Scan barcode
yahyaelkinani's review against another edition
3.0
Aleksandr is an amazing speaker, truly. The way he articulates his critique of the communist world and of the western world is full with passion and delivery. A person who would hear it would immediately give his attention to it and maybe even convinced by what he says. That is only if someone is not well informed on the topic then, Aleksandr is extremely hawkish and dangerous, he wishes to see the destruction of the system that hurt him, whatever the cost. His status and intellect make it hard to doubt him, which many people didnt.
Thankfully the world did not end like he predicted of the “imminent” Soviet threat of infiltration because of western relaxation. He did manage to make a prediction of the change of spirit within Eastern European countries on the peoples feelings about the system. He also makes a good analysis of the capitalist class in the west willing to compromise on morality for profit. That is about it, the rest was strong beautiful rhetoric meant to scare the west into a more tense world or even a war.
Thankfully the world did not end like he predicted of the “imminent” Soviet threat of infiltration because of western relaxation. He did manage to make a prediction of the change of spirit within Eastern European countries on the peoples feelings about the system. He also makes a good analysis of the capitalist class in the west willing to compromise on morality for profit. That is about it, the rest was strong beautiful rhetoric meant to scare the west into a more tense world or even a war.
chasegartzke's review against another edition
4.0
This is a well written and easily digestible didactic collection of speeches. A fantastic book to recommend for someone getting initially acquainted with Solzhenitzyn, and remarkably applicable to the state of the world today. I highly recommend reading this, regardless of your political leanings.
cara_p's review against another edition
5.0
Interesting and enlightening, I learned a few things I didn't already know about Communism and the West's response to it. But the warnings that Solzehenitsyn gives are worrying when we look around at the world today.
davidleecraw's review against another edition
5.0
Solzhenitsyn repeatedly analogized détente between the West and the Soviet Union to shaking hands and making peace with someone who’s wielding a rock in their other hand. I have a different comparison; it is more like the act of the Soviet Union spitting infectious phlegm into its hand before shaking the West’s hand, and subsequently the West becomes ill with the same fatal sickness that plagues the East. Solzhenitsyn is probably one of the most qualified men to speak on totalitarianism and how crucial it is to thwart its rapid spread. Yet, his messages are lost on Westerners today, and for our ignorance we will receive our payback when we look upon our diagnosis and see the black cancer growing in the stomachs of our countries.
June 30, 1975: Solzhenitsyn addresses the oppression of the Soviet Union against its own people which has gone under the radar of the Western world (both by ignorance and the fact that the USSR is so closed off). He says that the Western nations (particularly the European Allied Powers in WWII) are compliant in the spread of totalitarianism because they allied with the oppressive, Stalinist Soviet Union in World War II. He states that America is actually the least guilty of the Western nations of allowing totalitarianism to flourish because the U.S. has extended its humanitarian efforts for the sake of “détente”, essentially meaning to make peace by easing tensions between these nations on a political level, though not necessarily ensuring peace for the people under these totalitarian governments’ thumbs. He calls upon his American audience to not yield to totalitarianism and allow it to flourish under the pretense of “peace” and “goodness” because it is only allowing for the oppression, imprisonment, and murders of innocents.
July 9, 1975: Solzhenitsyn addresses the doctrine of communism and its application to the world. He argues that communism is a weak and vitriolic philosophy, worsened by Lenin. He says that communism doesn’t care who it kills and what systems it destroys in order to achieve full fruition. Communism is incongruent with democracy, freedom, and morality. It was against peace up until it could utilize peace in the name of peace treaties in order to blindside other nations by violating these treaties. He also explains that the Soviet Union’s strength is a façade and its economy is surviving solely on humanitarian aid and trade from America. Solzhenitsyn says to stop aiding this country that prides itself in its nationalistic superiority in order to call its bluff. He also says to stop paying for the shovels the USSR uses to bury its own men (metaphorically and literally).
July 15, 1975: Solzhenitsyn implores the American Congressmen to be cognizant of the weight of their decisions and positions in the world. As Americans, they lead the anti-totalitarian force in the world and their voices go far beyond the American border. It is up to the American lawmakers to continue to uphold morals both in and outside America, and to recognize and thwart oppressive forces that threaten the lives of many millions of civilians. They are the beacon of hope for the oppressed.
March 1, 1976: Solzhenitsyn is interviewed by Michael Charlton. Solzhenitsyn explains that he is seeing parallels in the present West to the past East. He is seeing patterns that were evident at the dawn of communist totalitarianism, and he is warning the British to steer away from the direction of Western collapse immediately. He is also disappointed to find that the weakened Soviet Union was gaining strength over the West while the West inversely weakened and capitulated more to the Soviet bloc. When the interviewer asks multiple times about Lenin, Solzhenitsyn gets passionately angry in his response. He concludes by explaining to not make “détente” with the Soviet Union for political reasons when all it does is enable and fund the oppression of Soviet citizens.
