Memory day

[never]

Elizabeth, I think that we are slightly off-topic, I don't like off-topic disputes, cause respect the forum laws, but I need to answer you.

I've rated your joke about Stalin as an "effective manager."
I hope that you are not talking serious. You seems to be a very intelligent person for those kind of things. It might be a good joke for USA or UK, which are not threatened for those kind of ideas (Stalinism, Fascism and etc.) And I don't wish you and your family to experience such kind of regimes.

I think also that any type of efficiency has a certain human restrictions.
How about baddest roads, economics that made only tanks and in "little addition" several tens millions of human lifes?

If we forgot about those "little addition" of million of deaths to Stalin efficiency, then Mr. or Comrade Stalin would be a true "effective manager".

I apologize profusely, Nicola. I sincerely was not joking when I said that Stalin was in many ways an "effective manager." Maybe I was being bitter and heavily sarcastic, but I was NOT joking. These matters should never be joked about.

I do think it is very dangerous, this tendency to discount evil as ineffectual, among young liberals like yourself (I count myself an old liberal, older and wiser, please, PLEASE do excuse me if I sound patronizing because I don't mean to at all, it's just that you come to realize certain things as you get older that you thought were impossible when you were younger). Evil people can be very good managers, they can even be geniuses at managing peoples and entire administrations, and this despite their evil natures and/or evil ideologies. You have to realize this, Nicola, if you are ever going to survive in this world. Not everybody who's bad is a stupid George W. Bush. Some of them are like Lenin, some like Stalin, some others like Hitler - what these three all had in common was a certain persuasive, even charismatic, and certainly very able management style - they got all the people who mattered on their side, and they kept them on their side. Think for a minute about Stalin. He should have been outwitted, reduced to mincemeat by so-called superior intellects like those supposedly possessed by Bukharin or Zinoviev. Instead he went on to rule the Soviet Union for a quarter of a century, to industrialize the Soviet Union, and in the meantime to murder millions in cold blood. I wouldn't call someone like this a half-wit or a bad manager. I would call him an evil, evil, evil genius.

Give evil its due. And never, never underestimate its power.

Hello from young liberals to old more, maybe too moderate liberals!
Elizabeth, I think, that liberalism hasn't any age restrictions.
I know a lot of middle-aged and old people, who stayed just good right liberals, without moderates, socialism and etc.
Of course Stalin was a great Evil, and we need to understand him, in order to prevent such a bad things..
Thanks for the discussion. (Discussion between implacable liberals;))
Let's stop it. I think we are too off-topic.

You are absolutely right, Nicola, we are way off topic. So I will cease and desist lecturing you, I promise! Still, I have to say, judging from my years here in the forum, that many of our off-topic discussions here, especially in the history threads, have been more interesting than the on-topic ones. I would even go so far as to say, that if you are the creator of a thread that generates a lot of off-topic discussion, then you have created a truly fascinating thread, one that can spawn multiple others. So congratulations! You are the creator of such a thread!

I've enjoyed this discussion very much, I must say.

But back OT, why do you think the dissidents originally chose October 30 as their day for protest against the Soviet regime and for remembering the victims of it? Did someone particularly significant to the dissidents die on this day? Or was it the anniversary of someone else's birth? The anniversary of some great protest in the past? I am just curious, because while it seems logical that dissenters would choose a day around the Oct/Nov Revolution to commemorate the victims of the Bolshevik regime, it nevertheless seems rather odd that they simply didn't co-opt the holiday itself (October 25 Old Style, November 7 New Style). I can't help but think that there's some political and/or symbolic significance to the choice of the date of October 30 that we are missing here.

[never]

I do think it is very dangerous, this tendency to discount evil as ineffectual,

Give evil its due. And never, never underestimate its power.

Still being off topic, but I, too, need to add another comment. Of course "evil" can be very effective as proved  by many recent regimes. Nevertheless, the term "efficiency" has rather positive connonations unless put in the respective context. If the Russian Government introduces new textbooks portraying Stalin as an efficient manager - and this was the starting-point of the discussion -  it's aim will hardly be to teach Russian schoolchildren that Stalin was the master of evil or the "manager of evil". On the contrary, it rather sets out to promote him as maybe somewhat evil but ultimately  necessary and very useful to Russia in a time of crisis. This point of view  does therefore very much contradict the position taken by human rights activists and all those who would like to see Russia enter on a democratic course.

But back OT, why do you think the dissidents originally chose October 30 as their day for protest against the Soviet regime and for remembering the victims of it? Did someone particularly significant to the dissidents die on this day? Or was it the anniversary of someone else's birth? The anniversary of some great protest in the past? I am just curious, because while it seems logical that dissenters would choose a day around the Oct/Nov Revolution to commemorate the victims of the Bolshevik regime, it nevertheless seems rather odd that they simply didn't co-opt the holiday itself (October 25 Old Style, November 7 New Style). I can't help but think that there's some political and/or symbolic significance to the choice of the date of October 30 that we are missing here.

Elizabeth, I'd answered already before on this topic, why did they selected that day.  I'm not an expert of dissident movement, but I think largely it was selected accidentally.
I'm also not a fan of any conspiracy theories. Elizabeth, be easier about those kind of things. Or, if we would based on your theories, and would imagine that they, for example selected something like May 3 for their Remembered Day:)) Ha ha, Near the May 1, Int. Labor Day.  Then, if we would base on conspiracy theory, we must say, that they choose this Day specifically close to this day:))))
To be honest with you, I think that all Russian calendar is totally fulled with those kind of red days(1May, October, and etc.) And all the future chosen dates, that we'd create could be easily associated with those kind of days.

Just 30 of October. Nothing more.

Well, I suppose it serves me right that you are now being condescending to me, after I was previously so condescending to you. Nevertheless, I have to point out that I have not been talking about conspiracy theories - what do you mean by using that expression, anyway? I'm not talking about anything remotely related to all the nonsensical theories swirling around the assassination of JFK or the death of Elvis or whatever. I'm just talking about the political symbolism of dates. I was wondering if there was some kind of larger political symbolism behind the date of October 30 (larger that is, than the narrow circle of dissidents in the decades preceding the collapse of the Soviet Union). You say no, I am willing to take your word for it. So please stop accusing me of espousing "conspiracy theories."

Really, I was asking a completely reasonable question because the Russian intelligentsia has always been extremely self-referential and aware of the importance of political symbolism. I would have thought they would have chosen a date of commemoration accordingly. But apparently I was wrong. No, apparently, they were just complete dullards in this regard, and didn't choose any date that had any particular resonance with Russian society as a whole (which is to say, beyond their own very narrow circle of dissidents). And perhaps that's just another example of the gap between the intelligentsia and the people that has existed in Russia since the time of Peter the Great. Because as you yourself admit, nobody in today's Russia pays any real attention to the October 30 holiday. And indeed, why should they?

10/30/1905 - Czar Nicholas II of Russia grants Russia's first constitution, creating a legislative assembly (according to Wikipedia).

Perhaps significant, perhaps not.

Well, I suppose it serves me right that you are now being condescending to me, after I was previously so condescending to you. Nevertheless, I have to point out that I have not been talking about conspiracy theories - what do you mean by using that expression, anyway? I'm not talking about anything remotely related to all the nonsensical theories swirling around the assassination of JFK or the death of Elvis or whatever. I'm just talking about the political symbolism of dates. I was wondering if there was some kind of larger political symbolism behind the date of October 30 (larger that is, than the narrow circle of dissidents in the decades preceding the collapse of the Soviet Union). You say no, I am willing to take your word for it. So please stop accusing me of espousing "conspiracy theories."

Really, I was asking a completely reasonable question because the Russian intelligentsia has always been extremely self-referential and aware of the importance of political symbolism. I would have thought they would have chosen a date of commemoration accordingly. But apparently I was wrong. No, apparently, they were just complete dullards in this regard, and didn't choose any date that had any particular resonance with Russian society as a whole (which is to say, beyond their own very narrow circle of dissidents). And perhaps that's just another example of the gap between the intelligentsia and the people that has existed in Russia since the time of Peter the Great. Because as you yourself admit, nobody in today's Russia pays any real attention to the October 30 holiday. And indeed, why should they?

Sorry, Elizabeth. Do not be offended. I'd only just wanted to say, that the number of the day(you said that the number is matter), on my opinion(maybe false opinion), number doesn't matter. It could be, again ONLY in my opinion, any day from 1 of January till 31 of December. I think that content of the day itself is more important.

Yes, it is a pity, that only minority of people in Russia know about this day. And we slowly going to another problem, that you've mentioned. Who is(are) guilty for that? By the way, very common Russian question!
Elizabeth, this is a very serious question. And not for 5 minutes. And not for a topic on forum. But if you want, we could talk about it.

I think, that there are a lot of reasons. And of course, liberal intelligentsia, as you said has some guilty for it. But, I think that we shouldn't blame intelligentsia. Those people, from Chaadaev, Gertsen, Milukov, Kerensky to Novodvorskaya, Kovalev, A. Saharov, Bukovsky and etc. always fought for Russia and always wanted to see Russia as an a free, democratic country. Some of them emigrated, but some fought till the end of their lifes and died in kommunal apartments or been killed.
Yes, they failed in their attempts to make Russia those kind of country. But whether is it their fault? I don't think so. I also don't think that they could ever do something with Russia. They, in their number were to small. Maybe problem are not in them? Maybe problem in Russian society itself (majority of it)? To change this difficult situation, that started from Ivan IV and continuous to this day, intelligentsia is not enough. It should be passed a lot of time(100,maybe 1000 years), when suddenly Russian people awaked from endless-totalitarian-autoritarian sleeping, and suddenly remembered Novgorod and Pskov democracy Republics(XII-IV ages), Alexander the Liberator(II), Decembrists, Gertsen, Vitte, Nicholas II, Yeltsin and etc... Then, when they'd(Russian people) builted the democracy, then they remembered about soviet political prisoners(millions), and then, finally they'd suddenly(now,Elizabeth we are going to our case) opened for themselves 30 OF OCTOBER. And they(new Russian democratic people) would be surprised, WHY, WHY they haven't already knew about this Day!?

This is my personal opinion.   

Elisabeth, I've just noticed that I'd several times misspelled your name.
Please, accept my apologies.

Sorry, Elizabeth. Do not be offended. I'd only just wanted to say, that the number of the day(you said that the number is matter), on my opinion(maybe false opinion), number doesn't matter. It could be, again ONLY in my opinion, any day from 1 of January till 31 of December. I think that content of the day itself is more important.

Yes, it is a pity, that only minority of people in Russia know about this day. And we slowly going to another problem, that you've mentioned. Who is(are) guilty for that? By the way, very common Russian question!
Elizabeth, this is a very serious question. And not for 5 minutes. And not for a topic on forum. But if you want, we could talk about it.

I think, that there are a lot of reasons. And of course, liberal intelligentsia, as you said has some guilty for it. But, I think that we shouldn't blame intelligentsia. Those people, from Chaadaev, Gertsen, Milukov, Kerensky to Novodvorskaya, Kovalev, A. Saharov, Bukovsky and etc. always fought for Russia and always wanted to see Russia as an a free, democratic country. Some of them emigrated, but some fought till the end of their lifes and died in kommunal apartments or been killed.
Yes, they failed in their attempts to make Russia those kind of country. But whether is it their fault? I don't think so. I also don't think that they could ever do something with Russia. They, in their number were to small. Maybe problem are not in them? Maybe problem in Russian society itself (majority of it)? To change this difficult situation, that started from Ivan IV and continuous to this day, intelligentsia is not enough. It should be passed a lot of time(100,maybe 1000 years), when suddenly Russian people awaked from endless-totalitarian-autoritarian sleeping, and suddenly remembered Novgorod and Pskov democracy Republics(XII-IV ages), Alexander the Liberator(II), Decembrists, Gertsen, Vitte, Nicholas II, Yeltsin and etc... Then, when they'd(Russian people) builted the democracy, then they remembered about soviet political prisoners(millions), and then, finally they'd suddenly(now,Elizabeth we are going to our case) opened for themselves 30 OF OCTOBER. And they(new Russian democratic people) would be surprised, WHY, WHY they haven't already knew about this Day!?

This is my personal opinion.  

Dear Nicola, I think we are friends enough that no apologies here are really necessary. By friends I mean we see eye to eye on the most important things. I chose the name "Elisabeth" only because the spelling "Elizabeth" was already taken. It doesn't bother me how people spell my name here. It's all very symbolic, right? It could be symbolic of Elizabeth I of England or it could be symbolic of Elisabeth of Austria. It doesn't matter in this case because it's only an internet forum. And here we get down to the nitty gritty of the matter between us.

I do now believe that, because it was such a matter of historical and political importance to the entire Russian nation, the Russian dissidents back in the old days of the USSR named October 30 as their day of remembrance of fallen political heroes PRECISELY BECAUSE it was the very same date (New Style, no less, the calendar of the Bolsheviks and the rest of the world, not that of the old Romanov regime) when Nicholas II issued the October Manifesto in 1905, granting Russia its first constitution.

