“Once I used to hope that experience of life could be handed on from nation to nation, and from one person to another, but now I am beginning to have doubts about this. Perhaps everyone is fated to live through every experience himself in order to understand”

—Alexandr Solzhenitsyn

Alexandr Solzhenitsyn’s name shines as an unwavering light against the darkness associated with the brutality and oppression of the Soviet rule, at its best in his works One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, The Gulag Archipelago, Cancer Ward and The First Circle. He received Nobel Prize for literature in the year 1970. Equally important are his works regarding the pre-revolutionary history of Russia, the many trials and tribulations of Russia at the hands of many forces originating at home and in Europe, and his unapologetic and painfully honest observations about various thought currents, political fashions and government policies of the Western nations. In his works, he criticizes the excesses of any regime, regardless of its ideological hues.

Solzhenitsyn’s, comparatively lesser known work, Warning to the West is a collection of his speeches and interviews during his exile in the West. What distinguishes it from his other, written works is the force of passion which is instantly obvious in a speech compared to a text. Each interview and speech sharply focuses on a certain topic, but also underscores some broader, overarching issues of the Soviet-Western relationship with special emphasis on the geopolitics of the 70s.

Capitalist-Communist Alliance, the Ideology and the Party

After the fall of Soviet Union, mainstream narrative has almost totally ignored the initial—and also continuing, even during the cold war—collaboration of the Western capitalists with the Communist establishment. We are reminded of them in a matter-of-factly manner by Solzhenitsyn: inconvenient for some and eye opening for many, facts such as the basis of this alliance has been laid by the famous Armand Hammer; the role of US surveillance technology in the form of machines and equipment which served the Soviet police state, or the competition among various Western industries to sell certain goods to USSR in order to maximize their profits. Thus, he remarks that, “This is something which is almost incomprehensible to the human mind: a burning greed for profit that goes beyond all reason, all self-control, all conscience, only to get money”.

This tendency to supplement, what can be called the ultimate ideological opponent, was sensed years ago by Lenin, who wrote about it and said that “the Western capitalists would do anything to strengthen the economy of the USSR”. Even during heated debates in the party meetings, as the wise writer educates us, he would advise against panicking, “for the bourgeois, if ever were to become dangerous, it will be given a rope to hang itself,” and this rope, Lenin adds, will be handed over to the party by the bourgeois itself!

One is bound to be intrigued by the nature of Communist thought which makes it so indifferent to the suffering and plight of so many in the name of its grand historical mission. And sure enough, Solzhenitsyn presents us his penetrating observations not only on the ideology, but also its baffling misunderstanding by numerous, often exceptionally sharp minds. The Communist ideology—which has been very open and blunt about its objectives, methods to achieve them and social structure that it envisions—has somehow remained incomprehensible to many and has somehow managed to avoid their careful scrutiny. So much so that many astute men such as Bertrand Russell, Olof Palme—the identity of whose killer has only recently been established—and many others made well meaning, but ultimately ignorant remarks about it. This is surprising, avers Solzhenitsyn, given that Communism has always been very open and vocal about what its intention are. One only needs to look at what they write, as Solzhenitsyn quotes from Marx and Engels’ works for the AFL-CIO members during his talk in 1975: “Reforms are a sign of weakness”; “Democracy is more to be feared than monarchy and aristocracy”; “…it will be necessary to repeat the year 1793. After achieving power, we’ll be considered monsters, but we couldn’t care less”.  Thus, whatever happens after it attains power—and here, our learned writer cites multiple historical examples—is only a natural, logical next step.

The reader also learns about another phenomenon—felt by many but rarely articulated—which is that of there being many understandings and definitions of Socialism. Two people talking on the subject may keep arguing about it endlessly, only to realize (perhaps after many years!) that they were talking through each other rather than talking to each other. The term has come to mean different things to different people. In the light of above, a discerning reader will not be alone in contemplating that to a considerable extent, the same can be said about Liberalism.

