“There is complete freedom of discussion in the Soviet Union”

A guy I know who worked in the Soviet Union for Canada in the 1970s surprized me one day when he said, in response to my comment, “On the contrary, there is complete freedom of discussion in the Soviet Union”.

What did he mean?

He said: “if you have known a guy since high school, and you are sure of him on all grounds, and you are out ice fishing on a lake, say, out of reach of microphones, then Russians have an extremely broad range of discussion, broader than here.” He intimated that Russians in such places would feel free to talk about Stalin and Hitler, the Russian Revolution, the future of communism, the United States, sex, God, Christianity, anything.

If you spoke too loudly in the wrong circumstances, you might draw attention of the secret police, and be called in for a threatening chat. You might lose your academic job. But within the boundaries of a totalitarian police state, where the compulsion was external, society itself maintained freedom of discussion. It also maintained educational standards. Communism may have wrecked social trust, the bedrock of cooperation, markets, and democracy, but it did not reach in and destroy friendships and a real but limited freedom of thought and speech.

In the same vein, Prof. Srdia Trifkovic speaks below of how the Communist system did not challenge the classical education system: grammar, logic, mathematics, essay writing, and how in consequence, the education system was less affected by cultural Marxism than it is in the West now, and how eastern European immigrants to Western Europe are succeeding because of this rigorous training in thinking.

Speaking of the absorption of political correctness by Western social elites, compared to Eastern Europeans,

The circle of people [here] who have internalized these idiocies, as a normal part of their world outlook is, I would say, much wider.

 

 

Go to minute 2:40 and thereafter for this important discussion.

Bookmark and Share
Alain

That may very well be, but in the West much the same (I suggest even worse) through neo-marxist tyranny where citizens self-censure out of fear of some state agency or mob bullying. That this was accomplished without the heavy hand of a totalitarian regime with its secret police is quiet the accomplishment. Here people can be forced out of their job, have their reputations ruined along with endangering themselves and their family. With such a long traditional heritage of free speech (something foreign in the old Soviet Union and even Russia under the Tsars) we have allowed others to take it from us.

Dalwhinnie

Alain: Exactly what I and the Serbian professor are saying: freedom of speech is more pervasively controlled in the West than in a dictatorship, by means of social pressure, rather than by police.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *