-Caveat Lector-

From
http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?control=574&month=27&title=Intellectual+Roots+of
+Terror&id=27

}}>Begin
Intellectual Roots of Terror
The Black Book of Communism (Harvard University Press, 1999)
Reviewed by James Ostrowski
{Posted December 19, 2000}

As zebras are fascinated by lions, libertarians are fascinated by communists, their
polar opposites and sworn enemies for the last 150 years. If one believes that
society should function with an absolute minimum of governmental coercion, one is
curious to know the results of a philosophy which places its faith in the maximum
possible use of governmental coercion, force, and violence, to achieve its goals. If
communism worked, we libertarians would be forced to check our premises and watch
our backs.
Can the laboratory of communism also shed light on the viability of a related
political philosophy, which also relies on centralized governmental coercion to
achieve its goals: modern liberalism?  The communists did all at once what stealthy
liberals apparently intend to do piece by piece while we sleep. We just lived
through a century in which liberals enacted several recommendations of the Communist
Manifesto and transformed a night watchman state into a welfare/warfare state with a
continual flow of "progressive" legislation and various "Democrat wars" and crusades
with the result that no one in my law school class in 1983 could identify, in
response to Professor Henry Mark Holzer's query, any aspect of life that was not in
some way regulated or controlled by the state.  Seventeen years later, are they
through?
Has liberalism closed up shop?  Will they ever be through?  Not until they have
established an egalitarian utopia where virtually all responsibility for living has
passed from the individual to the state. In the liberal utopia, if I may pilfer
Paddy Chayefsky's words, "all necessities [will be] provided, all anxieties
tranquilized, all boredom amused."
If you think I exaggerate, consider that liberals and communists share five critical
premises: egalitarianism, utopianism (the use of impossible "ideals" as a guide to
policy), the efficacy of force in accomplishing positive goals, hostility to civil
society (nonstate institutions, e.g., Boy Scouts, private schools), and the
individual's inability to govern himself.
In light of the recent attempted coup d'�lection, I am tempted to add a sixth
similarity-willingness to win political fights at all costs. Further evidence of
some basic affinity between communism and modern liberalism is the latter's frequent
cover-ups and apologies for the former. Finally, communists and liberals share a
tendency to expressly support "mass democracy" while they in practice concentrate
power in secretive elite bodies such as politburos and appellate courts.
THE BLACK BOOK
In that spirit of fascination with the enemy, I recently read The Black Book of
Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression (Harvard University Press: Cambridge, 1999), a
clinical and relentless dissection of the crimes of communism in the 20th century-
defined by "the natural laws of humanity"--written by several ex-fellow travelers
led by Stephane Courtois.
It is not a book to be read before, during or after a meal.  You would not want to
spoil a good meal with the image of Bolshevik troops throwing live human beings into
a blast furnace.  The Black Book is a story of mind-numbing and mindless
brutality.  Mao Zedong, one of the stars of the book, said, "political power grows
out of the barrel of a gun."
One wonders, after reading this book, whether political power actually grows out of
the depraved minds of solipsistic, megalomaniacs like Lenin, Stalin and Mao.  It
seems that if you hypnotize yourself into discarding all known ethics and morality,
and are willing to use any and all ruthless means to achieve power, then you can
have it.  A Bolshevik newspaper wrote in 1919: "Our morality has no
precedent...everything is permitted...Let blood flow like water..."  And it did.
THE RAP SHEET
When Khrushchev said, "We will bury you," he meant it.  Communists buried eighty-
five million people in the 20th century, give or take the number of people who live
in New York State.  What is really interesting, however, is not the sheer number of
victims.  After all, as Stalin said, "A single death is a tragedy.  A million deaths
is a statistic."  And what a statistician Stalin proved to be.
But even more awesome is the incredible variety of their murderous means.  In
pursuit of utopia, the communists were forced to outdo themselves in continually
discovering ever more ways to separate the bourgeoisie from their souls.  They
murdered people by hanging them, whipping them, slitting their throats, carving them
up with axes, boiling them, crucifying them, beheading them, drawing and quartering
them, stoning them, forcing them to fight to the death against other prisoners,
massively drowning them, throwing them from helicopters, asphyxiating them, starving
them, poisoning them, burying them alive, and making life unbearable leading to mass
suicides.  When creativity was absent, the communists fell back on their old standby-
the banal bullet to the base of the brain.
Communists killed all types of people, but focused their most intense fury on
entrepreneurs, community leaders and the highly educated.  They made some half-
hearted efforts to abolish money and decried "speculators", "rich bastards", and,
"shopkeepers."  Lenin said that "speculators...deserve...a bullet in the
head..."  Like the Nazis later would, the communists recruited many of their
murderous thugs from the dregs of society.  Thus, communism may be defined as the
execrable executing the exceptional.
Communists were not merely satisfied with manufacturing ghosts; they wanted to teach
their class enemies a lesson or two first.  It is not clear what that lesson was
