I just ordered it. Your bonus post (2 for 1 Tuesday) helped me understand why my 84 year father believes communism is the best form of government. As an atheist progressive he needs to believe in something and to have meaning and purpose in his life. Even though he knows that many people have been killed and tortured under communism he believes in it.
I think my socialist and atheist and woke friends are like your father. The human need to believe in a higher power is universal. If your higher power is not God, it will be something else. The insanity of the trans madness, the social justice / systemic racism is everywhere, socialism/communism/choose your -ism .... all of these to me seem like just a substitute for God. We need to live in service of something larger than ourselves. Once you have chosen your god, you will ignore (or rationalize) all contrary evidence so that you can continue to serve it.
Rod, as you said - We can't keep doing this! Your work is so important, and it is important or all of us to know and speak. You said "as I know about Soviet communism, it is not remotely enough." Not can it be for you or for me or for any of us. And we should know more.
Yet I hardly know what to say to some things you said here. In most ways it can't be my place to say this. But such suffering. Rod, you are so very moved by individuals. That is so good, positive and I am so moved as well. Still - The individual story becomes the story. You wrote the book, literally wrote the book, on the suffering of those who were not warped, who continued to follow Christ. And you drew patterns after a time. Are you seeing more of the dark side of those destroyed? The not Kamila Bendovas? It is terrible.
This is such a tough book. I've personally chosen to go through all seven of the ex-Yugoslavs, plus Georgia. One of my most recent talks with an ex-KGB agent in Georgia, a completely unrepentant communist, not the only one I've encountered. A story.
I have not been in Russia, but the ten countries I have been in, (plus, like you, Czech Rep., Slovakia, Hungary, Romania) have shown a variety of people. Alexievich chose a sub-set it appears. I spent over an hour yesterday after you mentioned this book - and after I coincidentally saw it mentioned just before I read what you said on the same day - on a site about Beria in Georgia.
I have not been in Russia, and I obviously cannot write. But if I could, I would go either go beyond the subset of people Alexievich uses in her wonderful book, or else say outright that this "horror, trauma yet faithful love of the abuser" is not how it is for everyone. She probably says that at some point. (And of course she is remarkable in what subjects tell her.)
I can't guarantee that Russia is not different from all the other countries where I have talked to people, I mean literally *dozens* of people, the topic fascinates me. You too! I've talked to them about the aftermath of communism in addition to their memories of communism. But Rod, you know, right? You first of all know, you already knew (?) the utter horrors of the Stalin/Beria torture and repression. But you know how many people did survive. So many are like my friend Dusan - yes Yugoslavs were not Soviets, but still, he "would take communism out behind the barn and shoot it" despite the sufferings in the 90s and the bad sufferings now in his country of Serbia. But yes, a significant minority are not like that, and they love communism. I can't tell you this - I think you know this....yes?
Kamala Benda at the beginning of part 2 talks about the dream of communism, and how it cannot be. The poor survivors, I think you know these were the ones who could not wake from the dream. So - through the traumatic accounts of "Secondhand Time" I'll persevere with you.
I guess I could also comment that a lot of people feel it is one form of "mafia" vs another, one form of dictator vs. another. I still think most know this is a less-sad form that the Soviets, and Hoxha (mixed reviews on Tito to be honest plenty of nostalgia plenty of happiness he is gone). Maybe the central words in today's Substack other than "we cannot afford to keep doing this are "you will absolutely know why the Russians went for Putin."
“Man can live with anything, but he cannot live without meaning.” A truth Victor Frankl learned from harsh experience - and made the foundation of logotherapy.
People in Trumps orbit have to tell him he's a genius as he dismantles the USA or he'll turn his attack dogs on them. He is sending people to prison camps (gulags!) in other countries without bothering to prove that they did anything at all. And when they have to admit that they sent an innocent person they take the case to the Supreme Court rather than bring the man home. So, this all powerful doosh can't convince El Salvador to release one prisoner, even though we are paying them millions of dollars to run these camps.
It's disgusting what's happening to this country at his hands.
What a bunch of baloney! Apparently you don't believe in law and order. What would you suggest we do with thieves, rapists, murderers, gang-members, human-traffickers, drug-traffickers, terrorists, anarchists, and assorted bums, free-loaders, petty thieves, law-breakers and ne'er do wells ... all thanks to the Democrats.
The problem with this country is that too many people have become so permissive, so tolerant, and so open-minded, that their brains have turned to sentimental mush. Freedom has to have limits, otherwise society will fall into chaos. Over the past eight years I have seen what that kind of chaos looks like and it's not the kind of society I want to live in.
Ever heard of the Constitution? The right to due process? Check it out. It's worked for almost 250 years. We shouldn't let a numbskull like Trump get rid of it on a whim.
I'd be in favor of extensive due process rights for possible criminal non-citizens in exchange for the elimination of the Patriot Act and FISA-court-approved spying on all citizens and non-citizens alike. The Washington uniparty has already trampled all over the due process rights of its citizens.
Not expecting this to change your mind, but there's a night and day difference between America and Soviet Russia. Here, where liberals image fantasy gulags government officials are getting fired, with very comfy severance pay.
In Russia, where there were real dictators, you'd be lucky to last by the end of each week. My great grandmother's siblings were all shot within months of the revolution. Her husband died at 30 after being sent away. She and my grandmother had to burn what little furniture they had so they wouldn't freeze to death when the famines started.
So, no, this is nothing like communism. At all. And if you actually knew anyone who went through that you'd never even think to make that comparison
Yeah, you're right about that. But my point is that it's starting here, not that we're in a full blown nightmare like the USSR.
And if you were one of the people who'd been swept off the street by unidentified masked men, hustled onto a plane and taken to a foreign prison, with no chance to defend yourself, you might not be so sanguine about our situation.
I really prefer the way our country was. I like the Bill of Rights. I like separation of powers. I don't want one man making all the decisions for the country. Especially an extremely flawed, vengeful asshole like Trump.
And yet, Sheila, when a vengeful asshole named Corpse Biden decided to unilaterally suspend our immigration laws, and open our southern border to between 10 and 12 million illegal immigrants (that we know of), we heard nary a peep from you about the rule of law.
Ditto when Corpse Biden bragged about circumventing the Supreme Court's decision invalidating his student loan forgiveness plans . . . only crickets from Sheila.
Please spare us your overheated hyperbole and cite one concrete example - - one - - where Trump has violated the Bill of Rights, without citing a lower federal district court decision that has not yet been subject to review by the Supreme Court.
Sir, I wasn't here to comment on any of those things. I just became a subscriber last week.
I think the right to due process is an amendment so it's not a violation of the bill of rights, but all the people who were rounded up and flown out of the country were entitled to a hearing. So that's at least 300 violations.
Sheila is definitely ignoring the rule of holes - - quit digging yourself deeper.
As Towne Acres pointed out, the first 10 Amendments, including the Fifth Amendment right to due process, are indeed the Bill of Rights. If you can’t keep the fundamentals straight, you’re going to struggle with the rest of the concepts.
The Supreme Court affirmed that the Tren de Aragua thugs were not (not, Sheila, not) entitled to the hearing they sought for judicial review challenging Trump’s determination under the Alien Enemies Act that Venezuela is engaged in a predatory incursion. No right to due process in the form of judicial review, Shelia. No 300 violations, Shelia.
Instead, they had the far more limited right to individual habeas petitions to dispute whether they were within the scope of Trump’s declaration.
But they chose not (not, Sheila, not) to file habeas petitions. And they chose to go forum shopping in the DC federal court (playing political games, Sheila), rather than properly file in federal court in Texas, where they were confined before the outbound flight to El Salvador. For both reasons, they lost.
If this is too complicated for you, Sheila, perhaps you should refrain from your puerile Stalin comments.
"He is sending people to prison camps (gulags!) in other countries without bothering to prove that they did anything at all."
What they did, Sheila, is break the law by entering the United States illegally. Is that so hard to understand?
And he is sending them back to their home country, Sheila. With me so far? And for those hostile home countries which refuse to take back their own citizens (i.e., Venezuela), he is sending them to El Salvador, to remain imprisoned until their home country relents. Are you following, Sheila?
And that is not happening through the exercise of a Stalin-esque authoritarian power. It is happening under the Alien Enemies Act, which allows the President to apprehend, restrain, secure and remove the denizens of a hostile nation in the event of declared war, invasion or a predatory incursion, without going through deportation proceedings in the immigration courts. Hello, Sheila, is this confounded Interwebs thing working?
The Supreme Court in the 1950s held that the President’s decision-making under the Alien Enemies Act is a political question not subject to judicial review, and the current Supreme Court affirmed that ruling this week, explaining that individuals could challenge their apprehension in court through the narrow tool of habeas corpus proceeding, but not a civil action for judicial review.
If you're having trouble understanding this, that's OK. JonF311 can't get any of this through his skull either. But in your ignorance, please spare us the talk about Stalin and gulags.
Even if they broke the law they are entitled to a hearing. And in some cases it's clear that they didn't actually break laws - their green cards were revoked on the whim of the administration. We're not in the middle of an invasion so the Alien Enemies Act doesn't apply.
Rod brought up Stalin and gulags. I was remarking on the similarities of some of Trumps recent actions to thing. He's starting by sending people he's pronounced criminals to prison camps overseas. He's suing law firms to deny legal representation to anyone who challenges him. If he's not stopped it's clear he'll be sending American citizens who oppose him to prisons too. Like a gulag. And you'll find some convoluted rationalization to justify it.
Welcome, Sheila. We find ourselves in the "I-don't-really-care-Margaret" universe because for the last 4 years we've been told that the border was "secure" despite what we saw with our own eyes: caravans of migrants headed north from Central America, most in debt to human traffickers and many women sexually abused along the way. Although the majority of migrants probably wanted to make better lives for themselves, a sizable criminal element crossed the border, terrorizing the immigrant communities they infiltrated.
