • LOL: Marckus
  130. lavoisier says: • Website
    @Irish Savant

    I read your article at the time and it was excellent.

    I have known about him being cancelled for some time, however.

    I had a good friend who used to translate Russian into English and thought how useful this skill would be today.

    The West desperately needs a book publisher willing to translate important Russian language books into English for distribution to the English speaking world. This book publisher, unlike Amazon, must not allow any censorship of scholarly work just because it offends the usual suspects.

    To an extent Ron Unz has served this role as well. Unfortunately, the site is still considered fringe by too many people, and it does not have the kind of public reach it well deserves.

    The Unz Review is quite remarkable for the kind of essays one can find here, including the really amazing work of the host.

    I have learned more about the history of the Twentieth Century here than I ever learned in school.

    • Replies: @Marcaurelius
  131. Miro23 says:

    Solzhenitsyn lived out his final years in Russia. On June 5, 2007, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree conferring the State Prize of the Russian Federation upon Solzhenitsyn for his humanitarian work. Putin, who personally visited the writer at his home to give him the award, said about Solzhenitsyn: “His activities as a writer and public figure, his entire long, thorny life journey will remain for us a model of true devotion, selfless service to the people, motherland, the ideals of freedom, justice and humanism.” Solzhenitsyn died August 3, 2008 near Moscow at Age 89.

    By way of contrasting present day Russia and the United States – ten years later US traitor and warmonger John McCain died, and was lauded by the massed US elite:

    Prior to his death, McCain requested that former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama deliver eulogies at his funeral, and asked that both President Donald Trump and former Alaska Governor and 2008 vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin not attend any of the services. McCain himself planned the funeral arrangements and selected his pallbearers for the service in Washington; the pallbearers included former Vice President Joe Biden, former Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold, former Secretary of Defense William Cohen, actor Warren Beatty, and Russian dissident Vladimir Vladimirovich Kara-Murza.

    Multiple foreign leaders attended McCain’s service: Secretary General of NATO Jens Stoltenberg, President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, Speaker of Taiwan’s Congress Su Jia-chyuan, National Defense Minister of Canada Harjit Sajjan, Defense Minister Jüri Luik and Foreign Minister Sven Mikser of Estonia, Foreign Minister of Latvia Edgars Rinkēvičs, Foreign Minister of Lithuania Linas Antanas Linkevičius, and Foreign Affairs Minister of Saudi Arabia Adel al-Jubeir.

    Dignitaries who gave eulogies at the Memorial Service in Washington National Cathedral included Barack Obama, George W. Bush, Henry Kissinger, Joe Lieberman, and his daughter Meghan McCain. The New Yorker described the service as the biggest meeting of anti-Trump figures during his presidency.

    Many American political figures paid tribute at the funeral. Those who attended included former United States Presidents Obama, Bush, Clinton, Carter; First Ladies Michelle, Laura, Hillary, Rosalyn; and former Vice Presidents Biden, Cheney, Gore, and Quayle. Former President George H.W. Bush (who died 3 months and 5 days after McCain) was too ill to attend the service, and President Trump was not invited. Many figures from political life, both current and former and from both political parties, attended. Figures included John F. Kelly, Jim Mattis, Bob Dole, Madeleine Albright, John Kerry, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Mitt Romney, Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake, Elizabeth Warren, and Jon Huntsman. President Trump’s daughter and son-in-law Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner attended to the displeasure of Meghan McCain. Journalists Carl Bernstein, Tom Brokaw, and Charlie Rose, as well as actors Warren Beatty and Annette Bening and comedians Jay Leno and Joy Behar also attended the funeral.

    Wikipedia

  132. Rogue says:
    @Schuetze

    Russians slobber all over weapons of mass destruction

    Yes, granted, but is that not specifically to signal 2 things?

    1) “We’re still a military superpower – so don’t screw with us.”
    2) “Rest assured, comrades, that we will defend the motherland no matter what.”

    Point one for the benefit of the outside world, especially the West. Point two for the benefit of the Russian people.

    I really don’t think Russia has any aggressive intentions to any of it’s neighbors, or anyone else. On the contrary, I think it simply wants to hang on to what it has.

    The Russian nuclear doctrine has been stated quite clearly: that Russia will not launch a first strike, and that nuclear weapons will only be used in the event of a nuclear attack upon itself or an ally- or if a conventional military attack upon the Russian state was in danger of destroying the state.

    So their nuclear doctrine is entirely defensive.

    And I’ll add that the Russian military intervention in Syria has borne good fruit – as opposed to the US one. Also, at least the Russians were invited by the Syrian government – unlike the US which just invited itself.

  133. Mikael_ says:
    @Schuetze

    Rand or Ron Paul, or Tulsi Gabbard explicitly acknowledged the magnitude of US (army) war crimes?
    Like nuking two non-military cities, fire-bombing hundreds more (in both theaters), and deliberately starving POWs, to just stick with WWII for now?

    I don’t believe so, but would be happy to learn – Links to such please!

    • Replies: @Schuetze
  134. Schuetze says:
    @Mikael_

    I went looking for a pithy Ron Paul quote on Hiroshima and I could find none. I will concede your point, no US politician that I know of has ever “explicitly acknowledged the magnitude of US (army) war crimes“. Although I am certain I could find a few Confederate politicians who had pointed out US war crimes, I would also concede that that is a little different.

    I do think that the rank militarism of the V-Day parades, and the way they are used to gloss over Soviet war crimes has no equivalent in the US, and are about far more than merely Russia’s ability to defend herself.

  135. John Wear says:
    @Ron Unz

    You write: “Obviously, each of us has to make his own decision, but I think it’s extremely ill-advised to casually cite such an inflammatory quote by Solzhenitsyn simply upon the basis of David Duke’s claim that the former had once said it in a private conversation, especially since that claim was made years after Solzhenitsyn’s death.”

    My response: I think it is well established that the Bolshevik Revolution was led primarily by Jews, and that Jews later controlled the Soviet government. The following is some of the evidence to support this claim:

    1. British Intelligence reports confirm that Jews controlled the Communist revolution in the Soviet Union. The first sentence in a lengthy British Intelligence report dated July 16, 1919, states: “There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an international movement controlled by Jews.” (Source: National Archives, Dept. of State Decimal File, 1910-1929, file 861.00/5067).

    2. Winston Churchill, in an article appearing in the Illustrated Sunday Herald on February 8, 1920, wrote: “There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews….” Churchill described Communism as a “sinister confederacy” of “International Jews” who “have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”

    3. Jews also dominated the Communist secret police, which underwent many name changes, including Cheka, OGPU, GPU, NKVD, NKGB, MGB, and KGB. Aleksandr Sozhenitsyn on page 79 of “Gulag Archipelago II” lists the leading administrators of the Communist secret police: Aron Solts, Yakov Rappoport, Lazar Kogan, Matvei Berman, Genrikh Yagoda, and Naftaly Frenkel. All six are Jews. The Soviet propaganda minister during World War II, Ilya Ehrenburg, was also a Jew.

    4. David Duke quotes the “Encyclopedia Judaica” on pages 791-792: “The Communist movement and ideology played an important part in Jewish life, particularly in the 1920s, 1930s and during and after World War II…Individual Jews played an important role in the early stages of Bolshevism and the Soviet Regime…The great attraction of Communism among Russian, and later also, Western Jewry, emerged only with the establishment of the Soviet Regime in Russia…Communism became widespread in virtually all Jewish communities.”

    5. David R. Francis, the American Ambassador to Russia at the time of the Russian Revolution, sent a cable to the U.S. government in January 1918: “The Bolshevik leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country but are internationalists and they are trying to start a worldwide social revolution.” (Source: Francis, D. R., “Russia from the American Embassy”, New York: C. Scribner’s & Sons, 1921, p. 214).

    6. Capt. Montgomery Schuyler, an American army intelligence officer in Russia during the Russian Revolution, wrote in an official report: “It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the United States, but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since its beginning, guided and controlled by Russian Jews of the greasiest types…” (Source: U.S. National Archives, Record Group 120: Records of the American Expeditionary Forces, June 9, 1919).

    7. A number of Jewish publications in recent years have disclosed Vladimir Lenin’s Jewish heritage, including “The Jewish Chronicle.” (Source: Ben-Shlomo, B. Z., “Reporting on Lenin’s Jewish Roots”, Jewish Chronicle, July 26, 1991, page 2).

    8. When Josef Stalin came to power he skillfully played one Jewish faction against the other until he emerged as the unquestioned authority in the Soviet Union. Jews probably lost some power under Stalin’s regime. However, Jews still had a tremendous amount of power in the Soviet Union even under Stalin. For example, the Jewish Voice in January 1942 stated: “The Jewish people will never forget that the Soviet Union was the first country–and as yet the only country in the world–in which anti-Semitism is a crime.” Jews were a protected class, and expressions of anti-Semitism could be punishable by death. It also should be noted that all three of Stalin’s wives were Jewesses. Molotov also married a Jewess. Thus, Stalin as well as Molotov had strong Jewish connections in their personal lives.

    9. Angelo Rappaport states: “The Jews in Russia, in their total mass, were responsible for the Revolution.” (Source: Angelo S. Rappaport, “The Pioneers of the Russian Revolution”, Stanley, Paul and C. London, 1918, p. 250).

    10. The American Hebrew magazine states: “The Bolshevist revolution in Russia was the work of Jewish brains, of Jewish dissatisfaction, of Jewish planning, whose goal is to create a new order in the world. What was performed in so excellent a way in Russia, thanks to Jewish brains, and because of Jewish dissatisfaction and by Jewish planning, shall also, through the same Jewish mental and physical forces, become a reality all over the world.” (Source: The American Hebrew, Sept. 10, 1920).

    11. According to a statement made by researcher Michael Mills, an official of the government of Australia at Canberra: “It is legitimate to adopt a critical attitude toward the relatively large number of Jews who particularly in the first decade after the Bolshevik revolution collaborated with the Soviet Government in the persecution of other peoples.” (Source: Forward, March 10, 2000).

    12. There is a tremendous amount of anecdotal evidence that Jews have run the Soviet Union. For example, in his memoirs, the Jewish physicist Edward Teller says that his boss, the Russian physicist George Gamow, “blamed the Jews for establishing the Soviet system of government.” Gamow was disturbed by the many Jews in Miami, so Teller and Gamow left Miami. Teller was not bothered by Gamow’s statements and actions, since Teller knew that Gamow was not prejudiced towards him or his Jewish friend, the Russian physicist Lev Landau. (Source: Teller, Edward, “Memoirs: A Twentieth-Century Journey in Science and Politics”, Cambridge, Mass., Perseus Publishing, 2001, p. 124).

    I have no qualms about using David Duke as a reference for this quote. Duke is much more of a scholar than most people realize.

