Solzhenitsyn the Prophet

Athena said: "Stalinism was NOT atheism. It was a "cult of personality" that sought to replace religion with the worship of the "State", or in this case, Stalin. He thought himself as much of a God as the latter-day Roman Emperors did. And most of the millions of people that died in the gulag system were there for a variety of reasons, not just because they were Christians."

Thank you, saved me a load of typing. It never ceases to amaze me that if you point out that Hitler was a christian, the religious shout you down. I'm not saying he killed in the name of religion, but he was a religious. But they are ever ready to point to him or Stalin or some other dictator and say, all the deaths were in the name of atheism/secularism.

This column reminds me of a friend from college. I was the agnostic, he the faithful. He decided he wanted a Volvo, and he was confident that God would help him get it. When I suggested that maybe God had other priorities, he suggested that maybe I didn't know how God worked.
I wouldn't dream that he speaks for all of the faithful, having been raised among many, just as Mr. Reynolds should not paint those who espouse secular values with a cartoonishly broad brush. I own much, much less stuff than most self-described believers I know in the U.S. -- not even a car -- and regularly give to charity, including to religious ones if I believe in their work. It's pretty insulting, and unhelpful, to link the mass murders of Stalin to secularists in the U.S. Should we start reviewing all the massacres that have taken place in the name of religion? There really isn't a secularism/materialism/murder continuum.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn was a mystery and an enigma rolled into one. His books were no doubt difficult reading and his love for the Tsar difficult to fathom.

But we should accept his role in history as a dissenter from tyranny.

Stalin too can never be called secular; after all like any other fanatic strain of thought, communism believes in banning and exterminating all other gods, except the rulers of the state and Mao.

Wonder why Reynolds is using Alexander Solzhenitsyn's death as a reason to bash up secularism. Unfortunately Alexander Solzhenitsyn went into exile because secularism cannot exist in a communist regime. And Reynold ends up bashing secularism rather than appreciating the idea of a plural society.

Mind you, to be fair to Stalin, he was in fact slapped around a lot by religious conservative parents, then forced to choose between sending millions of his countrymen to their deaths or letting the Nazis do it for him.

I figure that'd probably make *anyone* a little twitchy about their place in the world, one way or another.

I still find it disturbing that people will call Stalin even a proper Communist, not that I actually agree with Communism.

He was a fascist, abused in his youth by radical Christians, that appropriated the Communist party (well, the part he didn't *kill,* anyway) and used a nation to act out his damage.

Stalin was not a 'secularist,' he was a *Stalinist.* A self-styled God-king, no more, no less. Not secular, ...a religion unto himself. And woe to any who did not tremble in fear of that man-God.

Period.

I find it ironic that the writer, and many others who are claiming Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn as one of "them" have probably never set foot inside a Russian Orthodox Church. Solzhenitsyn was a Fundamentalist, yes. But a Russian Orthodox one. The concept of Western-style evangelicalism was probably as disgusting to him as communism was.

Solzhenitsyn was a hero for enduring and speaking out as he did. The Soviet Union would not have fallen without the courage of people like him.

I suggest everyone read Solzhenitsyn's 1987 Harvard address. It shows his strengths and flaws in full view. It is courageous of him to speak so openly and unfiltered. That does not mean we have to agree with everything he says.

His criticism of "western" materialism is dead on I think. We ARE a decadent culture; it's as if we have a banquet of delicacies around us and insist on gorging on junk food. We ARE weaker of will in many ways than our Russian counterparts.

Nevertheless he fails to understand the nature of our democracy--in order to have the best of things--literature, ideas, food, material goods--you have to have the worst of them too. It's a free market. His books and speeches are published right alongside the pornography and junk fiction of our day.

He is also authoritarian in the sense of wanting control--this book, but not that one, the great intellectual ideas, not the silly ones. The fact that Russians historically have put up with great hardships has often been to their disadvantage; the fact that we in America won't put up with the control inflicted by strongmen drunk on idealism (at least not more than 1 or 2 presidential terms) has been to our advantage.

Some of his conclusions--that we wimped out of the Vietnam War, should have stayed out of Bosnia, and shouldn't have partnered with the USSR in WW2 are really highly dubious assertions at best. He values stubbornness and idealogical commitment to the point of absurdity.

So, let's celebrate his virtues and historical accomplishments, heroic as they are. But we don't have to pretend he is without the flaws of most great men. He was a man for the 30 years following WW2, but in most ways his time has passed.

Slozhenitsyn was truly one of the "greatest of the greats." He un-masked the truth of the Bolsheviks as no one could: Lenin was a filthy butcher no less than Stalin. Indeed, there would have never been a Stalin without the fiendish Lenin who created the machinery for Stalin's murders. The intellectuals of the west hated Solzhenitsyn and he should wear that as a badge of honor. The leftist university community of western Europe and America are never going to admit to the crimes of the bolsheviks because in their hearts, they admire Lenin and Stalin and have never gotten over their intense grief that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union. May their eternity be spent alongside those monsters who they so admire. As for Solzhenitsyn may he rest in the arms of his God with his Tsar.

All posts on this thread are carefully screened - don't be surprised if your post doesn't make it. Two of mine have not.

This thread screens out posts that are 'undesirable' or that disagree with the author's point of view.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn Dead but not Communism

The best eulogy for the death of Solz (short form for Solzhenitsyn) is coming from his enemy, a commentary Tuesday in Pravda (Quoted form Aug 5th Washington post), the communist newspaper called “The Gulag Archipelago” a “bucket of tendentious muck” and “ Biological anti-Soviets, he become one of the main battering rams in destroying both the state and nation.” Indeed, I am glad the Pravda not lying this to admit Solz destroy Sovet-typed Communism!

