Imagine the scene at Harvard in the spring of 1978 when Alexander Solzhenitsyn gave his now-famous address. Solzhenitsyn had already won the Nobel Prize for The Gulag Archipelago and other great works exposing the murderous nature of atheist Communism. But at Harvard Solzhenitsyn touched on a topic much closer to home.
Even though he was second to none in his denunciation of totalitarian socialism, Solzhenitsyn said, "should someone ask me whether I would indicate the West such as it is today as a model to my country, frankly I would have to answer negatively." The whole address is worth reading, but here are some highlights.
On the lack of courage in facing a totalitarian enemy: "The Western world has lost its civil courage, both as a whole and separately, in each country...and of course in the United Nations....Such a decline is especially notable among ruling groups and the intellectual elite....They get tongue-tied and paralyzed when they deal with powerful governments and threatening forces, with aggressors and international terrorists."
On how materialism makes a nation soft: "Every citizen has been granted the desired freedom and material goods in such quantity and of such quality as to guarantee in theory the pursuit of happiness...So why and for what should one risk one's precious life in defense of common values and particularly in such nebulous cases when the security of one's nation must be defended in a distant country?"
On what has happened to the rule of law: "People in the West has acquired considerable skill in using, interpreting and manipulating law....If one is right from a legal point of view, nothing more is required, nobody might mention that one could still not be entirely right and urge a willingness to show restraint or sacrifice. Everybody operates at the extreme limits of those legal frames....A society without any objective legal scale is a terrible one indeed, but a society with no other scale but the legal one is not quite worthy of man either."
On the rights of criminals: "Legal frames especially in the United States are broad enough to encourage not only individual freedom but also certain individual crimes. The culprit can go unpunished or obtain undeserved leniency with the support of legions of public defenders. When a government starts an earnest fight against terrorism, public opinion immediately accuses it of violating the terrorists' civil rights. There are many such cases."
On the abuses of freedom: "Destructive and irresponsible freedom has been granted boundless space. Soceity appears to have litle defense against the abyss of human decadence, such as misuse of liberty for moral violence against young people, motion pictures full of pornography, crime and horror...Such a tilt of freedom in the directionof evil has come about gradually but it was evidently born out of a humanistic concept according to which there is no evil inherent to human nature."
On freedom of the press: "The press, too, enjoys the widest freedom. But what use does it make of this freedom? The press has become the greatest power within the Western countries, more powerful than the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. One would then like to ask: by what law has it been elected and to whom is it responsible? How many hasty, immature, superficial and misleading judgments are expressed every day, confusing readers, and without any verification? Thus we see terrorists made into heroes, or secret matters pertaining to the national defense publicly revealed, or shameful intrusion into the privacy of people under the false slogan: everyone has the right to know everything."
On the atrophy of the spiritual life: "Mere freedom does not in the least solve all the problems of human life and it even adds some new ones....We have placed too much hope in political and social reforms, only to find out that we were being deprived of our most precious possession: our spiritual life."
Thirty years ago, the very chattering classes mentioned in Solzhenitsyn's address ridiculed the man as a reactionary and a crank. The literary critic Susan Sontag describes Manhattan cocktail parties at which the cultural left would laugh at Solzhenitsyn. No one--certainly not liberals and libertarians--wanted to hear what the New York Times called Solzhenitsyn's "hectoring jeremiads."
But today when you go to Asia you hear everywhere the slogan, "Modernization, yes; Westernization, no." Throughout the Muslim world there is a reaction--exploited of course by the Islamic radicals--against what is perceived as the shamelessness and decadence of Western values and culture. Even in the West there is deep ambivalence about what has happened to cherished notions of liberty, the rule of law, freedom of the press, and the pursuit of happiness.
We don't have to agree with Solzhenitsyn on everything to say that, far from being a reactionary, here was a man who was ahead of his time in diagnosing some of the serious ailments of the modern era. Not only was he right about the Gulag; in many respects this forlorn Russian hermit was also right about us.
Reader Comments ( Page 18 of 19)
256. The fact that you see divinity where you want to see it is fine if it works for you but it isn't a compelling argument to anyone but you. >>>
This isn't about me ... it's about cutting edge physics. You want a compelling argument for God's existence ... try this.
Scientist find design in the numbers, because our universe is so finely tuned.