    • Replies: @utu
  136. Traddles says:
    @Rich

    Well said, Rich (my “Agree” button isn’t working currently).

  137. Traddles says:
    @Priss Factor

    Blacks have sun-souls while whites have ice-souls, and the cold frigid evil white soul must be warmed and redeemed by the sunny black soul.

    Yes, I saw this pushed relentlessly in the media from the early 70’s onwards. Sitcoms, TV dramas, rock music, other pop music, movies, and all sorts of media forms have promoted this, and I’m afraid it has been embraced by an awful lot of gullible whites.

    The “uptight white” who is supposedly at fault for all social ills became as much of a media stereotype as any other. I guess it dates back at least as far as Adorno’s writings.

  138. AMEN!!! to that John. And so would General Patton.

  139. utu says:
    @John Wear

    “My response: I think it is well established…” – Yes, so you do not need to support it with David Duke who for many has no credibility unless your objective is to improve David Duke reputation by associating him with Solzhenitsyn at expense of Solzhenitsyn’s reputation. It is zero sum game. Btw, did you corroborate from other sources that Duke met Solzhenitsyn and for how long?

    Clearly you do not have what it takes to be objective and impartial historian. You should be careful because somebody like you whose filter to be skeptic about bias confirming data is lax can easily be tripped or even set up.

    Remember Dan Rather and how he was set up with the fabricated dossier on Bush military service just so Dan Rather could be get rid of from CBS and prevented from doing something more damaging to Bush administration.

    • Troll: Schuetze, Rdm
    • Replies: @John Wear
  140. Marckus says:
    @Mulga Mumblebrain

    What a load of dog poo ! Are you really a smart Chinaman or some sort of freak outlier ?

  141. 9593 says:

    There is an English translation of “200 Years Together” by Columbus Falco. BUT, it was extinguished from Amazon by the copyright cops of the publisher, Librairie Artheme Fayard, who have the copyright for languages other than Russian.

    But there is a discussion: https://www.jewsandpolesdatabase.org/2019/11/04/censored-writer-solzhenitsyn-on-jews/

    The Falco translation is titled, “The Crucifixion of Russia”.

    https://www.hpb.com/products/the-crucifixion-of-russia-9781548660277

    Publisher: Createspace Independent Pub
    ISBN-13: 9781548660277
    ISBN: 1548660272
    Publication Year: 2017
    Edition: LRG

    I captured it in Kindle just before Amazon was awakened. It might disappear from my Kindle any day. Copyright laws are intended to protect creativity, while making texts available to the public. An example of studying law the for the purpose of perverting the law.

    While we are here, you may notice the eerie repetition in the destruction of American culture, the sequel to the Russian story, or to the Wiemar phase in Germany, so nicely sanitized in the musical “cabaret”.

    • Replies: @Arthur MacBride
  142. John Wear says:
    @utu

    David Duke has a PhD in history. He is as credible as any other historian.

    • Agree: Schuetze
    • Replies: @utu
  143. When I discovered that the Gulag Archipelago had a Part II, I thought that was too much. Part I was enough.

  144. @lavoisier

    I tried to post articles from the Unz Review on Facebook, but Zuckerberg won’t let me.

  145. @9593

    Just for Information –

    “The Crucifixion of Russia” is available at scribd.

    https://www.scribd.com/document/375854468/THE-CRUCIFIXION-OF-RUSSIA-Russia-and-the-Jews

    Vdo Same title —

    Bolshevism and its toll on Russia and the East of Europe was one of the most devastating atrocities that ever occurred. While most Genocides are fairly recorded in the history books, the impact of Bolshevism and Marxism is still very unclear to most.

    https://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/the-crucifixion-of-russia-bolshevik-documentary/236110

  146. utu says:
    @John Wear

    David Duke has a PhD in history. He is as credible as any other historian.LOL

    Is that true that he got his PhD from

    Interregional Academy of Personnel Management (Ukrainian: Міжрегіональна Академія управління персоналом (МАУП), translit.: Mizhrehional’na Akademiya upravlinnya personalom, English acronym: MAUP)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interregional_Academy_of_Personnel_Management

    “In 2008, the U.S. State Department published its “Contemporary Global Anti-Semitism: A Report Provided to the United States Congress”[1] and singled out MAUP when it stated the organization “is one of the most persistent anti-Semitic institutions in Eastern Europe.”

    Is that true that he got his Ph.D in 2004 at age of 54 for dissertation titled: Zionism as a Form of Ethnic Supremacism?

    Do you believe that teaching and research of history in Soviet Union was up to the standard of western universities? Do you believe that the same Soviet professors who wrote historical books to whitewash all Bolshevik and Stalin crimes or false attribute them to other perpetrators have what it takes to produce an honest research? Those people lost their moral compass the moment they were recruited to Komsomol and are incapable to regain it under any circumstances. Do you really honestly believe that post-Soviet school of higher education where probably all faculty are former Soviet faculty-apparatchiks turned Ukrainian nationalists can provide a good preparation for a degree in history?

    • Troll: Rdm
    • Replies: @John Wear
    , @Petermx
  147. @John Wear

    If David Duke had falsely attributed or misrepresented Solzhenitsyn. The media would have been all over it to discredit Duke and his book.

    The fact that they remained silent speaks volumes.

    • Replies: @LeoB
  148. John Wear says:
    @utu

    David Duke’s PhD dissertation was a modified version of the material in his book “Jewish Supremacism”. This is a truly excellent book. If you have not read this book, I highly recommend that you read it.

    The fact that a 2008 U.S. State Department does not like MAUP is of no relevance to me. Do you seriously think that the U.S. State Department is objective in such matters?

    I also think that the teaching and research of history in Ukraine is up to the standard of western universities. MAUP apparently allows free speech and open inquiry, while most western universities do not.

    • Agree: Schuetze
    • Replies: @utu
  149. Petermx says:
    @utu

    “Do you believe that teaching and research of history in Soviet Union was up to the standard of western universities?” That’s news, that western universities have high standards in their history departments, but I do believe most people think that, and not only in the west. Western standards stink to high heaven, not just in Europe where you are thrown in jail if you don’t accept the holocaust story that is rammed down the entire population’s throats but in the US too.

    • Agree: John Wear, Rdm
  150. LeoB says:
    @John Wear

    How do you know that David Duke is falsely attributing this quote to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn?

    How do you know the opposite? But regardless, whether Duke attributes it falsely or not is not the issue. I never even claimed he attributes it falsely.

    In this particular case, all we know that it’s YOU who falsely claims that Solzhenitsyn said it.

    If you’re really eager to use this quote from David Duke, then you should have said exactly that: “as per David Duke”, or “David Duke reports” etc.

    But to say “He [Solzhenitsyn] said in 2002…” is extremely dishonest, to say the least.

    Especially inappropriate in an article about Solzhenitsyn who called us to “live not by the lie” (жить не по лжи).

    • Replies: @John Wear
  151. LeoB says:
    @Spender_CGB

    If David Duke had falsely attributed or misrepresented Solzhenitsyn. The media would have been all over it to discredit Duke and his book.

    The fact that they remained silent speaks volumes.

    “The media” doesn’t really care what David Duke says. And in particular what Solzhenitsyn may or may not had told him in Russian, assuming they ever met at all.

    I know it’s very tempting to think that Solzhenitsyn said this. Especially that it’s all over the Internet in all kind of memes. And yet all we know is that it’s the words David Duke attributes to Solzhenitsyn.

    And that’s the only way to reference this “quote” (provided the author wants to remain honest, of course).

    • Replies: @John Wear
  152. Rdm says:
    @Richard B

    When you see a dark eye Blinken, you’d realize it’s going downhill.

  153. John Wear says:
    @LeoB

    In comment number 127 on this discussion thread, you write: “…while most of the info is in general correct, this quote is fake…these are not words of Solzhenitsyn. these are words of David Duke, which he attributes to Solzhenitsyn…it’s not a good idea to put David Duke’s words into Solzhenitsyn’s mouth.”

    Now, in comment number 156, you write in regard to this quote: “I never even claimed he [Duke] attributes it falsely.” Actually, you did claim that Duke falsely attributed this quote to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. You said that the “quote is fake” and “these are not the words of Solzhenitsyn” and “it’s not a good idea to put David Duke’s words into Solzhenitsyn’s mouth.”

    The only way anyone can prove for certain that Solzhenitsyn said these words is if David Duke recorded their conversation. Also, if anyone can translate Solzhenitsyn’s book “Two Hundred Years Together” into English, it might be possible to find similar statements from Solzhenitsyn.

    • Thanks: Bubba
    • Replies: @LeoB
  154. John Wear says:
    @LeoB

    You write: “The media” doesn’t really care what David Duke says.”

    My response: The media does care what David Duke says. This is why they always say extremely negative things about Duke to attempt to discredit him. This is also why Duke has been totally censored from interviews by all of the major media.

    The last interview of David Duke in major media I know about was in December 2006 at the Iranian Holocaust convention. CNN enlisted Tony Blair to say that the Iranians were using a former KKK Grand Wizard to promote Holocaust denial. CNN also had several correspondents speak negatively about Duke, with these correspondents always referring to Duke as a former KKK Grand Wizard.

    The interview is still on the internet at https://vimeo.com/34646600. Determine for yourself if what Duke says makes sense.

    • Thanks: Bubba
  155. utu says:
    @John Wear

    David Duke’s PhD dissertation was a modified version of the material in his book “Jewish Supremacism”.

    So he wrote his dissertation prior to any association with an academic institution. He was a hobbyist. This does not exclude a possibility that his dissertation was Ph.D worthy but it is not exactly what your previous response was conveying: “David Duke has a PhD in history. He is as credible as any other historian.” that he was trained as a historian. Just like you who also was not trained as a historian with a degree in accounting from Southern Methodist University (1974) and degree from University of Texas Law School (1977) but later in life picked up a hobby. I am all for the hobbyist historians but I am not for misrepresenting ones credentials. And the lack of professional training as a historian exactly showed in your mishandling of the quote you got from David Duke’s book.

    • Replies: @John Wear
  156. John Wear says:
    @utu

    You write: “And the lack of professional training as a historian exactly showed in your mishandling of the quote you got from David Duke’s book.”

    My response: I quoted Duke correctly and told people where I got the quote from. There is nothing wrong with this. Hopefully, we can get Solzhenitsyn’s book “Two Hundred Years Together” translated into English. I suspect we will find similar passages to the one Duke uses if this ever happens.

    In regard to David Duke, he took all of the classes necessary and wrote his dissertation to earn his PhD in history. Duke is as credible as any other historian.

