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 5 of 19)
61. Bill Teibel - ever heard of drug-resistant organisms? I don't know what further proof you could require.
Ron V at 10:15PM on Aug 5th 2008
62. oops, sorry Triebel
Ron V at 10:27PM on Aug 5th 2008
63. GHB,
I was not trying to defend or promulgate hell. MIW showed his utter ignorance of the subject by those ridiculous fraction quotes.
MIW,
Nobody was trying to dispell the bible's severity for goodness sake, since that's what you seem to enjoy. I don't care what you believe about hell, but I can guarantee from your relentless assaults that your fruits do not bear witness of Christ.
Anger can be a godly thing, but not tireless bitter invectives. One can be angry without resorting to violence or insults.
As per the doctrinal pseudo-discourse, your rebuke was impotent, just like your rage. God bless you.
oneblood at 10:33PM on Aug 5th 2008
64. “Freedom is inherent within objective reality, it is not granted by any Delusion of State Power.” - Peter
"I love when you put yourself out there, mocking everyone that might demonstrate theistic beliefs, with doozies like that." - Eric
Well is simple is the way of the universe Eric for any non-deterministic system or system that has the possibility of non-determinism at times. The universe, is a wonderful place, check it out sometime Eric. Also learn to think for yourself and not just from what they taught you in school or church.
"Why is freedom “inherent within objective reality?” From where does this inherent “right” arise? Since this is the beginning of a blog and not page 60, by which I’m completely exhausted from the “mythical god” remarks, I’d love to hear a clear, lucid explanation why the above statement is the case."
I'm glad that you are exhausted Eric. I'm reaching you in some way.
"Try to leave out the faith-freak, mythical god crap. I beg you." - Eric
But but but but but but but but but I don't think I could do that in an exchange with one of you, you know.
The part that is crap is the god part. The part that is real is that it's all mythology with no reality of any kind except the nonsense and the killings and other evil vile deeds of the faith driven.
“Freedom is inherent within objective reality, it is not granted by any Delusion of State Power.” - Peter
First off ultimately as some like to point out there is nothing stopping anyone from doing anything that is actually possible within objective reality. That is freedom to do what you want. Sure you can't jump up to the top of a building like superman but I wasn't talking about the power to violate the laws of Nature. I was speaking of personal freedom within the realm of what is actually possible in our lives. The power to choose.
Let's take a famous example of the USA. You don't need a "Declaration of Independence" to grant freedom. You had that freedom before that declaration. The declaration simply expressed a fact of Nature and then people fought to shed off one oppressor that was attempting to prevent people's freedom. A declaration of independence and freedom in a constitution is there for the purpose of protecting the population from the evil vile actions of those who pretend that they are the members of the government. Not that it's helping any to stop people like Bush and Cheney to steal away the encoded rights of Americans! Don't let them steal your freedom that you were born with!
Freedom is the Natural born right of every living thing that has the ability to choose in a non-deterministic way, whatever that might be.
Freedom doesn't "come from" anywhere as it's an inherent property of living systems and systems that exhibit non-determinism.
Now it's certainly possible that most people alive today live in situations where they have their freedom taken away from them in such a way that they give up resisting or simply won't take the risk to fight back. Others fight back which is often why there are people known to those they fight as "terrorists". Remember the old saying that one man's freedom fighter is another's terrorist. It is real and it's unfortunate that the majority of the population listen to their "politicians" when they spew the brain numbing propaganda of "terrorism" while mass murdering the people they call terrorists along with young children and other innocents.
To sum it up. Freedom is an inherent property of objective reality that every non-deterministic system, for example human beings, has. Whether or not they exercise that freedom - even if it's only the freedom to choose how to be killed by an oppressor - they still have it.
There you go oh faith based believer Eric. Welcome to the world of freedom. Choose. Choose what? Choose your freedom or choose to be in the bondage of your faith based beliefs and which ever virulent cult you are a part of.
Unfortunately Somber "freedom" is NOT a human invention. Sure we picked a word for it but it's a quality of non-deterministic systems as outlined above. I would not presume to be speciest by suggesting that it only exists within humanity. ANY sentient living system would have the ability to choose.
Peter at 10:34PM on Aug 5th 2008
65. Peter,
The problem with you and Hays' assertions is the use of the relative terms 'good' and 'evil.' You'll have to pardon me while I don't pay even the slightest attention to your pretention.
You are a 'true believer,' congratulations, and welcome to the club.
oneblood at 10:44PM on Aug 5th 2008
66. I'm just a dumby here.
Can someone help me a little?
Help me understand this crap from Dinesh.
Is he advocating the abolishment of our present form of government in favor of a theocracy?
-----------------------------
On the lack of courage in facing a totalitarian enemy:
What shoud we do? Run head first into a poorly planned war? ....We tried that, hows it working thus far?!
-----------------------------
On how materialism makes a nation soft:
What is described in this paragraph is personal freedom, not materialism. As to not having a reason to fight - Sure there is, it's called patriotism. That should never be taken for granted, or wasted.
----------------------------
On the rights of criminals:
Let's not confuse the accused with the convicted.
--------------------------
On what has happened to the rule of law:
Again, the advocation of state religion.