since, according to Marxist doctrine capitalists' capitalist ideas are strictly
determined by their relationship to "the means of production."  I suppose the answer
to that quibble is that the communists' hatred of the bourgeoisie was also a class-
determined fact beyond their control.  There was no time for arcane debates,
however, there was only politically incorrect flesh to be fried, literally.
Leaving aside being forced to read all three volumes of Das Kapital, the communists'
means of torture included: partial asphyxiation, burning with red hot irons,
confinement in tiny cells without plumbing, systematic rape and forced prostitution
of "bourgeois women", mock execution, beatings, near starvation, being forced to eat
the flesh of recently executed family members, forced marches, electric shocks,
kneeling on broken glass, being manacled in tight handcuffs, hanging by the wrists
or thumbs, and prolonged sleep deprivation leading to madness. Cannibalism, while
not strictly speaking a form of torture, was also a common occurrence in communist
countries due to their felonious collectivization of agriculture and resulting
famine. The things communists did to priests and seminarians were so despicable that
I cannot bear to describe them in words.
When communists were not destroying individual persons, they were busy destroying
individual personality.  They made heavy use of concentration camps and transported
prisoners there in cattle trucks.  (Sound familiar?)  Prisoners were deprived of all
privacy and were forced to confess their innermost thoughts.  Spies were
everywhere.  No one could be trusted.  There was only the "brutish imposition of a
heavy-handed ideology" and the "permanent saturation with the message of
orthodoxy."  The result was an "abdication of the personality."
To rationalize their mass murder and torture, the communists first used the
technique usually associated with the National Socialists--rhetorically dehumanizing
their enemies.  The communists exhorted their thugs to "shoot them like dogs," and
referred to the bourgeoisie as "vultures," "pygmies," "foxes," "lice," "insects,"
and "pigs."
Thus, communism meant mass murder, mass famine, mass torture, physical and 
psychological, dehumanization, and widespread cannibalism.  With that kind of record, 
we can say about the death of communism what Pol Pot's troop
s said to those about to experience death by communism: "Losing you is not a loss,
and keeping you is no specific gain."  Lenin said, "The cruelty of our lives,
imposed by circumstances, will be understood and pardoned."  Not!
THERE WAS GOOD STUFF TOO
Don't get me wrong.  Not all was bad under communism.  There were elements of life
under the dictatorship of the proletariat that would appeal to today's liberals and
conservatives.  Liberals, who on economic issues favor a dictatorship of the
majority, would have been happy with socialized medicine, communal day care and the
total abolition of private firearms.  Lenin, in a cautiously worded policy analysis,
recommended "immediate execution for anyone caught in possession of a firearm."  He
understood that "gun control" means the control that an armed citizenry has over a
tyrannical government.  The Bolsheviks systematically disarmed the peasants before
systematically starving millions of them to death.  Peasant pitchforks proved no
match for Bolshevik machine guns.
Liberals also would have been ecstatic over the enshrinement of their moronic slogan
"People over Profits" by the communists.  There was not a capitalist profit to be
made in communist countries, other than a few rubles for waiting in line to buy
toilet paper for a comrade.  Communists knew, perhaps instinctively, that all human
action, not just capitalist action, is profit-seeking behavior.  That is, all human
action aims at achieving satisfaction from the attainment of goals more highly
valued than the resources expended to attain them.  Thus, the only way to stop
people from putting "profits over people", was to murder them en masse.  However,
since the communist thugs' murderous behavior was itself profit-seeking, they
logically erred by neglecting to commit suicide.
A certain type of conservative would have approved of the communist legal
system.  There were no lawyers to speak of, except in graveyards: no criminal
lawyers "getting people off"; no "ambulance chasers"; and no namby-pamby civil
rights lawyers filing suits over prison conditions.  Habeas was a corpse.  Communist
prison reform consisted of cleaning out the raw sewage from tiny prison cells at
least one a month. Knee-jerk lawyer-bashing conservatives would have loved it there-
right up until the moment when government agents broke down their doors in the
middle of the night, arrested them for some imaginary crime, locked them up and
tortured them until they not only confessed to the imaginary crime, but asked for
forgiveness and literally thanked the government for prosecuting them, minutes
before they were taken out, without appeal, put up against the nearest wall, shot
and buried in an anonymous grave, while their families were sent a bill for the
bullets.
Under communism, "People were not arrested because they were guilty; they were
guilty because they were arrested." Stalin eloquently expressed his own philosophy
of criminal procedure when he commented about a tiresome lackey recently executed:
"The old fellow couldn't prove his innocence."  Instead of the right to remain
silent, interrogations lasted as long as 3,000 hours.  Rule of thumb: any country
that kills people to use them as fertilizer probably has no lawyers.
I DID NOT KNOW THAT
I knew that the communists killed millions.  There were surprises in the book,
however.  In the winter of 1939-40, many Polish Jews fled east to escape the
advancing German Army.  They ran into the heroic Red Army, which five years later
would boast of liberating the Jews from concentration camps.  The Red Army greeted
the fleeing Jews with bayonets and machine gun fire.  Many Jews returned to the
German sector.  Ultimately, 400,000 Polish Jews who ended up in Soviet-controlled
territory died during deportation, brutal concentration camp life and forced labor.
IDEAS HAVE CONSEQUENCES
The Black Book of Communism is a brilliant description of the crimes of
communism.  Its concluding chapter, written by Courtois, which attempts to explain
"Why?", faces a more difficult challenge.  The "why?" will perhaps never be fully
understood.  Courtois points to a number of factors, many of which are related to
the philosophical similarities between communists and liberals previously discussed.
The inability of the individual to govern himself without coercive direction from
the state.  Courtois locates the genesis of Leninist terror in the French
Revolution.  Robespierre ruled by fear and terror because the people "were not yet
pure enough" to grasp the wisdom of the Revolution.  All left-wing thought is
premised on the individual's inherent inability, intellectually and morally, to
function without continual direction from the state.
Elitism.  Of course, if people are incapable of successful living without external
guidance, that implies the need for a small elite, the "moral guardians of society"--
Courtois' words describing the Bolsheviks' self-image--to give them their marching
orders.
Utopianism.  This concept is critical to understanding the crimes of
communism.  Utopians posit some imagined, allegedly ideal state of affairs, which,
not being grounded in human nature and the human condition, cannot be
achieved.  Yet, it must be achieved, and since it is the ultimate moral value, any
and all means necessary to achieve this ideal, are sanctioned.  As Courtois writes,
"the real motivation for the terror . . . stemmed from . . . the utopian will to
apply to society a doctrine totally out of step with reality. * * * In a desperate
attempt to hold onto power, the Bolsheviks made terror an everyday part of their
policies, seeking to remodel society in the image of their theory, and to silence
those who, either through their actions or their very social, economic, or
intellectual existence, pointed to the gaping holes in the theory. * * * Marxism-
Leninism deified the system itself, so that categories and abstractions were far
more important than any human reality."
Egalitarianism.  The primary targets of communism were persons of accomplishment:
businessmen, successful farmers, intellectuals, and priests.  It was easy to harness
the natural envy of the masses toward their betters, particularly when this age-old
envy was dressed up in utopian and moralistic terms.
The efficacy of force.  Naturally, at the heart of Leninism was a fervent belief in
the use of force and violence.  Society can be improved by killing, starving,
torturing and generalized terror.  Trotsky said it best: "only force can be the
deciding factor . . . Whoever aims at the end cannot reject the means."
Violence begets violence.  Courtois deems it significant that communism first
emerged from the wreckage of World War I.  The war "to make the world safe for
democracy" made it safe for a murderous communist dictatorship in Russia.  The
senseless violence of the war habituated the Russian people to the senseless
violence of Leninism and Stalinism.  Later communist regimes were nurtured in the
womb of other senseless wars.  Courtois quotes Martin Malia:
"crime begets crime, and violence violence, until the first crime in the chain, the
original sin of the genus, is expiated through accumulated suffering. . . it was the
blood of August 1914, acting like some curse of the Atreidae on the house of modern
Europe, that generated the chain of international and social violence that has
dominated the modern age."
None of these factors, however, can fully explain why a human being would throw
another human being into a blast furnace.  In the end, we are left with the words of
Maksim Gorky: "What are the roots of human cruelty?  I have thought much about this
and I still do not understand it in the slightest."
-----------
James Ostrowski practices law in Buffalo, NY. See his archive and send him MAIL.
BACK

^ Top of Page
Send this page to a friend or associate

To:
(Enter their email address)
From:
(Enter your email address)
Comments:


518 W. Magnolia Avenue
Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
(334)
321-2100 -- Phone
(334) 321-2119 -- Fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




� 2000 Mises.org

Database Programming, Site Design and Hosting IWDC, Inc.



End<{{
A<>E<>R
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Integrity has no need of rules. -Albert Camus (1913-1960)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The libertarian therefore considers one of his prime educational
tasks is to spread the demystification and desanctification of the
State among its hapless subjects.  His task is to demonstrate
repeatedly and in depth that not only the emperor but even the
"democratic" State has no clothes; that all governments subsist
by exploitive rule over the public; and that such rule is the reverse
of objective necessity.  He strives to show that the existence of
taxation and the State necessarily sets up a class division between
the exploiting rulers and the exploited ruled.  He seeks to show that
the task of the court intellectuals who have always supported the State
has ever been to weave mystification in order to induce the public to
accept State rule and that these intellectuals obtain, in return, a
share in the power and pelf extracted by the rulers from their deluded
subjects.
[[For a New Liberty:  The Libertarian Manifesto, Murray N. Rothbard,
Fox & Wilkes, 1973, 1978, p. 25]]

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to