    • Agree: Bubba, Robin Hood
    • Replies: @Schuetze
    , @utu
  157. @John Wear

    John, seeing as you mention one of the world’s prominent war criminals (Tony Blair) in your comment # 160, it’s appropriate that I feature this 3 minute clip which we can all sing along to:

    Look at that photo of a young Blair at the 15 sec mark and tell me that isn’t a dead ringer for Alfred E. Neumann.

    You’ll notice also the mention of the name ‘Miranda’, which was Blair’s nickname when studying at Oxford.
    Miranda happens to be one of the moons of Uranus and Blair got that nickname because he had a propensity for going down on all fours and ‘gratifying’ his university colleagues.

    You see, like the moon Miranda, Blair tended to orbit Ur-anus.

    • Thanks: John Wear
  158. LeoB says:
    @John Wear

    The last interview of David Duke in major media I know about was in December 2006

    Ok so you do confirm that “the media” doesn’t care what David Duke says if the last known interview with him was in 2006. Which was my point exactly.

    • Replies: @John Wear
  159. LeoB says:
    @John Wear

    You misrepresent the situation with this “quote” as well as what I said.

    This quote IS FAKE when attributed directly to Solzhenitsyn (which is what you did). The only way to refer to this quote in an honest and factual way is to specify that it’s a quote from a David Duke’s book where he attributes it to Solzhenitsyn.

    As to “200 Years Together”, I fortunately don’t need any translation as I have read it in Russian. That’s exactly why, when this “quote” appeared in various memes several years ago, I was curious to find out where did it come from. Turned out it’s not from Solzhenitsyn but from David Duke.

    I’d expect that people who fight for historical truth and against falsification of history would be especially picky when dealing with Solzhenitsyn quotes – and especially strong ones like this quote. If anything, just to avoid being accused of the very same falsification.

    • Replies: @John Wear
  160. John Wear says:
    @LeoB

    You write: “Ok so you do confirm that “the media” doesn’t care what David Duke says if the last known interview with him was in 2006. Which was my point exactly.”

    My response: The major media has censored Duke because he comes off too well in his interviews with them.

  161. John Wear says:
    @LeoB

    You write: “As to “200 Years Together”, I fortunately don’t need any translation as I have read it in Russian. That’s exactly why, when this “quote” appeared in various memes several years ago, I was curious to find out where did it come from. Turned out it’s not from Solzhenitsyn but from David Duke.”

    My response: I am wondering if Solzhenitsyn said anything in his book about the predominant Jewish nature of the Bolshevik Revolution. I suspect he said something, because this book is not available in English.

    • Replies: @LeoB
  162. @John Wear

    Thank you, John Wear, for posting this instructive video of Dr. David Duke being interviewed (attacked) by Wolf Blitzer.

    During the short clip, when it was apparent that Dr. Duke was winning the argument, suddenly the interview was concluded because… “the satellite” …don’t you know?!

    The media cabal, having seen this performance, would not make this mistake again, and they haven’t.

    Here is a clip from Dr. Duke on the Phil Donahue show (1992)…enjoy!

    • Agree: John Wear
    • Replies: @John Wear
  163. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators.’

    The ((( Bolshevist ))) Industrial Complex.

  164. John Wear says:
    @Palerider1861

    I am glad you enjoyed watching David Duke’s interview with Wolf Blitzer. Obviously, Blitzer was losing the debate, so he made up an excuse that the satellite is going down.

    I have seen David Duke’s interview with Phil Donahue. This interview was in November 1991 shortly before the Louisiana governor election, which Duke lost to Edwin Edwards. I was impressed at how many news reporters were at this interview in addition to the regular studio audience.

  165. Schuetze says:
    @John Wear

    Utu encapsulates the problem with western “intelligentsia” today.

    One timeless characteristic of these people is that due to the multitude of “titles” given to each other with great fanfare, they end up believing that they are superior to the hoi-polloi. The most crass of this class are of course Hollywood actors, who think that just because they played some fake character on a silk screen that they have some special insight and a pretense to being an instantaneous subject matter expert. Since Jews are as overrepresented in the Screen Actors Guild as they are in the Communist Party, there is a large degree of inbreeding and Jewish personality defects involved. Of course, if the Oscars and Emmys that these self promoting groups of people put on weren’t off-putting enough, it gets far worse.

    Politicians come close to Hollywood actors in the degree to which they have accomplished nothing in life, yet due to their proximity to other psychopaths they believe that they have a special privilege when it comes to determining “facts”, “truth”, and most of all “the people’s will”. It is all fake, and the hoi-polloi know it but the are forced to listen to politicians blathering on in the same way that they are forced to scan through people like Utu’s inane comments.

    Scientists are one of the more obnoxious groups not only due to the number of honors and titles they bestow upon themselves, but even more so in the manner that they continually dog whistle their elitist snobbery to each other. “peer reviewed”, “credentialled”, “nobel prize”, “doctor”, “professor” are among the myriad of ego massaging code words they use to prop up their own prestige and belittle the hoi-polloi. This also made them an easy mark for the Jewish Racial Supremacists who also placed their own fake “scientists” like cuckoo birds among the rare, truly talented. Today, science and scientists have become little more that cock roaches feeding off of the tablescraps thrown their way by the Jews who own the entire planet. The Climate Science Mafia is one of the supreme examples of how scientists have prostituted themselves to the racial supremacists, where cockroach climatalogists all gang up together to dog pile on anyone contesting their “science”, or even worse any of the hoi-polloi who dares to merely speak up. Utu would be at home among them.

    But it is Historians who are the true scum at the bottom of the barrel. Of course it is from the holocaust is the most putrid stench of fake history and prostitute historians emanates. Their refusal to even address the 6 million number when even Auschwitz has been continually forced to revise their figures of the number of Jews gassed in 1943 and 44 that reveals their rank corruption. Of course WMD in Iraq and Building 7 come close, but it is with their bitter clinging to the jews holy 6 million holocausted jews that Historians have committed their greatest sin against humanity. 75 years later all of humanity is being bludgeoned with the holocaust bully club daily, yet faux historians like Utu insist on bitterly clinging to fake narratives that prop up their own self importance.

    This is why Utu simply cannot accept that David Duke is as legitimate an historian as any Jew ever was, because Duke steadfastly refuses to give ground on the Holocaust. Where even David Irving had to kow-tow, apologize and rescind the truths he had discovered, David Duke refuses to flinch to Jewish Power. In this aspect he actually reminds one of Ernst Zündel or even Ursula Haverbeck. Compared to them Utu is a spineless worm.

    • Replies: @Truth Vigilante
  166. Rdm says:
    @InnerCynic

    The same as when the US, UK and the alike are saying there’s genocide going on Xinjiang, isn’t it? When Chinese Foreign Minister (FM) Wang Yi said “My fellow European friends know much better how the genocide looks like”, German FM said it’s a new low that Chinese FM said such a thing. But there’s a mysterious driving force going on in Europe.

    This week Germany announced an apology to Namibia that they were involved in Genocide in 1904 in Africa and promised to reimburse the damage by billions of dollars.

    Last 2 weeks, French Macron apologized to Rwanda that they were involved in 250,000 Rwandan genocide in 1994.

    UK also apologized for Blacks and Asians.

    If an ordinary citizen can understand how the genocide would look like and should look like, you’re seeing how completely the entire republic is controlled by MSM and taking care of dirty business behind our back.

    It’s not either pro-whatever. It’s the underlying problem that cognitive ability of European Whites are dwindling at the speed of light at Zion behest.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  167. Rdm says:
    @John Wear

    Isn’t it like when they’re saying Assad is an evil person who killed his own Syrian people with chemicals?

    If you listened to his talk, he represents an excellent leader with manners and grace, nothing like Biden or Johnson or any of that leader. He is in fact a medical doctor, later specialized in eyes. His approval rating was like 91% of the 17 millions population.

    Sometimes when you observe a person without knowing anything of their background, we humans can easily judge whether or not the person in question is utterly insane or has an ulterior motive.

    I can vouch with 100% certainty that Jared Taylor is also the same caliber as a sane person and speaks with clarity so as to why diversity hurts the value and social fibre of White people. But if you search online, the first thing that you’d see in wiki was he’s White supremacist, scares the people out of the diversity context.

    Recent MSM take on Asian Americans, especially Chinese Americans, also speaks volumes. MSM is now pushing the narrative that the major driving force behind the Proud Boy patronage and gofundme donations was because of Chinese Americans. You’d see what is up with the Zion-controlled MSM in their sleeves.

  168. LeoB says:
    @John Wear

    I am wondering if Solzhenitsyn said anything in his book about the predominant Jewish nature of the Bolshevik Revolution. I suspect he said something, because this book is not available in English.

    I can assure you that there’s something Solzhenitsyn did NOT say in the book: namely, that he’d love people to frivolously misquote him and attribute to him words of someone else (even if his book isn’t available in English).

    Because that’s the only topic at hand in this discussion.

    In the end, you only undermine your own credibility by false-quoting Solzhenitsyn like this. What’s the point.

    • Replies: @John Wear
  169. @Schuetze

    I agree wholeheartedly with what you’ve said – except for the bit about David Irving.

    Everyone’s got a breaking point and, if the level of threats and intimidation are sufficient, you too would ‘kow-tow’ to your oppressors.

    As the greatest WWII historian that ever lived, the Zio-cabal went out of their way to harass Irving.
    He had to be made an example of because his output was so factually unimpeachable, obtained from primary sources and lauded as the benchmark in WWII historical research.
    No individual has been demonised from pillar to post, for so LONG, as has David Irving.

    They crushed him financially (he lost his house and much of his fortune in the Lipstadt affair), and spiritually (culminating when in September 1999, at the age of 32, Irving’s daughter Josephine committed suicide by throwing herself out of a window of her central London flat).

    Make no mistake, alongside Ernst Zundel, no one amongst the revisionists has suffered so greatly.

    • Agree: John Wear, Schuetze
  170. utu says:
    @John Wear

    In regard to David Duke, he took all of the classes necessary and wrote his dissertation to earn his PhD in history. Duke is as credible as any other historian.

    Duke was rereleased from Federal Prison in April 2004 and then had to spend several months in the half way house in Louisiana. He was awarded his Ph.D in September 2005. He did not have more than one year to take what a normal student would had to take in a normal university to earn his degree. We already know that his dissertation was his book he wrote earlier. Since in 2002 Duke was awarded honorary degree by the same university it is reasonable to assume that Due did not follow a strict course. So your statement you keep repeating that “Duke is as credible as any other historian” is nonsense.

    • Replies: @John Wear
  171. John Wear says:
    @LeoB

    You write: “I can assure you that there’s something Solzhenitsyn did NOT say in the book: namely, that he’d love people to frivolously misquote him and attribute to him words of someone else (even if his book isn’t available in English).”

    My response: You don’t know that Duke frivolously misquoted Solzhenitsyn. For all you know Duke might have quoted Solzhenitsyn accurately.

