After listening to a podcast where Michael Malice discussed a portion of this book I decided I wanted to read it. I wanted to see how he examined the history of the Soviet Union. I knew the evils of the Soviet Union so was curious as to how he would present the white pill.
This book spans a long period of time so it is a good introductory book for an overview of life in the Soviet Union and a few major events in American and British history.
Malice stresses that the Soviet Union dissolved without major violence even when the experts never thought it was possible. He writes:
“In politics the argument is that power never cedes power without massive war and bloodshed; except in those cases when it does. In which case those in power never had a choice and the whole thing was inevitable the whole time. But those in power always have some kind of choice. That is the definition of power. Having the ability to make choices. Within 10 years the Soviet Union went from being a perpetual world dominating superpower to literal nonexistence.”
Malice outlines the barbaric nature of the Soviet regime using accounts from Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman including the following passage:
“The Bolsheviks often invoked mercilessness and ruthlessness in furthering their aims and Goldman did not at all hold back when it came to spelling out exactly what she saw and exactly why she so condemned it.”
Malice stressed throughout the book the plight of the average Russian citizen. One example is quoted below:
“The Checka took their work quite seriously working in some ways independently of Lenin but not shying away from shedding blood in achieving its goals. The Checka is not a court the head of the Checka publicly stated in 1918. We stand for organized terror. This should be frankly admitted, the Checka is obligated to defend the revolution and conquer the enemy even if its sword does by chance sometimes fall upon the heads of the innocent.”
The Soviet Union was a brutal dictatorship especially in its early years and Malice provides a glimpse into that life.
Overall this was a good read. At times it seemed slightly tangential. I rate this book 4 out of 5 stars.
William Wilberforce has been called an agitator for his commitment to ending the slave trade. One of his well known speeches on the subject was given on May 12, 1789.
Cardinal Richelieu has been hailed as a great statesman and as a subversive authoritarian. Depending on who you talk to he was a man needed to strengthen the monarchy in France, or he was a tyrant seeking personal power. Next week I will have a book review that may shed more light on Cardinal Richelieu.
When Lenin was working on his major writing projects he would often pace across the room formulating the ideas that he would write down by saying them out loud. Once he had the idea for what he wanted to write he would often repeat the idea to Nadezhda Krupskaya, who would provide feedback. Once this process was complete he would then write the ideas down.
Here is an AI rendering of what that might have looked like when he was drafting What is to be Done.
This month this community will focus on political subversion. What is subversion? When is it justified? What is the interplay between subversion and agitation? These are some of the topics to be discussed this month.
“You get used to the despot’s shortcomings, when they are not great vices, and the change of an autocratic ruler leads to involuntary fear.”
Sergei Trubetskoi
