Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn as he saw himself • Hacker News Board

Re: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn as he saw himself

#61

Post by patrickg_zill » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 2:41 PM UTC

matt4077 wrote: post #45

patrickg_zill wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First Soviet Politburo was between 80 and 85% Jewish. Jewish population was no more than 4% in Russia at the time. Commissars (the political office) and Cheka officials had similar numbers in terms of representation. Underlying reason included the suspicion that anyone Orthodox was tainted by secret sympathy for the Tsar or the Orthodox church. Jews were therefore seen as trustworthy, having no alliance or sympathy f…

This is an anti-semitic rewriting of history. The first Politburo was: Lenin (his mother's father was jewish. Judaism is transmitted maternally, so neither of Lenin's parents were jewish, and neither was he) Trotsky: jewish Stalin: Not jewish. Launched Anti-semitic campaign around '50 Lev Kamelev: Jewish father, orthodox mother -> not jewish (see above) Nikolay Krestinsky Not jewish So that's 1/5, or 20%, and you're…

[flagged]

Re: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn as he saw himself

#62

Post by patrickg_zill » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 2:43 PM UTC

connorelsea wrote: post #49

patrickg_zill wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First Soviet Politburo was between 80 and 85% Jewish. Jewish population was no more than 4% in Russia at the time. Commissars (the political office) and Cheka officials had similar numbers in terms of representation. Underlying reason included the suspicion that anyone Orthodox was tainted by secret sympathy for the Tsar or the Orthodox church. Jews were therefore seen as trustworthy, having no alliance or sympathy f…

I'm pretty sure this isn't true but I'm curious, got a source? Afaik they were somewhat overrepresented but never a majority and only about 5% of party members were Jewish although percentages in leadership were slightly higher at around 15% https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/66ecq3/were_...

https://www.timesofisrael.com/putin-first-soviet-government-...

Re: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn as he saw himself

#63

Post by connorelsea » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 2:46 PM UTC

patrickg_zill wrote: post #62

connorelsea wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure this isn't true but I'm curious, got a source? Afaik they were somewhat overrepresented but never a majority and only about 5% of party members were Jewish although percentages in leadership were slightly higher at around 15% https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/66ecq3/were_...

https://www.timesofisrael.com/putin-first-soviet-government-...

That is the only source I could find as well but I also found others saying it was false and that Putin was lying and misguiding

Re: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn as he saw himself

#64

Post by enriquto » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 2:48 PM UTC

agsdfgsd wrote: post #59

enriquto wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume that most books must contain some false sentences. They are certainly worrying in a serious scholarly work, but not in the case of "Two Hundred Years Together", which is an informal essay that nobody is expected to use as the ultimate reference on historical facts.

I don't understand. You assume the book is wrong but that doesn't matter because it isn't serious? It is serious, and I am not aware of anything incorrect in it. The criticism is not its accuracy, it is that it says things you're not allowed to say.

It is certainly inaccurate (thus, false) in some concrete numbers. Most famously, it says that in the first Soviet government almost all of the ministers were jewish people; in fact it was less than a half of them who were jewish.

I am not saying that the book is not serious. It gives a valuable personal perspective of important historical facts. But it should not be used as a source of factual data.

Re: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn as he saw himself

#65

Post by andrepd » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 2:53 PM UTC

enriquto wrote: post #5

asianthrowaway wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I heard it's rather... controversial, to say the least.

He's a writer, not an historian. Thus his non-fiction works do not have to be read like history books, more like journalistic opinion pieces. In that sense, the factual errors on this book are mostly irrelevant, and the work is still very interesting and insightful.

But if it is not factual, what makes it insightful? If you're looking for insights, aren't you better off reading an actual history, rather than the text of an anti-semitic, nationalist, Putin apologist?

Re: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn as he saw himself

#66

Post by andrepd » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 2:55 PM UTC

agsdfgsd wrote: post #59

enriquto wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume that most books must contain some false sentences. They are certainly worrying in a serious scholarly work, but not in the case of "Two Hundred Years Together", which is an informal essay that nobody is expected to use as the ultimate reference on historical facts.

I don't understand. You assume the book is wrong but that doesn't matter because it isn't serious? It is serious, and I am not aware of anything incorrect in it. The criticism is not its accuracy, it is that it says things you're not allowed to say.