    For your information, I did email Germar Rudolf at Inconvenient History and asked him to change the words before this quote from “He said in 2002” to “David Duke says that Solzhenitsyn told him in a private conversation in 2002.” Hopefully this change will be made in the near future.

    I am still curious to know if Solzhenitsyn said anything in “Two Hundred Years Together” about the predominate Jewish nature of the Bolshevik Revolution. Since you speak Russian and have read the book, this should be a simple question for you to answer.

    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @LeoB
  172. geokat62 says:
    @John Wear

    For your information, I did email Germar Rudolf at Inconvenient History and asked him to change the words before this quote from “He said in 2002” to “David Duke says that Solzhenitsyn told him in a private conversation in 2002.” Hopefully this change will be made in the near future.

    While we’re reduced to dotting our Is and crossing our Ts, they’re not willing to budge on one iota of their gargantuan lies.

    • Agree: John Wear
  173. John Wear says:
    @utu

    You write about David Duke: “Duke was rereleased from Federal Prison in April 2004 and then had to spend several months in the half way house in Louisiana. He was awarded his Ph.D in September 2005. He did not have more than one year to take what a normal student would had to take in a normal university to earn his degree.”

    My response: Duke had been in Ukraine before he came back to the United States in 2002. Your statement assumes that Duke had taken no classes at MAUP prior to his returning to the United States. Do you know that Duke had taken no classes at MAUP prior to his release from Federal Prison in Big Spring, Texas and the half-way house in Louisiana?

    • Replies: @utu
  174. utu says:
    @John Wear

    “Do you know that Duke had taken no classes at MAUP ” – Do you know that he took classes?

    This article that tries to trace Duke’s itinerary claims that he did not go to Ukraine until 2002 when he he was awarded his honorary degree.

    https://momentmag.com/david-duke-abroad/

    But the same year he returns to the US to face Federal charges; is convicted in April 2003 and fined $10,000 and sentenced to 15 months in prison. After his release from prison and the half way house he had only 12 months before the ceremony of being awarded his Ph.D in September 2005. But I do not know if he even when to Ukraine for extended period in 2004/2005 to be able to participate in classes. It all looks like a sham that his Ph.D was awarded not differently than his honorary degree three years earlier.

    • Replies: @Schuetze
    , @Schuetze
  175. John Wear says:

    You write: ““Do you know that Duke had taken no classes at MAUP ” – Do you know that he took classes?”

    My response: I don’t know the details of when and how many classes David Duke took at MAUP to receive his PhD in history. To be honest, I don’t know the details of when and how many classes all of the other historians on the planet took to receive their PhDs in history. These are details I never ask about.

    You are, however, the one assuming that David Duke did not take all of the required classes to earn a legitimate PhD in history at MAUP. Until you can provide tangible proof that Duke’s PhD in history at MAUP was not legitimately earned, I will assume that it was.

    The article you cite at https://momentmag.com/david-duke-abroad/ has references from the ADL, the SLPC and other biased sources. It also has a number of mistakes:

    1. Duke was born July 1, 1950. He is 70 years old, and not age 71 as stated in the article;
    2. Duke is referred to in the article as “America’s best-known white supremacist”, even though Duke is not a supremacist;
    3. Duke is referred to in the article as an anti-Semite, even though Duke is not anti-Semitic;
    4. Duke has always preached non-violence. His KKK never participated in violence, as is implied in this article;
    5. The article states that Duke “ultimately threw his support to Democratic contender Tulsi Gabbard.” Actually, as Duke states on his website, Duke never formally endorsed Gabbard. Duke merely said he approved of Tulsi Gabbard’s anti-war stance.

    • Replies: @Rdm
  176. Rdm says:

    John Wear,

    You could use blockquote to respond somebody’s statement. It’s hard to follow your thought when you doing Q&A without bolding the Q or make it prominent.

  177. Rdm says:

    If Elizabeth of Russia (1741) said this and described in 200 years together by Solzhenitsyn,

    that these jews still find themselves in our realm and, under various pretexts, especially in Little Russia, they prolong their stay, which is in no way beneficial; but as we must expect only great injuries to our loyal subjects from such haters of the name of our Savior Jesus Christ, [G29] we order: all jews, male and female, along with their entire possession, to be sent without delay from our realm, over the border, and in the future not allowed back in, unless it should be that one of them should confess our Greek-Christian religion.”

    I won’t be surprised to learn the same sentiment from Solzhenitsyn regarding the aforementioned hearsay.

  178. @glib

    By any sane standards Solzhenitsyn discredited himself with his claims that the US should have gone on fighting in Vietnam during his Harvard Address:

    “Your short-sighted politicians who signed the hasty Vietnam capitulation seemingly gave America a carefree breathing pause; however, a hundredfold Vietnam now looks over you. Small Vietnam had been a warning and an occasion to mobilize the nation’s courage.”
    — Commencement Address Delivered at Harvard University, June 8, 1978

    Chomsky and Herman were being totally fair to Solzhenitsyn when they gave their judgment:

    “…the most generous reaction must be pity — and distress at the fact that the Soviet state has reduced so many of its most courageous dissidents to such blindly destructive hostility.”
    — The Washington Connection, p. 38.

    Except that they’re exaggerating Solzhenitsyn’s courage. When Solzhenitsyn was arrested back in WWII it wasn’t for any explicit dissident act. It was just the paranoia of the GPU/NKVD over some disgruntled sentiments. Certainly it was tragic to be sent to a prison labor camp over this, but it wasn’t an explicit act of courage on Solzhenitsyn’s part. Later when he was released by Khrushchev he was originally encouraged to start writing as part of de-Stalinization. This didn’t require any courage. After Khrushchev had been turned out the Brezhnev clique began to tighten things up, but not like before the “Secret Speech” of 1956.

    When the new authorities had enough of Solzhenitsyn they simply deposited him abroad as an exile. The KGB was now much more cautious about casually executing dissidents the way that was done in Latin America during the 1970s. So, sure, Solzhenitsyn lived through some terrible times but this was less a matter of him being courageous and more a case of unwittingly bringing hell down on himself. The way that he positioned himself as an advocate for the New Cold War of the 1980s shows that he was not such an outstanding dissident. He simply would have been more suited for the Cold War as it was in the 1950s. Maybe if he had been exiled 2 decades earlier he might have gone to Vietnam in the 1960s and come out a changed man again. We’ll never know.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  179. Rdm says:
    @John Wear

    You need a PhD to fully understand one’s sentiment, internalize someone else psyche, reflect upon the historical context and project their thoughts. Otherwise, you can’t claim what someone else sentiment could/would/should have been.

    Besides, it must be a rigid curricula to fully absorb the authority over someone’s thoughts. An honorary PhD degree won’t do justice. If you’re from Podunk University, you’re out. One plus one makes two only in American Universities with rigid curricula. We are not sure if one plus one makes other numbers in Ukrainian Universities. This is universal value.

  180. LeoB says:
    @John Wear

    Well I’m glad that this discussion was productive, especially for protecting the legacy of Solzhenitsyn and the proper attribution of his words.

    Regarding your question: I read the book years ago (as well as quite a few different works that analyze the book from different sides – all in Russian, of course).

    If you expect that Solzhenitsyn in general blames the Revolution on the Jews then you’ll be bitterly disappointed, to say the least.

    (As a side note, Solzhenitsyn was a staunch supporter of Israel and Zionism in general, so he already didn’t have a quarrel with that part of the Jewry for sure. Here’s a rare example where it’s discussed in English – with real quotes from 200 Years: http://www.peterbrooke.org/politics-and-theology/solzhenitsyn/shafarevich/israel.html)

    And if you’re looking for a confirmation that a certain part of the Jewry was actively involved in the Revolution (as well as its atrocities), then I don’t know why the hell do you need to wait for the translation. This fact is well known for decades and even in Wikipedia you can find tons of info on this (not to mention countless other sources).

    Plus 200 Years was translated into French long time ago. There’s quite a few people in France who are dealing with the “Jewish question” one way or another. Some of them are quite well known. Why not to contact them directly and ask what they found, as well as for whatever juicy quotes they can provide – the real ones, with references to their location in the book?

    And lastly, it looks like the English translation is expected in 2024: https://www.solzhenitsyncenter.org/his-writings/large-works-and-novels/two-hundred-years-together

    (BTW, on the same page they also mention that “In Two Hundred Years Together, Solzhenitsyn emphatically denies (in Chapters 9 and 14) that the Russian revolutions of 1905 and 1917 were the result of a “Jewish conspiracy””… [etc])

    • Replies: @Rdm
    , @Patrick McNally
  181. John Wear says:

    LeoB

    Thanks for the information. I will read the English translation of “Two Hundred Years Together” when it comes out in 2024.

  182. Rdm says:
    @LeoB

    Did you read the 200 years together carefully? Not that I don’t want to downplay your view, but the entire book was filled with contemporary references on anti-Jews from every person you can think of and Solzhenitsyn was not anti-Jews at all and favor Israel and Zion?

    Are you sure about that?

    Even given the benefit of the doubt on his allegedly new found love on Israel and Zion, why had he been “canceled” ?

    • Replies: @LeoB
  183. Solzhenitsyn breaks last taboo of the revolution
    Nobel laureate under fire for new book on the role of Jews in Soviet-era repression

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jan/25/russia.books

    “But it is impossible to find the answer to the eternal question: who is to be blamed, who led us to our death? To explain the actions of the Kiev cheka [secret police] only by the fact that two thirds were Jews, is certainly incorrect.”

    “My book was directed to empathise with the thoughts, feelings and the psychology of the Jews – their spiritual component,” he said. “I have never made general conclusions about a people. I will always differentiate between layers of Jews. One layer rushed headfirst to the revolution. Another, to the contrary, was trying to stand back. The Jewish subject for a long time was considered prohibited. Zhabotinsky [a Jewish writer] once said that the best service our Russian friends give to us is never to speak aloud about us.”

  184. @LeoB

    “If you expect .. bitterly disappointed…”

    Even Solzhenitsyn can sometimes be held to a standard which demands more than literary talent. Every single actual historical account of the events in Russia makes it clear that the overwhelming majority demanded the overthrow of the old social order. The only point one can make about Jews and other ethnic minorities such as Poles (Felix Dzerzhinsky) or Georgians (Joseph Stalin) is that the more educated revolutionary leadership tended to come from these non-Russian sectors. All that that signified was that the educated ethnic Russians tended to blinded by their own privileged status to the point where they failed to read the scene around themselves. The uprising of January 22, 1905, had shown how easily a popular spontaneous explosion could break out without and party-handlers managing it, but the Czarist aristocracy closed its eyes to the writing on the wall.