Example: For our universe to work the way it does Hydrogen must be converted into Helium in a very precise manor. When hydrogen is converted into helium seven one thousandths of its mass is converted into energy. Lower the value ever so slightly to six one thousandth and no transformation can take place. The universe would consist entirely of hydrogen ... I.E no possibility for life. Raise the value to eight one thousandths and bonding would be so prolific it would have exhusted all the hydrogen in the universe ... I.E. no possibility for life.
Now, there are two theories that explain this finely tuned universe of ours. The first is that our universe was designed to allow life. The second is that the BB created infinite universes, and with infinite universes each with it's own set numbers (physics) one would be 'tuned' to allow life.
I find this second explaination a bit odd. It's a theory offered by scientist (atheist) that can never be test, as we simply can't know anything about what might exist outside our universe. See what I mean? The atheist argument is one of 'FAITH'. All the real evidence that we have suggest design. Oh, how the worm turns.
Thomas J Gassett at 12:12PM on Aug 8th 2008
257. "At the moment we think life is abundant in the universe."
Not really, but it is a hypothesis that anywhere the conditions for life are correct, life will exist.>>>
Which is known as a 'theory'.
We have no evidence as yet so it's not called a theory.>>
First you postilate a theory ... then you test it.
There is also the hypothesis that life here on earth came from "out there" and did not start here but evolved after arriving - again no evidence but it may be testable eventually.>>
This is a perfect example of an atheist theory. The atheist can't allow for God to create life, so he claims an alien created it. Of course it dosen't say where this supposed alien life came from. It's just easier to stay atheist if you believe in aliens instead of God.
Note: This is Dawkins pet theory and it's as insane as he is.
Thomas J Gassett at 12:19PM on Aug 8th 2008
258. "255. botts, man, you try way too hard.
Coming off like a holier-than-thou know-it-all throwing idle accusations at other religious denominations is so wrong. It almost seems like you're jealous of the Catholics.
To be fair, even if I disagree with their beliefs, the Catholics who post here are extremely intelligent, well-versed and factual.
They don't take cheap shots at your church. Your statement below is cheap and unwarranted. I know you like to recruit other Christians over to your denom, but, damn if this is the way to go. It just doesn't seem like a "christian" thing to do.
"..Catholics .. don't even practice really anything that Scripture teaches. Which is why you see some people like Preter and so forth..."
Botts at 8:16PM on Aug 7th 2008
Skeptic at 3:04AM on Aug 8th 2008
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Obviously there are at least 2 Skeptics around these parts ;)
Botts, I for one find your positions interesting even when I don't agree.
Skeptic at 1:03PM on Aug 8th 2008
259. 249. "Consider that we often learn of scientist that entered the field of unified theory as atheist and changed their minds, Id say that science is just as likely the process of figuring out how God did it."
And what about all of the scientists out there that were, and continue to be Atheists? >>>
Instead of the design theory, they favor the infinite universe theory.
Both sides to this arugment understand that you simply can't come up with this universe on one throw of the dice ...I.E a single BB.
My point is, the infinite universe theory, that can never be tested, relies on faith even more than the design theory. With the design theory you have the numbers to back you up. With the infinte universe theory you have nothing to back it up. It's either 'it happened this way, or God created the our universe' to allow life.
Thomas J Gassett at 12:31PM on Aug 8th 2008
260. Skeptic,
Thank you for the feedback, and I am grateful to respond.
"botts, man, you try way too hard."
Hardly. I'm not "trying" enough. I've been posting for almost a year or maybe a year now. Who knows? Time flies by. A few weeks ago I promised to be more forward in my beliefs, which I hadn't been in the past. I wanted to make it clear, and I am fulfilling that promise.
"Coming off like a holier-than-thou know-it-all throwing idle accusations at other religious denominations is so wrong. It almost seems like you're jealous of the Catholics."
I'm not even close to holier than thou and I certainly don't know it all. I don't know enough and there is so much out there to learn from all aspects of life. I continue to do things that I would consider not "right" with God. I've done things in the past that are horrible.
In regards to Catholics, I am not jealous by any stretch of the imagination. In all honesty, I'm not jealous towards anything including my Wife. That weakens your character big time and totally screws with your thinking. I try to stay away from it.
"To be fair, even if I disagree with their beliefs, the Catholics who post here are extremely intelligent, well-versed and factual."