As a philosopher, I am not naive or innocent as the former neo-con scholar, Francis Fukuyama to declare that communism is dead in history, Western democracy prevailed, just ask Wen Jiabao of China, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Castro and his brother in Cuba or the extreme, Stalin Kim of North Korea. Readers know, Communism is still existed in certain countries!

What makes a great tragedy of Communism in human history? I need not to quote Karl Popper , just imagine yourself as Karl Marx! Sit in a Library in London, hungry and thirsty and he imagines with his tender mind, a limit intelligence without any data, field work and experiment. Eureka! Karl Marx declared, “ The Communist Manifesto. Communism will save this greedy capitalistic world!!” No Joke! Lenin, Stalin believes it, Mao Believes and take advantage form it, Teng Believes it. Even now Hugo Chavez believes, Kim loves it! The result, millions, millions die on Karl Marx’s hallucination. Solz’ s “One Day in a life of Ivan Denisovich” and the famous “Gulag Archipelago” vindicates this greatest human experimental tragedy in 20 century. What a fool of human being!

Sloz exiled himself 20 years in New England, United State. I “imagine” he wants to find a western panacea to save his beloved country, Soviet Union from communism! Western world or at least America failed him. The greedy capitalism, materialism or distorted moral society and lawyerlike-evil-witted ideology in America failed him actually. He retreated back to a new and broken Russia , presided by the incompetent , know nothing about Western democracy, but copy-catlike pro-West Boris Yeltsin. Insulted by his foolishness “ Harvard led shock therapy” economic saving grace song! Sloz tried to find his own way, until Vladimir Putin! He ignores his KGB background , he loves Putin the way bring stability and prosperity in his Post-Gulag Russia! He has his own right. Unfortunately, the West deserted him and some blackened him to anti-Semitic about Jews for his book “Two Hundred Years Together.”

Stalin typed Communism is dead for sure. Gulag or concentration labor camps in no more in Russia. Communism is proved not working in this world! Human being is still not happy!

Sloz once wrote (quoted from Aug 5th,Washington Post ) “Though lies conceal everything, though lies embraces everything but not with any help from me,”. I salute Sloz, during the very difficult time, Sloz was not afraid a second to capacitate by the Stalin labor camp! He exposed it in Gulag Archipelago”. We live in this open Western and democratic society. Do we have the courage or simply to tell the truth: such as THERE IS NO WMD.

NO! That bothers me! Solz was dead, however this world needs his self-sacrificed spirit: truth telling for spurning the dirty and lawyer-spurn tricks, debunk propaganda as truth; assertion as logic and the most importantly expose the “imagined ideology” made up by Politician in Communist or democratic world. We need to learn those from Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Otherwise, we will expend the catastrophe of any human tragedy made by the evil-spirited so-called leader in Western free-world or communist country.

God bless!

Alexander Solzhenitsyn Dead but notCommunism

The best eulogy for the death of Solz (short form for Solzhenitsyn) is coming from his enemy, a commentary Tuesday in Pravda (Quoted form Aug 5th Washington post), the communist newspaper called “The Gulag Archipelago” a “bucket of tendentious muck” and “ Biological anti-Soviets, he become one of the main battering rams in destroying both the state and nation.” Indeed, I am glad the Pravda not lying this to admit Solz destroy Sovet-typed Communism!

As a philosopher, I am not naive or innocent as the former neo-con scholar, Francis Fukuyama to declare that communism is dead in history, Western democracy prevailed, just ask Wen Jiabao of China, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Castro and his brother in Cuba or the extreme, Stalin Kim of North Korea. Readers know, Communism is still existed in certain countries!

What makes a great tragedy of Communism in human history? I need not to quote Karl Popper , just imagine yourself as Karl Marx! Sit in a Library in London, hungry and thirsty and he imagines with his tender mind, a limit intelligence without any data, field work and experiment. Eureka! Karl Marx declared, “ The Communist Manifesto. Communism will save this greedy capitalistic world!!” No Joke! Lenin, Stalin believes it, Mao Believes and take advantage form it, Teng Believes it. Even now Hugo Chavez believes, Kim loves it! The result, millions, millions die on Karl Marx’s hallucination. Solz’ s “One Day in a life of Ivan Denisovich” and the famous “Gulag Archipelago” vindicates this greatest human experimental tragedy in 20 century. What a fool of human being!

Sloz exiled himself 20 years in New England, United State. I “imagine” he wants to find a western panacea to save his beloved country, Soviet Union from communism! Western world or at least America failed him. The greedy capitalism, materialism or distorted moral society and lawyerlike-evil-witted ideology in America failed him actually. He retreated back to a new and broken Russia , presided by the incompetent , know nothing about Western democracy, but copy-catlike pro-West Boris Yeltsin. Insulted by his foolishness “ Harvard led shock therapy” economic saving grace song! Sloz tried to find his own way, until Vladimir Putin! He ignores his KGB background , he loves Putin the way bring stability and prosperity in his Post-Gulag Russia! He has his own right. Unfortunately, the West deserted him and some blackened him to anti-Semitic about Jews for his book “Two Hundred Years Together.”

Stalin typed Communism is dead for sure. Gulag or concentration labor camps in no more in Russia. Communism is proved not working in this world! Human being is still not happy!

Sloz once wrote (quoted from Aug 5th,Washington Post ) “Though lies conceal everything, though lies embraces everything but not with any help from me,”. I salute Sloz, during the very difficult time, Sloz was not afraid a second to capacitate by the Stalin labor camp! He exposed it in Gulag Archipelago”. We live in this open Western and democratic society. Do we have the courage or simply to tell the truth: such as THERE IS NO WMD.