-------------------------
On the abuses of freedom:
I'm comepletely baffled here. I did not know FREEDOM could be abused. Taken yes, but not abused.
-----------------------------
On freedom of the press:
This one seems like he wants us to be like mushrooms....Always in the dark and fed bullshit. If the press does not exist, what stops the tyrrants from acting as they wish?
-----------------------------
On the atrophy of the spiritual life:
More theocratic leanings?
????
mac at 10:54PM on Aug 5th 2008
67. Oh, and generally by non-deterministic system I mean one that is sentient, although we won't know for sure until we've studied other species much closer.
Certainly elephants, dolphins, apes, other great apes, and some other primate species could very well be sentient and have free choice.
Also in many ways we sentient beings are still very deterministic. We live in a universe that is highly deterministic as the laws of nature demonstrate so well.
It's amazing that we can make free choices at all.
Unfortunately some of us - many of us in fact - undertake to become slaves to a virus of sorts, the mind virus (look up thought meme) of faith based beliefs strips people of their freedom since the belief system constrains them to within the box of their faith. Faith based beliefs confine one to a box of thinking that limits freedom of choice to only those within that box. Not much different than being an obedient slave to another human, but in this case it's being a slave to an idea, the mythology of god that your faith based cult revels in sucking your money into their filthy little paws.
To maximize freedom you must eliminate any faith based beliefs that constrict your life.
Now that doesn't mean that you go on a killing spree as that would not be a good thing for you as spree killers are usually caught and punished with a loss of freedom of movement by being put in a cell or killed in the process of being caught or in some endarkened States of Delusion, murdered for their murders.
So from a biological point of view you can be free but there are also consequences to every action. Choose wisely and be free of thought constraints.
Peter at 10:54PM on Aug 5th 2008
68. "Peter, The problem with you and Hays' assertions is the use of the relative terms 'good' and 'evil.' You'll have to pardon me while I don't pay even the slightest attention to your pretention. You are a 'true believer,' congratulations, and welcome to the club." - oneblood
Sorry to disappoint you oneblood but terms "evil" and "vile" that I use (don't use good much at all as you assert) are relative terms. Nothing we can do about that. Evil to me means doing something that harms another. Simple. Relative since the amount of "evil" or "harm" can vary considerably and often depends on the person who felt the harm. The same for vile.
Since I don't mean any religious connotations by either of these words in the sense that religions usually mean as in "super natural evil" of a "devil" or whatnot I'm not in the same club as you oneblood. Sorry to disappoint.
It's a good idea to ask people what they mean before assuming it. I sometimes make that mistake too so don't do anything with that except learn to ask before jumping to your conclusion. It's called thinking with questions.
I use these words since everyone generally knows what I mean. You are the first to point it out in a very long time.
Peter at 11:00PM on Aug 5th 2008
69.
And now, the real prophet:
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/08/05/paris-hilton-responds-to-celebrity-ad/?icid=200100397x1206879156x1200370102
Who knew?
T.Brough at 11:37PM on Aug 5th 2008
70. Oneblood you make an excellent point:
I find that I'm not too interested in the people who want people to 'burn in hell.' They seem to be worried less about their own accountability/behavior than others' a/b, which ticks me off.
oneblood at 8:40PM on Aug 5th 2008
soldier at 12:09AM on Aug 6th 2008
71.
DoubleD didn't realize he died on sunday. Read many of his works and wrote him off when he started to advance the pre-revolution holy mother Russia superior system of thought. At least he had the bravery to expose the Soviet camps to world scrutiny. In the end he seems to succumbed to the antisemitism of Imperial and Soviet Russia.
JefFlyingV at 12:44AM on Aug 6th 2008
72. An example of freedom - In the U.S. parents are privileged to raise their children if they accept the responsibility that government bodies and society require of them by conforming to the established standards of human behavior.
All freedoms are privileges granted to those who accept the requisite responsibility.
naturalpuppy at 12:57AM on Aug 6th 2008
73. RonV-Yes,of course I've heard of antibiotic-resistant bacteria,blind cave fish,lots of examples of changes within a species.Problem with that idea is,they're still the same species.Kind of like when I made a living as a snake wrangler.I would use incremental amounts of diomandback venom to build up resistance.I haven't evolved into anything else,I'm still me.The organisms have merely devoloped resistance to overused chemicals,kind of like insects devoloping a tolerance to pesticides.
Bill Triebel at 1:05AM on Aug 6th 2008
74.
Triebel, you believe Lucy to be a hoax?
JefFlyingV at 1:10AM on Aug 6th 2008
75. Peter,you would make a good politician.A whole lot of words basically saying nothing.I can understand what you're getting at,though.Kind of like being a slave to beleif in an outdated,invalid scientific theory.Since you're so convinced there's no God,maybe you can explain this.About 9 years ago,a group of about 30 scientists got together,and developed the tech to measure the universe,and traced it back to the big bang.They found that before the big bang,nothing,not even time,existed.
Since it is scientifically impossible for something to,just by random chance,to devolop out of nothing,where did the anomaly that started the universe come from?I guess my real question is,have you ever put aside the pride and arrogance that your kind seem to be slaves to,and considered that maybe we're not the be-all,end-all ultimate authority over it all?
Bill Triebel at 1:28AM on Aug 6th 2008