Spiritual Roots of Communism
It is quite natural to wonder if communism is a fluke, an eternal temptation, or part of the odds and the gods. Communism prevailed in countries as diverse as Cuba and China. It threatened Greece and France and England. It triumphed in regimes all over Africa. During the 1960s and 1970s, looking at a map colored red for Socialism (instead of the defunct British Empire that couldn't keep the Suez Canal) would have convinced you that Communism was the goal of history. It is significant that Lenin's corpse was enshrined in Red Square, like an Orthodox saint, that the masses might see his incorruption and rejoice. Red Square is the spiritual epicenter of communism. One can easily imagine the communist regime of Angola falling without effecting the history of socialism one way or the other. But when Paul McCartney shook Gorbachev's hand and played the Beatles' tunes in Red Square in 2003, one can be sure that the dream is over. The video of the event, by the way, is worth watching, with the Kremlin in the background. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/2935244.stm
China, for instance, is slowly reforming its economy along free market lines. The Chinese love Christmas, because they love to shop. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FL21Ad03.html
Their revolution was under the aegis of Soviet Russia, and without Stalin, undoubtedly Chiang Kai-Shek might have easily been re-armed and sent back to the mainland backed by American Flying Tigers. Cuba, of course, was also under the aegis of Russia, as the missile blockade made evident. Socialism would have existed, but could have enjoyed no such power or influence without the Great Revolution of 1917, and the immense thought and suffering and daring that dared to transform that wintry and immense continent into a pre-eminent and almost super power. (The fact that communism fed off of a decayed Christian culture is, in my opinion, no insult to Orthodoxy. It is, in fact, a testimony to the power of that culture even in decay. Any type of theological culture can fall apart. Some may be more prone to, possibly, but the key point is that none is immune to the rule of all good things must end. Christ's power has to endlessly regenerate culture, and the Spirit blows where it lists.)
Much as the rise of Hitler was impossible with the inversion of a pre-existing Imperial and Latin order (the secular emperor and spiritual pope became a secular pope and spiritual emperor), so 1917 was prepared for well over a century by the writers and thinkers and sufferers of Russia. The Chinese learned socialism in the new Western universities at the turn of the century, and, of course, Western thought had tended towards socialism at this point, despite the inoculation against it with the Bourgeoise Revolution of 1789 and the suppression of Babeuf.
One can argue, naturally, that it was China that was essentially the lynchpin of Communism, because without it's seconding vote and the Korean War, the USSR would have shriveled up. Or that Castro was the indispensable poster child of propaganda, without which the Soviets would have not survived in a post-modern world of image and icon. But these are, to right reason and common sense, quite specious. Communism might very well have occured with or without Red Oktober. But one can certainly not understand much of the depth of Socialistic thought without delving into Russian literature. In history, the opposite of Ockham's razor applies. Science seeks for the simplest explanation. History, on the other hand, is more complex. It favors the thesis which gives the most depth, coloring, passion, and even alternate angles. The best theory of history is the one that calls forths the most adversaries, the one most fruitful of opposition. That is why Western thought will retain its preponderance beyond postmodernism. It is to Rasputin, Saint John of Kronstadt, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Marshal Kutozov, Borodino, and to the women revolutionaries rotting in Czarist gulags that we must look in order to understand, appreciate, and (eventually) "see through" communism. For communism is nothing but primitive Christianity without Christ. Our Western varieties pale before the collosus of martyred Russia, with its thousands of new-martys like Lydia, sainted and demonic Czars, and the Orthodox spires of the Kremlin.
China, for instance, is slowly reforming its economy along free market lines. The Chinese love Christmas, because they love to shop. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FL21Ad03.html
Their revolution was under the aegis of Soviet Russia, and without Stalin, undoubtedly Chiang Kai-Shek might have easily been re-armed and sent back to the mainland backed by American Flying Tigers. Cuba, of course, was also under the aegis of Russia, as the missile blockade made evident. Socialism would have existed, but could have enjoyed no such power or influence without the Great Revolution of 1917, and the immense thought and suffering and daring that dared to transform that wintry and immense continent into a pre-eminent and almost super power. (The fact that communism fed off of a decayed Christian culture is, in my opinion, no insult to Orthodoxy. It is, in fact, a testimony to the power of that culture even in decay. Any type of theological culture can fall apart. Some may be more prone to, possibly, but the key point is that none is immune to the rule of all good things must end. Christ's power has to endlessly regenerate culture, and the Spirit blows where it lists.)
Much as the rise of Hitler was impossible with the inversion of a pre-existing Imperial and Latin order (the secular emperor and spiritual pope became a secular pope and spiritual emperor), so 1917 was prepared for well over a century by the writers and thinkers and sufferers of Russia. The Chinese learned socialism in the new Western universities at the turn of the century, and, of course, Western thought had tended towards socialism at this point, despite the inoculation against it with the Bourgeoise Revolution of 1789 and the suppression of Babeuf.
One can argue, naturally, that it was China that was essentially the lynchpin of Communism, because without it's seconding vote and the Korean War, the USSR would have shriveled up. Or that Castro was the indispensable poster child of propaganda, without which the Soviets would have not survived in a post-modern world of image and icon. But these are, to right reason and common sense, quite specious. Communism might very well have occured with or without Red Oktober. But one can certainly not understand much of the depth of Socialistic thought without delving into Russian literature. In history, the opposite of Ockham's razor applies. Science seeks for the simplest explanation. History, on the other hand, is more complex. It favors the thesis which gives the most depth, coloring, passion, and even alternate angles. The best theory of history is the one that calls forths the most adversaries, the one most fruitful of opposition. That is why Western thought will retain its preponderance beyond postmodernism. It is to Rasputin, Saint John of Kronstadt, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Marshal Kutozov, Borodino, and to the women revolutionaries rotting in Czarist gulags that we must look in order to understand, appreciate, and (eventually) "see through" communism. For communism is nothing but primitive Christianity without Christ. Our Western varieties pale before the collosus of martyred Russia, with its thousands of new-martys like Lydia, sainted and demonic Czars, and the Orthodox spires of the Kremlin.
posted by Matthew C Smallwood | 7:20 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home