NO! That bothers me! Solz was dead, however this world needs his self-sacrificed spirit: truth telling for spurning the dirty and lawyer-spurn tricks, debunk propaganda as truth; assertion as logic and the most importantly expose the “imagined ideology” made up by Politician in Communist or democratic world. We need to learn those from Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Otherwise, we will expend the catastrophe of any human tragedy made by the evil-spirited so-called leader in Western free-world or communist country.

God bless!

Yes, Solzhenitsyn was a truth teller that endured much to tell his tale. Eventually, after sweeping up the financial proceeds of his extended stay in the uber-capitalist USA, he got homesick for a somewhat reformed Mother Russia and his religious orthodoxy. His citizenship was restored.

He had been protected here as an ex-patriot and persona non grata without citizenship in Russia for a good many years, before his return. He also made his fortune here.

In 1993 he was welcomed back with open arms and lived the life of a celebrated author outside of Moscow, thanks in part to those 'capitalist tainted' greenback dollars - which I'm sure he didn't leave behind. That's what Swiss bank accounts are for, after all.

He was an extraordinary man that was at the same time all too human - as we all are.

Yes, MarkF, and religeous intolerance and bigotry, too.

"Liberal secularism" has the specialty of mainly butchering only the unborn children. It hides the casualties better than communism... in trash cans outside of abortion clinics.

"Liberal secularism" kills the soul by killing the truth first... if everything is relative, and life has no objective meaning, then life is meaningless and we see the results of that all around us... drugs, depression, consumerism, divorce, homosexuality, etc.

Reformer:

Indeed, Reynolds is a bigot. And Solzhenitsyn's Antisemitism is well known, too.

You cannot take out the fact that Stalin is a product of Christian culture, and Reynolds can spin all he wants, but Stalin was the product of a seminary.

Mortal

The issue of secularism is not a phoney issue. Secularism is all that is not religious. And Communism was a form of Fundamentalism, very similiar to Protestant Fundamentalism, and very similiar to the Catholic Church, in the way that it demands mental conformity to a dogma. All dogma is human dogma; religious dogma is invented by human beings and is therefore human doga as well.

Capitlism and self-reforming democracy are secular. "Secular" is not bad; it is merely a word of opposition and contrast, to describe what is not religious.

It seemed to be John Mark Reynolds's point that "liberal" and secular people were responsible for Stalin's programs in the Soviet Union in the past, and that such people today continue to believe that Stalin was good and his policies were good. I do not think Johh Mark Reynolds is that ignorant. So what is left? His arguments are all based and founded in cynicism and bad faith, in an attempt to persuade others by deception and fasle statments.

I do not think Alexander Solshenitsyn would approve of his death notice being woven into such a false and disingenuous article such as John Mark Reynolds has written.

Since I first read Solzhenitsyn's "Ivan Denisovich" in the early 70's, he has been one of my favorite writers. I consider his three-volume GULAG to be one of the 3 or 4 most significant literary achievements of the past century. It is a work of universal and eternal significance, concerned with what it means to be a human being, and how hard it is to become one. I mourn the passing of a great, great man.

As to the (largely phoney) issue of secularism discussed in many previous posts, here are Solzhenitsya's own words: "But that [the misery of the Soviet era] is the price a man pays for entrusting his God-given soul to human dogma". (The GULAG Archipelago, Part 3, Chapter 11)

Can we please get past the myth of the Stalin-loving leftists? I don't know a single moderate-to-liberal Democrat--or an atheist, for that matter--who thinks that Stalin's regime was anything but an abomination, and we do rank him right up there with Hitler, although I find repellent some right-wing arguments I have heard that seek to mitigate Hitler's crimes by comparison.

If Solzhenitsyn went wrong in that Harvard speech, it's in blaming the liberal, humanistic spirit of the West for the poverty, moral weakness, and violence that afflict us and may destroy us. With his experience, I can understand his suspiciousness, but I am saddened that he could not see that it wasn't the principles of democracy, or the welfare state, that were at fault, but, to paraphrase the quote posted above, that dark corner that in the best of hearts--and of leaders, and of movements and nations. Greed, fear, the overwhelming need to control, the selfish, venal, easily manipulable petty desires and cowardices of individuals--those are the things that thwart and deform the enlightened, humanistic ideals at the heart of Western civilization.

The Bolshevik revolution, lest we forget, was a response, and a very idealistic if misguided one--to a system of government that was not serving its people, allied with a wealthy, powerful state church that looked the other way when atrocities occurred, protecting its own interests. This is not to say that all religions are evil, or that all atheists are good. I tend to think that one's moral values are entirely independent of one's religious persuasion.

I think I need to go back and read the Gulag Archipelago again. And we need to find some way to reclaim Solzhenitsyn from the conservative ideological machine--they do him incredible disrespect by using his words for their own purposes.

I met Alexander Solzhenitsyn. It was only for a moment, and he only shook my hand courteously and briefly; I was in a crowd of people he was greeting. He was looking the other way, and I said his name, and he turned around to me, and I held out my hand, and he shook it.

I think that John Mark Reynolds is either very ignorant and misinformed, or else he is deliberatedly decepttive and crooked.

It is wrong, wrong, wrong, to equate Soviet Communism with "secularism." From a psychological perspective, this kind of Communism had developed into a complex quasi-relgious organization, complete with scriptures, prophets to venerate, and strict requirements of dogmatic conformity, with harsh punishments for wrong thinking.

This article was disingenuous, and written in bad faith, to equate "liberal" and progressive people with Stalin, and to exploit the death of Alexander Solzhenitsyn to make propoganda points. I do not think that Solzhenitsyn would approve of this type of thing, and I do not think he would approve of John Mark Reynolds.

