PDA

View Full Version : Solzhenitsyn in a Nut Shell



Submariner
11-10-08, 12:38
There are many types of fever. Gun fever. Magazine fever. Ammo fever.

Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn,in his book The Gulag Archipelago, devotes a lengthy chapter to describing the waves of arrests which populated the gulags. He relates one of the efforts, referred to as 'Gold Fever', which occurred around the end of 1929:


Who was arrested in the “gold” wave? All those who, at one time or another, fifteen years before, had had a private “business,” had been involved in retail trade, had earned wages at a craft, and could have, according to the GPU's [Russian secret police] deductions, hoarded gold.

But it so happened that they often had no gold. They had put their money into real estate or securities, which had melted away or been taken away in the Revolution, and nothing remained. They had high hopes, of course, in arresting dental technicians, jewelers, and watch repairmen. Through denunciations, one could learn about gold in the most unexpected places: a veteran lathe worker had somewhere gotten hold of, and held on to, sixty gold five-ruble pieces from Tsarist times. The famous Siberian partisan Muravyev had come to Odessa, bringing with him a small bag full of gold. The Petersburg Tatar draymen all had gold hidden away. Whether or not these things were so could be discovered only inside prison walls. Nothing – neither proletarian origin nor revolutionary services – served as a defense against a gold denunciation. All were arrested, all were crammed into GPU cells in numbers no one had considered possible up to then – but that was all to the good: they would cough it up all the sooner! It even reached a point of such confusion that men and women were imprisoned in the same cells and used the latrine bucket in each other's presence – who cared about those niceties? Give up your gold, vipers! The interrogators did not write up charge sheets because no one needed their papers. And whether or not a sentence would be pasted on was of very little interest. Only one thing was important: Give up your gold, viper! The state needs gold and you don't. The interrogators had neither voice nor strength left to threaten and torture; they had one universal method: feed the prisoners nothing but salty food and give them no water. Whoever coughed up gold got water! One gold piece for a cup of fresh water!

People perish for cold metal.

This wave was distinguished from those that preceded and followed it because, even though fewer than half its victims held their fate in their own hands, some did. If you in fact had no gold, then your situation was hopeless. You would be beaten, burned, tortured, and steamed to the point of death or until they finally came to believe you. But if you had gold, you could determine the extent of your torture, the limits of your endurance, and your own fate. Psychologically, this situation was, incidentally, not easier but more difficult, because if you made an error you would always be ridden by a guilty conscience. Of course, anyone who had already mastered the rules of the institution would yield and give up his gold – that was easier. But it was a mistake to give it up too readily. They would refuse to believe you had coughed it all up, and they would continue to hold you. But you'd be wrong, too, to wait too long before yielding: you'd end up kicking the bucket or they'd paste a term on you out of meanness. One of the Tatar draymen endured all the tortures: he had no gold! They imprisoned his wife, too, and tortured her, but the Tatar stuck to his story: no gold! Then they arrested his daughter: the Tatar couldn't take it any more. He coughed up 100,000 rubles. At this point they let his family go, but slapped a prison term on him. The crudest detective stories and operas about brigands were played out in real life on a vast national scale.

Also from The Gulag Archipelago:


And how we burned in the camps latter, thinking: What would things have been like if. during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those blue caps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you'd be cracking the skull of a cutthroat. Or what about the Black Maria sitting out there on the street with one lonely chauffeur---what if it had been driven off or its tires spiked? The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst; the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more. We had no awareness of the real situation. We spent ourselves in one unrestrained outburst in 1917, and then we hurried to submit. We submitted with pleasure! We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.

How to deal with the State?


Don't believe them, don't fear them, don't ask anything of them.

lowprone
11-10-08, 12:55
How very relevent, think real hard about it folks, act 2 is just behind those curtains.

rmecapn
11-10-08, 16:07
Consider that a valid warning. Stalin was quoted the other day on Glenn Beck as stating they would feed socialism to our youth a bit at a time, until it was accepted. They have accomplished that task.