I couldn't agree more. They are extremely intelligent and completely factual on their history. Most of them for that matter. Their responses are honest, well thought out and true to their beliefs.
"They don't take cheap shots at your church."
Of course they do. All the time. But I don't care. I'm not part of a denomination. I'm a non denomination follower.
"Your statement below is cheap and unwarranted. I know you like to recruit other Christians over to your denom, but, damn if this is the way to go. It just doesn't seem like a "christian" thing to do."
Well you're not a Christian, so I don't think you realize what the "Christian" thing to do is. I constantly over and over again say the same things and will continue to do so. Follow the First Two Commandments unconditionally and without hesitation. It doesn't matter to me what denomination a Christian is part of. They can choose whatever they feel is right for them. But as a Christian, it is my responsibility to witness to the fellow believers first before anyone else. So many Christians and in fact the majority have lost the message. They don't know it, nor are they being taught it. And I feel it's on purpose.
All I ever say is Love God and Love your neighbor whoever they may be. Then, if that is genuinely accomplished they can actually communicate with the Holy Spirit they so much believe in.
And because of this, I'm the asshole. I'm the false follower. I'm the divider in their eyes. And that's okay with me. I'll accept that label for now. But if they listen and do what Scripture has guided them to do, they can finally see what I'm talking about. In regards to "this", I know what I'm talking about.
"..Catholics .. don't even practice really anything that Scripture teaches. Which is why you see some people like Preter and so forth..."
Botts at 8:16PM on Aug 7th 2008"
Uh huh. Exactly. Have you read his/her posts. He/she would love nothing more than to get the Catholic Teaching in control of Government. But don't take my word for it. Read the posts.
Us Christians focus entirely too much on everyone else. Muslims, Liberals, Scientists, Atheists. I mean crap, just read Dinesh's blog. I come on here to tell them that we are not supposed to worry about any of that. And if we are, clearly we're not following the Two Commandments which by the way the Whole Law was written from.
I don't care if these Christians come on over to the non denominational side. But let me tell you, if they actually follow the way it's laid out, I'd bet all my money that they would either leave their denomination or be inspirational in changing the way that denomination practices.
Like I said, I'll continue to be forward and continue to say the same things. I'm not so worried about the people that comment on here. I'm focused on the ones that don't comment on here.
To think, they are dedicating each day to their Christianity being divisive, bigoted, judgmental, and doing it in Christ' name. That's really not good at all.
I love my fellow Brothers and Sisters. Muslims, Hindhu's, Siekh's, Buddhists, Atheists, Agnostics, Gays and Lesbians, you name it. They have much to offer to help me grow as a person.
I can't stand it when I see someone say Atheists Hate God. I'm sure some do, but most don't. I can't stand it when they group radical Muslims with all of Islam. I can't stand it when they condemn Gays and Lesbians when the Bible does no such thing. That's right, no such thing.
I can't stand it when they don't bother to learn any science and then preach against it because this is what they learned in Sunday service.
False teaching is all over the place, and it's not getting any better. Whole states and communities all over the nation are saturated with this stuff.
Someone needs to remind them of the First Two Commandments even if it goes against everything they've been brainwashed on.
And I have no problem being the one to point it out. The Holy Spirit told me I needed to do it, and that's what I'm doing.
50 people can call me whatever they want. Persecute me, make fun of me, and anything else. I simply do not care. If 1, just 1 understands what I say and actually gives it a complete effort to do what I'm saying, they will not regret it. 1 out of 50 is terrible odds, but it's worth it. I can go to sleep comforted.
Botts at 12:46PM on Aug 8th 2008
261. "Obviously there are at least 2 Skeptics around these parts ;)"
Obviously. Well Skeptic 1 or 2, looks like there is a one trick pony. I've only seen you commenting on these blogs.
"Botts, I for one find your positions interesting even when I don't agree."
Thanks very much. But there is one thing you and I can very much agree on. We should love our neighbors unconditionally and without hesitation.
Botts at 1:08PM on Aug 8th 2008
262. "Thanks very much. But there is one thing you and I can very much agree on. We should love our neighbors unconditionally and without hesitation. - Botts"
XXXXXXXXXXX
True enough. The golden rule is something I most definitely believe in and try to abide by (with varying results on a given day...). And although I mean it in a secular manner - peace be with you and yours.