Alexander Isayevic Soljenitsin,
who is the man working in the rock mine?

Jesus in Israel?

where is the family of rock?
in Jerusalem?

one point, the old woman is my neighbour, door neighbour.

last night, in the sleep state, after 1:30 AM, Her MAjesty Queen left Bursa. i heard as "Queen is leaving, please stand up".

She was in Bursa the city i am in, we should not leave our seats before She leaves. then a woman explained why she had argued with me, and we made up.

i must thank Washington Post for this vacancy for online interviews. it fit good, really good.

i dont make jokes

maybe that is the reason why WAshington Post did not profit this year

this morning i woke up ready.
i was already awake.

later i heard as "the claxon worked"

then i realized that "clocks of numerous people" are on and working.

and i recollected "Freaky Friday" of Jamee Lee Curtis.

and then read the movie on 14th of November, "W"
i am in this war too, at least literally.

what is "war"? it is "we are".
is it U-Bunt-U? well, maybe.

i remind nowadays Web 2, Java and Open Solaris.
not linux, web is not based on linux.

a few nights ago, i did see my mother with a jacket.

and in the sleep state, i opened the mobile phone and my father yelled on me to learn where i have been". they are not corporal parents.

then today i drank a cup of coffee.
with my parents, i recollected Veysel Karani.

and my mind is clear. i decided to write the life of a teacher more than 90 years old woman, her eyes are sharp, and her mind is too.

what is "war"? it is being evened.
it is being "u+u", it is "w"

who are we? shall John McCain be present?
this is not a war, this is education of corporal and spiritual.

this is inspiration.
we are inspired.

on Earth, in the Milky Way.
may i have some coffee in my cup please?

Mar is "saint" in Armenian

MAr-Y and MAr-X are available in MArmara and MArmaris.

and on MArs, too.

scottish saint,
armenian jesus and jewish jesus.

i am interested in genetics and linguistics.

after Susan Smith's article on slavery
and Chronicles of Riddick

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/susan_k_smith/2008/08/racial_reconciliation_begins_w/all_comments.html

Soljenitsin Isayevic Alexander
Cyrus Alexander, Iron Wall of Language

the author of verbalization of his land on "hospital and jail" structure.

Isayevic may be "son of isaac"

"A DAy of Ivan Denisovitch"
a man of cabbage and rock mine.

on MArs, the soil and water were available for bean, asparagus and turnip, greenery for flower on the door, irish and nicholas, german scottish and russian.

but because of chlore, perchlorate, present in surface waters and springs, from salt mines in Israel Jordan and Utah, for fireworks, the soil on MArs is not available for Life.

MArmaris "Icmeler" is available for 2 units of currency in UK for a week, cheaper than a beer.

Cause I'll tell you this much. I read a *great deal* of Solzenitzyn at a pretty young age, myself, and the message I took from it was *not* that American 'secularism' had the least bit to *do* with the recent Fundie ambitions and persecution complexes.

Quite the opposite.

"Many Russians and much of the American Left still do not like to admit that millions were butchered in horrific camps in the name of secularism."

Cause it *wasn't* 'in the name of secularism.' It was in the name of *Stalinism.*

Saying it was 'secularism' over and over doesn't make it true.

In America, 'Secularism' is short for 'Secular humanism.' The Stalinist state was *not* humanistic. The 'religion' it purported to be against was related to the Eastern Church as connected with the Tsars.

It was against *feudalism.* For all the good *that* did. But, no, it wasn't about the 'secularism' religious authoritarians so demonize in a free country like America.

Dude... what world are you living in to think that the Left doesn't acknowledge the Gulags?

I majored in Russian in college, so I know a little bit about Solzhenitsyn (since I've read his works in Russian). He was a Godly man, in the "old school". I think that he would have been as disgusted by the American evangelical movement as he was Stalinism.

BTW, Stalinism was NOT atheism. It was a "cult of personality" that sought to replace religion with the worship of the "State", or in this case, Stalin. He thought himself as much of a God as the latter-day Roman Emperors did. And most of the millions of people that died in the gulag system were there for a variety of reasons, not just because they were Christians. They were there because they looked at a policeman funny, or they said something that might be construed as anti-Stalin, or they had the misfortune of being in a village that was captured by the Nazis, or a POW. Once WWII was over, people who were behind the lines were re-patriated right over to Siberia, unless they got really lucky. (Which my professor's family did...)

Oh, and for the person who claims that Russian Christians were harmed by the Jews... it was the other way around. Look up the word "pogrom" in Wikipedia and see what you find. Or, if that's too hard for you, watch the musical "Fiddler on the Roof".

Solzhenitsyn's contribution to understanding ourselves was sealed forever when he observed that the line between good and evil is not drawn through nation states, political parties, or ideologies, but through the heart of every human being. It occurred to him that even the most evil among us has a little corner of good left, and even the best of us has a little corner of evil. This is who we are, and it is what makes us human and fundamentally equal, no matter what our station.

Solzhenistsyn realized this not while studying dogma or memorizing platitudes, but spontaneously, while lying on rotting prison straw. Regardless of any political opinions he held, he was great for this reason if for no other: in a time beset by idealogy, he restored an experiential understanding of what it is to be human, and he proclaimed it to the world.

Att: A N D Y, M O U R S A N D;

interesting 'iNSIGHT & PATTERN RECOGNiTIoN" ability's. So For Comparison or Contribution to a ex-Soviet Product, Please see ADREi SAKHAROV

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakharov

EXCERPT:
From the late-1950s Sakharov had become concerned about the moral and political implications of his work. Politically active during the 1960s, Sakharov was against nuclear proliferation. Pushing for the end of atmospheric tests, he played a role in the 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty, signed in Moscow. In 1965 he returned to fundamental science and began working on cosmology but continued to oppose political discrimination.