However, in my former comments I did not mean to infer that I thought the ENTIRE Russian intelligentsia was guilty of the crimes of October, that is, the Bolshevik Revolution, either in aiding or abetting it by their thoughts or deeds, or for that matter, by any negligence or inaction! I agree with you that the Russian people themselves, the "narod," have some share of guilt here. I say some share of guilt, because the peasantry's numbers far outweighed those of the intelligentsia by the hundreds of thousands, and in the end they had the last say in the appropriation of land from landowners (gentry and nobilty and intelligentsia alike).

On the other hand, if you were a Russian intellectual at the turn of the twentieth century, if you were educated and politically aware and up to date and so on (not necessarily a noble or member of the gentry, plenty of the working class qualified on this score), then naturally you had a huge advantage over the average Russian peasant, who was still basically mired in the eighteenth century (in other words, illiterate and not schooled in the new agricultural technology, much less the new politics). So on that score, I do think the Russian intelligentsia - only as defined in the very broadest and most sweeping of terms - does bear some responsibility (along with the peasantry) for what afterwards unfolded with the October Revolution.

To my mind, it's all but impossible to ascribe guilt to peoples who suffered under a new political regime, even if they were complicit in the very same political parties that brought that regime to power. It's one of those grey areas that never ceases to annoy me and vex me and haunt me. I defy anyone to come up with a solution. I only wish that someone would - or could.

Dear Nicola, I think we are friends enough that no apologies here are really necessary. By friends I mean we see eye to eye on the most important things. I chose the name "Elisabeth" only because the spelling "Elizabeth" was already taken. It doesn't bother me how people spell my name here. It's all very symbolic, right? It could be symbolic of Elizabeth I of England or it could be symbolic of Elisabeth of Austria. It doesn't matter in this case because it's only an internet forum. And here we get down to the nitty gritty of the matter between us.

I do now believe that, because it was such a matter of historical and political importance to the entire Russian nation, the Russian dissidents back in the old days of the USSR named October 30 as their day of remembrance of fallen political heroes PRECISELY BECAUSE it was the very same date (New Style, no less, the calendar of the Bolsheviks and the rest of the world, not that of the old Romanov regime) when Nicholas II issued the October Manifesto in 1905, granting Russia its first constitution.

However, in my former comments I did not mean to infer that I thought the ENTIRE Russian intelligentsia was guilty of the crimes of October, that is, the Bolshevik Revolution, either in aiding or abetting it by their thoughts or deeds, or for that matter, by any negligence or inaction! I agree with you that the Russian people themselves, the "narod," have some share of guilt here. I say some share of guilt, because the peasantry's numbers far outweighed those of the intelligentsia by the hundreds of thousands, and in the end they had the last say in the appropriation of land from landowners (gentry and nobilty and intelligentsia alike).

On the other hand, if you were a Russian intellectual at the turn of the twentieth century, if you were educated and politically aware and up to date and so on (not necessarily a noble or member of the gentry, plenty of the working class qualified on this score), then naturally you had a huge advantage over the average Russian peasant, who was still basically mired in the eighteenth century (in other words, illiterate and not schooled in the new agricultural technology, much less the new politics). So on that score, I do think the Russian intelligentsia - only as defined in the very broadest and most sweeping of terms - does bear some responsibility (along with the peasantry) for what afterwards unfolded with the October Revolution.

To my mind, it's all but impossible to ascribe guilt to peoples who suffered under a new political regime, even if they were complicit in the very same political parties that brought that regime to power. It's one of those grey areas that never ceases to annoy me and vex me and haunt me. I defy anyone to come up with a solution. I only wish that someone would - or could.

ELisabeth, you said that we see eye to eye on the most important things. Yes, you are right, for the most part of the things, but I think, not quite. I'll try to explain why. Continue the discussion of two liberals. And then people still wonder why liberals can not agree, even just of the date of the holiday, can not assign satisfies to all conditions;))
  
ELisabeth, what you are saying is correct, but I'm not quite agree with you. Any people (the entire population, including the people themselves, intelligentsia, different elites, army and etc.) is responsible for everything that happens in their country. There is a golden rule of any normal human being and society itself in general - "What you earned, ONLY that you get". No socialism, equality and fraternity. Elisabeth,  you offered all of the Russian intelligentsia, or its remnants (after emigration), sit together and go to the people and tell them everything. They did it already numerous times. Still not available. But if it doesn't help, maybe this is not the problem of the intelligentsia? How else to explain? Posting posters in public squares? Books have all written, different parties already existed, what else to do?