    It’s not even correct to say that those Jewish intellectuals who leaned to the Left gravitated towards the Bolsheviks per se. Every examination of the Bolshevik/Menshevik in the Russian Social Democratic Party which happened in 1902-4 showed that Jewish members of the RSDP were more likely to become Mensheviks or else go independent (Leon Trotsky). In the context of the early days of the Russian Civil War it was common for Jewish shopkeepers to eagerly welcome the Whites whenever a town was captured from the Red Army, only to be met with pogroms which forced the Jewish population to turn their support back to the Bolsheviks.

    Simultaneously the most important conflict in the Russian Civil War was the war of the Whites against the Russian peasantry who were determined to seize the lands of the old aristocracy. The Whites carried out their own massacres of such peasants in ways which easily compensated for the tensions between the Bolsheviks and non-urban sectors. This was the most important factor in determining the outcome of the Russian Civil War, not anything having to do with Jews. The Bolsheviks were in a rather touchy position because, having taken control of the major cities, they now depended upon taking food from the countryside to feed to urban centers. With the whole country breaking down this clearly led to conflict between the Bolsheviks and the countryside.

    But the land-owning aristocracy from Czarist times which defined the orientation of the Whites meant that the primary conflict was always between the peasants and the Whites as long as the latter were undefeated. After the defeat of the Whites Lenin saw the need to drop the “War Communism” which had prevailed throughout the Civil War and adopt the New Economic Policy, which would be dumped later in 1928 when Stalin launched the push for the first five-year plan. However the Civil War could easily have had a different outcome if the White leadership had been dedicated towards building some kind of populist movement among the peasants. But that notion was completely alien to the way of thinking held by Kornilov, Denikin, Wrangel, Kolchak, Unger, Semyonov and the White leadership overall.

    Knowing Solzhenitsyn’s style he probably does not try to go so far overboard as claiming that the revolution was somehow made by a Jewish conspiracy. He more likely simply harps upon any example of a Jewish Leftist being involved in events (even a Menshevik like Julius Martov might be tossed in as part of an ideological rant) but downplays the clear evidence of mass-support for the general revolutionary cause among the overwhelming majority of Russians. The only reason that the Russian Civil War ever even occurred was because of the split which planed the Bolsheviks at odds with the Mensheviks, Social Revolutionaries, Popular Socialists and a melange of anarchistic groups. As far as the majority of Russians were concerned, they never fought at all in defense of the pre-revolutionary order.

    The Bolsheviks had maintained that for the revolution to triumph it was necessary for a tightly formed revolutionary party to take the vanguard leadership. The Whites did everything possible to prove the Bolsheviks right. If they had been smarter they would have declared their loyalty to the Constituent Assembly that was voted in shortly after the Bolsheviks overthrew the Provisional Government. Lenin had made a great demand of Kerensky that elections should be held to the Constituent Assembly. They were held shortly after the October Revolution, and the Left-wing rivals of the Bolsheviks won a huge victory.

    That was when Trotsky (who had only joined with the Bolsheviks in July 1917) dismissed the Assembly. The members of the Assembly retreated to the east to form their own potential government, but they were all assassinated and executed by Admiral Kolchak. That put an end to any popular alternative to the Bolsheviks. Solzhenitsyn may be just honest enough to avoid blathering about a Jewish conspiracy as the cause of the revolution, but his main ideological goal was to obscure the real facts about the revolution.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  185. geokat62 says:
    @Patrick McNally

    Solzhenitsyn may be just honest enough to avoid blathering about a Jewish conspiracy as the cause of the revolution, but his main ideological goal was to obscure the real facts about the revolution.

    Jewish conspiracy? Speaking of obscuring the facts, why not mention the humongous role played by Jewish banker, Jacob Schiff? Wasn’t he the man who provided the financing to his “fellow Bolsheviks” to the tune of $20 million (that’s in 2017. In today’s dollars, estimates range from half a billion to two billion)? How does the saying go? Oh, I remember… “follow the shekels!”

    By the way, I luv your screen name… Patrick McNally… much more discreet than Shlomo McShmuel.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  186. Schuetze says:
    @utu

    Alan Savory talking about “utu”:

    • Agree: Rdm
  187. @geokat62

    More Right-wing garbage. First of all it should be mentioned that even if your fable of Jacob Schiff giving the Bolsheviks 20 million dollars were true, it would have no relevance to the issue of why did the Bolsheviks win the Civil War. Russia was in a state of collapse and one couldn’t buy votes or anything like that. The Whites were defeated because no one was willing to fight for them. At the beginning when it seemed as if the conflict might be between the Bolsheviks and the rest of the Left then there was a substantive sector of the populace which supported the latter, but that faded away when Kolchak had destroyed. No money was involved in deciding the outcome of the Russian Civil War.

    Now the issue what is that fake story of Jacob Schiff giving the Bolsheviks 29 million dollars about and where did it come from? It may have arisen from 2 different stories which are more plausible. First there are reports that in the early months of 1918 the Allies attempted to fund propaganda inside Germany through the Bolsheviks. This has nothing to do with Jacob Schiff.

    This would have had no relevance on the course of the Russian Civil War, but may have involved a total like the fabled 20 million. Not that it seems to have had much effect on Germany either. The German troops rebelled in late 1918 when Ludendorff wanted to throw their lives away. But nothing before that seems to have had much effect,

    Second, there are reports that when Trotsky was returning to Russia in April 1917 that he was stopped along the way and found to have about 10,000 (not 20 million) mysteriously packaged away. Although no clear source for this has ever been traced, the suggestion that it may actually have come from Schiff is at least worth entertaining. Of course, Trotsky was not a Bolshevik at this time. Anyone familiar with the record knows that Trotsky and Lenin were extremely vituperative opponents of each other in early 1917. That actually gives credence to the idea that maybe Schiff did give Trotsky this bit of aid. If he did, then Schiff would have been giving it someone who was a political exile with no major political party around him. There was no way that anyone in April 1917 could have foreseen that Trotsky and Lenin would join together 3 months later. It was only that reconciliation which made it possible for Trotsky to suddenly gain a position of authority. If Schiff had wanted to fund a revolution he would have contacted Lenin. There’s no evidence that he ever did.

    Some decades later there was an entertainment editorial which seems to have merged these 2 stories together into the claim that Schiff had given 20 million dollars to the Bolsheviks to make a revolution. Elizabeth Dilling repeated the legend uncritically and since then the hoax has been passed around on the Right as a fact. Jacob Schiff never gave the alleged 20 million to either Trotsky or anyone else eventually linked with the Bolsheviks.

    As I already said, the only time-frame in which monetary aid would even have been relevant would have been in the early to late 1917 when Kaiser Wilhelm II provided some money for helping Lenin set up Pravda and related organs. Even that, however, should not be exaggerated in significance. The Russian Civil War was not something decided by payouts. It happened amidst total social breakdown where trying to buy voters would have been irrelevant. The bad politics of the Whites were the decisive factor in shaping the course of things.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  188. geokat62 says:
    @Patrick McNally

    More Right-wing garbage.

    You must have missed this comment by Ron Unz?

    @soll
    Schiff supported the February revolution and the Provisional Government, not the Bolsheviks in the October Revolution which is often misrepresented into the wrong revolution of 1917.

    That’s just propaganda and total nonsense. There’s strong even overwhelming evidence that Schiff was a key financial backer of the Bolsheviks, and remained closely aligned with them up to his death in 1920. You might want to read my 2018 article on those issues:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-bolshevik-revolution-and-its-aftermath/

    And here’s a short passage from the personal memoirs of Henry Wickham Steed, a leading foreign correspondent and former Editor of the Times of London, then the world’s most authoritative newspaper:

    Potent international financial interests were at work in favour of the immediate recognition of the Bolshevists. Those influences had been largely responsible for the Anglo-American proposal in January to call Bolshevist representatives to Paris at the beginning of the Peace Conference — a proposal which had failed after having been transformed into a suggestion for a Conference with the Bolshevists at Prinkipo. The well-known American Jewish banker, Mr. Jacob Schiff, was known to be anxious to secure recognition for the Bolshevists…
    …the prime movers were Jacob Schiff, Warburg, and other international financiers, who wished above all to bolster up the Jewish Bolshevists in order to secure a field for German and Jewish exploitation of Russia.

    A large number of additional links are also provided in a long comment of mine from earlier this year:

    https://www.unz.com/article/the-russian-revolution-separating-truth-from-myth/?showcomments#comment-4411642

    https://www.unz.com/article/solzhenitsyns-two-hundred-years-together/#comment-4544712

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  189. Schuetze says:
    @utu

    Rand Paul talking about self-declared brainiacs like utu:

  190. LeoB says:
    @Rdm

    I’m not sure what exactly your question is about and what was “canceled”. I posted a link that specifically deals with Solzhenitsyn’s attitudes to Israel including his own words and quotes from the book.

    His position was akin to Churchill’s: he hated Jewish (and non-Jewish) Communists – but didn’t have anything Israel and Zionism.

    • Replies: @Rdm
  191. @Patrick McNally

    Perhaps the Soviet authorities realised that Solzhenitsyn, like the vile Anatoly Sharansky, was just a nassty shit.

  192. @Rdm

    The Chinese FM was masterfully understating. The Western liars guilty of LYING about ‘genocide’ in Xinjiang, seem to have forgotten the genocides of the Indigenous of the Americas, Australia, and Africa, particularly the hecatomb of ten million in the Congo, the utter brutality of Dutch rule in the East Indies, the tens of millions killed in Great Famines in India under English misrule, the horrors of the Taiping Revolution, the Boxer Revolution and the Opium Wars in China, The Nazi genocides, the French atrocities in Algeria, US genocides in Korea, Indochina, Iraq and Afghanistan etc, etc, etc. The sheer diabolical villainy of Western racist hypocrites is almost beyond belief. Imagine if, as in Canada, they had just unearthed the bodies of over 200 children murdered by the authorities in Xinjiang, surely only one of many such horrors.

  193. Rdm says:
    @LeoB

    If you expect that Solzhenitsyn in general blames the Revolution on the Jews then you’ll be bitterly disappointed, to say the least.

    (As a side note, Solzhenitsyn was a staunch supporter of Israel and Zionism in general, so he already didn’t have a quarrel with that part of the Jewry for sure. Here’s a rare example where it’s discussed in English – with real quotes from 200 Years:

    That’s what you wrote. I’m not disappointed at all. In fact, Solzhenitsyn’s treatment on Jews settlement in Israel in “The Birth of Zionism” chapter is completely fair to the point where you don’t even know where his sentiment exists. That’s why he kept saying broaching about Zionism subject always carries reproach on both sides. People don’t read his book, but just label him as anti-Semite or anti-Jews. He treaded the subject with the most objective manners. But that doesn’t say he’s for Israel and Zionism. Zionism also hurts those Jews who were already assimilated to their newly found motherland, either in Russia or Europe. There’s a clash of Jews and Zionists, both in Europe and Russia.

