The story of Russia and its purposeful forced devolution into that Godless Bolshevik Communist hellhole called the Soviet Union breaks my heart. The murder of the Tsar and his whole family?
Me, too.....that's how we got in this mess in the first place.... your article was bang on! Wanted to share my favourite part....
"Many governments refuse to bargain with terrorists. But Americans let their media and government terrorize them. And once Mitigation Mania began, people reacted as if they were negotiating with their captor/government. They told themselves that, “If I only make the next concession, they’ll make this whole nightmare end.”
They didn’t understand that their Dear Leaders weren’t playing that game and weren’t bound by either truth or good faith."
What if I disagree to agree. Words are such a mind fuck.
"I believe humanity's foray into fiction began with the breakdown of the bicameral mind, and the insertion of meaningless symbols in between the subject and the seer. In short, back when people used pictographic alphabets, we were limited to discussing things we could actually see in the real world. The invention of phonemic alphabets like this one, which are comprised not of representative pictures but of meaningless letters, provides the opportunity to invent an endless stream of non-sense, the greatest of these being spelled with just a single capital letter."
The Tsar was not stupid, he knew his fate and that of his family. There was no escaping it though. All he could do was hope and it never turned his way. The substance of his family and especially those girls was a huge loss to the world.
The accidental joke in the video is quite funny, actually.
I like the word "tropes" but it is misused very often. It should only refer to figures of speech, not to commonly repeated interpretations or rumors. Perhaps it would be better to used the word "motif" sometimes. But I don't like "motif." Sound weird.
I also dislike the "truth somewhere in the middle" motif (ugh! lol)
Perhaps I'm too dogmatic to be a good skeptic. I specially dislike that one when it is said by people who clearly have stated before that there is no truth, or some other form of the same idea. And these people are often dogmacitally skeptic, which is a hopeless position.
I've commented in various substacks comment sections that the Law of the Excluded Middle formulated by Aristotle refers to a comparison between a sentence A and its negation, not-A. It does not apply when not-A is almost there but not exactly the same as not-A.
And this is the origin of this business of "you're a binary thinker bro!"
Some of those who accuse others of being binary thinkers don't realize that what they are criticizing is not the logic of Aristotle, but the corrupt custom of presenting A and B, and claiming that B is equal to not-A, and then using the razor to eliminate B. That is sophistry. Close to a strawman fallacy, but more perverse.
This is one of the favorite fallacies of university professors who want to destroy the minds of their students. Few people see it.
So, yes, it is a way to betray the audience. But when two exactly opposite ideas are presented, one of the must be true (even in fantasy), and its negation, false. Unless one formally renounces to logic, in which case, anything goes.
For example, the sentence A="Goldilocks had to choose one out of four dishes of porridge" and its negation "it is not the case that A is true", which happens to be true, even though it refers to a fairy tale.
The sentence "Not A" says nothing about the correct number of dishes of porridge she had to choose from. The readers know it was three, if they know the approved version tale as licensed by the ministry of fairy tales and electron microscopy. But if they don't know the tale or they have received a communist version of the tale were there are no dishes because there is no food and dishes are a bourgeoise vice anyway who wants them, then the readers cannot discern whether A or not-A is true, but they know (if they have a license to drive an Aristotelian Logic freight train) that the law applies in this case. No binary thinking in this example.
I especially love when they say the truth is somewhere in the middle between two corrupt, pro-war, pro-censorship, anti-science corporate-owned political parties.
The Gulag Archipelago is Solzhenitsyn's masterwork, a vast canvas of camps, prisons, transit centres and secret police, of informers and spies and interrogators and also of heroism, a Stalinist anti-world at the heart of the Soviet Union where the key to survival lay not in hope but in despair. The work is based on the testimony of some two hundred survivors, and on the recollection of Solzhenitsyn's own eleven years in labour camps and exile. It is both a thoroughly researched document and a feat of literary and imaginative power.
The three-volume book is a narrative relying on eyewitness testimony and primary research material, as well as the author's own experiences as a prisoner in a gulag labor camp. Written between 1958 and 1968, it was published in the West in 1973, thereafter circulating in samizdat (underground publication) form in the Soviet Union until its official publication in 1989.
I watched the movie. We have been lied to about lots of things, haven’t we. Watching the movie reminded me of a book I started reading by Fr Denis Fahey, an Irish priest who wrote in the early and mid 20th century. Fr Fahey is considered “anti-Semitic” in todays world which of course means he was telling the absolute truth. The book “The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World” can be read on archive.org here.
A quote from the introduction: “According to the English review, The Patriot, of 20th February, 1930, after Robert Wilton (an English correspondent in Russia with intimate knowledge of Russian affairs) had written in 1920 : “ The Jewish domination in Russia is supported by certain Russians . . . they are all mere screens or dummies behind which the Sverdlovs and the thousand and one Jews of Sovdepia continue their work of destruction,” his chances in English journalism were gone. It is a well-known fact that he died in straitened circumstances in January, 1925.
On page 29 of Les Derniers Jours des Romanof, we read : “ In order not to leave myself open to any accusation of prejudice, I am giving (on pages 136-137), the list of the members of the Central Committee of the Extraordinary Commission and the Council of Commissars functioning at the time of the assassination of the Imperial Family. The 62 members of the Committee were composed of 5 Russians, 1 Ukranian, 6 Letts, 2 Germans, 1 Czech, 2 Armenians, 3 Georgians, 1 Kara'nn (Jewish sect), 41 Jews. 1 The Extra¬ ordinary Commission of Moscow was composed of 36 members, including l German, 1 Pole, 1 Armenian, 2 Rus¬ sians, 8 Letts, 23 Jews. The Council of the People’s Com¬ missars numbered 2 Armenians, 3 Russians, 17 Jews. According to the data furnished by the Soviet Press, out of 556 important functionaries of the Bolshevik State, including the above-mentioned, there were in 1918-1919, 17 Russians, 2 Ukranians, 11 Armenians, 35 Letts, 15 Ger¬ mans, 1 Hungarian, 10 Georgians, 3 Poles, 3 Finns, 1 Czech, 1 Karai'm, 457 Jews.
“ If the reader is astonished to find the Jewish hand everywhere in the affair of the assassination of the Russian Imperial Family, he must bear in mind the formidable numerical preponderance of Jews in the Soviet administration.”
I found “Architects of Deception” on archive.org. Thank you for this new lead on trying to figure out what the world is crazy and we swim in lies. My grandfather was a 33rd degree mason. I’ve been praying deliverance prayers for myself and my family. Funny, not funny. Thank you for the suggestion. I think you posted a movie by Juri awhile back because the name sounds familiar. I also bought a book from Fidelity Press -“The Truth Will Set You Free: the Case for Holocaust Revisionism” by John Beaumont. I read his article in the March 2024 Culture Wars magazine - “The Triumph of a Catacomb Revisionist”: The Case of Walter Lüftl”. Beaumont describes how Lüftl, a court-recognized expert engineer who was elected president of the Federal Austrian Chamber of Engineers proved the impossibility of the use of Zyklon B to gas people to death in gas chambers in Auschwitz in research he published in March 1992 called “The Lüftl Report.”
I want to write up Beaumont's excellent, thorough book on the case for Hcaust revisionism one of these days, as well as EMJ's "The Hcaust Narrative". Dunno if I can do them justice. "Holocaustianity" rules our politics, values, morality, outlook, today, alas.
Thank you. I had no idea that my prejudicial image of the last tsar was informed by propaganda. And yes, the lazy, all-purpose formula that truth is always in the middle is infuriating. In a murder trial does truth always reside at some midpoint between prosecution and defense? Nonetheless, about the Russian Revolution, there is the alarm raised by Dostoyevsky in his final speech at the Pushkin monument, his seeing a cataclysm to come and hoping that a return to the Russian Orthodox Church would avert it. As you probably know, Dostoyevsky wrote The Devils about the revolution he saw coming. And, as you no doubt also know, Tolstoy wrestled his whole life with the great disparity between the extremely wealthy like himself and the peasants. At the end of his life he left his vast estate in a donkey cart--ran away from home to be a pilgrim. He only got as far as a nearby railway station before he was swamped by admirers and died there. The Russian Revolution was not all foreign meddling. I am grateful, though, for the correction about Tsar Nicholas II. I didn't know how little I knew. What a blessed and tragic people.