March 24, 1976: Solzhenitsyn has less praise to offer Britain than he does for the United States. He is disappointed in Britain’s reluctance to be aware of the state of affairs within the borders of the totalitarian countries it has ambassadors in. It prioritized the comfort of political and economic calm over the value of millions of innocent lives, wasted away in labor camps. He describes exactly what’s wrong with the West today that was wrong with pre-Soviet Russian society. He calls upon Britain to come to its senses as a strong, successful, and educated nation and to cease to allow totalitarianism to flourish by choosing “peace” and freedom for themselves instead.
I say that Solzhenitsyn is the most valuable, crucial author to read, especially today. His words and warnings will only continue to ring true as the disease of totalitarian continues to spread and culminate in even the most democratic of nations.
June 30, 1975: Solzhenitsyn addresses the oppression of the Soviet Union against its own people which has gone under the radar of the Western world (both by ignorance and the fact that the USSR is so closed off). He says that the Western nations (particularly the European Allied Powers in WWII) are compliant in the spread of totalitarianism because they allied with the oppressive, Stalinist Soviet Union in World War II. He states that America is actually the least guilty of the Western nations of allowing totalitarianism to flourish because the U.S. has extended its humanitarian efforts for the sake of “détente”, essentially meaning to make peace by easing tensions between these nations on a political level, though not necessarily ensuring peace for the people under these totalitarian governments’ thumbs. He calls upon his American audience to not yield to totalitarianism and allow it to flourish under the pretense of “peace” and “goodness” because it is only allowing for the oppression, imprisonment, and murders of innocents.
July 9, 1975: Solzhenitsyn addresses the doctrine of communism and its application to the world. He argues that communism is a weak and vitriolic philosophy, worsened by Lenin. He says that communism doesn’t care who it kills and what systems it destroys in order to achieve full fruition. Communism is incongruent with democracy, freedom, and morality. It was against peace up until it could utilize peace in the name of peace treaties in order to blindside other nations by violating these treaties. He also explains that the Soviet Union’s strength is a façade and its economy is surviving solely on humanitarian aid and trade from America. Solzhenitsyn says to stop aiding this country that prides itself in its nationalistic superiority in order to call its bluff. He also says to stop paying for the shovels the USSR uses to bury its own men (metaphorically and literally).
July 15, 1975: Solzhenitsyn implores the American Congressmen to be cognizant of the weight of their decisions and positions in the world. As Americans, they lead the anti-totalitarian force in the world and their voices go far beyond the American border. It is up to the American lawmakers to continue to uphold morals both in and outside America, and to recognize and thwart oppressive forces that threaten the lives of many millions of civilians. They are the beacon of hope for the oppressed.
March 1, 1976: Solzhenitsyn is interviewed by Michael Charlton. Solzhenitsyn explains that he is seeing parallels in the present West to the past East. He is seeing patterns that were evident at the dawn of communist totalitarianism, and he is warning the British to steer away from the direction of Western collapse immediately. He is also disappointed to find that the weakened Soviet Union was gaining strength over the West while the West inversely weakened and capitulated more to the Soviet bloc. When the interviewer asks multiple times about Lenin, Solzhenitsyn gets passionately angry in his response. He concludes by explaining to not make “détente” with the Soviet Union for political reasons when all it does is enable and fund the oppression of Soviet citizens.
March 24, 1976: Solzhenitsyn has less praise to offer Britain than he does for the United States. He is disappointed in Britain’s reluctance to be aware of the state of affairs within the borders of the totalitarian countries it has ambassadors in. It prioritized the comfort of political and economic calm over the value of millions of innocent lives, wasted away in labor camps. He describes exactly what’s wrong with the West today that was wrong with pre-Soviet Russian society. He calls upon Britain to come to its senses as a strong, successful, and educated nation and to cease to allow totalitarianism to flourish by choosing “peace” and freedom for themselves instead.
I say that Solzhenitsyn is the most valuable, crucial author to read, especially today. His words and warnings will only continue to ring true as the disease of totalitarian continues to spread and culminate in even the most democratic of nations.
aaronlindsey's review against another edition
4.0
This is a series of speeches and lectures. Very informative and important.
spacestationtrustfund's review against another edition
3.0
I think every leftist who simps for communist dictators should read this book.
aristotle910's review against another edition
5.0
How blind we have been. How blind we have been to the atrocities in the east; the results of a dogmatic communist ideology, bound to result in complete totalitarianism and a complete and utter destruction of individuality. And when the atrocities were said and done, still we did not listen. The ceaseless ideological warfare, and we are blind.