Right or wrong, no one cares when Tren de Aragua thugs are denied due process and sent to the El Salvador Supermax. Bourgeois leftists want them returned to the US for their day in court, a fringe & boutique opinion that only resonates in gang-free Park Slope, Brooklyn and Berkeley CA.
The case of the hairdresser is sad but he has a loving family back in Venezuela. He's their concern, not ours.
Paul, you should care when due process is denied to any person to whom it's owed by law. If these dudes are really the criminals we're assured they are, it should be pretty easy to present evidence of their criminality. It also helps provide safeguards against punishing those who are wrongly accused of being members of these gangs.
Ah, you know what, f*** justice. Just as long as we're slapping tariffs on our penguin trade competitors, then I will sleep soundly knowing American greatness has been achieved.
There's definitely a "don't-really-care-Margaret" aspect to this debate, as the Leftists who cheered Corpse Biden's decision to throw open the southern border now lecture us sanctimoniously on the rule of law.
But Vince and Sheila are also wrong on the substance. THERE WAS NO DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS.
The Supreme Court on Monday affirmed that the Tren de Aragua gang-bangers were not entitled to challenge Trump’s declaration under the Alien Enemies Act; namely, that Venezuela is engaged in a predatory incursion. They had a right to limited habeas corpus review to contest whether they individually fit within the scope of Trump’s declaration . . . but that's not what the ACLU chose to file.
Hence, Judge Boasberg's injunction was reversed, and future removals of Tren de Aragua thugs can now proceed, without the right to immigration hearings, and without the ability to judicially challenge the President's authority under the Alien Enemies Act.
The caravan moves on, but Sheila and Vince are still barking.
It would be fine if they actually deported the guy. The horror is that people are stuck in prison camps out of the range of legal representation and human decency.
The phrase "I-don't-really-care-Margaret" is being used here as a magical enchantment that means if I'm sick of hearing about something I don't have to pay attention to our norms of law and decency. That's not the United States I grew up in. And I'm afraid about how far that will go.
How soon til it's the bourgeois leftists in Park Slope who are being hustled into a van and shipped to El Salvador? You know Trump would loooove to be able to do that.
Sayeth Sheila: "How soon til it's the bourgeois leftists in Park Slope who are being hustled into a van and shipped to El Salvador?"
I think Sheila is locked in a room, strapped in a chair, eyes propped open through the 'Ludovico technique' in Clockwork Orange, watching Rachel Madcow's 2019 monologues on MSNBC on an endless repeating loop. When she sleeps, Sheila mutters "the walls are closing in" through the din of her CPAP machine.
Sheila's Next Post: citations to the Mueller Report, the Steele Dossier, and links to Adam Schiff's Kompromat file.
Sayeth Sheila: "We're not in the middle of an invasion so the Alien Enemies Act doesn't apply."
Wrong as usual. The Alien Enemies Act allows the President to apprehend and/or remove the natives, citizens or denizens of a hostile nation in the event of declared war, invasion or a predatory incursion.
The President has declared that the government of Venezuela is engaged in a predatory incursion, Sheila, and that declaration is not subject to judicial review.
Sayeth Sheila: "Oh well if he's declared it so who can possible disagree!"
Sayeth the Alien Enemies Act, 50 U.S.C. § 21: "Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event . . ."
Sayeth the US Supreme Court: "The very nature of the President's power to order the removal of all enemy aliens rejects the notion that courts may pass judgment upon the exercise of his discretion."
One more time, Sheila: your beloved murderers and rapists, illegal aliens all, can challenge the constitutionality of the law, they can challenge whether their individual circumstances fit within the President's declaration, but they cannot seek judicial review to challenge the President's declaration.
Also, "The divided court agreed the Trump administration can use the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged members of a foreign gang, as long as they are given the right to challenge the government’s claim."
Looking forward to another voluble and informative missive.
Sayeth Sheila: "He's suing law firms to deny legal representation to anyone who challenges him."
Wrong as usual. He’s barring them from government contracts (as if they have a God-given right to federal largesse). He’s revoking the security clearance of partners which allows the firms to work with clients on matters that involve confidential government information. And the DOJ is investigating the firms to the extent they are engaged in racial discrimination in their hiring practices.
But why is Trump "attacking" these firms? They’re just zealously representing their clients in the loftiest traditions of the legal profession. Not quite. In the case of Perkins Coie, they’re not even acting as lawyers; they acted as a financial cut-out for the Clinton campaign to pay for the Steele Dossier. Kind of ironic. Hillary and the DNC paid a fine for concealing the Steele Dossier as a legal expense; Trump was convicted of 34 felonies for concealing the Stormy NDA as a legal expense.
In the case of the Paul Weiss law firm, you have a partner filing pro bono civil lawsuits to bankrupt J6 protestors. Pro bono in this case is a fancy way of saying that the law firm was subsidizing the work. And you have another Paul Weiss partner, also acting pro bono, launching a media campaign to persuade the Manhattan DA’s office to prosecute Trump in the Stormy NDA case. That partner, Mark Pomerantz, ultimately joined Alvin Bragg’s team.
These law firms were engaged in politics; indeed, hard ball politics. No need to shed tears when the law firms discover that political hard ball works both ways. And forgive me for not smelling the Constitution burning from these Gestapo tactics.
I love that you defined pro bono for me. So considerate!
It will take a lot for you to see what's right in front of you. I wonder how far it has to go before you see that Trump is not concerned at all about democracy. He's cowed the Republican Party and ignoring the norms of our civilization. Not to mention tanking the economy. I hope we can pull out of this nosedive.
It appears you need more definitional clarity. "Ignoring the norms of our civilization?" Sheila, you're dialing the hysteria machine past 10 quadrillion.
As for tanking the economy, you may be right. But if the stock market rebounds in the next few months, I'm pretty certain you'll be memory-holing these comments.
It's much like the price of eggs - - during Corpse Biden's tenure, there was Leftist silence on egg prices. Following Trump's first hour in office, CNN was bemoaning egg prices non-stop. Now that egg prices are down . . . crickets.
Good Lord. This is the exact discussion I had with my 34 year old niece. Word For Word. I know my niece is not a bot, but I'm beginning to wonder about Shiela. Comrade Shiela. Listen to others who refute your liberal bias talking points. Regurgitating liberal talking points will get you nowhere.
I'm just a run of the mill liberal with a liberal bias. I've been reading Rod's writing since way back in the Iraq war days. I disagree with him on most things but I think he's interesting and honest and I come here to see what he thinks about the latest lunacy.
So can I just ask you personally, John, how do you feel about Trumps cabinet meetings when each member of the cabinet outdoes the next one flattering Trump? Does it not worry you that he needs that kind of ass kissing?
Also, are you following his crypto adventures? Basically, any company or country that wants to influence his policy can bribe him by buying his meme coins. You guys were all up in arms about Hunter Bidens grifting which was small potatoes compared to this racket.
My niece’s name is Rachel. Are you in the same echo chamber?
Have you ever been in a corporate meeting where millions of dollars were being discussed? I have. Have you ever been on a TV show? I have. They are discussing trillions.
Thats the way the game is played. The cameras are on for one purpose. It's called theater. They are doing it to push your buttons.
Donald Trump is a billionaire. He wasva billionaire before he became President. He will be one after. Nobody is forcing anyone to GAMBLE on crypto. Enter at your own risk.
Yup, I've been in big corporate meetings in NY where millions of dollars were being discussed. I don't know Rachel. 50% of the country agree with Rachel and me so not sure why you're so triggered by our opinions.
I don't even know what to say about your theater/button pushing comment. No other president has behaved this way and the point of a cabinet is to have people with expertise advise the president. This is not that - it's a bunch of yes men/women. It's pathetic to watch.
Trump has declared bankruptcy like 6 times. He is a terrible businessman. The Apprentice was a tv show! Not real. His instincts are bad - he's delusional about tariffs and he may default on our debt.
Also, nobody is gambling on Trumps crypto coin - they are BRIBING him. It's an investment and he and his family's net worth has gone up by like $3B since he's been president.
From what I read of the Soviet Union, especially Stalin's times, it was the worst there. Albania perhaps matched it. It was very bad in the Soviet satellites. Georgia, where I visited last week was, I admit, was my first trip a part of the former Soviet Union proper. Rod wrote last fall of a friend who told him to go to Georgia. I strongly second that, and I even have people from him to talk to.
It is a fine book, as Rod describes. It is also an exceptional audiobook, with close to a dozen different (and talented) narrators, enabling the "reader" to get a more realistic sense of the many different voices in the author's oral history. A gem.
When the Kronstadt sailors revolted against the direction the new Bolshevik regime was trending, their slogan was "Communism without commissars." Putin is the opposite: Commissars without communism.
The EU is not that cutting edge. The EU is a sclerotic, self-satisfied bureaucracy with no particular individual running the show but a general elite consensus on which way to push things. No commissars, just a very banal brand of low-key evil.
I read this a few years ago and loved it. Finally, I was able to understand why people in post-Soviet Russia yearned for a return to Stalinism.
I remember thinking as I read it that the Soviet era was colorful and vibrant to them and after 1989 everything was just gray and bleak whereas I had always thought of the Soviet years as gray and bleak.
Just yesterday, I read the following observation from Marianne Hirsch, who grew up in Romania on Nicolai Ceauscescu's watch: "I never realized until this moment how much fear I carried with me from my childhood in Communist Romania. Arrests were arbitrary, and every time the doorbell rang, I started to shiver."
What triggered this realization was the manner ICE is operating in carrying out arrests as part of President Trump's massive deportation program. Men in plain clothes, wearing masks, who refuse to give their names or even identify their agency, who refuse to answer questions about either one, summarily handcuffing the person they came to arrest.