The major turn in Sakharov’s political evolution started in 1967, when anti-ballistic missile defense became a key issue in US–Soviet relations. In a secret detailed letter to the Soviet leadership of July 21, 1967, Sakharov explains the need to "take the Americans at their word" and accept their proposal "for a bilateral rejection by the USA and the Soviet Union of the development of antiballistic missile defense", because otherwise an arms race in this new technology would increase the likelihood of nuclear war.

He also asked permission to publish his manuscript (which accompanied the letter) in a newspaper to explain the dangers posed by this kind of defense. The government ignored his letter and refused to let him initiate a public discussion of ABM in the Soviet press.

Especially now, we can not tolerate any differences and thinkers loose respect when they do not agree with all of our USA self congratulation and misunderstood history. So when the New Yorker, known for its longs time support for Senator Obama, has a cartoon with some humor many trash it as a tabloid.

Certainly his views on Vietnam were not welcomed. But they were to the point. Someday we will understand.

Thank you, Gareth Harris, for that wonderful quote from Solzhentsyn himself.

And we don't need to pigeonhole him into any western political category in order to appreciate his work. For God's sake, The Gulag Archipelago almost singlehandedly shook the French left out of its anti-anti-Communist postwar stupor. That magnificent trilogy did what decades of other testimonies couldn't accomplish. That's quite a feat in itself.

Of course he wasn't the "liberal" that we western liberals had been hoping for, and perhaps projecting from his earlier works. But any western "conservative" who reads his words carefully won't find much comfort, either. Let's just say that Solzhenitsyn didn't worship at the alter of unbridled capitalism.

Take Solzhenitsyn on his own terms. That should be enough. He was up there with King, Mandela, Gandhi, and Walesa among the secular witnesses of our time. What a great life he led.

B R E A K i N G, N E W S:

OBAMA is thinking of endorsing Jesse Jackson or Oprah Winfrey for Vice President. And Al Sharpton is an alternate bteween them!

Rather than the usual fundamentalist drivel, which never recognizes it own evil, we should resort to Solzhenitsyn's own words from the Gulag Archipelago:

" Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago (1973)

It was granted to me to carry away from my prison years on my bent back, which nearly broke beneath its load, this essential experience: how a human being becomes evil and how good. In the intoxication of youthful successes I had felt myself to be infallible, and I was therefore cruel. In the surfeit of power I was a murderer and an oppressor. In my most evil moments I was convinced that I was doing good, and I was well supplied with systematic arguments. It was only when I lay there on rotting prison straw that I sensed within myself the first stirrings of good. Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either, but right through every human heart, and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. Even within hearts overwhlemed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained; and even in the best of all hearts, there remains a small corner of evil."

Ironic that the Soviet bloc could throw up a Solzhenitsyn, and the so called purveyors of democracy are still labouring under a mainstream press that is little more than a propaganda machine, spreading disinformation and outright lies. Wonder when we will see an independent Dr. Reynolds and press that we can truthfully say "... always told the truth even when his audience wanted congratulatory lies."

Many Americans "...still do not like to admit that millions were butchered by the US using wmd's like agent orange in vietnam, and continue to be butchered in Iraq and Afghanistan ... in horrific conditions in the name of democracy.."

This piece by Reynolds perfectly fits the 'congratulatory lies" genre, that others are accused of. Ironic

A beautiful eulogy, and one I think he would appreciate. Thank you.

"Any ancient deeply rooted autonomous culture, especially if it is spread on a wide part of the earth's surface, constitutes an autonomous world, full of riddles and surprises to Western thinking, For one thousand years, Russia has belonged to such a category."

-From Solzhenitsyn's Harvard speech

Please don't blame John Mark for linking communism with secularism. Alexander Solzhenitsyn had perused the idea for several decades. Please read his Harvard address of 1978...

Communism stems from humanism and secularism by definition (i.e. an assumption to the contrary negates communism). Contrary to opinions expressed earlier, communism cannot assume a Christian worldview. The latter is based on the belief that man is inherently evil in his present state. Communism, on the contrary, assumes that man is inherently good.

George Wolf:

Thanks, George.

"each religion appears to think it is a unique form of truth"

That more and more people realize this truth fills me with optimism.

"secularism is a religion like calling baldness a hair color"

Yes. Baldness is certainly a hair color.

"Solzhenitsyn was a deeply flawed man and a great writer"

Writers are often not personally responsible for the truths they convey. We, the people of their world and the readers of their words, also have a responsibility. Solzhenitsyn has helped to reveal our responsibility, with the help of his god.

Wow. I just read his Harvard speech. Awesome.

Solzhenitsyn was born into a family of Cossacks who are historically nominal Russian Orthodox Christians, Monarchists, and anti-Semites. He was welcomed back by (Tsar) Putin and will enjoy a decent burial in his homeland. Of course he was anti-Western. But he was right on about the Gulag
and Stalin. He had first hand experience and wrote
about it. He is very much up to date with today's
tendencies in Russia.

1-the horrors Stalin did was done NOT in the name of secularism.
2-Solzhenitsyn was a fundamentalist. If he were to rule Russia instead of the Stalin, he would have done the same killings/imprisoning to clean the country from apostates and heretcs. He and Stalin shared a 'closed mind' set as how to deal with those different from them in thought, behavior and expression of emotions.
Solzhenitsyn, I believe, did not have a clue as to what freedom is all about....unless it is about him.
May he rest in peace.