Skeptic the first ;) at 2:09PM on Aug 8th 2008
263. "Now, there are two theories that explain this finely tuned universe of ours. The first is that our universe was designed to allow life. The second is that the BB created infinite universes, and with infinite universes each with it's own set numbers (physics) one would be 'tuned' to allow life. TJ Gassett
xxxxxxxxx
Thank you for your thoughtful response Thomas, Let's table this one until the data comes in from the Large Hadron Collider and see if any of Arkani-Hamed's predictions on the multiverse concept pan out. It's a long shot but could be interesting.
Skeptic at 2:09PM on Aug 8th 2008
264.
Botts, you are one long-winded,self-contradicting, paranoid,lying sack o'shit, partially deluded, non-denominational wannabe leader of other Church's follower$ ;~)
skeptic at 3:18PM on Aug 8th 2008
265. "Botts, you are one long-winded,self-contradicting, paranoid,lying sack o'shit, partially deluded, non-denominational wannabe leader of other Church's follower$ ;~)"
Nice rebuttal. Next time try proving your point, otherwise you just sound retarded.
You short winded, non contradicting, non-paranoid, truthful sack o'shit, completely sane, probably denominational follower of a cult, meany poo poo.
Got nuttin but Love for you
Botts at 4:38PM on Aug 8th 2008
266. "264.
Botts, you are one long-winded,self-contradicting, paranoid,lying sack o'shit, partially deluded, non-denominational wannabe leader of other Church's follower$ ;~) skeptic?
xxxxxxxxxxxx
If this is a joke on poor Botts by one of his friends, then I would ask that you use another naming convention. If this is some infantile "swift boats for truth" form of disinformation by someone who doesn't like what I have to say, well, I would ask that you return to your sandbox and not interrupt the adult conversation or directly engage with me about what you find objectionable.
Skeptic at 4:40PM on Aug 8th 2008
267. Skeptic,
This person is who I call "No Name". SHE comes on as different names and a lot of the times using other names using lower case letters.
What can I say, she has a thing for me. The truth hurts sometimes, especially to brainwashed individuals.
Not using a consistent name shows how chicken shit this poster is and basically has an underlining meaning that she doesn't really know herself.
Botts at 4:58PM on Aug 8th 2008
268. Botts; I was wondering if MI was an incarnation of SHE.
Ryan Anderson at 7:47PM on Aug 8th 2008
269. "Botts; I was wondering if MI was an incarnation of SHE. "
Could be. You never know. But I'm sshhhhing
Botts at 8:04PM on Aug 8th 2008
270. "With the design theory you have the numbers to back you up. With the infinte universe theory you have nothing to back it up. It's either 'it happened this way, or God created the our universe' to allow life."
And the biggest hurdle that the God crew has to jump is 'where did God come from' then. There simply is no way to explain it without setting all logic aside and claiming 'faith' as your answer. Which requires no real proof, at all.
If you're so skeptical of the infinite universe theory, how can you not be VERY skeptical of an omnipotent, omniscient presence capable of creating the entirety of existence out of absolute nothingness? I don't deal in magical explanations, no matter how 'sound' some people may believe them to be. I'm perfectly fine not knowing the answer to every question about the universe. I don't obsess over it. Any human claiming to know the secrets of the universe is seriously delusional, yet there are plenty that do. Until the universe is explained in a completely scientific way (it is quite possible that it will never happen for humanity), true science will seek the answers, without need for supernatural explanations. Just because we don't have the math to explain something today, doesn't mean that we NEVER will. Regardless of whether you believe in a divine creator or not, the universe is obviously complicated enough where even complex explanations wouldn't do it justice.
Of course, religion is another matter entirely. Believing in a universal creator is one thing (even though the idea sounds silly), attempting to explain it's actions/motives/thoughts is quite another, and one that I will never buy into. Such is why I've always been an Agnostic Atheist, and always will be. That's not an attempt to mock religious believers, it's just a simple fact for me, I'm not a believer in religions, it's just not in me. I've been told that I have a "hardened heart" (I don't think I do) am a "traitor to God" (There's no God to betray imo) and naturally threatened with "eternal torment" for not 'believing', and I don't care one bit.
Zatheus at 1:32PM on Aug 9th 2008