I also do not quite agree with you about the suffering of the peasants. Of course it was very hard life. Terrible living conditions. But who is to blame? The bourgeois? So Yakov Yurovsky wrote in his note that he grew up in a poor family, had nothing to eat and etc. BUT, Attention! Then he makes a very interesting point - to revenge their persecutors Nicholas II, all the riches and etc.! What do you think about it? Why in his head, the head of a photographer and sensible, even rather intelligent person (I never thought that I would praise Yurovsky), didn't come another good thought - maybe perhaps we ourselves are to blame? For the stagnant days of Nicholas I and Alexander III ? In the constant persecution of the Jews and Poles? Can we ourselves change this situation? Earn, for example, the same money. Buy good apartments. Fortunately, but not all the people followed Yurovsky and his friends. Many people of his generation became prominent right-wing liberals of any stripe (Milyukov, Shingaryov, Prince Lvov, senior Nabokov), many became progressives, left liberals, such as Kerensky.

Elisabeth, I also think that any people in any country even in the United States, or even on the Panamanian Islands or Papua New Guinea, and, finally, in Russia, are directly responsible for what happens in their country. No excuses here. Common people say, that they are not interested in destiny of their country and have not noticed, how the political system changed, they went for a walk, and still walking from 16-Th century to nowadays.

Of course, Elisabeth, you are right that any intelligent and educated person who understands the situation and all the problems, should not be silent, and should try to tell all his thoughts to a simple man. But will it help? I doubt very much.

Finally, I turn to the holiday, which I think on whichever day you'd appointed it, still doesn't matter. By the way, do you think, how many percent of Russians remember the day of October Manifesto 1905? I think a couple of dozen people;))

Although the event itself(30 of October 1905) is certainly a big landmark and deserves to make a big anniversary about it.

Dear Nicola,

Thank you again for starting such an interesting discussion. Here in the AP this is a noteworthy accomplishment these days, since most of our big brains long ago left the scene (Tsarfan, Bev, even RichC posts less regularly, etc.). You, Nicola, seem ready and able to succeed them as the creator of interesting and intellectually challenging threads about Russian history and the Russian revolution(s), so all power to you. I do hope you continue to post in this forum for a long time, otherwise I will give it up again, as I have in the past, because of the many incredibly boring discussions on the lines of "who was the prettiest grand duchess" and "new photos of Olga" - discussions which have seemed to dominate the board at times, although admittedly I was perhaps just logging in on the wrong days.

But to continue our argument between two liberals, the old and the young... I do still think that although literacy rates and living standards among the peasantry were rising if not rapidly then quite steadily throughout the reigns of Alexander III and Nicholas II, nevertheless, the bulk of the peasantry remained in the 18th century in terms of overall education (or lack thereof) and agricultural techniques. In other words, the majority of the Russian population - because about 80 percent of the total population was peasant in origin - remained mired in ignorance, especially in political terms. I can hold ignorant, uneducated people responsible for the violence they commit against others, but I can't hold them responsible for stupid political decisions because they honestly and sincerely can't see the woods for the trees, the big picture versus their own petty self-interest.

As for intellectuals, and here I'm thinking more on the lines of really famous Russian intellectuals who supported the Bolshevik cause, people like Bukharin or Gorky or even (blasphemy!) the poet Mayakovsky - it's interesting to cite the case of Robert Brasillach, a famous French intellectual who was shot for collaboration with the Nazis on the orders of de Gaulle. And you know why this incredibly talented man (who, if he had lived, probably would have been someone in the league of Derrida or Foucault) was shot by a firing squad, while other collaborators got away with mere jail sentences? Because, as de Gaulle put it, in denying Brasillach's pardon:

"If they hadn't served the enemy directly and passionately, I commuted their sentences on principle. In the opposite case - the only one - I didn't feel I had the right to pardon. For in literature as in everything, talent confers responsibility [le talent est un titre de responsabilité]." (From Alice Kaplan, The Collaborator: the Trial and Execution of Robert Brasillach, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000, p. 212).

 Dear Elisabeth, yes, it's a pity, that a majority of people "with brains" as you said left this part of the forum, about Russian Revolution or Russian history. But on the other hand, I don't think that we should complain about it. To talk about Russia and it's difficult and brutal history, you must at least read a plenty of books about it, or even knew Russian, or even to live in Russia for sometime, or even to be a Russian yourself or with Russian roots. Eventually intelligent people, people who are trying to understand the course of the History, politically active people are always been in minority. In USA, and another highly developed countries this amount I think, is something about 10-15%, in Russia this amount is much less, maybe 1-5%(emigration, repressions, WWII). But don't worry about that, even 5% is already not bad.