We have now elected an individual to POTUS who has associated himself with avowed Marxists, who has stated he believes in many of the tenets of Marxist ideology, and has demonstrated his willingness to support Marxist ideology. We also elected a congress to support this ideology and this individual.

I have witnessed just how much of what I believe prophetic will be able to be accomplished.

I do not believe we will survive this attempt to escape to utopia. I will prepare as if that were certain. May Yahweh have mercy on those who actually serve Him.

Bat Guano
11-10-08, 19:52
Solzhenitsin is one of my few heroes. I read the Gulag Archipelago, all three volumes, when it came out. It's numbing and horrible at the same time. I particularly remember his comments about resistance.

Neitzche is NOT one of my heroes; (:rolleyes:) but now and then he said something worth noting. "The state is a cold monster."

Not to give anything away, but I can attest to the truth of those two statements...

Leonidas
11-10-08, 22:59
What did we fight WWII again for?

LibertyCola
11-11-08, 00:25
http://www.lewrockwell.com/podcast/?p=episode&name=2008-11-10_065_a_libertarian_in_the_ussr.mp3

Interview with a libertarian who lived in the USSR, interesting.

LibertyCola
11-11-08, 00:32
What did we fight WWII again for?

-to stop the killing of the jews...........oh wait, stalin did that too.
-to save europe from tyranical rule.........oh wait, that didn't work out so well for the eastern part.
-to put an end to americas enemies........oh wait, I thought I read somewhere that we didnt like the ussr at some point....
-cause FDR is a dumbass that wanted war with europe so he maneuvered japan into attacking us? yup thats the one.

Submariner
11-11-08, 07:34
What did we fight WWII again for?

Profits for the banksters?

The Yankee dollar as world reserve currency, as good as gold?

Now we face the end of dollar hegemony. (http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&start=1&q=http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2006/cr021506.htm&ei=JIoZSfXWNIjg8wSQ68yfDg&usg=AFQjCNFqm7Y_v4ekbAQ6u8pNCHe_vY0smA)

Leonidas
11-11-08, 23:01
"History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain

When events start to rhyme will we have the courage?

Submariner
11-12-08, 06:29
When events start to rhyme will we have the courage?

Yes we can!

rmecapn
11-12-08, 15:21
Yes we can!

Roger that! Zeig hiel!! ;)

Mjolnir
11-13-08, 19:24
He will be missed by a few of us. A numbing and chilling read. He has another book - I cannot recall the title - that is being translated. I hope it's completed soon.

Submariner
11-14-08, 01:48
He will be missed by a few of us.

Indeed. And few are aware of him as he was dropped into the memory hole.


Exiled from the USSR soon after receiving the Nobel Prize, Solzhenitsyn found refuge in the mountains of Vermont, where he continued to write and declare the truth. Initially lionized by the American intelligentsia, he was invited to deliver the 1978 commencement address at Harvard University, published as A World Split Apart (New York: Harper & Row, c. 1978). He began his speech abrasively, noting that though Harvard’s motto is Veritas graduates would find that “truth seldom is sweet; it is almost invariably bitter” (p. 1). But he would speak truly anyway! And his words proved “bitter” to many who heard him!

After assessing various developments around the world, he questioned the resolve of the West to deal with them. Alarmingly, he said, “A decline in courage may be the most striking feature that an outside observer notices in the West today. The Western world has lost its civic courage, both as a whole and separately, in each country, in each government, in each political part, and, of course, in the United Nations. Such a decline in courage is particularly noticeable among the ruling and intellectual elites, causing an impression of a loss of courage by the entire society” (pp. 9-11). This decline, “at times attaining what could be termed a lack of manhood,” portended a cataclysmic cultural collapse.

Solzhenitsyn also lamented the West’s materialism, litigiousness, licentiousness, and irresponsible individualism. Personal freedom is, of course, a great good, but irresponsible freedom erupts in evil acts and “evidently stems from a humanistic and benevolent concept according to which man—the master of this world—does not bear any evil within himself, and all the defects of life are caused by misguided social systems, which must therefore be corrected” (p. 23). If so, it would seem that affluence would eliminate crime! Strangely enough, however, crime was more rampant in the wealthy West than in the impoverished USSR!