We owe much to Mr. Solzhenitsyn. He came to the west to warn us. He didn’t have to. He could’ve left us to rot and stew in our own ideological idiocy as Soviet Russia engulfed us in their propagandistic, deceitful behavior. Solzhenitsyn exposed everything that Soviet Russia did, every crime they had committed, and the horror that their people had to endure. And still we laugh and scoff behind our constitution and freedom, that we so often take for granted. But according to Mr. Solzhenitsyn, even that won’t stop such an idealistic dogma from invading and terrorizing our Land of the Free. I’d like to put a quote from Mr. Solzhenitsyn’s speech in England:
“Human nature is full of riddles and contradictions; its very complexity engenders art - and by art I mean the search for something more interesting than simple linear formulations, flat solutions; oversimplified explanations. One of these riddles is: how is it that people who have been crushed by the sheer weight of slavery and cast to the bottom of the pit can nevertheless find the strength to rise up and free themselves, first in spirit, and then in body; while those who soar unhampered over the peaks of freedom suddenly lose the taste for freedom, lose the will to defend it, and, hopelessly confused and lost, almost begin to crave slavery.”
This is a striking issue! and not one to be taken lightly. Why is there this cycle? I often use this quote, but I think it suits this quote strongly:
“that ancient legend about paradise... Why it’s about us, about today. Yes! Just think. Those two, in paradise were given a choice: happiness without freedom, or freedom without happiness. There was no third alternative. Those idiots chose freedom, and what came of it? Of course, for ages afterward they longed for the chains. The chains—you understand? That’s what world sorrow was about. For ages! And only we have found the way of restoring happiness”
“We” by Yevgeny Zamyatin
This cycle is apparent once you spot it. We never truly value our freedom until it’s gone. Isn’t that true with everything? But with this, is goes a step farther! When freedom exists in nations in the west, the people grow bored. They want something new. They, then, “long for the chains”, said Yevgeny Zamyatin. Why? Why, when we have such beautiful freedom, do we resort to slavery, and beg to be subjugated to an authoritarian state. This is due to radical and dogmatic idealism. When such ideals are proposed, we have a proclivity to believe it, only because it promises benefits. But once we realize when safety is offered in the place of freedom, we no longer are allowed to exercise our inherent individual freedoms, and thus, stops the spread of alternative and individualistic ideas.
What is the importance of individualistic freedom? It is a good question, anyway. Jordan Peterson says that freedom allows the spread of unfiltered ideas. Censorship is inherent in a communist society.
To wrap up my rambles, this book is amazing. Solzhenitsyn makes strong arguments.
5/5
We owe much to Mr. Solzhenitsyn. He came to the west to warn us. He didn’t have to. He could’ve left us to rot and stew in our own ideological idiocy as Soviet Russia engulfed us in their propagandistic, deceitful behavior. Solzhenitsyn exposed everything that Soviet Russia did, every crime they had committed, and the horror that their people had to endure. And still we laugh and scoff behind our constitution and freedom, that we so often take for granted. But according to Mr. Solzhenitsyn, even that won’t stop such an idealistic dogma from invading and terrorizing our Land of the Free. I’d like to put a quote from Mr. Solzhenitsyn’s speech in England:
“Human nature is full of riddles and contradictions; its very complexity engenders art - and by art I mean the search for something more interesting than simple linear formulations, flat solutions; oversimplified explanations. One of these riddles is: how is it that people who have been crushed by the sheer weight of slavery and cast to the bottom of the pit can nevertheless find the strength to rise up and free themselves, first in spirit, and then in body; while those who soar unhampered over the peaks of freedom suddenly lose the taste for freedom, lose the will to defend it, and, hopelessly confused and lost, almost begin to crave slavery.”
This is a striking issue! and not one to be taken lightly. Why is there this cycle? I often use this quote, but I think it suits this quote strongly:
“that ancient legend about paradise... Why it’s about us, about today. Yes! Just think. Those two, in paradise were given a choice: happiness without freedom, or freedom without happiness. There was no third alternative. Those idiots chose freedom, and what came of it? Of course, for ages afterward they longed for the chains. The chains—you understand? That’s what world sorrow was about. For ages! And only we have found the way of restoring happiness”
“We” by Yevgeny Zamyatin
This cycle is apparent once you spot it. We never truly value our freedom until it’s gone. Isn’t that true with everything? But with this, is goes a step farther! When freedom exists in nations in the west, the people grow bored. They want something new. They, then, “long for the chains”, said Yevgeny Zamyatin. Why? Why, when we have such beautiful freedom, do we resort to slavery, and beg to be subjugated to an authoritarian state. This is due to radical and dogmatic idealism. When such ideals are proposed, we have a proclivity to believe it, only because it promises benefits. But once we realize when safety is offered in the place of freedom, we no longer are allowed to exercise our inherent individual freedoms, and thus, stops the spread of alternative and individualistic ideas.
What is the importance of individualistic freedom? It is a good question, anyway. Jordan Peterson says that freedom allows the spread of unfiltered ideas. Censorship is inherent in a communist society.
To wrap up my rambles, this book is amazing. Solzhenitsyn makes strong arguments.
5/5
rhubarb1608's review against another edition
4.5
A heartbreaking and vital book, all the more heartbreaking due to its being mostly unknown where it could do the most good. Every human able to read English should have read this book following 2020.