Having disclosed the ideologies for what they are and not afraid of stating the truth, the Nobel laureate lays bare the real face of the party which called itself a representative of workers and peasants. Barely four months after the Revolution (i.e. in March 1918), representatives of factory workers were denouncing the communists, and were oppressed in the most violent way by the establishment. Likewise, while Lenin is generally understood to be the progenitor of the Communist rule, he was an émigré intellectual who took the reign of the party in his hands much later. It was a normal worker, Alexandre Shliapnikov, who was the leader of the party before Lenin – a genuine representative of workers (he was arrested and later shot dead). There have been many rebellions and revolts even after the Khrushchevian thaw. To list all the examples of party’s excesses, as narrated by the author, will make this review inordinately long, but it suffices to say that he exposes the sham of the so called people’s party for what it was.

Hypocrisy, Deceit, Doublespeak & Willful Ignorance

While critiquing the Soviet ideology, state machinery and methods, Solzhenitsyn in this book has also mercilessly lambasted Western democracies, their many alliances of convenience, unbelievable selfishness and opportunism. This should not be seen as a blind hatred for the West: indeed, at one point of time in his life, he (and many of his compatriots of post-World War I generation) were worshippers of Western democracies. The story of his attitude’s transformation, from worship to skepticism and ultimately to disillusionment is perhaps among the most the stirring and thought provoking aspects of this book. And to understand what led to this deep skepticism and disillusionment, it is necessary to appreciate and acquaint with the events, decisions and policies of Western democracies observed by Solzhenitsyn over the course of many decades, some of which—by no means complete, but enough to drive the point—are:

Roosevelt’s continued support for the occupation of the Eastern European countries and aid for USSR; calling upon Russia to help whenever Western democracies find themselves in danger (this particular point is also pertinent in contemporary geopolitics, with Trump attempting to woo Russia to G7 in an effort to contain China); famine generated death of 6 million people in Ukraine between 1932 and 1933, which went unnoticed in Europe; ill treatment of Russian army men (including confiscating their underwear in exchange of ration!) who were allies in the World Wars at the hands of Britain and the shocking silence of the famed, incorruptible, independent and renowned press including the Times, The Guardian, News Statesman etc. (until Dr. Julius Epstein published his accounts of it); incomplete and inaccurate knowledge of pre-revolutionary Russia obtained from dubious and biased sources; duplicity of the English love for freedom – that is, freedom only for the English and not for others: a strange quality also noted most recently in the light of Brexit by many contemporary thinkers and by Gandhi in his Hind Swaraj; the farce at Nuremberg trial where the Soviet judges were as much guilty of crimes against humanity as the Nazis who were on trial, yet the Allies had no qualms in sitting next to them; the faux Helsinki accord which only increased the repression even more within the USSR; the treacherous and convenient truce in Vietnam (described by The New York Times as “The Blessed Silence”) and so on.                                                       

In the light of above (and a lot more), one can sympathize and imagine that the author became disillusioned and gave up the hope of any sincere initiative on part of the Western nations. And yet—as we saw earlier—this does not stop him from being equally critical of the Soviet oppression and brutality. Soviet practices of erasing any records of Western help like critical industrial supplies and food for millions of hungry in USSR (under the American Relief Administration); repression of journalists and reporters; concoction of false histories, data and explanations; inventing crimes to punish own party members and numerous others are severely reprimanded by the him.

Author’s pain regarding the West conceding to the Communists’ demands comes across consistently throughout the book in various different contexts: be it moral, material or any other. Thus his statement, “We are slaves, but we are striving for freedom. You, however, were born free. So why do you let yourselves be used by slavery? Why do you help our slave-owners?”

It will be prudent to end this section by another—even at the risk of saturating this review with quotes from the book—penetrating, unapologetic and profound statement on the double standards of the West, made by Solzhenitsyn (emphasis added):

“What can one say when your leading liberal paper compares the contemporary development of the Russian spiritual regeneration with pigs trying to fly? This is not just contempt for the spiritual potential of my people. It’s broader than that. It’s a kind of fastidious contempt for any kind of spiritual regeneration, for anything which does not stem directly from economics but which is based on moral criteria. What an inglorious end to four hundred years of materialism!”