Then he upbraided the media. Granted virtually complete “freedom,” journalists in the West used it as a license for irresponsibility. Rather than working hard work to discover the truth, they slip into the slothful role of circulating rumors and personal opinions. Though no state censors restrict what’s written, “fashionable” ideas get aired and the public is denied free access to the truth. Fads and fantasies, not the illumination of reality, enlist the mainstream media. “Hastiness and superficiality—these are the psychic diseases of the twentieth century and more than anywhere else this is manifested in the press” (p. 27). Consequently, “we may see terrorists heroized, or secret matters pertaining to the nation’s defense publicly revealed, or we may witness shameless intrusion into the privacy of well-known people according to the slogan ‘Everyone is entitled to know everything’” (p. 25).

Solzhenitsyn was further disturbed by the widespread pessimism and discontent Westerners displayed regarding economic development. Amazingly, elite intellectuals celebrated the very socialism that had destroyed his homeland. (Remember that Harvard’s superstar economist, John Kenneth Galbraith, still trumpeted the virtues of socialism in the 1980s!) This, Solzhenitsyn warned, “is a false and dangerous current” (p. 33). In the East, “communism has suffered a complete ideological defeat; it is zero and less than zero. And yet Western intellectuals still look at it with considerable interest and empathy, and this is precisely what makes it so immensely difficult for the West to withstand the East” (p. 55). But the capitalist system in the West is no panacea either. Both East and West, he said, need “spiritual” rather than “economic” development, and the spirit has been “trampled by the party mob in the East, by the commercial one in the West” (p. 57).

American politicians who appeased Communism especially elicited Solzhenitsyn’s scorn. In fact, looking at the nation’s recent withdrawal from Vietnam, he said: “the most cruel mistake occurred with the failure to understand the Vietnam War. Some people sincerely wanted all wars to stop just as soon as possible; others believed that the way should be left open for national, or Communist, self-determination in Vietnam (or in Cambodia, as we see today with particular clarity). But in fact, members of the U.S. antiwar movement became accomplices in the betrayal of Far Eastern nations, in the genocide and the suffering today imposed on thirty million people there. Do these convinced pacifists now hear the moans coming from there? Do they understand their responsibility today? Or do they prefer not to hear? The American intelligentsia lost its nerve and as a consequence the danger has come much closer to the United States. But there is no awareness of this. Your short-sighted politician who signed the hasty Vietnam capitulation seemingly gave America a carefree breathing pause; however a hundredfold Vietnams now looms over you” (p. 41). The future he envisioned would be shaped by a “fight of cosmic proportions,” a battle between the forces of either Goodness or Evil. Those who are morally neutral, those who exalt in their moral relativism, are the true enemies of mankind. Thus, two years before Ronald Reagan was elected President, Solzhenitsyn insisted that only a moral offensive could turn back the evil empire.

Cowardice had led to retreat in Southeast Asia. Democracies themselves, Solzhenitsyn feared, lack the soul strength for sustained combat. Wealthy democracies, especially, seem flaccid. “To defend oneself, one must also be ready to die; there is little such readiness in a society raised in the cult of material well-being. Nothing is left, in this case, but concessions, attempts to gain time, and betrayal” (p. 45). More deeply, the “humanism” that has increasingly dominated the West since the Renaissance explains its weakness. When one believes ultimately only in himself, when human reason becomes the final arbiter, when human sinfulness is denied, the strength that comes only from God will dissipate. Ironically, the secular humanism of the West is almost identical with the humanism of Karl Marx, who said: “communism is naturalized humanism” (p. 53).