1-the horrors Stalin did was done NOT in the name of secularism.
2-Solzhenitsyn was a fundamentalist. If he were to rule Russia instead of the Stalin, he would have done the same killings/imprisoning to clean the country from apostates and heretcs. He and Stalin shared a 'closed mind' set as how to deal with those different from them in thought, behavior and expression of emotions.
Solzhenitsyn, I believe, did not have a clue as to what freedom is all about....unless it is about him.
May he rest in peace.

Thank you for making this clear, yes he was a prophet, and God is so gracious for sending him to Russia and the United States.

Solzhenitsyn told of the atrocities Russian Christians suffered at the hands of the Jews. He told of the millions of Christians murdered, maimed, and tortured by the Jews. He himself was tortured for telling these truths.
God bless Mr. Solzhenitsyn and all others with the courage to speak the truth.

Put aside.. secularism and communism.
It is about humanism.

"You can have power over people as long as you don't take everything away from them.
But when you've robbed a man of everything, he's no longer in your power."

That could say a lot more...
Makes sense? Anyone?

Avraam:

Right on...and if you go back and read JMR's article closely that is what he was saying.

For Solzhenitsyn slammed the "sins" of the Western world, esp materialistic worldview that drives both secularism and much of evangelicalism today, in a similar fashion to the way he spoke out against the "sins" of the Eastern world. Suggestions that Reynolds (and Solzhenitsyn) are stumping for the Religious Right are a bit ridiculous from my perspective, for Solzhenitsyn's criticisms extended their way as well as for the secularist.

I find that BOTH communism and Christianity are religions and BOTH are capable of inspiring immense slaughter. There is nothing that says that a religion must be a form of Monotheism (a belief in a single god), although each religion appears to think it is a unique form of truth.

I define religion as a series of emotionally addicting lies that uses inheritance, mob appeal, coercion and terrorism to spread itself rather than logic.

The most successful religions have been those spread by empires as an excuse to maintain the autocracy of the empire; thus the early Persian empire promoted Zoroastrianism, the Armenian, Roman, early Russian, Spanish and Abyssinian Empires promoted Christianity, the Arab, late Persian, Mogul and Turkish empires promoted Islam, and the later Russian and Chinese empires promoted Marxism. This is by no means an exhaustive list.

It's often been said that to claim secularism is a religion is like calling baldness a hair color. Well, to say that Marxism is a form of secularism is like saying that a haircut is a form of baldness.

The best that can be said about Solzhenitsyn is that he was a deeply flawed man and a great writer -- but doesn't that apply to many great writers?

A little lesson for Scott,FJ Taylor and others:

If we as Christians do what we are commanded to do

Love others and love God- we won't strive to murder
people or anyone else for that matter.

The murder of others is the result of people wanting and coveting things and power over love of people and God. You can't pin something on Christianity if the people aren't real Christians.

Atheistic societies do nothing to solve the problem of humankind's intrinsic problem of sinfulness.

The reason for division in homes, Mr Taylor, is the failure of people to give up their pride to acknowledge and love the God revealed in Jesus.

You've twisted that tell a twisted version of what you believe to be "truth"

.
Solzhenitsyn is venerated because he exposed the sins of an enemy.
.
Our own sins, such as the huge number of people incarcerated because of a misguided drug war or the fact the the USA allows gang stalkers to openly and notoriously poison people, are ignored.
.

"morality stops at national boundaries" is a "stupidly immoral excuse"

Yes. How can any educated, rational person believe we do not all share in events that happen to some. This is the source of morality. Solzhenitsyn's being published worldwide has been a monument to just this conclusion. A corollary to this would be religious boundaries.

So many of the critiques of JMR's article have not understood what he said before they spouted out criticism. Nor have most of them understood Solzhenitsyn. To call Reynolds a bigot is to demand the same be said of Solzhenitsyn, and is an incredibly bigoted statement in itself.

For instance, just read his commencement lecture to Harvard and you will begin to understand both...and then be able to fairly critique both. For Reynolds was just echoing the sentiments conveyed by Solzhenitsyn himself.

Somewhat of an aside: Stalin is responsible for killing 42 million people, most of whom were Russian. Let that number sink in...it should shake your soul, regardless of your religious persuasion.

If you can let that number sink in just a bit, compare Hitler and the Holocaust to it (but a small fraction of Stalin's murders), compare the crusades to it (small fraction), compare it to all killing in the name of religion.

And study Stalin. From his own perspective, Stalin was driven by his deep commitment to atheism of the strain that is so popular today. He would have resonated strongly with Hitchens, Dawkins, and Sammy boy and he did demonstrate and act out the same aggressive attacks that they verbalize and encourage in their books. It amazes me that the blind followers of these men turn a discussion of Solzhenitsyn into a lambast on how many people Christianity has been responsible for killing. That is stealing a page straight out of the book of the Religious Right, spinning anything for a power play.

Dr. Reynolds appears to believe that all the troubles of the world and its attendant evils "horrors and deceptions" began with WW I and are because of "secularism."

With respect, if his doctorate had been in history or even theology instead of philosophy, perhaps he might be better equipped to understand that the world and mankind have always been in a state of warfare, with its attendant "horrors" no matter what their mythology. (Although one is led to wonder how "horrible" war really is to mankind since it keeps recurring.)

As to a state of religion of any stripe somehow being or producing a perfect world, he seems blissfully unaware of the fact that religion in its many guises has wrought (or perhaps been used by the ruling classes to wreak) most of the evils of the wars and evils in history, and Christianity is not only not exempt from this, but has been a main perpetrator, from the evils of the Inquisition to the bloody slaughters of unarmed civilians (including not only Muslims, but Jews and Eastern Orthodox and other non-Roman Christians) by the Crusaders.