The article in which this quote appears was in the NY Times, but the fact that someone who survived Communism in Romania would respond this way speaks volumes. She was not among those arrested -- just observing what is going on around her. One of the specific examples in the article was Mahmoud Kahlil -- and I'm not at all certain that its wrong to deport him. The president does have discretion to deport a non-citizen here under some kind of lawful temporary residence who is actively campaigning on behalf of a foreign organization the government has classified as terrorist. Whether it is wise or sound policy to deport him is a valid question, but its a different question than whether the president has authority to make that call.
However, the case of the legal resident accused without evidence of being a member of Tren de Aragua and summarily shipped off to a prison outside of U.S. jurisdiction highlights what due process is all about: to make sure that there is factual evidence establishing legal cause, and that an innocent person isn't being swept up.
As I've said before, there is nothing unique about the methodology used by communist parties in power to keep their grip on a population. Similar methods are used by a variety of regimes, which serve a variety of ideologies, or, a non-ideological commitment to a particular caudillo, Dear Leader, or self-infatuated personality.
I fear that people who are sympathetic to the notion of deporting illegals (/criminals/agitators) are hardening their hearts, and closing their eyes, to the abuses that may be carried out. (The same goes actually for indiscriminate mass firings from the federal government and slashing of some worthwhile programs, with all the appropriate disclaimers that losing a job is obviously not the same as being tortured by the NKVD.) So many people these days are determined not to give an inch to "the other side" that they are unwilling to call out any wrongs by their own side.
The problem is that people have been lied to for so long, mainly by the mainstream media but also by sloppy and disingenuous alternative sites, that people don't believe the criticism of Trump anymore. I fear he can get away with anything now, because the people are so sick of the talking heads crying "wolf!" for so long.
Exactly. It's "I don't really care, Margaret." syndrome if you will. One thing I've been thinking about a lot lately in my Lenten journey is the limits of what is a 'me problem'. Increasingly, the 'me problems' are becoming much more narrow and extremely local. In one way, this is very good, it prevents a lot of fretting over things that are not my business or in my control. On the other hand, it definitely leads to "I don't really care, Margaret", because you've cried so many times that I truly do not care about your problems anymore.
It's like walking away from the toddler throwing the tantrum. Sometimes, you've got to take a deep breath and just let them cry it out.
But when you walk away from the toddler, you (should) do it because you DO care. That's not the same at all really as not giving a sh*t anymore -- which is a human reaction but not one to be proud of.
Fair point. Is there room then in the discourse for doing the action from a spirit of love while at the same time needing to let off a bit of steam in frustration?
I am not following any of these stories closely, so, my comment is just directed about general attitudes. True abuses should never be tolerated, but, when wolf is cried constantly, it does get hard to separate the real from the fake.
"The people" inflates Trump's support. After all, he got a little less than half the vote (as have the Dems he ran against) and his approval rating has seldom if ever reached 50 percent, often lower. Also, a large number of those who voted for him weren't enthusiastic, just sick of what the other party persisted in offering and patting themselves on the back for. Even if eighty percent of the population demanded that enforcement policies be brought into line with constitutional norms, Trump and his minions would ignore them. They don't care. They have the power for a period of time and will do all they are not vigorously (and lawfully) restrained from doing.
And it is a problem if demands for due process, and respect for civil liberties, are adopted by one "side" as their own pet project. People who are zealous about fixing a perceived problem tend to forget that its important to get the people or offices or agencies that ARE posing the problem, not indiscriminately get anyone who happens to be in sight who can be labeled as X. But a lot of political factions tend to accept the label as definitive, without demanding proof and evidence. Its a bit like the family of a murder victim insisting that "someone ought to pay for this." Yes, someone ought to pay for it -- the perpetrator, and nobody else.
To the books Rod recommends here, I also recommend "This I Cannot Forget" by Nikolai Bukharin's widow. It has a different flavor of course, but as the wife of one of the most prominent Politbureau members executed during the purge trials of the 1930s, she is familiar with many of the weaknesses of the Bolshevik regime. She recounts being transported on a train to Siberia and having a brief encounter with the widow of General Tukhachevsky (who probably could have stopped the later Wehrmacht offensive well short of Moscow if he, not Joseph Stalin meddling in areas he was not competent to direct, had been in charge of the Red Army). After some time in the Gulag, she was about to be shot when an order arrived to send her to Moscow. It turned out that Lavrenty Beria had a soft spot for her, remembering idyllic visits to her family home when her father was still living. He was, as Beria put it "a valuable militant" -- a committed Bolshevik who had the good luck to die while still in good standing, before the purges began. Bukharin has also been a close family friend. She was disappointed by the collapse of Gorbachev's government, because at long last the state press was going to publish Bukharin's long-suppressed collective works. Like I said, its a different flavor, but you will have a better understanding of the purges and the rivalries involved if you read her recollection. I would never have known this book existed, except that I found a long row of discounted brand new volumes for sale on a shelf at The Strand in NYC.
Ah yes, the fascinating memoir of Anna Larina was one of my late husband's favorites. (Number 1 being Eugenia Ginsberg's two volumes.) His hobby was modern Russian history and he collected gulag memoirs by the score. For True Believer Communists, nothing done to them or others during the purges shook their faith in the least.
Anna was featured in some PBS documentary after her release. She attributed her survival to the possession of a warm fur hat, originally Stalin's own hat. (So my husband resolved to grab his good tweed coat if the Knock on the Door ever came.)
Hedrick Smith, long time NYT correspondent in the USSR wrote an interesting cultural survey, The Russians, just at the end of Soviet rule. He also did a pair of documentaries one right after the collapse and a followup a few years later. None of the hopes of the people interviewed for the first one had been fulfilled--except for the one who sold out, of course.
That should be "Ginzberg" not "Ginsberg." Her books are Journey into the Whirlwind and Within the Whirlwind. Hedrick Smith's books are The Russians and The New Russians. He doesn't seem to be published his followup material and the documentaries weren't issued as DVDs.
And actually—Ginzburg! At least in the volume of Journey into the Whirlwind I have. Amazing book. Have not read the second volume—that’s about her time in exile?
From her brief epilogue: “I strove to remember all these things in the hope of recounting them to honest people and true Communists….How wonderful…that the great Leninist truths have again come into their own in our country and Party!”
Irony? A fillip for the censors? What she really believed? All of the above?
Sandra I am glad you and some others are coming to comment. I am out of sorts over this book for now. Online sources say the book is not all nostalgia for Soviet times, however, and other sources will come in eventually.
But it is intense. Yes, I've read and seen dramas. Then - My experiences talking to various people. I've found nostalgic and not nostalgic people. Usually *not* nostalgic. The book so far is so much awful detail, many "nostalgic interviews" in a row. Then the fan-ship for communism despite them. Plus, I have to get my mind around the fact that it is really something like 50 percent novel, 50 percent interview but written as interviews.
I do think the Brezhnev and Gorbachev bad but were different from Stalin and Khruschev. It seems like people in the book are only nostalgic for the post-Khruschev times. (?)
Something I like about the book is how "religious" the nostalgic people are. It is just their religion is something like pure anti-capitalism.
Please understand that I'm not any kind of expert here. I'm only passing on what I absorbed from my husband's reading habits. (He said that gulag memoirs cheered him up after a hard day in the lab.) The only books of this kind that I've read are Fr. Walter Cizek's memoirs: With God in Russia and He Leadth Me which I highly recommend.
It is my choice not to use the f word. But I'd like to. I will just say: I’d like those comparing Trump to Stain to shut the F up. Now. And I’ve already said I’d vote “disapprove” at present on Trump, the lesser of two bad choices so don't strawman me.
Guard again any over-authoritarianism. Of course – but - Comparison between Donald Trump and Joseph Stalin fails meaningful scrutiny concerning power, governance, and human rights.
Stalin's rule was by total control over every aspect of society. The Great Purge of 1936-1938 alone resulted in the execution of hundreds of thousands of people, with millions more sent to the Gulag labor camp system. About 8 million were murdered in Ukraine via induced famine.. Under his rule, the Soviet Union maintained a single-party state that tolerated no political opposition, controlled all media, not some like parties today. They were terrorists enforcing complete conformity through terror. There was total control, no private property, you could not sell a lemonade or rent out a room – though you didn’t have a room.
By contrast, Trump's presidency and subsequent administration have operated within the constitution, within democracy. Yes, there is controversy, but Trump has governed through established democratic institutions. (Don't tell me one plane took off and was not returned. I know that.) The deportations are harsh and to my shock they did not start with just criminals – and they never would have finished if they deported only criminals. Plus, they made mistakes, it appears, with at least two sent to El Salvador. And they cut way too many jobs in horrible ways.
But there are independent courts. Opposition parties function freely. The scale of human suffering also bears no comparison. Stalin's policies directly resulted in the deaths of millions through execution, deliberate starvation, and forced labor in extreme conditions.
I tire of hysteria. You are posting here. And you are not going to a gulag. Nor a British jail.
Deaths for the entire Soviet regime - Lower credible estimates, 23-30 million. Higher credible estimates 45-55 million. Back to Stalin: Keep in mind he probably killed 20-25 million, but here are the lower credible estimates just for his regime:
***Lower*** credible estimates: 13-18 million deaths
Ukrainian famine (Holodomor): 4-5 million deaths (It is more - LA)
Kazakhstan famine: 1.5-2.3 million deaths
Other Soviet regions' famine deaths: 1-2 million
Gulag system: 1.5-1.7 million deaths
Great Terror executions: 800,000-1.2 million
Forced relocations/deportations of ethnic groups: 1-1.5 million
"Scorched earth" and targeting of Soviet civilians during WW2: 1-2 million
Collectivization violence and de-kulakization: 2-3 million
Does Rod's comment about so many anti-Nazi things on Netflix but then people not knowing about this, very little to be found, make sense?