Consequently, he said, “If the world has not approached its end, it has reached a major watershed in history, equal in importance to the turn from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance. It will demand from us a spiritual blaze; we shall have to rise to a new height of vision, to a new level of life, where our physical nature will not be cursed, as in the Middle Ages, but even more importantly, our spiritual being will not be trampled upon, as in the Modern Era” (pp. 60-61). This speech ended Solzhenitsyn’s speaking career in the United States. The nation’s elite newspapers—the New York Times and Washington Post—thenceforth ignore him. Prestigious universities, such as Harvard, closed their doors. He became something of a persona non grata and spent the last 15 years of his life in America living as a recluse, working industriously on manuscripts devoted to Russia’s history.

http://reedings.com/archive/148April2004.htm

Complete text of Harvard address here. (http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/solzhenitsyn/harvard1978.html)

rmecapn
11-14-08, 10:06
Indeed. And few are aware of him as he was dropped into the memory hole.

Thanks for the quote, Paul. He was both insightful and prophetic. It's too bad we didn't seem to want to listen. :(

CarlosDJackal
11-14-08, 11:08
What did we fight WWII again for?

Because Hitler was an idiot and turned most of the United States against him when he started persecuting and murdering the Jews. Because Churchill was a genius and managed to sucker us into the fray.

I grew in a very dark and dangerous period in history where the elected President managed to convince the world that him becoming dictator for life was the best option. As a result, tens of thousands are still unaccounted for and a country that has never recovered economically even though it was, at the time of the elections, was growing by leaps and bounds.

The pattern to this decline was as follows:

- A popular President was elected by well-meaning citizens. He convinced the masses that he was the best option through his charisma.
- He did well at first, then he let himself get corrupted by the "power" that came with his office.
- He managed to install his cronies into the highest levels of the military and governments at all levels.
- He convinced well-meaning gun owners that they had to register their firearms so that they could "tell who the criminals were".
- Because of the graft and corruption, there were riots. Some of these resulted in the deaths of hundreds of students who were trying to bring about positive change.
- He used the riots as an excuse to declare Martial Law.
- He used the Martial Law to declare that guns were illegal and that everyone who registered had to turn in their guns by a certain date or face prosecution and jail time. NOTE: My Uncles were smart enough not to register all but a few of their guns and bury the rest.
- He ruled with an iron fist and took away individual rights as he so pleased. No freedom of speech, no right to own a firearm for selfe-defense, no freedom of the press, and total control.

RESULT: Increased crime and violence. The President for life and his cronies got richer while the rest of the country got poorer. Anyone who spoke out against the government were either jailed without a trial, disappeared without a trace or outright assassinated. Free speech was nonexistent and nobody was immune from retaliation. Elections were fixed adn anyone who dared to run against teh President's party was in danger. In fact, one of my Uncles ran for office against the President's party - during a televised rally the platform they were standing on was blown up (he broke both legs in the process, but otehrs lost their lives). In most cases the ballots were stuffed in favor of the ruling party. In some cases, someone who was from an "opposing party" would win - but everyone knew that party was fake and the person who "won" was in fact a member of the ruling party. There were rare cases when the ruling party would let one of their own loose - mostly because they had fallen from grace and they knew that the winner could be controlled either by bribery or threat to themselves or their family.

During this time, criminal elements flourished because they could bribe their way out of anything. Despite the laws, they managed to obtain firearms for their use anyway (big surprise!!). The death rates for Police officers and Private (armed) Security Guards rose because they were the prime targets for criminals who wanted to obttain a firearm. As a result, the only ones who had any guns were: the Military, the Police, the wealthy and their Body Guards, and Criminals. And in a lot of cases, these were all one and the same. It was not unusual for some well-connected scumbags to have their own standing Armies (in some cases comprised of Cops or Soldiers who were "moonlighting").

Even decades after the President-for-Life was deposed, the culture of corruption and nepotism is still in place. While the rich get richer and the poor get poorer; the country has never come close to fully recovering from the resulting economic and moral chaos this guy created (With any luck, he's currently burning in hell).

I can only hope that we don't even come close to this type of a situation although there are some uncanny similarities between obama and the former President I am talking about. :(

rmecapn
11-14-08, 11:58
although there are some uncanny similarities between obama and the former President I am talking about.

And that, my friend, is exactly what concerns many of us.

Submariner
11-14-08, 14:57
What did we fight WWII again for?


Because Hitler was an idiot and ...

... declared war on the United States after the United States declared war on Japan following Pearl Harbor.