    That’s why I said if your claim of AS being pro-Israel and Zionism is widely accepted sentiment, why had he been ‘canceled’?

    Well, I thought you’d be well aware of “canceled” parlance in 2021 and how it reflects the discrepancy between the sentiment perceived by the mass and those gatekeepers.

    • Replies: @LeoB
  194. @geokat62

    While I’m willing to take the time to rake through more muck whether made up by Unz or anyone else, I noticed right away that your link just shows Unz regurgitating the hoax of the New York Journal-American gossip column. Anyone who has looked into the bit of gossip realizes that it was not a news report based upon journalistic investigation of any kind. It was a society gossip column with no credentials behind it. You might just as well cite Ann Landers for proof of the Dachau gas chamber.

    When Unz gets to something that has some substance to it, he distorts the facts. He mentions the book by Kenneth Ackerman, Trotsky in New York. But Unz forgets to remind readers that Leon Trotsky was not a Bolshevik. Although Ackerman may be a bit skeptical, there wouldn’t be anything surprising about finding confirmation that Schiff probably did give some aid to Trotsky while Trotsky was in New York. Anyone familiar with Schiff knows that he was opposed to the US joining with the Allies against Germany as long as the Czarist monarchy was in power. Trotsky spent his time in New York telling everyone that the First World War was a bad thing and working people shouldn’t want to join it. There’s no surprise at the suggestion that Schiff may have given aid to Trotsky during this time.

    But Schiff never gave aid to the Bolsheviks and Trotsky was not a Bolshevik in early 1917. That understates the matter. Trotsky and Lenin were 2 of the most vituperatively hostile figures on the Russian Left-wing of that time. Since 1904 when Trotsky wrote Our Political Tasks they had been on bitter terms. Lenin’s own comments from February 1917 still show him denouncing Trotsky. There was no reason in the world why Schiff or anyone else would have associated Trotsky with Lenin.

    More than that, no one who was familiar with Trotsky’s style would have envisioned him as ever gaining any power anywhere. It was Lenin who built the Bolshevik party-machine with the intent of eventually being able to take hold of power as the Czarist state self-destructed (and he knew that it would eventually). Trotsky, despite many formal differences, shared more in common with Solzhenitsyn than with Lenin. Both Trotsky and Solzhenitsyn gloried in the role as the individualistic outside dissenter; neither had any qualifications for building a functional party that could act as an organized machine; yet both attracted special cults of followers who could be very dedicated to hanging on every word of the great author.

    So if Trotsky had not managed to join with Lenin after July 1917 then he would have been politically helpless. He was just a charismatic individual with no organization before July 1917. After being exiled from the USSR Trotsky did attempt to build his own Fourth International. The outcome of that simply showed again that Trotsky had no ability for organizing a coherent apparatus. All that he got out of it were feuding sectarian cults.

    Anyway, the point is that if Jacob Schiff had in early 1917 been at all interested in facilitating the rise to power of the Bolsheviks then he would have contacted Lenin but not Trotsky. If somehow Schiff had contacted Lenin and asked him about Trotsky then Lenin would likely have told Schiff to leave Trotsky stuck somewhere in Harlem and don’t send him back to Russia. There was no alliance between Lenin and Trotsky.

    Until the July Uprising was launched at the initiative of anarchist in July 1917. That outbreak convinced Lenin and Trotsky together that the time was soon to be at hand for making the revolution. In all of his previous years Trotsky had sharply attacked Lenin’s model of a revolutionary party, yet now in the face of revolution breaking out all across Russia Trotsky suddenly became persuaded of the need to have an effective apparatus. He saw at that moment that his rhetorical skills would not be enough to enable him to lead the revolution.

    Meanwhile, having been shipped back to Russia by Wilhelm II, Lenin was also becoming fed up with his own party. Many of the early critiques of Lenin’s party-model made by Leon Trotsky or Rosa Luxemburg had argued that Lenin would simply breed a stale bureaucratic machine of pencil-pushers. Lenin saw this happening when he arrived in Russia. People like Kamenev, Zinoviev and even Stalin at first were simply working to build political careers within the new Provisional Government apparatus. They weren’t showing much sign at first of acting as the revolutionary vanguard. Something needed to be done to shake the party up by bringing in someone new who was more dynamic.

    It was in that context that seemingly out of nowhere Lenin and Trotsky joined hands in political alliance, and history was made. But there is no way on earth that Jacob Schiff or anyone in New York could have foreseen something like this before July 1917. While it probably is true that Schiff did support Trotsky in New York out of opposition to US entry into WWI, that had absolutely no bearing on any claims that Schiff or anyone else in New York somehow brought the Bolsheviks to power. It’s a moronic claim popular among the Right, but several times dumber than even Rezun gets.

    Like I said already, that claim of “Schiff gave the Bolsheviks 20 million dollars” seems to be the offspring of 2 distinct stories merged into a hybrid through the gossip column at New York Journal-American. There were reports that Trotsky himself was found to be carrying 10,000 during his trip back to Russia from New York. That much is quite plausible, as is the suggestion that he got the money from Schiff. But Trotsky was not a Bolshevik at this time and so not only does this not support the claim of Schiff-aligned-with-Lenin but it flatly contradicts it.

    Then there are other reports that after the Provisional Government of Kerensky had been overthrown there were attempts by the Allies to turn the Kaiser’s own trick back at him. Just as the German Army had given Lenin aid in arriving in Russia and setting up his newspaper, the Allies now hoped to fund revolutionary propaganda in Germany. This may have involved the Allies in sending 20 million dollars to Bolsheviks. Of course such money would have had absolutely no relevance in deciding the Russian Civil War. By early 1918 the social breakdown across Russia was such that possessing foreign dollar bills was meaningless for domestic purposes. That money would have been used to fund propaganda abroad, most obviously in Germany.

    There is no evidence that Schiff had anything to do with such efforts to fund Bolshevik propaganda in Germany. Nor is there much evidence that attempts to do so had much effect. The uprising among the German soldiers broke out when Ludendorff was forced to concede defeat, but then tried to order the soldiers into a suicidal attack. In any event, the issue of Allied diplomats attempting to fund Bolshevik propaganda in Germany has nothing to do with Trotsky’s stay in New York.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  195. geokat62 says:
    @Patrick McNally

    But Unz forgets to remind readers that Leon Trotsky was not a Bolshevik.

    Not Bolshevik? You need to edit the following wiki entry on Leon Trotsky to make that correction.

    Excerpts from Leon Trotsky:

    Political party
    * Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (1898–1903)
    * Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks) (1903–1918)
    * Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) (1918–1927)…

    During the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party 1903 ideological split he sided with Julius Martov’s Mensheviks against Lenin’s Bolsheviks. Trotsky helped organize the failed Russian Revolution of 1905, after which he was again arrested and exiled to Siberia. He once again escaped and spent the following years working in Austria, Switzerland, France, Spain and the United States. After the 1917 February Revolution brought an end to the Tsarist monarchy, Trotsky returned to Russia and became a leader in the Bolshevik faction

    Once in government, Trotsky initially held the post of Commissar for Foreign Affairs and became directly involved in the 1917-1918 Brest-Litovsk negotiations with Germany as Russia pulled out of the First World War. From March 1918 to January 1925 Trotsky headed the Red Army as People’s Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs and played a vital role in the Bolshevik victory in the Russian Civil War of 1917-1922. He became one of the seven members of the first Bolshevik Politburo in 1919…

    The following summary of Trotsky’s role in 1917 was written by Stalin in Pravda, 6 November 1918. Although this passage was quoted in Stalin’s book The October Revolution (1934), it was expunged from Stalin’s Works (1949).

    All practical work in connection with the organization of the uprising was done under the immediate direction of Comrade Trotsky, the President of the Petrograd Soviet. It can be stated with certainty that the Party is indebted primarily and principally to Comrade Trotsky for the rapid going over of the garrison to the side of the Soviet and the efficient manner in which the work of the Military Revolutionary Committee was organized.

    By the end of 1917, Trotsky was unquestionably the second man in the Bolshevik Party after Lenin.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Trotsky

    Like I said already, that claim of “Schiff gave the Bolsheviks 20 million dollars” seems to be the offspring of 2 distinct stories merged into a hybrid through the gossip column at New York Journal-American.

    Gossip column? Does the same criticism apply to The Jewish Communal Register of New York City?

    Excerpt from Jacob Schiff:

    The Jewish Communal Register of New York City stated that “Mr. Schiff has always used his wealth and his influence in the best interests of his people. He financed the enemies of autocratic Russia and used his financial influence to keep Russia from the money markets of the United States.”

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Schiff

    • Replies: @soll
    , @Patrick McNally
  196. soll says:

    This piece is discredited by its selective usages against Solzhenitsyn.

    See the contradictions which shows that author John Wear as never read Solzhenitsyn.

    >[Solzhenitsyn had a deep-seated disdain for the Western media, which he revealed in his interview with Sixty Minutes. When asked to respond to an American commentator who had branded him “a freak, a monarchist, an anti-Semite, a crank, a has-been, not a hero,” Solzhenitsyn replied:

    “The Western press works in the following way: they don’t read my books. No one has ever given a single quotation from any of my books as a basis for these accusations. But every new journalist reads these opinions from other journalists. They have been just as spiteful to me in the American press as the Soviet press was before.”]

    Now see Wear do the exact against same Solzhenitsyn.

    “After extensive research, Solzhenitsyn realized that the Russian Revolution was primarily perpetrated by Jews, most of whom were imported into Russia from other countries.”

    Solzhenitsyn never claimed either of the Russian Revolution were created and “was primarily perpetrated by Jews”]

    See:

    “Solzhenitsyn emphatically denies (in Chapters 9 and 14) that the Russian revolutions of 1905 and 1917 were the result of a “Jewish conspiracy” (just as he had earlier forcefully criticized the extreme nationalists who were and are obsessed with Freemasons and Jews—see, e.g., Russia in Collapse, Chapter 25, “The Maladies of Russian Nationalism”).” Meanwhile, readers need to be forewarned that any and all English versions of ‘Two Hundred Years Together’ available on the Internet… are illegal, pirated, and/or entirely unauthorized; often poorly and loosely translated; and redact passages, and indeed whole chapters, that apparently do not support the prejudices of those behind these illegal editions.”

    https://www.solzhenitsyncenter.org/his-writings/large-works-and-novels/two-hundred-years-together

    John Wear claims

    >He said in 2002:

    “You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse.

    The October Revolution was not what you call in America the “Russian Revolution.” It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history.

    It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators.”]