Yes, I was thinking Soviet communism or its cousins (Tito) and was not clear on that. But then Ukraine lost approximately around one-third of its population during the Holodomor. It is also said Kazakhstan lost around 38% of its ethnic Kazakh population during forced collectivization. Crimean Tatars and Chechens are said to have lost 20-40% of their populations.
My father in law did his PHD in North Carolina in the 1970s and he still jokes (in a very grim way, obviously) about the professors and grad students who gushed over Pol Pot for bringing "real Communism" to Southeast Asia... It made him a conservative for life.
Remember that the USSR lost 20 million people in WWII, many of those deaths directly due to Stalin's policies.
When I was growing up we heard a lot about the horrors of Communism. It was everywhere in movies and on TV. I even remember reading Robert Conquest on the Great Purge in Life magazine. In grade school, classmates were refugees from Hungary, in high school we heard a talks by a priest who escaped from Red China, s in college it was Cuba. I knew a guy who'd participated in the 1956 Hungarian uprising. My stepmother's family had escaped from Ukraine after the Bolsheviks shot her grandfather. My point is, the real suffering under Communism was communicated personally--it was not all McCarthyism as people now imagine.
Though I believe you were born before me, opposition to communism was also an important part of the way I was brought up. This was through my grandmother, and through books my parents gave me. I had nothing like your knowledge of people who escaped, however, nor have I even met anyone in Hungary who has told me of their own experiences in 1956 (they tell of their parents and grandparents), Criticism of McCarthyism was not popular in my circles. I don't think I heard it until I was a teenager. Already, as a child I somehow got hold of and read "None Dare Call it Treason." I accept it when I am told that book was extreme. However, though I am certainly no John Bircher, I do not recall extremes I read in that book. I believed from the start that McCarthy went too far but that he was right to do something.
I have felt different, always, as long as I can remember. On entering my teens that amplified, due to what I believe about communism. People don't know. People can look at someone like me, should I refer to my beliefs, as a weird John Bircher McCarthyite. I'm not.
An important, more recent influence on me was the novel "Child 44" and its two sequels, by Tom Rob Smith. It's an unforgettable portrayal of a KGB agent and his wife, of what was happening and of psychological conditions, under Stalin. These books are a lot easier to bear than Secondhand Time. Anyway, I highly recommend them.
Thanks for putting me onto this author, with whom I was not familiar. All of her stuff looks great. I may be about to spend a lot of money on (Kindle) books.
In our lifetimes, my wife and I have met some people who experienced life in the USSR and some of the satellite countries. My wife had a friend in university who came over in one of the waves of Jewish emigration from the USSR in the early 1970s. The route was generally USSR>Iron Curtain satellite>Israel>US or Canada. She always talked about how school kids were encouraged by their teachers to snitch on anyone in the family saying anything bad about the government. Another person was someone who came of age during WWll and went through life under Stalin, Khruschev, and the rest. My kids have lots of friends whose parents and grandparents experienced life in the USSR. The parents and grandparents shook their heads when talking about the laziness and lax attitudes here and how people take things for granted. A 1980s work colleague of my wife who was from Rumania was rendered incapable of carrying a child thanks to the 'hospitals' of Rumania. ...One nightmare after another.
I agree wholeheartedly. It's delusion to equate Trump to Stalin/Hitler/Pol Pot. When these awful comparisons are made they just discredit the source.
No human process will be perfect and so deportations will have false deportations. It's inevitable. The Trump folks need to minimize these. At this point they've made 2 (possible) errors out of 1000s of deportations? That's an astonishingly low number.
It is a very tough thing. I have watched so many documentaries. I watch original material in Spanish from El Salvador, regarding CECOT, the counterterrorism (counter-gang) prison there.
Life in El Salvador whet from thousands murdered each year, fear to go out even in daylight in so many places, hardly any business not giving large monies to gangs, to peace, safety and a low murder rate. Yes, they put people with the tattoos in prison to await trial. Tens of thousands are there. With heavy heart, I believe CECOT is the only way, though with deep sadness. It is not impossible for a mistake to be made and an innocent to go there. However, I've not seen anyone out of literally hundreds in the films without the characteristic tattoos all over themselves however - and yes I know about the one guy in the USA said to have only one crown tattoo who was sent there, which is terrible.
MS-13 is Salvadoran, though originally formed by Salvadoran migrants in the USA. TDA of course is Venezuelan but at first Venezuela would not take them back. I hear they will take them now (?)
My (unofficial) godson from Honduras recently won a one-week academic all expenses paid study program in San Salvador over winter break and was really impressed.
Oh, I don't. He was born in what is now Georgia, the dictator of Georgia for many years before going to Moscow and becoming head of the secret police. One of the worst psychopathic murderers ever. In Georgia they almost all understand Stalin to be evil. However, I was told a few Georgians, including many in Stalin's hometown Gori, think Beria was responsible for the horror and Stalin did not know. (Of course Stalin knew and instigated much, but Beria is as big a monster as Stalin, and yes, a serial rapist to boot,)
By some accounts Stalin was even a little afraid of Beria. The conspiracy theory that Stalin was murdered by warfarin (an anti-clotting drug) posits Beria as the mastermind of the plot.
Stalin is one of the great extremes of tyranny (which the 20th century was noteworthy in producing). He sits in an unholy trinity along with Hitler and Mao. Comparisons of any present day leader with any of that troika are over the top hysteria. Which does not mean we can't criticize present day leaders, including our own for abuses.
I agree. We can, and should, criticize leaders. But comparing any present day leader to the three you mentioned along with Pol Pot and many others is horrible and a disservice to the people who were murdered by these evil men and those working for them. So Trump is not Hitler or Stalin. But neither were Obama or George W. Bush.
This hits so hard. Yesterday I taught a class on writer Isaac Babel and in doing research for it literally got ill with what I learned. Felt this horrible heaviness even talking about it to the class.
What caused my fear? How familiar it felt.
I won't lie--I glossed past the excerpts you included and won't read the book because I can't.
I know I am posting a lot today, but this is getting to me. I'm moved by the interviews. Something else has also come up or me.
Further in, I am starting to question Alexievich. Almost no one speaks as well, as colorfully as descriptively, as her interviewees. The literary quality of the speeches is consistently very high. Yes, this is a "portrait of true" for some. These certainly are not transcripts of interviews, however. I looked into it. Alexievich herself has described her work as a "novel of voices" and explained that she condenses hundreds of interviews, selecting and arranging material, At first I did not realize.
Here is an example: ***"We were free now and that was that. When you’re stuck in an elevator, the only thing you think about are the doors opening—you’re ecstatic when they finally open. Pure euphoria!"*** (1) A great description of what it feels like to suddenly have choice, but he confused. (2) Maybe one great interviewee did speak so well. (3) But, basically, all of the interviews have passages of this quality. I call this strange.
edit to be clear: I never thought these were transcripts. But I thought they stuck pretty clearly to what each person said. I think now these are composite, with additions, With Alexievich sticking closely to what she saw as the spirit of what she heard. But she filters it and adds her words to a greater extent, I think, than I first realized.
OK, you know me, Katja. People might get tired of me blithering on regarding Rod, but this seems the perfect time to say it. There is contrast between Rod's portrayal of me as I really am after interviewing me, no words changed. I can say this must generally be his habit and that he has a strong ability to do things like this. This contrasts with Alexievich's novel-interview hybrid format.
There is a lot of skill needed to really portray someone after speaking with them, To not let one's own thoughts superimpose over who the interviewee is. I've seen a few other interviews written up with people I knew. They did not work. I am saying yes, interviewing is tough, and few people are Rod.
Part of me does not want Rod to do a LNBL 2 book (documentary yes, book...eh...) because this stuff tears a person up. But if he chose, Rod could go to Georgia and write about leaving communism and those coming to faith despite the hypocrisy of clergy. How this happens for some, not others. That would be something. I'm not the only person who knows him that has suggested time in Georgia.
This was what Robert Coles, the Harvard psychiatrist did, but never admitted it, as perhaps this woman has wisely done. I was reading his supposed transcript of what a poor person told him one day, and had to laugh, realizing pretty quickly that he was just writing what he wanted and needed this woman to say, rather than what she might have actually said. I never really trusted his "scholarship" or research after that.
Wow. Just wow. Thanks for sharing.
I just ordered it. Your bonus post (2 for 1 Tuesday) helped me understand why my 84 year father believes communism is the best form of government. As an atheist progressive he needs to believe in something and to have meaning and purpose in his life. Even though he knows that many people have been killed and tortured under communism he believes in it.
I think my socialist and atheist and woke friends are like your father. The human need to believe in a higher power is universal. If your higher power is not God, it will be something else. The insanity of the trans madness, the social justice / systemic racism is everywhere, socialism/communism/choose your -ism .... all of these to me seem like just a substitute for God. We need to live in service of something larger than ourselves. Once you have chosen your god, you will ignore (or rationalize) all contrary evidence so that you can continue to serve it.
Rod, as you said - We can't keep doing this! Your work is so important, and it is important or all of us to know and speak. You said "as I know about Soviet communism, it is not remotely enough." Not can it be for you or for me or for any of us. And we should know more.
Yet I hardly know what to say to some things you said here. In most ways it can't be my place to say this. But such suffering. Rod, you are so very moved by individuals. That is so good, positive and I am so moved as well. Still - The individual story becomes the story. You wrote the book, literally wrote the book, on the suffering of those who were not warped, who continued to follow Christ. And you drew patterns after a time. Are you seeing more of the dark side of those destroyed? The not Kamila Bendovas? It is terrible.
This is such a tough book. I've personally chosen to go through all seven of the ex-Yugoslavs, plus Georgia. One of my most recent talks with an ex-KGB agent in Georgia, a completely unrepentant communist, not the only one I've encountered. A story.