Wisdom, Prescience & Insights

One of the many remarkable qualities of truly great writers, apart from the fact that they’re silent but keen observers of human nature and behaviour, is their ability to grasp the reigning thought currents, polity and general direction of society so well that their work almost acquires a prophetic vision. Solzhenitsyn, aware of this fact himself, cites Dostoevsky who suspected that Socialism will cost Russia 100 million lives. In reality he, as Solzhenitsyn informs us, was wrong only on the side of underestimation, for the figure stands at 110 million lives.

He warns the West about the onset of a deeper spiritual crisis and that the leadership of the USA will have to “bear the burden of this crisis”, and for this, it will be in “need of not just exceptional men, but of great men”. Continuing on the US, he avers that it has not suffered the trials and horrors of the old continent or Soviet Union and this has made it complacent into believing that such tragedies can never occur on its own soil. Steady rise of general dissatisfaction with society and an ever increasing void—created by the loss of meaning, unfulfilled by even the best of material comforts—in the Western societies show that Solzhenitsyn had his finger on the pulse. Regardless of what happened after the 70s, a contemporary reader cannot help but reflect upon his words: what is the current state of the Western nations in general and USA in particular? Is it in the hands of exceptional or great men, as remarked by Solzhenitsyn?

Prescience is almost always born together with wisdom. The author immerses us in his extraordinarily wise words, acquired not by mere textual research or dry and abstract intellectual analysis, but by the virtue of his own lived experience; many of which remain true even after almost five decades. Consider, for example, his advice that:

“It is against the natural order of things for those who are youngest with the least experience of life to have the greatest influence in directing the life of society”

The readers may want to contemplate and relate it to his/her day to day reality and public discourse: for many decades now, the unwritten rule is that merely being successful in any area—often based on very limited, flimsy, linear and ephemeral parameters—gives one the right to opine on any and everything under the sun. A “celebrity” is somehow competent enough to speak on matters related to say discrimination in society to national security and whatnot. Solzhenitsyn correctly diagnosed this phenomenon, albeit—and must be emphasized here—in a different and graver context, and cautioned against it.

Political moves, totally devoid of any moral considerations in the name pragmatism or “practical philosophy”, are thoroughly condemned by Solzhenitsyn. Merely adhering to petty political calculation eventually brings disasters, and nations must take into account the noble and honorable (and not just what is profitable). Solzhenitsyn advises nations to have transparent, open and deceit less relationship, instead of the so called détente which only eases tensions, without any real check on the ideological warfare, which continues even after such “détente”. International relationship scholars and thinkers would probably find his views detached from realpolitik (or Kissingerian “balance of power” doctrine). However, a careful, historically grounded examination of the phenomenon, described by the author in his statement, “The whole western world made an unprincipled deal with totalitarianism”, will reveal that this policy has brought about untold and unspeakable suffering to the world – a policy of, knowingly, arming a lesser evil to defeat the (perceived or real) bigger evil, until the lesser evil becomes the next bigger evil, and the cycle repeats itself ad nauseam. Going deeper into critiquing immoral deals with the oppressive regimes, Solzhenitsyn proffers a near spiritual reason to support his case. The evil done to others, he says, eventually comes back to confront us, sooner or later and it may be so subtle so as to be impervious to the practical mind, thus: “However hidden it may be from human gaze, however unexpected for the practical mind, there is sometimes a direct link between the evil we cause to others and the evil which suddenly confronts us. (…) Today’s generation has had to pay for the shortcomings of their fathers and grandfathers, who blocked their ears to the lamentations of the world and closed their eyes to its miseries and disasters”

If viewed from a slightly different angle, it invokes a consistently present and unsettling notion in the Western subconscious: that of the Faustian bargain with the Devil, for knowledge, success and secrets of the world. If this Faustian bargain is one deeply discomforting layer of Western subconscious, the other one is that of anthropocentrism—which now clearly appears to be on its way to a disastrous conclusion, ironically, for man himself—rooted in the Enlightenment thought, plainly stated for what it is by the author as follows:

“Once, it was proclaimed and accepted that above man there was no supreme being, but instead that man was the crowning glory of the universe and the measure of all things, and that man’s needs, desires, and indeed his weaknesses were taken to be the supreme imperatives of the universe. Consequently, the only good in the world—the only thing that needed to be done—was that which satisfied our feelings. (…) since there are no higher spiritual forces above us and since I—Man with a capital M—am the crowning glory of the universe, then if anyone must perish today, let it be someone else, anybody, but not I, not my precious self, or those who are close to me.”