This is hardly to be unexpected. Dr. Reynolds mentions the "ideals of the gospel." Far from being a guide for good behavior, the Bible shows us that Jahweh is a petty, spiteful, and murderous oriental tyrant and despot, who persecutes his own most loyal followers just to make a point with the Adversary (Job), or induces mental torture to "test" their "faithfulness" to his petty whims. (The order to Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac [Genesis 22] is one such example.

He condoned or even ordained everything from murder to genocide, concubinage and sex-slavery to child rape - and gloried in it - e.g.; the massacre of the Midianites and Amalekites.

In the former instance, after the murder of their fathers, brothers, and other male relatives (Num. 31:17 lists about 32,000 male children murdered to comply with the orders to "kill every male among the little ones"), as well as their mothers and sexually mature sisters, 32,000 Midianite young virgin girl children were "spared" - for rape and ongoing sexual abuse and slavery by their captors.

In the Amalekite massacre, acording to the Bible account, there were hundreds or even thousands of murders in which Amalekite women, children, and babies were run through by Israelite swords.

Perhaps the good doctor can enlighten me as to how this "god-governed" society and others like it was any better than the Communists or any other "secular" regime?

As to Christianity, we are told the New Testament and Gospel of "Christ" (as most Christians ignorantly refer to the reb who they believe founded their faith) over-rides the Old, and is somehow more loving and caring. In point of fact, Yehoshua ben Yussuf (as he would have been known among his contemporaries) said;

"I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled? But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished! Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. (Luke 12:49-53, KJV)

So while I can agree that secular consumerist material societies
have made a dog's breakfast of the world, and with many other points Dr. Reynolds and Solzhenytzin made, I fear that a religious society is not only no answer, but often a worse one.

Religion in general causes nothing but intolerance and hatred, and breeds some of the worst violence and atrocities this sorry race has ever seen.

I do not see any good in any "Age to Come" if it is a religious one - I'd rather take my chances with the secular world.

Sincerely,

F. J. Taylor

This attempt to claim Solzhenitsyn as an anti-secular humanist and right-wing American Republican is offensive. Who will be the hero that exposes the Bush administrations lies, deceits, manipulations, secret torture camps, and political purity tests for government jobs. An organized religion-based society can be as totalitarian as any Communist society.

Solzhenitsyn was great because he bore witness and spoke out. The essence of freedom is that you have to insist on another persons right to it or you have no claim of your own.

He spoke of Protestantism with derision. There was nothing Christian about this, not to mention prophetic.
I doubt that he is "in a better place" now, but of course, it is not up to us to decide about this.

I was 17 when i started to read Solzhenitsyn books
those who say they were to long and winded just dont have the capacity to see what he was saying and now that Lenins archives are open the truth is out.
As for the fearful read the bible especially the New Testament and you will find a lot of what is happening in the world predicted quite TRUE no other writing or scriptures do.

I think christians still hold the record for butchery.
the crusades
inquisition
genocide in north america
1500 years of bigotry

I hereby enroll John Mark Reynolds in the Holy Inquisition/Mutawah/KGB Order of the Golden Rack. Its honored members are those who somehow don't see the resemblance between the Holy Inquisition, Mutawah and KGB.

I read the English translation of Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago from cover to cover. I am reminded of several things on his death. The man himself was badly addicted to religion, first to Marxism and then to Russian Orthodox Christianity. The result was oddly like Martin Luther King; a thinker, writer and speaker of epic proportions who preferred to stay in the trenches and had a lot of affairs.

The writer prepared the most complete history of the USSR's death camp system; very important because unlike Nazi Germany's death camp system there were no liberating armies or news photographers to document the Gulag, which evidence suggests dwarfed the SS's operation. I await a similar book about the Chinese Gulag, which is still butchering people even as we speak. What are you doing about it -- or were only Germany's victims culturally or racially enough like us to be worth remembering; a kind of funhouse mirror of what the Nazis were doing?

While we in the US congratulated ourselves on "winning World War II," Stalins' "labor" camps were busy killing more people than died in the Third Reich. And later, during the late 1950's and the 1960's, China managed to top both of them. Oh we who said, "never again!" Where were we really? Where are the monuments to all of these people, slaughtered namelessly and facelessly in the bloodiest century in all of history?

Will our defense that morality stops at national boundaries finally look like the stupidly immoral excuse that it really is?

Why is Reynolds' bio and photo opens this post?

Solzhenitsyn was westerner because he did not have a natural necessity of joining the herd. In a sense he was an idealist and so what (?) He didn't accept the West with its consumerism and corporate greed? Isn't that upsetting... "God-fearing", "Christian" - non of these. He was deeply religious but he acquired his religion (whatever it was) throughout the turmoil which he survived. His values and views are philosophical, his later books should be studied in that sense.

The introduction to this article - a series of outrageous, hateful lies - provides incontrovertible proof that at least some University faculty are controlled by Satan. And where you least expect to find them.

Hopefully he will be listened to and understood more now that he has passed on.

He was no doubt a devout man, perhaps to even a Christian fundamentalist if you would in weird Russian sort of way. However, I believe you are confusing his critique of social engineering e.g. Polanyi, with a critique of leftism in general.

Puhleeze.

Error No. 1 -- equating communism with secularism.

Error No. 2 -- that Solzhenitsyn was hated, rather than ignored as he became more irrelevant.

Error No. 3 -- ignoring that Solzhenitsyn wanted to go back to Tsarist caesaropapism, which was good for neither church nor state.

And, those are just the most egrigious errors in this waste of Internet electrons.