I have not been in Russia, but the ten countries I have been in, (plus, like you, Czech Rep., Slovakia, Hungary, Romania) have shown a variety of people. Alexievich chose a sub-set it appears. I spent over an hour yesterday after you mentioned this book - and after I coincidentally saw it mentioned just before I read what you said on the same day - on a site about Beria in Georgia.
I have not been in Russia, and I obviously cannot write. But if I could, I would go either go beyond the subset of people Alexievich uses in her wonderful book, or else say outright that this "horror, trauma yet faithful love of the abuser" is not how it is for everyone. She probably says that at some point. (And of course she is remarkable in what subjects tell her.)
I can't guarantee that Russia is not different from all the other countries where I have talked to people, I mean literally *dozens* of people, the topic fascinates me. You too! I've talked to them about the aftermath of communism in addition to their memories of communism. But Rod, you know, right? You first of all know, you already knew (?) the utter horrors of the Stalin/Beria torture and repression. But you know how many people did survive. So many are like my friend Dusan - yes Yugoslavs were not Soviets, but still, he "would take communism out behind the barn and shoot it" despite the sufferings in the 90s and the bad sufferings now in his country of Serbia. But yes, a significant minority are not like that, and they love communism. I can't tell you this - I think you know this....yes?
Kamala Benda at the beginning of part 2 talks about the dream of communism, and how it cannot be. The poor survivors, I think you know these were the ones who could not wake from the dream. So - through the traumatic accounts of "Secondhand Time" I'll persevere with you.
I guess I could also comment that a lot of people feel it is one form of "mafia" vs another, one form of dictator vs. another. I still think most know this is a less-sad form that the Soviets, and Hoxha (mixed reviews on Tito to be honest plenty of nostalgia plenty of happiness he is gone). Maybe the central words in today's Substack other than "we cannot afford to keep doing this are "you will absolutely know why the Russians went for Putin."
“Man can live with anything, but he cannot live without meaning.” A truth Victor Frankl learned from harsh experience - and made the foundation of logotherapy.
Claremont Review of Books posted a review of Solzhenitzyn's son's book of his speeches here:
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/from-russia-with-tough-love/
Well worth the read
Magnificent book. Should be required reading in every school in the country, and every sensate adult should seek it out.
It's starting to happen here, right now.
People in Trumps orbit have to tell him he's a genius as he dismantles the USA or he'll turn his attack dogs on them. He is sending people to prison camps (gulags!) in other countries without bothering to prove that they did anything at all. And when they have to admit that they sent an innocent person they take the case to the Supreme Court rather than bring the man home. So, this all powerful doosh can't convince El Salvador to release one prisoner, even though we are paying them millions of dollars to run these camps.
It's disgusting what's happening to this country at his hands.
What a bunch of baloney! Apparently you don't believe in law and order. What would you suggest we do with thieves, rapists, murderers, gang-members, human-traffickers, drug-traffickers, terrorists, anarchists, and assorted bums, free-loaders, petty thieves, law-breakers and ne'er do wells ... all thanks to the Democrats.
The problem with this country is that too many people have become so permissive, so tolerant, and so open-minded, that their brains have turned to sentimental mush. Freedom has to have limits, otherwise society will fall into chaos. Over the past eight years I have seen what that kind of chaos looks like and it's not the kind of society I want to live in.
Ever heard of the Constitution? The right to due process? Check it out. It's worked for almost 250 years. We shouldn't let a numbskull like Trump get rid of it on a whim.
I'd be in favor of extensive due process rights for possible criminal non-citizens in exchange for the elimination of the Patriot Act and FISA-court-approved spying on all citizens and non-citizens alike. The Washington uniparty has already trampled all over the due process rights of its citizens.
What about, what about, what about, what about...
:) So true.
Not expecting this to change your mind, but there's a night and day difference between America and Soviet Russia. Here, where liberals image fantasy gulags government officials are getting fired, with very comfy severance pay.
In Russia, where there were real dictators, you'd be lucky to last by the end of each week. My great grandmother's siblings were all shot within months of the revolution. Her husband died at 30 after being sent away. She and my grandmother had to burn what little furniture they had so they wouldn't freeze to death when the famines started.
So, no, this is nothing like communism. At all. And if you actually knew anyone who went through that you'd never even think to make that comparison
Yeah, you're right about that. But my point is that it's starting here, not that we're in a full blown nightmare like the USSR.
And if you were one of the people who'd been swept off the street by unidentified masked men, hustled onto a plane and taken to a foreign prison, with no chance to defend yourself, you might not be so sanguine about our situation.
I really prefer the way our country was. I like the Bill of Rights. I like separation of powers. I don't want one man making all the decisions for the country. Especially an extremely flawed, vengeful asshole like Trump.
The word 'vengeful' conjures up the name Obama. However, he was masterful in disguising it.
If you say so. I have no idea what you mean about Obama.
It's true that Trump is right up front about it.
And yet, Sheila, when a vengeful asshole named Corpse Biden decided to unilaterally suspend our immigration laws, and open our southern border to between 10 and 12 million illegal immigrants (that we know of), we heard nary a peep from you about the rule of law.
Ditto when Corpse Biden bragged about circumventing the Supreme Court's decision invalidating his student loan forgiveness plans . . . only crickets from Sheila.
Please spare us your overheated hyperbole and cite one concrete example - - one - - where Trump has violated the Bill of Rights, without citing a lower federal district court decision that has not yet been subject to review by the Supreme Court.
Sir, I wasn't here to comment on any of those things. I just became a subscriber last week.
I think the right to due process is an amendment so it's not a violation of the bill of rights, but all the people who were rounded up and flown out of the country were entitled to a hearing. So that's at least 300 violations.
the first ten amendments to the constitution are known as the bill of rights
Sheila is definitely ignoring the rule of holes - - quit digging yourself deeper.
As Towne Acres pointed out, the first 10 Amendments, including the Fifth Amendment right to due process, are indeed the Bill of Rights. If you can’t keep the fundamentals straight, you’re going to struggle with the rest of the concepts.
The Supreme Court affirmed that the Tren de Aragua thugs were not (not, Sheila, not) entitled to the hearing they sought for judicial review challenging Trump’s determination under the Alien Enemies Act that Venezuela is engaged in a predatory incursion. No right to due process in the form of judicial review, Shelia. No 300 violations, Shelia.
Instead, they had the far more limited right to individual habeas petitions to dispute whether they were within the scope of Trump’s declaration.
But they chose not (not, Sheila, not) to file habeas petitions. And they chose to go forum shopping in the DC federal court (playing political games, Sheila), rather than properly file in federal court in Texas, where they were confined before the outbound flight to El Salvador. For both reasons, they lost.
If this is too complicated for you, Sheila, perhaps you should refrain from your puerile Stalin comments.
I thought it was the 14th.
Your expertise is wonderful. I'm sure it will protect you from the chaos that your hero is whipping up.
Sayeth Sheila:
"He is sending people to prison camps (gulags!) in other countries without bothering to prove that they did anything at all."
What they did, Sheila, is break the law by entering the United States illegally. Is that so hard to understand?
And he is sending them back to their home country, Sheila. With me so far? And for those hostile home countries which refuse to take back their own citizens (i.e., Venezuela), he is sending them to El Salvador, to remain imprisoned until their home country relents. Are you following, Sheila?
And that is not happening through the exercise of a Stalin-esque authoritarian power. It is happening under the Alien Enemies Act, which allows the President to apprehend, restrain, secure and remove the denizens of a hostile nation in the event of declared war, invasion or a predatory incursion, without going through deportation proceedings in the immigration courts. Hello, Sheila, is this confounded Interwebs thing working?
The Supreme Court in the 1950s held that the President’s decision-making under the Alien Enemies Act is a political question not subject to judicial review, and the current Supreme Court affirmed that ruling this week, explaining that individuals could challenge their apprehension in court through the narrow tool of habeas corpus proceeding, but not a civil action for judicial review.
If you're having trouble understanding this, that's OK. JonF311 can't get any of this through his skull either. But in your ignorance, please spare us the talk about Stalin and gulags.
Even if they broke the law they are entitled to a hearing. And in some cases it's clear that they didn't actually break laws - their green cards were revoked on the whim of the administration. We're not in the middle of an invasion so the Alien Enemies Act doesn't apply.
Rod brought up Stalin and gulags. I was remarking on the similarities of some of Trumps recent actions to thing. He's starting by sending people he's pronounced criminals to prison camps overseas. He's suing law firms to deny legal representation to anyone who challenges him. If he's not stopped it's clear he'll be sending American citizens who oppose him to prisons too. Like a gulag. And you'll find some convoluted rationalization to justify it.
Welcome, Sheila. We find ourselves in the "I-don't-really-care-Margaret" universe because for the last 4 years we've been told that the border was "secure" despite what we saw with our own eyes: caravans of migrants headed north from Central America, most in debt to human traffickers and many women sexually abused along the way. Although the majority of migrants probably wanted to make better lives for themselves, a sizable criminal element crossed the border, terrorizing the immigrant communities they infiltrated.
Right or wrong, no one cares when Tren de Aragua thugs are denied due process and sent to the El Salvador Supermax. Bourgeois leftists want them returned to the US for their day in court, a fringe & boutique opinion that only resonates in gang-free Park Slope, Brooklyn and Berkeley CA.
The case of the hairdresser is sad but he has a loving family back in Venezuela. He's their concern, not ours.
Paul, you should care when due process is denied to any person to whom it's owed by law. If these dudes are really the criminals we're assured they are, it should be pretty easy to present evidence of their criminality. It also helps provide safeguards against punishing those who are wrongly accused of being members of these gangs.
Ah, you know what, f*** justice. Just as long as we're slapping tariffs on our penguin trade competitors, then I will sleep soundly knowing American greatness has been achieved.