    Yet, this is a hoax quotation invented by “Dr.” David Duke he first introduced in 2013 while crowd-funding money for the publication of his, “The Secret Behind Communism” no source of his 2002 newsletter The Duke Report, “A Life-Changing Conversation in Moscow” he claims he first published it in has ever been found, while Duke neither included it in any of his books like “Jewish Supremacism” (2002 or its 2007 reprint) even though Duke quotes Solzhenitsyn in them.

    As previously stated in this piece when Solzhenitsyn defended himself against both the US/Russian press calling him an anti-Semite, “The Western press works in the following way: they don’t read my books. No one has ever given a single quotation from any of my books as a basis for these accusations…” John likewise never quotes his work, instead you are dependent on this hoax quote by David Duke that contradicts Solzhenitsyn’s own works.

    >Solzhenitsyn wrote a two-volume nonfiction work titled Two Hundred Years Together. The first volume, published in 2001, was Russian-Jewish History 1795-1916 and ran to 512 pages. The second volume, which was published in 2002, was a 600-page investigation titled The Jews in the Soviet Union.[33] This second volume exposed the predominantly Jewish constitution of the Bolshevik Revolution. No English-language translation of this work has been commercially published, and the only version of it offered on Amazon is the original Russian, at $978 as of May 2021.”]

    Even this summary of the book is wrong, again it shows that John Wear as never read Solzhenitsyn. “Two Hundred Years Together” was about Jewish-Russian relations as living together for the past 200 years, it has nothing to do with this fantasy claims that it allegedly “exposed the predominantly Jewish constitution of the Bolshevik Revolution.”

    Which Solzhenitsyn in the very book himself dismisses, both of 1905 and 1917 (February/October).

    John Wear’s “insights” are wholly based off a neo-Nazi translation that is poorly made, selectively edited and redacted whole chapters that contradicts this narrative Wear is attempting to propagate.

    “In The Red Wheel Solzhenitsyn had shown the Revolution in full complexity; and indeed—to avoid boiling down that complexity or skewing it via the narrow prism of Russian-Jewish relations—he gave The Red Wheel priority of publication in every major language, ahead of Two Hundred Years Together. And so likewise in English, an authorized translation of Two Hundred Years Together will follow The Red Wheel.”

    https://www.solzhenitsyncenter.org/his-writings/large-works-and-novels/two-hundred-years-together

    >”…Dr. David Duke writes about Solzhenitsyn: “He was a victim of Bolshevism and through his literary genius he laid bare the most horrific killing machine in all of world history.”]

    And again, David Duke with his hoax quote influences John’s views which are in contradiction to Solzhenitsyn’s work.

    https://archive.org/details/aleksandr-solzhenitsyn-you-must-understand-debunked

  197. soll says:
    @John Wear

    John Wear says

    “I recommend you read David Duke’s book “Jewish Supremacism” some time. It is a really good book. For your information, Duke spent a lot of time with Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in 2002 while Duke was in Russia. They conducted research in the Soviet archives together. Solzhenitsyn would not have spent so much time with David Duke if Duke was the horrible person that you and the mass media try to make him out to be.”

    There is no evidence that Duke ever even met Solzhenitsyn, Duke still in almost 20 years never stated where they allegedly came together, at what meeting nothing that can be validated. Never mind the bogus claim that they did “research” Duke does not speak Russian, and Solzhenitsyn never spoke English. Their works are not in common at all, however much Duke attempts to merge himself while creating a hoax quote that even misrepresent Solzhenitsyn works. Just the same as you Wear as shown above.

    Why did Duke not include his invented 2013 quote, in his 2002 or 2007 editions of “Jewish Supremacism” while Solzhenitsyn was still alive? Yet Duke claims it was published in a 2002 newsletter “The Duke Report, “A Life-Changing Conversation in Moscow” which likewise has never been found.

    The first recorded time that Duke presented his quote to the world was in 2013 while attempting to source funds from his readers. It was created merely for interest of money and ideology, it certainly does not represent Solzhenitsyn works, writing or even style, but it does of Dukes.

    Whatever you think of the ADL, it’s the first time Duke made his hoax quote available.
    https://www.adl.org/blog/david-duke-solicits-funds-to-distribute-new-anti-semitic-book

  198. soll says:
    @geokat62

    @Patrick McNally
    But Unz forgets to remind readers that Leon Trotsky was not a Bolshevik.

    @geokat62
    Not Bolshevik? You need to edit the following wiki entry on Leon Trotsky to make that correction.

    Trotsky only became a Bolshevik in 1917, since 1903 he was a Menshevik. Trotsky at the time wrote and opposed Lenin, it’s why they could never get along, only with Trotsky’s influence at establishing the Red Army into the Civil War did Lenin keep him around. Lenin was tactical, Stalin was the 2nd in line as General Secretary of the Party not Trotsky as of their past rivalry.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  199. @geokat62

    Your own sources are compatible with what I said. Trotsky joined the Bolsheviks after July 1917. The time that he spent in New York was up to about April 1917. He definitely was not a Bolshevik during that time and moreover the record shows numerous fierce polemics between Trotsky and Lenin right up through that time. Your own source specifically states “he sided with Julius Martov’s Mensheviks..”

    As far as “financed the enemies of autocratic Russia” goes, that statement is general enough that it doesn’t warrant more than a small qualifier. The overthrow of the Czarist monarchy was obviously supported by the vast majority of Russians. Anyone who bothers to look through the accounts of how both the 1905 and February 1917 revolutions broke out will realize that much. The Bolsheviks were just one single faction among all of the various revolutionary groups which existed at the time. Even if one were to count the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, two different factions of what was originally the Russian Social Democratic Party, as one unit there would still be plenty of others left. The Social Revolutionaries were much more based on the peasant populace, and the Popular Socialists were an offshoot of the Social Revolutionaries. There’s no reason to dispute that someone like Jacob Schiff tried to support elements who were fighting the Czarist monarchy.

    However there is no evidence of Schiff ever having given any support to Lenin’s Bolshevik faction. What someone like Schiff wanted was to create a liberal society in which the monarchy would either be abolished or else it would take the form of the British monarchy in a constitutional order. It certainly is plausible that Schiff would have given aid to Trotsky in New York at a time when Trotsky was trying to argue against US entry into the war against the Central Powers. It’s also plausible that Schiff gave Trotsky the alleged 10,000 dollars that was allegedly found on him when he transported back to Russia. But Schiff never gave Trotsky 20 million dollars and he never gave the Bolsheviks a penny.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  200. @soll

    Properly speaking, Trotsky wasn’t even a Menshevik. He fell out with both factions in 1903. His writing of Our Political Tasks was a polemic against Lenin. But the Menshevik theory of two-stage revolution was so directly opposed to his own theory of permanent revolution that he couldn’t actually join with them either. This is actually the kind of point which makes it easy to believe that Schiff may have supported Trotsky’s hotel bill in New York in early 1917. Schiff had no interest in getting tied down with any specific party in Russia. But a lone individual without any party who was preaching against WWI would be someone that Schiff would have an interest in temporarily helping.

    As far as the later events with Stalin as General Secretary, Lenin was trying to remove Stalin from that position shortly before his death. He even tried forming an alliance with Trotsky for the purposes of moving against Stalin. Of course Lenin still had no interest in seeing Trotsky emerge as the principal leader of the party. If Lenin had recovered for another year he undoubtedly would have stripped Stalin of the General Secretary position while forming a temporary alliance with Trotsky that would still be only a short-term arrangement. But again, this was long after the time when Trotsky was in New York and has absolutely nothing to do with that era.

    • Replies: @soll
  201. geokat62 says:
    @Patrick McNally

    Your own sources are compatible with what I said.

    I thought you said Trotsky wasn’t a Bolshevik?

    Your own source specifically states “he sided with Julius Martov’s Mensheviks..”

    That split occurred much earlier, in 1903:

    During the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party 1903 ideological split he sided with Julius Martov’s Mensheviks against Lenin’s Bolsheviks.

    However there is no evidence of Schiff ever having given any support to Lenin’s Bolshevik faction.

    I think this comment by Ron Unz should put this issue to rest:

    All credible contemporaneous observers, including leading political figures, top journalists, and American, British, and French Intelligence agreed that Schiff had been a crucial financial backer of the Bolsheviks, and his own grandson later confirmed that fact. But you prefer to emphasize that some writers two or three or four generations later say “Nope, it never happened!”

    https://www.unz.com/article/solzhenitsyns-two-hundred-years-together/#comment-4545217

  202. soll says:
    @Patrick McNally

    I never claimed that Schiff supported the Bolsheviks, this is contradictory to his support of the February Revolution and the Provisional Government. Why would Schiff go against his own interests to then switch sides over to the Bolsheviks? It makes no sense.

    This narrative comes from people who hear that he supported the Russian Revolution, which he did in February, and being unfamiliar with the subject attach it instead to the wrong event in October.

    “Schiff had no interest in getting tied down with any specific party in Russia. But a lone individual without any party who was preaching against WWI would be someone that Schiff would have an interest in temporarily helping.”

    Why then did Schiff support the Provisional Government that kept Russia in the War? His issue was not over WW1, instead it came from mistreatment of the Jews. You present Schiff as being a Communist, which he wasn’t, by claiming that he would have promoted a vague “two-stage revolution.”

    “As far as the later events with Stalin as General Secretary, Lenin was trying to remove Stalin from that position shortly before his death. He even tried forming an alliance with Trotsky for the purposes of moving against Stalin. Of course Lenin still had no interest in seeing Trotsky emerge as the principal leader of the party. If Lenin had recovered for another year he undoubtedly would have stripped Stalin of the General Secretary position while forming a temporary alliance with Trotsky that would still be only a short-term arrangement.”

    This is contradictory, you have claimed that Lenin was trying to remove Stalin to form an alliance with Trotsky to state “Of course Lenin still had no interest in seeing Trotsky emerge as the principal leader of the party.” to “If Lenin had recovered for another year he undoubtedly would have stripped Stalin of the General Secretary position while forming a temporary alliance with Trotsky that would still be only a short-term arrangement.” Stalin would have never been assigned as General Secretary of the Party had, according to you, Lenin distrusted him. Stalin was his loyal servant which is why he established himself through the party becoming 2nd in line.

    As for Lenin’s supposed “testament,” there is no evidence that this was genuine, all evidences points to it being an invention of Krupskaya, Lenin’s wife as shown by Stephen Kotkin. see, “Vol. 1, Paradoxes of Power, 1878-1928” or a background summary.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  203. @geokat62

    The ignorant, hate-filled judeobolshevism denialists are really going crazy in this thread.

    • Replies: @soll
  204. soll says:
    @James Forrestal

    “judeobolshevism denialists”?

    Nonsensical.