"Many Russians and much of the American Left still do not like to admit that millions were butchered in horrific camps in the name of secularism." Solzhenitsyn claimed in The Gulag Archipelago that Marxist Communism caused butchery. "Secularism" (i.e. government that allows a diversity of thought and religion) is not what he was worried about. He was worried about all dogma--communist, capitalist, and religious.

Solzhenitsyn wasn't interested in a whitewashed, revisionist (American conservative vs. liberal) history. Let's not pretend otherwise.

Thank you for your appropriate and well-measured words on this truly sad occasion. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn lived a pure and undeluted life and left a significant mark on the national Russian body, as much as the international culture, history, society... Whichever way one chooses to look at - if Aleksandr's presence was there - it becomes historic. Such was his influence on my life - whereas I had to re-do my doctoral dissertation in Leningrad due to the fact that it was based on the theories of the author to the Foreword to Gulag Archipelago, in its SAMIZDAT version. So painful at the time and so bitter-sweet to savour today - Memory Eternal!

"millions were butchered in horrific camps in the name of secularism"??????

What the hell are you talking about? Get a grip man. It's not all about you. Finally, Alexander Solzhenitsyn was not a man of our age. He was a man of the future.

Aren't we past believing that all "leftists" are God-hating atheists, and all "righties" are God-fearing, upstanding Christian men? Come on Reynolds, given your bio I would have expected more. This article is incredibly simplistic, and unfortunately a very poor representation of a man's life, as filtered through your religious-right agenda.

I dont get the what he has to do with Jeremiah?

Helpful post. Thanks for drawing our attention to Solzhenitsyn's passing. His life challenges me to continue to critically examine our culture, especially the consumerism that is mixed in with so much of our popular religion. I pray for the grace to be as faithful in my generation as Solzhenitsyn was in his.

What an incredible bigot John Mark Reynolds is.

Stalin's education was the result of Christianity.

The culture that produced Stalin was a Christian culture.

The millions who died at the hands of Stalin did not die because of "secularism," but because of a bloody murderer who had been trained in a Christian seminary in "good Christian love."

Stalin was a power-hungry tyrant; he made himself an idol.

That isn't secularism.

Why must liars such as Reynolds be given such megaphones?

Communism was not secularism; it was a religion, which had its own faith, god, sin and so forth. The Communists did not seek to eradicate religion; they sought to REPLACE it.

Religion is bad for one's health, whether from the Pope, Caliph, or Communist.

American-style liberty frees man from requiring to show his loyalty to one spirit or another, whether Allah, God or the State.

Solzhenitsyn was indeed a courageous man for speaking the truth about Soviet evil. But he failed to go all the way philosophically, and uphold the only antidote to suffering at the hands of other men; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Love the opening line -- beautifully put.

But, wha--? Who are these alleged people on the American Left who "do not like to admit that millions were butchered in horrific camps in the name of secularism"? You're saying "much of the American Left" -- a group that presumably includes "much of the Democratic Party" -- thinks that Stalin and Lenin were swell guys who didn't kill people? Or that Communism as practiced in Russia would have been A-OK if they hadn't existed?

That just doesn't make any sense.

If your point is that Solzhenitsyn was a god-fearing man, and that made some people uncomfortable, great. But your (apparent) premise that liberals didn't like him because they hate religion... that's just nutty.

It is not accurate to say that those butchered by the Soviet Union were butchered in the 'name of secularism'. They were butchered in the name of Communism. There are many varieties of secularism , including liberal humanistic secularism , and not in their name was the Soviet Union operating.
As for the basic claim however there is truth in what is said here. Solzhenitsyn was a man of great courage and one who had a significant role in bringing down the 'evil empire'. He also was a deeply religious Orthodox Christian.
However as a great champion of human freedom he did in fact disappoint many in the world with his distorted and limited view of the West, and of secular American democracy.
That said, the greatest truth about him is of course the courageous writing, the bearing witness of the evils of the Gulag, the tremendous moral voice and indignation with which he chronicled the evils of that world- his redemptive action , his noting and making live for others those who had suffered so much, and suffered unknown, in the Gulag world.
For that he will have a lasting place both in Russian and in world history.

It is not accurate to say that those butchered by the Soviet Union were butchered in the 'name of secularism'. They were butchered in the name of Communism. There are many varieties of secularism , including liberal humanistic secularism , and not in their name was the Soviet Union operating.
As for the basic claim however there is truth in what is said here. Solzhenitsyn was a man of great courage and one who had a significant role in bringing down the 'evil empire'. He also was a deeply religious Orthodox Christian.
However as a great champion of human freedom he did in fact disappoint many in the world with his distorted and limited view of the West, and of secular American democracy.
That said, the greatest truth about him is of course the courageous writing, the bearing witness of the evils of the Gulag, the tremendous moral voice and indignation with which he chronicled the evils of that world- his redemptive action , his noting and making live for others those who had suffered so much, and suffered unknown, in the Gulag world.
For that he will have a lasting place both in Russian and in world history.

That was very good reading, and a fitting tribute to someone who was, to use a sadly hackneyed and hardly-understood phrase, a great man.

Delightful to see that there are still men around who know that much of contemporary 'progress' has been nothing but rotting from the head down, that the world is now full of smart and 'educated' people who are functionally illiterate, and the fact that we can do something does not give us the moral right to go ahead and do it. And that without listening to the voice of the spirit, we are bound to perish at the root, no matter how powerful and outwardly grand and glamorous our civilization becomes.

Truth that is either written or spoken is recognized as truth by those who love truth and seek to see it proclaimed.
Solzhenitsyn...a man of honesty and true values.
John Mark Reynolds...a man of honesty and true values.