Spot-on, Paul.
There's definitely a "don't-really-care-Margaret" aspect to this debate, as the Leftists who cheered Corpse Biden's decision to throw open the southern border now lecture us sanctimoniously on the rule of law.
But Vince and Sheila are also wrong on the substance. THERE WAS NO DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS.
The Supreme Court on Monday affirmed that the Tren de Aragua gang-bangers were not entitled to challenge Trump’s declaration under the Alien Enemies Act; namely, that Venezuela is engaged in a predatory incursion. They had a right to limited habeas corpus review to contest whether they individually fit within the scope of Trump’s declaration . . . but that's not what the ACLU chose to file.
Hence, Judge Boasberg's injunction was reversed, and future removals of Tren de Aragua thugs can now proceed, without the right to immigration hearings, and without the ability to judicially challenge the President's authority under the Alien Enemies Act.
The caravan moves on, but Sheila and Vince are still barking.
It would be fine if they actually deported the guy. The horror is that people are stuck in prison camps out of the range of legal representation and human decency.
The phrase "I-don't-really-care-Margaret" is being used here as a magical enchantment that means if I'm sick of hearing about something I don't have to pay attention to our norms of law and decency. That's not the United States I grew up in. And I'm afraid about how far that will go.
How soon til it's the bourgeois leftists in Park Slope who are being hustled into a van and shipped to El Salvador? You know Trump would loooove to be able to do that.
Sayeth Sheila: "How soon til it's the bourgeois leftists in Park Slope who are being hustled into a van and shipped to El Salvador?"
I think Sheila is locked in a room, strapped in a chair, eyes propped open through the 'Ludovico technique' in Clockwork Orange, watching Rachel Madcow's 2019 monologues on MSNBC on an endless repeating loop. When she sleeps, Sheila mutters "the walls are closing in" through the din of her CPAP machine.
Sheila's Next Post: citations to the Mueller Report, the Steele Dossier, and links to Adam Schiff's Kompromat file.
Sayeth Sheila: "We're not in the middle of an invasion so the Alien Enemies Act doesn't apply."
Wrong as usual. The Alien Enemies Act allows the President to apprehend and/or remove the natives, citizens or denizens of a hostile nation in the event of declared war, invasion or a predatory incursion.
The President has declared that the government of Venezuela is engaged in a predatory incursion, Sheila, and that declaration is not subject to judicial review.
Oh well if he's declared it so who can possible disagree!
Sayeth Sheila: "Oh well if he's declared it so who can possible disagree!"
Sayeth the Alien Enemies Act, 50 U.S.C. § 21: "Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event . . ."
Sayeth the US Supreme Court: "The very nature of the President's power to order the removal of all enemy aliens rejects the notion that courts may pass judgment upon the exercise of his discretion."
One more time, Sheila: your beloved murderers and rapists, illegal aliens all, can challenge the constitutionality of the law, they can challenge whether their individual circumstances fit within the President's declaration, but they cannot seek judicial review to challenge the President's declaration.
Also, "The divided court agreed the Trump administration can use the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged members of a foreign gang, as long as they are given the right to challenge the government’s claim."
Looking forward to another voluble and informative missive.
Sayeth Sheila: "it's clear he'll be sending American citizens who oppose him to prisons too."
Wrong as usual (and a bit hysterical, don't you think). The Alien Enemies Act does not apply to US citizens or lawful permanent residents.
Sayeth Sheila: "He's suing law firms to deny legal representation to anyone who challenges him."
Wrong as usual. He’s barring them from government contracts (as if they have a God-given right to federal largesse). He’s revoking the security clearance of partners which allows the firms to work with clients on matters that involve confidential government information. And the DOJ is investigating the firms to the extent they are engaged in racial discrimination in their hiring practices.
But why is Trump "attacking" these firms? They’re just zealously representing their clients in the loftiest traditions of the legal profession. Not quite. In the case of Perkins Coie, they’re not even acting as lawyers; they acted as a financial cut-out for the Clinton campaign to pay for the Steele Dossier. Kind of ironic. Hillary and the DNC paid a fine for concealing the Steele Dossier as a legal expense; Trump was convicted of 34 felonies for concealing the Stormy NDA as a legal expense.
In the case of the Paul Weiss law firm, you have a partner filing pro bono civil lawsuits to bankrupt J6 protestors. Pro bono in this case is a fancy way of saying that the law firm was subsidizing the work. And you have another Paul Weiss partner, also acting pro bono, launching a media campaign to persuade the Manhattan DA’s office to prosecute Trump in the Stormy NDA case. That partner, Mark Pomerantz, ultimately joined Alvin Bragg’s team.
These law firms were engaged in politics; indeed, hard ball politics. No need to shed tears when the law firms discover that political hard ball works both ways. And forgive me for not smelling the Constitution burning from these Gestapo tactics.
I love that you defined pro bono for me. So considerate!
It will take a lot for you to see what's right in front of you. I wonder how far it has to go before you see that Trump is not concerned at all about democracy. He's cowed the Republican Party and ignoring the norms of our civilization. Not to mention tanking the economy. I hope we can pull out of this nosedive.
You're most welcome.
It appears you need more definitional clarity. "Ignoring the norms of our civilization?" Sheila, you're dialing the hysteria machine past 10 quadrillion.
As for tanking the economy, you may be right. But if the stock market rebounds in the next few months, I'm pretty certain you'll be memory-holing these comments.
It's much like the price of eggs - - during Corpse Biden's tenure, there was Leftist silence on egg prices. Following Trump's first hour in office, CNN was bemoaning egg prices non-stop. Now that egg prices are down . . . crickets.
Thankfully, he caved on the tariffs today and the market is up. I don't have a death wish for the country.
What hubristic, invincible ignorance. I'd suggest you educate yourself, but you're beyond that. Seek help. Your hate is eating you alive.
Good Lord. This is the exact discussion I had with my 34 year old niece. Word For Word. I know my niece is not a bot, but I'm beginning to wonder about Shiela. Comrade Shiela. Listen to others who refute your liberal bias talking points. Regurgitating liberal talking points will get you nowhere.
I'm just a run of the mill liberal with a liberal bias. I've been reading Rod's writing since way back in the Iraq war days. I disagree with him on most things but I think he's interesting and honest and I come here to see what he thinks about the latest lunacy.
So can I just ask you personally, John, how do you feel about Trumps cabinet meetings when each member of the cabinet outdoes the next one flattering Trump? Does it not worry you that he needs that kind of ass kissing?
Also, are you following his crypto adventures? Basically, any company or country that wants to influence his policy can bribe him by buying his meme coins. You guys were all up in arms about Hunter Bidens grifting which was small potatoes compared to this racket.
My niece’s name is Rachel. Are you in the same echo chamber?
Have you ever been in a corporate meeting where millions of dollars were being discussed? I have. Have you ever been on a TV show? I have. They are discussing trillions.
Thats the way the game is played. The cameras are on for one purpose. It's called theater. They are doing it to push your buttons.
Donald Trump is a billionaire. He wasva billionaire before he became President. He will be one after. Nobody is forcing anyone to GAMBLE on crypto. Enter at your own risk.
Yup, I've been in big corporate meetings in NY where millions of dollars were being discussed. I don't know Rachel. 50% of the country agree with Rachel and me so not sure why you're so triggered by our opinions.
I don't even know what to say about your theater/button pushing comment. No other president has behaved this way and the point of a cabinet is to have people with expertise advise the president. This is not that - it's a bunch of yes men/women. It's pathetic to watch.
Trump has declared bankruptcy like 6 times. He is a terrible businessman. The Apprentice was a tv show! Not real. His instincts are bad - he's delusional about tariffs and he may default on our debt.
Also, nobody is gambling on Trumps crypto coin - they are BRIBING him. It's an investment and he and his family's net worth has gone up by like $3B since he's been president.
We really don't care, Margaret.
good German
“… but this is your hour, and the power of darkness” (St. Luke 22:53)
From what I read of the Soviet Union, especially Stalin's times, it was the worst there. Albania perhaps matched it. It was very bad in the Soviet satellites. Georgia, where I visited last week was, I admit, was my first trip a part of the former Soviet Union proper. Rod wrote last fall of a friend who told him to go to Georgia. I strongly second that, and I even have people from him to talk to.
But - it was demonic. We see that.
It is a fine book, as Rod describes. It is also an exceptional audiobook, with close to a dozen different (and talented) narrators, enabling the "reader" to get a more realistic sense of the many different voices in the author's oral history. A gem.
The Light Shines in the Darkness and the Darkness shall not Overcome it
Glad you’re reading this, Rod, so that you better understand the attitude of those whom Ukraine is fighting.
FWIW, they hammered the nail into the leg OF THE STOOL and then sat the guy on the leg with the nail.
When the Kronstadt sailors revolted against the direction the new Bolshevik regime was trending, their slogan was "Communism without commissars." Putin is the opposite: Commissars without communism.
You've just described the EU.
The EU is not that cutting edge. The EU is a sclerotic, self-satisfied bureaucracy with no particular individual running the show but a general elite consensus on which way to push things. No commissars, just a very banal brand of low-key evil.
I read this a few years ago and loved it. Finally, I was able to understand why people in post-Soviet Russia yearned for a return to Stalinism.
I remember thinking as I read it that the Soviet era was colorful and vibrant to them and after 1989 everything was just gray and bleak whereas I had always thought of the Soviet years as gray and bleak.
Just yesterday, I read the following observation from Marianne Hirsch, who grew up in Romania on Nicolai Ceauscescu's watch: "I never realized until this moment how much fear I carried with me from my childhood in Communist Romania. Arrests were arbitrary, and every time the doorbell rang, I started to shiver."