It very much has many factual errors pointed out by historians several times since its publication. If you're truly looking for an objective account and not something to stoke emotions and tell you want you want to hear, I think you're better off reading an actual history.

Re: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn as he saw himself

#67

Post by arethuza » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 2:58 PM UTC

charlysl wrote: post #57

arethuza wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"fought some of the other leftists as fiercely as it fought the right." Wasn't that the Soviet influence though - they regarded anarchists/Trotskyists as a far bigger threat than Franco.

Yes, that was one factor for sure. But it was actually really complicated, quite mind boggling in fact. The thing is that, in spite of Stalin being pretty much the only effective external support the Spanish republic had, the communists inside Spain were pretty much a marginal group when the war started, and had to resort to all kinds of intrigues to get support from both the population and the, still, official gover…

Yeah - I read Homage to Catalonia again recently - I have read The Battle for Spain by Antony Beevor a while back but as you say, it is quite complex - I need to read it again!

Re: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn as he saw himself

#68

Post by andrepd » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 3:00 PM UTC

nec4b wrote: post #16

CapacitorSet wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solzhenitsyn is an anti-semite, and blames atheism for the existence of the Soviet Union and the problems in the modern world in general. It is a great thing that he isn't being listened to - and yet, he is receiving more attention than he's worth.

Yep, people surviving gulags (where btw. lot of jewish people died as well), need to be called names, because they them selves were not saints and said stupid things sometimes.

The good old "Jews died in the holocaust, so you can't criticise Israel" argument. As you can see that's not very sound. Plus, nobody was calling then names, so that's another thing: conflating criticism with persecution (a favourite of e.g. Trump).

The fact is that his accounts are not factual, but designed to stoke emotions. That is the definition of propaganda, even though people may not like that word. Plus, his personal feelings about matters such as anti-semitism, Russian exceptionalism, and dictators such as Putin, have to be taken into account when reading his texts about such matters.

Re: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn as he saw himself

#69

Post by scottlocklin » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 3:02 PM UTC

matt4077 wrote: post #46

asianthrowaway wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always wondered why Franco has such a bad rep. I'm not really knowledgeable about the Spanish civil war but it seems he prevented Spain from becoming a Stalinist totalitarian country, which is a good thing in my book. I mean no doubt he was a brutal dictator but in the grand scheme of things he was by far the lesser of two evils. Edit: also I think your comparison of the American prison system and the gulag to be r…

If you wonder about Franco's bad rep, why don't you actually check it out, instead of challenging people to prove the evil of fascist to you from first principle, and claiming their virtue if they don't. What is your professed naïveté supposed to accomplish, except to serve as propaganda for a universally abhorred fascist while simultaneously retaining your option to claim ignorance when challenged?

It wasn't actually a fascist regime (the Falangists were brought under political control by Franco); it was a standard issue military dictatorship, encompassing many right wing tendencies. Including things most English speakers would consider bonkers, like Carlism, which was a movement to install ... some other guy (from a slightly different branch of the Bourbon family) on the Spanish throne. Carlism was arguably more of a political force than the Falange (and still is) -they had just fought a vicious civil war over this a hundred odd years back.

Franco also wasn't and isn't universally abhorred; many Spaniards still admire Franco for whatever reasons, and there are large monuments and contemporary political rallies by fairly ordinary people honoring his memory.

Anyway, it's fascinating history and current events; reading a book will serve you better than ... expressing sentiments.

Re: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn as he saw himself

#70

Post by 99052882514569 » Fri, Dec 07, 2018, 3:32 PM UTC

frereubu wrote: post #2

Reading The Gulag Archipelago at university changed my life. I'd been reading Dostoyevsky for a bit, which I was enjoying, but The Gulag Archipelago was the book that opened my eyes to the idea that literature could have fierce moral purpose. I also loved the fact it was dripping with deadpan sarcasm and irony. A wonderful response for the powerless to take given the Kafkaesque situations that people found themselves…

If you found the Gulag Archipelago insightful (the word 'enjoyed' seems wrong in this context), I highly recommend The Kolyma Tales[1] by Varlam Shalamov. Shalamov spent 17 years in 'hard labour' camps, in total. His work is more like a historical novel, akin to "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich", but more raw and visceral.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kolyma_Tales