    1. In the Council of People’s Commissars in 1917, of the 16 members only 1 was Jewish, Leon Trotsky. (1 out of 16)

    2. In the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic before the Soviet Union was established in 1922, out of the 50 members, only 6 were Jewish. (6 out of 50)

    3. Before the Provisional Government walked away in October and allowed Lenin’s rise, there were 30 officials of the Bolshevik party, only 6 who were Jewish. (6 out of 30)

    4. On the Central Committee there were 7 members, of 3 who were Jewish. (3 out of 7)

    Of the 50 party officials, there was a total of 6 members who were Jewish. (*Total of 12% of the Bolsheviks were Jewish, by 1922 this came down to 5% that was 1.8% of the population).

    There existed an anti-Semitic campaign even started by the Red Army in 1918 against the Jews. While their support continued to drop after Trotsky had been kicked out of the USSR in 1929. In the 1930s there existed 36 Jews who held leadership roles in the NKVD, who were then removed in 1939 after the Hitler-Stalin Pact had been signed.

    For their disposition in the NKVD as stated by J. Arch Getty, Jews became attracted to the secret police in response to their past treatment under the Tsarist rule. It was their way of assuming authority which they never held before as expelled to the Pale of Settlement where their movement, economy and education had been restricted from the general population.

    It’s why Solzhenitsyn focused on “The Red Wheel” as his main work, a 6.000-page tome (and the reason “Two Hundred Years Together” has not received any English translation); this topic is complex rather than the singular subject of Jewish-Russian relations as found in “Two Hundred Years Together” which is why he gave priority over to “The Red Wheel.”

    Yet simpletons like to look for simple narratives. John Wear states proudly.

    “Solzhenitsyn’s books are all readily available on Amazon except for “200 Years Together”. This later book is threatening to the establishment…”

    This myth that “Two Hundred Years Together” is being “suppressed” was started by David Duke. It became a meme in 2013 which Duke used for interviews where he would first recite his hoax Solzhenitsyn quote, explain how the book was allegedly “threatening” then he would tell his audience that they should instead buy his book “The Secret Behind Communism.”

    It was a marketing ploy and nothing else.

    As stated by Daniel Mahoney (the leading scholar on Solzhenitsyn in English/French) over 3 million copies of “Two Hundred Years Together” were sold, an international bestseller.

    Solzhenitsyn does not claim the Jews were behind the breakdown of the Tsarist autocracy or later the overthrow of the Provisional Government that replaced the Tsar in February that kept the system in place and held the Russians in the War that eventually led into October where the Provisional Government then walked away and allowed Lenin’s rise.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
  205. @soll

    Case it point — yet another ignorantl, hate-filled judeobolshevism denialist histrionically spewing a stream of histrionic, logorrheic, semitic supremacist blabber. Thanks for further illustrating the indisputable truth of my observation.

  206. @geokat62

    As I said, Trotsky only joined the Bolsheviks after the July Uprising, instigated by anarchists in July 1917. Here are Lenin’s own words from a letter to Alexandra Kollontai, written February 17, 1917:

    “What a swine this Trotsky is — Left phrases, and a bloc with the Right against the Zimmerwald Left!! He ought to be exposed (by you) if only in a brief letter to Sotsial-Demokrat!”

    There was no alliance between Lenin and Trotsky at this time. It was only after Trotsky had returned to Russia that he and Lenin slowly came to see a need for each other and formed an alliance which had not existed previously.

    As for the other comments, No, Jacob Schiff’s grandson never “confirmed” any such nonsensical claim. That statement is just taken off of the gossip-column that appeared in the New York Journal-American of February 3, 1949. I characterize it as a gossip-column because that is what it was. This was not the result of a news investigation where a reporter interviews various sources and forms a story out of them. The pseudonym “Cholly Knickerbocker” was used by various successive columnists in the paper for several decades. In such columns the author is allowed to rant without having to carefully match their statements to sources in a way that could be defended as professional journalism.

    In this case the columnist made the claim:

    “Today it is estimated by Jacob’s grandson, John Schiff, a prominent member of New York society, that the old man sank about 20,000,000 dollars for the final triumph of Bolshevism in Russia.”

    Where did John Schiff make such a claim? In an interview? No reference is given or suggested. It’s the kind of gossip rumor which people like John Schiff would have learned to ignore. It’s real evidence on the gullibility of Ron Unz that he treats such a column as if it were a major piece of historic evidence about anything other than the way media columnists can repeat rumors.

    When I saw that you were referring to a link to a link where Unz references Bendersky then I ran back over to my copy to see if he has anything to say about John Schiff. No, he does not. This is a classic form of trickery which you’re playing here where the reliance upon a gossip column is buried under 3-fold references to give the impression that it is somehow based upon academic sources.

    Like I said already, the basic facts are perfectly clear. Trotsky in New York was given support by someone opposed to US alliance with Czarist Russia. Probably it was Jacob Schiff. Trotsky was regarded as a bitter rival of Lenin’s at this time. When Trotsky traveled back to Russia the officers handling things reported that he was carrying 10,000 (not 20,000,000) dollars on him. Probably that was given to him by Schiff. After Trotsky and Lenin had both landed in Russia it took them a few months to patch things up.

    Once the Provisional Government had been overthrown (without any help from the Allies, although Germany provided Lenin with material to sent up his newspaper) then the Bolsheviks began looking to send propaganda into Germany. In early 1918 the Allies made contact with them in the hopes of using Lenin against the Kaiser just as the latter had used him against the Russian authorities. There credible reports which imply that the Allies gave the Bolsheviks 20 million for this anti-Kaiser campaign. None of that money would have had relevance to the ability of the Bolsheviks to hold power in Russia, since the monetary economy was already in a state of collapse by early 1918. It was money to be used to foster revolution in Germany.

    It didn’t accomplish much until Germany was truly defeated in November 1918. But the Allies were willing to expend the resource on the attempt anyway. There is no evidence that Schiff had anything to do with that Allied policy of 1918, but the bit of gossip contained in that New York Journal-American column is a byproduct of gluing together different stories, as is common with most gossip. The 20 million comes from the later story, whereas the stuff about is the earlier story. All evidence shows that Schiff was against dealing with the Bolsheviks after they took power and he had nothing to do with the Allied policy of trying to fund Lenin’s propaganda in Germany.

  207. @soll

    I didn’t have the impression that you were regurgitating the Schiff-supports-Bolsheviks hoax. If I implied that I thought you did then it was a misstatement on my part.

    Yes, Schiff did support the Provisional Government which remained at war with Germany. Schiff’s opposition to the war was based at a time when the Czarist monarchy was still in power. That was the basis for his very likely having given some assistance to Trotsky in New York where Trotsky was denouncing the war as an imperialist war. Once Kerensky had taken office Schiff stopped being concerned about opposing the war.

    While there are questions about the final testament and the extent to which Krupskaya may have figured into its formulation, no has really been able to dispute the rising conflict which led Lenin to write to Stalin:

    “You had the uncouthness to summon my wife to the telephone and swear at her. Although she has given you her agreement to forget what was said .. it goes without saying that I consider something done against my wife to be something also done against me.”

    The conflict grew from there. Now some authors like Bill Bland sought to attribute the fallout mainly just to Lenin’s declining health. That is plausible. But the conflict was there.

  208. LeoB says:
    @Rdm

    why do you mean by saying that Solzhenitsyn “had been ‘canceled’”?

  209. Solzhenitsyn hasn’t been officially cancelled but he is as good as so : all his literary production now just makes everybody yawn and the matter he treats leaves everybody indifferent. People who read and write in America have always despised the concerns he voices. He is already too boring and despicable to be cancelled. You can only cancel former idols, for instance in Rock music or cinema, but not people who were always known to be un-American by all standards. You cannot cancel Klaus Barbie or General Pinochet or François Duvalier, despite the fact each one of them was hired for specific missions by the American empire : even while being used they bore the label : danger, to be touched at your own risks. Solzhenitsyn right at the time he made himself known by writing Gulag Archipelago was classified as a necessary evil to defeat Soviet power, namely a Nazi and religious fundamentalist of the kind to be favoured in Russia, not in America, a character to be used for the distant empire and also to discourage humanists and leftists at home by bringing disheartening facts and arguments, in that way he ressembles any Taliban leader of the kind that was deployed near the former Soviet border. To be cancelled you need to have been some idol. The idol he was never meant for domestic adoration, he could not be cancelled, he already bore the word poison on his forehead, and he was sold as a poison to throw at foes.

    Solzhenitsyn, on the other hand, clearly knew what he did and played a very dishonest game right from the start : he counted on the American media machine to enjoy an otherwise very hard to achieve celebrity. Solzhenitsyn is a good novelist, the personal low-level anecdotes he tells about the gulag are very accurate, but the mass figures he gives are mistaken at best and often mendacious. Solzhenitsyn despite his long-hoped for reputation as a first-order antisemite always courted Jewish powers in reality, of the kind he knew were abandoning all concerns for the workers in favour of neo-liberalism, and he presented falsified figures the new generation of media Jews would salivate hearing. The gulag was indeed the horror he describes. But it is simply not true that communism made 60 millions deaths among Russians and was an enterprise to exterminate Russians. What killed so many Russians was WWII, its preparation and its aftermath. The number of deaths due to the gulag system proper always remained small in comparison. The horror of camps in Siberia was greatly superseded by that experienced by far more people on the battlefields and in the besieged cities.

    Moreover, that must be insisted upon, only a tiny fraction of the gulag inmates were sent there for reasons of political dissidence of some sort, or for espionage : among let us say 1000 camp prisoners a dissident was lucky if he could meet with two or three people literate enough to understand what he was dissident against. More than 99% were bandits and pillagers of about the same kind and mentality that compose the Mexican Cartels nowadays and most generally they were sent to camps for crimes of sadism. The Russian Empire was not a holy pious society nor even a relatively sane society suddenly taken over by a bunch of sadistic Jews, it was an empire ruled with the aid of many criminals pillaging the pesants for their own interest while protecting the landlord class to enjoy some immunity unless that landlord class would grant them their booty in which case they massacred it in the name of various malevolent ideologies. It is true that the first Bolshevik regime was explicitly satanic and resorted quite explicitly to the darkest occult forces. But the kind of orthodox religion that had prevailed in Russia from Ivan the terrible and even more so from Peter the Great onwards was based on a satanic theology quite like that of Kabbalah : it was based on the idea of the absence of God in the world as well as on the idea of a god beyond good and evil. It resembled in many ways the worst Hindu theology which stated that the manifest universe was the result of an act of deception, not of generosity by God. This as a consequence of the refusal to mention the clause “filioque” in their credo : man could hope for the exertion of absolutely no positive influence in this world even united with Christ, he could only fight for survival and also vindicate his church by way of deception.

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 have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All John Wear Comments via RSS