What triggered this realization was the manner ICE is operating in carrying out arrests as part of President Trump's massive deportation program. Men in plain clothes, wearing masks, who refuse to give their names or even identify their agency, who refuse to answer questions about either one, summarily handcuffing the person they came to arrest.
The article in which this quote appears was in the NY Times, but the fact that someone who survived Communism in Romania would respond this way speaks volumes. She was not among those arrested -- just observing what is going on around her. One of the specific examples in the article was Mahmoud Kahlil -- and I'm not at all certain that its wrong to deport him. The president does have discretion to deport a non-citizen here under some kind of lawful temporary residence who is actively campaigning on behalf of a foreign organization the government has classified as terrorist. Whether it is wise or sound policy to deport him is a valid question, but its a different question than whether the president has authority to make that call.
However, the case of the legal resident accused without evidence of being a member of Tren de Aragua and summarily shipped off to a prison outside of U.S. jurisdiction highlights what due process is all about: to make sure that there is factual evidence establishing legal cause, and that an innocent person isn't being swept up.
As I've said before, there is nothing unique about the methodology used by communist parties in power to keep their grip on a population. Similar methods are used by a variety of regimes, which serve a variety of ideologies, or, a non-ideological commitment to a particular caudillo, Dear Leader, or self-infatuated personality.
Live not by lies, Donald Trump.
I fear that people who are sympathetic to the notion of deporting illegals (/criminals/agitators) are hardening their hearts, and closing their eyes, to the abuses that may be carried out. (The same goes actually for indiscriminate mass firings from the federal government and slashing of some worthwhile programs, with all the appropriate disclaimers that losing a job is obviously not the same as being tortured by the NKVD.) So many people these days are determined not to give an inch to "the other side" that they are unwilling to call out any wrongs by their own side.
The problem is that people have been lied to for so long, mainly by the mainstream media but also by sloppy and disingenuous alternative sites, that people don't believe the criticism of Trump anymore. I fear he can get away with anything now, because the people are so sick of the talking heads crying "wolf!" for so long.
Exactly. It's "I don't really care, Margaret." syndrome if you will. One thing I've been thinking about a lot lately in my Lenten journey is the limits of what is a 'me problem'. Increasingly, the 'me problems' are becoming much more narrow and extremely local. In one way, this is very good, it prevents a lot of fretting over things that are not my business or in my control. On the other hand, it definitely leads to "I don't really care, Margaret", because you've cried so many times that I truly do not care about your problems anymore.
It's like walking away from the toddler throwing the tantrum. Sometimes, you've got to take a deep breath and just let them cry it out.
But when you walk away from the toddler, you (should) do it because you DO care. That's not the same at all really as not giving a sh*t anymore -- which is a human reaction but not one to be proud of.
Fair point. Is there room then in the discourse for doing the action from a spirit of love while at the same time needing to let off a bit of steam in frustration?
I am not following any of these stories closely, so, my comment is just directed about general attitudes. True abuses should never be tolerated, but, when wolf is cried constantly, it does get hard to separate the real from the fake.
"The people" inflates Trump's support. After all, he got a little less than half the vote (as have the Dems he ran against) and his approval rating has seldom if ever reached 50 percent, often lower. Also, a large number of those who voted for him weren't enthusiastic, just sick of what the other party persisted in offering and patting themselves on the back for. Even if eighty percent of the population demanded that enforcement policies be brought into line with constitutional norms, Trump and his minions would ignore them. They don't care. They have the power for a period of time and will do all they are not vigorously (and lawfully) restrained from doing.
And it is a problem if demands for due process, and respect for civil liberties, are adopted by one "side" as their own pet project. People who are zealous about fixing a perceived problem tend to forget that its important to get the people or offices or agencies that ARE posing the problem, not indiscriminately get anyone who happens to be in sight who can be labeled as X. But a lot of political factions tend to accept the label as definitive, without demanding proof and evidence. Its a bit like the family of a murder victim insisting that "someone ought to pay for this." Yes, someone ought to pay for it -- the perpetrator, and nobody else.
To the books Rod recommends here, I also recommend "This I Cannot Forget" by Nikolai Bukharin's widow. It has a different flavor of course, but as the wife of one of the most prominent Politbureau members executed during the purge trials of the 1930s, she is familiar with many of the weaknesses of the Bolshevik regime. She recounts being transported on a train to Siberia and having a brief encounter with the widow of General Tukhachevsky (who probably could have stopped the later Wehrmacht offensive well short of Moscow if he, not Joseph Stalin meddling in areas he was not competent to direct, had been in charge of the Red Army). After some time in the Gulag, she was about to be shot when an order arrived to send her to Moscow. It turned out that Lavrenty Beria had a soft spot for her, remembering idyllic visits to her family home when her father was still living. He was, as Beria put it "a valuable militant" -- a committed Bolshevik who had the good luck to die while still in good standing, before the purges began. Bukharin has also been a close family friend. She was disappointed by the collapse of Gorbachev's government, because at long last the state press was going to publish Bukharin's long-suppressed collective works. Like I said, its a different flavor, but you will have a better understanding of the purges and the rivalries involved if you read her recollection. I would never have known this book existed, except that I found a long row of discounted brand new volumes for sale on a shelf at The Strand in NYC.
Ah yes, the fascinating memoir of Anna Larina was one of my late husband's favorites. (Number 1 being Eugenia Ginsberg's two volumes.) His hobby was modern Russian history and he collected gulag memoirs by the score. For True Believer Communists, nothing done to them or others during the purges shook their faith in the least.
Anna was featured in some PBS documentary after her release. She attributed her survival to the possession of a warm fur hat, originally Stalin's own hat. (So my husband resolved to grab his good tweed coat if the Knock on the Door ever came.)
Hedrick Smith, long time NYT correspondent in the USSR wrote an interesting cultural survey, The Russians, just at the end of Soviet rule. He also did a pair of documentaries one right after the collapse and a followup a few years later. None of the hopes of the people interviewed for the first one had been fulfilled--except for the one who sold out, of course.
That should be "Ginzberg" not "Ginsberg." Her books are Journey into the Whirlwind and Within the Whirlwind. Hedrick Smith's books are The Russians and The New Russians. He doesn't seem to be published his followup material and the documentaries weren't issued as DVDs.
And actually—Ginzburg! At least in the volume of Journey into the Whirlwind I have. Amazing book. Have not read the second volume—that’s about her time in exile?
From her brief epilogue: “I strove to remember all these things in the hope of recounting them to honest people and true Communists….How wonderful…that the great Leninist truths have again come into their own in our country and Party!”
Irony? A fillip for the censors? What she really believed? All of the above?
The book was published in 1967.
Also, I recently watched the 2009 miniseries starring Emily Watson called Within the Whirlwind—thought it was very well done.
Sandra I am glad you and some others are coming to comment. I am out of sorts over this book for now. Online sources say the book is not all nostalgia for Soviet times, however, and other sources will come in eventually.
But it is intense. Yes, I've read and seen dramas. Then - My experiences talking to various people. I've found nostalgic and not nostalgic people. Usually *not* nostalgic. The book so far is so much awful detail, many "nostalgic interviews" in a row. Then the fan-ship for communism despite them. Plus, I have to get my mind around the fact that it is really something like 50 percent novel, 50 percent interview but written as interviews.
I do think the Brezhnev and Gorbachev bad but were different from Stalin and Khruschev. It seems like people in the book are only nostalgic for the post-Khruschev times. (?)
Something I like about the book is how "religious" the nostalgic people are. It is just their religion is something like pure anti-capitalism.
Please understand that I'm not any kind of expert here. I'm only passing on what I absorbed from my husband's reading habits. (He said that gulag memoirs cheered him up after a hard day in the lab.) The only books of this kind that I've read are Fr. Walter Cizek's memoirs: With God in Russia and He Leadth Me which I highly recommend.
Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago is a good read, if you haven't already.
It is my choice not to use the f word. But I'd like to. I will just say: I’d like those comparing Trump to Stain to shut the F up. Now. And I’ve already said I’d vote “disapprove” at present on Trump, the lesser of two bad choices so don't strawman me.
Guard again any over-authoritarianism. Of course – but - Comparison between Donald Trump and Joseph Stalin fails meaningful scrutiny concerning power, governance, and human rights.
Stalin's rule was by total control over every aspect of society. The Great Purge of 1936-1938 alone resulted in the execution of hundreds of thousands of people, with millions more sent to the Gulag labor camp system. About 8 million were murdered in Ukraine via induced famine.. Under his rule, the Soviet Union maintained a single-party state that tolerated no political opposition, controlled all media, not some like parties today. They were terrorists enforcing complete conformity through terror. There was total control, no private property, you could not sell a lemonade or rent out a room – though you didn’t have a room.
By contrast, Trump's presidency and subsequent administration have operated within the constitution, within democracy. Yes, there is controversy, but Trump has governed through established democratic institutions. (Don't tell me one plane took off and was not returned. I know that.) The deportations are harsh and to my shock they did not start with just criminals – and they never would have finished if they deported only criminals. Plus, they made mistakes, it appears, with at least two sent to El Salvador. And they cut way too many jobs in horrible ways.
But there are independent courts. Opposition parties function freely. The scale of human suffering also bears no comparison. Stalin's policies directly resulted in the deaths of millions through execution, deliberate starvation, and forced labor in extreme conditions.
I tire of hysteria. You are posting here. And you are not going to a gulag. Nor a British jail.
Deaths for the entire Soviet regime - Lower credible estimates, 23-30 million. Higher credible estimates 45-55 million. Back to Stalin: Keep in mind he probably killed 20-25 million, but here are the lower credible estimates just for his regime:
***Lower*** credible estimates: 13-18 million deaths
Ukrainian famine (Holodomor): 4-5 million deaths (It is more - LA)
Kazakhstan famine: 1.5-2.3 million deaths
Other Soviet regions' famine deaths: 1-2 million
Gulag system: 1.5-1.7 million deaths
Great Terror executions: 800,000-1.2 million
Forced relocations/deportations of ethnic groups: 1-1.5 million
"Scorched earth" and targeting of Soviet civilians during WW2: 1-2 million
Collectivization violence and de-kulakization: 2-3 million
Does Rod's comment about so many anti-Nazi things on Netflix but then people not knowing about this, very little to be found, make sense?