I also must say to you, although I'm not a big fan of photos, etc. But if our dear girls from forum like it(colouring, posting new pictures), let them make it. In any case, it is better then reading Harry Potter and other "high class" literature. Some of their works are very beautiful;) I've already posted on request topic several of Kerensky b&w pics. Two of them are already coloured! Waiting for others.

Now to the peasants. Elisabeth, let me tell you just a few names of people who were from the same peasants as Mr. Yakov Yurovsky. How about this names: Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Brodsky, Solzhenitsyn, plus almost all of the Russian intelligentsia (intellectuals) of 20th century. We can have an endless talk about the problems of the peasants, but it seems to me that the problem is not at that point. There is another big problem - someone achieve something in his life, but someone not. At this point, everyone, take a decision for himself, and it is possible, seeing all injustices going with you to hang all the bourgeois, or, make another decision - start reading a books, go to University, etc.
 
Elisabeth, I think that any intelligentsia or intellectuals (writers, poets, musicions, artists, literary critics) have some peculiar presumption of innocence. They all are the people of the human impulse, inspiration and of endless creative searching of new ideals. I can not say anything bad about Maxim Gorky, Erenburg, Mayakovsky, Bulgakov and other great intellectuals. If we will evaluate them as a writers (Erenburg was a very good poet), then all of them are certainly with varying degree are very talented and good authors. But if we will have a look on their political position, then we must, as the liberals start to criticize them mercilessly. Something like, the servants of communism, stalinism, etc. But Elisabeth, they are intellectuals, and I perfectly understand them. Just imagine, what feelings they have experienced at the time of February and October Revolutions. The revaluation of all their ideas, so we can understand them. In the end, do not forget what happened to the Mayakovsky, for example. I think he understood everything about the new regime, but it was too late and finally he decided to make an a suicide.

Nicola, I very much like Mayakovsky, as a personality and as a poet, but one has to admit that he was often a rabble-rouser, in the very worst sense, for the Bolsheviks. Merely recall these lines from his poem "150,000,000":

Into the backs of those who flee [the Revolution],
I shoot my Luger!*

* Luger - literally, Parabellum,  a synonym for this type of pistol.

Nicola, I would submit to you that it's hard to excuse this kind of behavior (basically supporting the murder of anyone perceived as a "counter-revolutionary"), especially from someone so gifted, a true poetic genius. And let us please note, Mayakovsky was not a peasant, far from it, he came from the privileged classes. Moreover, throughout his life he gloried in the aestheticization of violence and liked to have himself photographed looking like a rarefied, Russian version of Mussolini. (Bald head, stern features, looking like he was born not of woman but from a rock.) None of this is accidental, Nicola. It's all well and good to have a fondness for certain intellectuals, who have won our hearts through their genius, but it's quite something else to overlook their very obvious faults. My favorite poet, for example, once noted in his diary that he wondered if the Jews should not be exterminated. I mean, this is heavy stuff. He was writing in the nineteenth century, long before Hitler or Nazism, but still... it makes one pause and it should make one pause. Just because someone is a great artistic genius doesn't necessarily mean they're worthy of making serious political decisions or right in espousing a particular political cause. It doesn't mean they're innocent, in other words. It doesn't mean they used their poetic voice wisely or well all the time.

Furthermore, as to the question of social class, even Solzhenitsyn came from the kulak class, not the ordinary peasantry. His maternal grandfather was a very wealthy farmer - he and his family lived in a mansion, he drove a Rolls Royce (one of the nine or so existing in Russia at that time, I believe). And I never heard Solzhenitsyn making excuses for the political positions of fellow writers like Mayakovsky or Babel or whoever, quite the contrary. Like de Gaulle, for that matter like Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, it could be said that Solzhenitsyn believed first and foremost that "talent confers responsibility" - not only towards one's contemporaries on this planet, but towards posterity as well. The role of the writer is sacred in Russian history.

In the 1930s Hitler also had the most socially progressive, advanced legislation on the planet for the prevention of cruelty to animals.

[/quote]

It is most difficult to accept this.  Hitler took the life of his own German Shepard in the confinement of his bunker, during the last days before his suicide.  When everything appeared lost, he want nothing to live in Germany...

HMB