And therein, lies the simplest explanation of the causes behind what happened, in the last three to four centuries, to various Asian, Latin American and African cultures of the world.

Final Thoughts

For an Indian reader, the book is especially important for not only its various truisms on ideologies, historical experiences and insights, but also for a degree of relatability.

He will be captivated, readily, by the author’s many comments about the state of Soviet economy as India too walked upon a similar path, the results of which are still with us. Soviet economy’s low productivity and efficiency, and huge dependence only on “that which is put in the ground”, remains true to a substantial extent for Russia even today, as it continues to rely on export of natural resources, primarily oil. Though, to be fair, there have been massive efforts, with considerable success, to diversify and develop other sectors as well.

Solzhenitsyn deeply moving account of pain, agony and sacrifices made by the Russians also remind us of India’s own sufferings. Consider his description about the state of Russian people:

“We endured inhuman experiences which the Western world—and this includes Britain—has no conception of and is even frightened to think about.”

While mentioned in the context of historical tragedies experienced by Russia: the onset of Communist rule, Stalinist purges, the colossal loss of Russian lives during the world wars (especially World War II), does it not remind us of our own sufferings—under the colonial rule, and beyond—of which the Western world indeed has no conception of?

His caution about inviting a wolf to save the lambs from dogs (for the wolf after finishing the dogs will inevitably come after the lambs) is pertinent in the Indian context on multiple levels: both domestically and internationally. His advice in the face of the Communist mentality—that of trying to grab everything—is rather simple: firmness. Only when firmness is shown, the Communists will retreat. This too carries a message for our country in the light its struggle against equally damaging ideologies.

As noted already, the book offers abundant facts, often forgotten or overlooked about the Communist party of the USSR, Soviet era geopolitics and Western policies, and helps create a much needed nuance in critically assessing and understanding this crucial period. These tidbits are sprinkled on practically every single page of this rather short book. And yet the author does not claim that he is the first one to pen them down; in fact—displaying impeccable honesty and humility—he informs us that at least 30 books have been published in the West before his book saw the light of the day (and yet no one noticed them).

Solzhenitsyn’s Warning to the West may be misunderstood as an invitation to the West to actively and aggressively interfere in Soviet Union. This will be a hasty conclusion for—as he himself refutes the commentary in facile newspaper reports after his speeches and interviews (“The press does not feel responsibility for its judgments, it makes judgments and attaches labels with the greatest of ease. Mediocre journalists simply make headlines of their conclusions, which suddenly become generally accepted”)—his advice to his countrymen, to the contrary, has always been the opposite: “Don’t wait for assistance, and don’t ask for it; we must stand on our own feet”. His love for and desire to see his motherland stand on her feet by her own efforts, can also be seen in his later works—after his return to Russia—comprising vehement criticism of the so called “shock-therapy” economic reforms under the reign of Boris Yeltsin, which, in the hindsight was nothing but mostly an directionless, open and organized loot of Russia’s vast national assets and resources. And for this, he was seen in a remarkably different light by the same democracies which had so far hailed him as the beacon of liberty. This (not so) curious phenomenon is also seen in case of many other prominent, humanitarian award winning figures, with Aung San Suu Kyi being the latest example.

As our world stands at the brink of another cold war—and history, as they say, seems to be repeating itself—and, a section of technology czars promise us unprecedented and unheard of growth, progress and utopia by toying with artificial intelligence and, purportedly, the very building blocks of life (gene editing, CRISPR) and physical reality itself (nanotechnology, quantum computing), it is only timely that we conclude this essay by urging our readers to ponder upon the sage advice of Alexandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn:

“There is a borderline beyond which the natural cause of ‘progressive principles,’ of ‘the dawn of a new era,’ becomes nothing more than calculated, conscious hypocrisy; for this makes life more comfortable to live.”

Image Credits: Medium