The Cambodians probably had the worst of Communism. Straight up something like 1/4th of their population was killed for it under the Khmer Rouge.
Yes, I was thinking Soviet communism or its cousins (Tito) and was not clear on that. But then Ukraine lost approximately around one-third of its population during the Holodomor. It is also said Kazakhstan lost around 38% of its ethnic Kazakh population during forced collectivization. Crimean Tatars and Chechens are said to have lost 20-40% of their populations.
My father in law did his PHD in North Carolina in the 1970s and he still jokes (in a very grim way, obviously) about the professors and grad students who gushed over Pol Pot for bringing "real Communism" to Southeast Asia... It made him a conservative for life.
Remember that the USSR lost 20 million people in WWII, many of those deaths directly due to Stalin's policies.
When I was growing up we heard a lot about the horrors of Communism. It was everywhere in movies and on TV. I even remember reading Robert Conquest on the Great Purge in Life magazine. In grade school, classmates were refugees from Hungary, in high school we heard a talks by a priest who escaped from Red China, s in college it was Cuba. I knew a guy who'd participated in the 1956 Hungarian uprising. My stepmother's family had escaped from Ukraine after the Bolsheviks shot her grandfather. My point is, the real suffering under Communism was communicated personally--it was not all McCarthyism as people now imagine.
Though I believe you were born before me, opposition to communism was also an important part of the way I was brought up. This was through my grandmother, and through books my parents gave me. I had nothing like your knowledge of people who escaped, however, nor have I even met anyone in Hungary who has told me of their own experiences in 1956 (they tell of their parents and grandparents), Criticism of McCarthyism was not popular in my circles. I don't think I heard it until I was a teenager. Already, as a child I somehow got hold of and read "None Dare Call it Treason." I accept it when I am told that book was extreme. However, though I am certainly no John Bircher, I do not recall extremes I read in that book. I believed from the start that McCarthy went too far but that he was right to do something.
I have felt different, always, as long as I can remember. On entering my teens that amplified, due to what I believe about communism. People don't know. People can look at someone like me, should I refer to my beliefs, as a weird John Bircher McCarthyite. I'm not.
An important, more recent influence on me was the novel "Child 44" and its two sequels, by Tom Rob Smith. It's an unforgettable portrayal of a KGB agent and his wife, of what was happening and of psychological conditions, under Stalin. These books are a lot easier to bear than Secondhand Time. Anyway, I highly recommend them.
Check out 'American Betrayal' by Diane West for some information on the extent of communist infiltration of the U.S. government during the WWll years.
Thanks for putting me onto this author, with whom I was not familiar. All of her stuff looks great. I may be about to spend a lot of money on (Kindle) books.
In our lifetimes, my wife and I have met some people who experienced life in the USSR and some of the satellite countries. My wife had a friend in university who came over in one of the waves of Jewish emigration from the USSR in the early 1970s. The route was generally USSR>Iron Curtain satellite>Israel>US or Canada. She always talked about how school kids were encouraged by their teachers to snitch on anyone in the family saying anything bad about the government. Another person was someone who came of age during WWll and went through life under Stalin, Khruschev, and the rest. My kids have lots of friends whose parents and grandparents experienced life in the USSR. The parents and grandparents shook their heads when talking about the laziness and lax attitudes here and how people take things for granted. A 1980s work colleague of my wife who was from Rumania was rendered incapable of carrying a child thanks to the 'hospitals' of Rumania. ...One nightmare after another.
Re: Remember that the USSR lost 20 million people in WWII, many of those deaths directly due to Stalin's policies.
Er, um, I think that guy with with the funny mustache to their west had something to do with the Soviet deaths in WWII.
I agree wholeheartedly. It's delusion to equate Trump to Stalin/Hitler/Pol Pot. When these awful comparisons are made they just discredit the source.
No human process will be perfect and so deportations will have false deportations. It's inevitable. The Trump folks need to minimize these. At this point they've made 2 (possible) errors out of 1000s of deportations? That's an astonishingly low number.
Here are questions no one is asking:
How much blood and rape was on the hands of those that Stalin went after, compared to those in TDA and MS-13?
How much robbery/thievery was committed by those that Stalin went after compared to robbery/thievery among TDA and MS-13?
It is a very tough thing. I have watched so many documentaries. I watch original material in Spanish from El Salvador, regarding CECOT, the counterterrorism (counter-gang) prison there.
Life in El Salvador whet from thousands murdered each year, fear to go out even in daylight in so many places, hardly any business not giving large monies to gangs, to peace, safety and a low murder rate. Yes, they put people with the tattoos in prison to await trial. Tens of thousands are there. With heavy heart, I believe CECOT is the only way, though with deep sadness. It is not impossible for a mistake to be made and an innocent to go there. However, I've not seen anyone out of literally hundreds in the films without the characteristic tattoos all over themselves however - and yes I know about the one guy in the USA said to have only one crown tattoo who was sent there, which is terrible.
MS-13 is Salvadoran, though originally formed by Salvadoran migrants in the USA. TDA of course is Venezuelan but at first Venezuela would not take them back. I hear they will take them now (?)
My (unofficial) godson from Honduras recently won a one-week academic all expenses paid study program in San Salvador over winter break and was really impressed.
Don't forget serial rapist Beria. Even Uncle Joe felt compelled to warn his daughter about him.
Oh, I don't. He was born in what is now Georgia, the dictator of Georgia for many years before going to Moscow and becoming head of the secret police. One of the worst psychopathic murderers ever. In Georgia they almost all understand Stalin to be evil. However, I was told a few Georgians, including many in Stalin's hometown Gori, think Beria was responsible for the horror and Stalin did not know. (Of course Stalin knew and instigated much, but Beria is as big a monster as Stalin, and yes, a serial rapist to boot,)
By some accounts Stalin was even a little afraid of Beria. The conspiracy theory that Stalin was murdered by warfarin (an anti-clotting drug) posits Beria as the mastermind of the plot.
Stalin is one of the great extremes of tyranny (which the 20th century was noteworthy in producing). He sits in an unholy trinity along with Hitler and Mao. Comparisons of any present day leader with any of that troika are over the top hysteria. Which does not mean we can't criticize present day leaders, including our own for abuses.
I agree. We can, and should, criticize leaders. But comparing any present day leader to the three you mentioned along with Pol Pot and many others is horrible and a disservice to the people who were murdered by these evil men and those working for them. So Trump is not Hitler or Stalin. But neither were Obama or George W. Bush.
This hits so hard. Yesterday I taught a class on writer Isaac Babel and in doing research for it literally got ill with what I learned. Felt this horrible heaviness even talking about it to the class.
What caused my fear? How familiar it felt.
I won't lie--I glossed past the excerpts you included and won't read the book because I can't.
I'd like to sleep at night.
All of her work makes for very difficult reading.
Agreed! I still wish I could unsee some of the images I saw online-especially as relates to the times of starvation.
Teaching Red Cavalry? That will keep you up at night, definitely!
That's it exactly--and even Babel gets executed in the end.
I know I am posting a lot today, but this is getting to me. I'm moved by the interviews. Something else has also come up or me.
Further in, I am starting to question Alexievich. Almost no one speaks as well, as colorfully as descriptively, as her interviewees. The literary quality of the speeches is consistently very high. Yes, this is a "portrait of true" for some. These certainly are not transcripts of interviews, however. I looked into it. Alexievich herself has described her work as a "novel of voices" and explained that she condenses hundreds of interviews, selecting and arranging material, At first I did not realize.
Here is an example: ***"We were free now and that was that. When you’re stuck in an elevator, the only thing you think about are the doors opening—you’re ecstatic when they finally open. Pure euphoria!"*** (1) A great description of what it feels like to suddenly have choice, but he confused. (2) Maybe one great interviewee did speak so well. (3) But, basically, all of the interviews have passages of this quality. I call this strange.
edit to be clear: I never thought these were transcripts. But I thought they stuck pretty clearly to what each person said. I think now these are composite, with additions, With Alexievich sticking closely to what she saw as the spirit of what she heard. But she filters it and adds her words to a greater extent, I think, than I first realized.
That line in telling stories is certainly a tough one to dance on sometimes, especially when there are so many stories, and so many echo so similarly.
OK, you know me, Katja. People might get tired of me blithering on regarding Rod, but this seems the perfect time to say it. There is contrast between Rod's portrayal of me as I really am after interviewing me, no words changed. I can say this must generally be his habit and that he has a strong ability to do things like this. This contrasts with Alexievich's novel-interview hybrid format.
There is a lot of skill needed to really portray someone after speaking with them, To not let one's own thoughts superimpose over who the interviewee is. I've seen a few other interviews written up with people I knew. They did not work. I am saying yes, interviewing is tough, and few people are Rod.
Part of me does not want Rod to do a LNBL 2 book (documentary yes, book...eh...) because this stuff tears a person up. But if he chose, Rod could go to Georgia and write about leaving communism and those coming to faith despite the hypocrisy of clergy. How this happens for some, not others. That would be something. I'm not the only person who knows him that has suggested time in Georgia.
This was what Robert Coles, the Harvard psychiatrist did, but never admitted it, as perhaps this woman has wisely done. I was reading his supposed transcript of what a poor person told him one day, and had to laugh, realizing pretty quickly that he was just writing what he wanted and needed this woman to say, rather than what she might have actually said. I never really trusted his "scholarship" or research after that.