I can believe this about Nicholas II. I think he was betrayed by his cousins. Especially George V, who declined to rescue his cousin Nicky for fear of criticism from some in the UK (I forget the details, but there was initial talk in Britain of rescuing the Romanovs from the Bosheviks at one time).
The Romanovs were a kind people. Nicholas and Alexandra genuinely loved each other as few couples in the world have done. Empress Alexandra's sister (her doppelganger!) became a nun in the ROC, stayed close to the royals, and was well-known for her many acts of charity and deep piety. (There's a video about her in this series.)
Alexandra herself was a good and brave woman, and she and her lovely daughters all truly cared for and nursed injured soldiers over a few years, steeling their delicate female natures against the awful pain they had to witness, sometimes assisting at surgeries. too. That work is not for the faint-hearted. And it was not done for any "photo ops," either, as the royals all do these days. And Alexei, the only boy--how does a mother not feel crushed at the thought that her son might die with every physical injury he sustains no matter how minor?
Going off on a tangent, the Bolsheviks were actually inspired by the success of the bloodthirsty French Revolutionaries in toppling the aristocracy and monarchy and values of family, faith, honor, noblesse oblige (it is a good thing, that), in favor of "reason," secularism and state power. Do look into the Vendee massacre in NW France to see what atrocities were committed by the Revolutionaries en masse against the poorly armed and organized Catholic farmers. It was only in the late 70s or 80s that France accepted these bloody events as a 'genocide' thanks only to the student dissertation of Reynald Secher -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynald_Secher -- that opened up this long-hidden crime in French history.
What Russia had under the Tsar was a form of anarchy, where people ruled themselves.
The royalty had luxury but they were indebted to the people.
I joke sometimes that democracy is worse than a dictatorship because in a dictatorship the people know who is responsible for doing or not doing something.
In modern democracy there's a lot of fingers pointing elsewhere.
Czar Nicholas was the only European subject that fascinated my father who otherwise focused his interests on western history. I have always felt that Nicholas was too nice, too polite--and that he was dealing with historical forces in Russia that began in 1830. And, Peter the Great, Catherine, Alexander 1--all had an extremely strong hand and I think Nicholas wanted to be a kinder monarch. But I will look at the film. He is certainly tragic. His grandfather was assassinated in the 1880s, and then his son of course was a hemophiliac, and Rasputin was raging about the court with Alexandra's blessing, I've always imagined he felt beleaguered and somewhat adrift. My father's interest in him likely stems from his role as a lynchpin--history turning on a dime--the millions who died because he died and then the concomitant reverberations which ensued through the world in the 20th century spreading destruction and fear in their wake.
Why no study or discussion, in US public schools, of the "Russian" Revolution??
Or of Solzhenitsyn?
_______________________
Was Nobel Laureate Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn an Anti-Semite?
""You must understand, the leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators."
You can easily, and affordably, get any other book by Solzhenitsyn, who is NOT suppressed in the U.S., on Amazon, wherever. Except the one you are referring to ("Two Hundred Years Together"). I wonder why?
The story of Russia and its purposeful forced devolution into that Godless Bolshevik Communist hellhole called the Soviet Union breaks my heart. The murder of the Tsar and his whole family?
The "West..."
Yeah. Right.
Perhaps “The West” is being used as a synonym for something else.
I've always HATED that idea that the truth is found in the middle.
https://markoshinskie8de.substack.com/p/the-center-cannot-hold
Glad we agree
Me, too.....that's how we got in this mess in the first place.... your article was bang on! Wanted to share my favourite part....
"Many governments refuse to bargain with terrorists. But Americans let their media and government terrorize them. And once Mitigation Mania began, people reacted as if they were negotiating with their captor/government. They told themselves that, “If I only make the next concession, they’ll make this whole nightmare end.”
They didn’t understand that their Dear Leaders weren’t playing that game and weren’t bound by either truth or good faith."
...hope people check it out.
It’s as bad as “We’re going to have to agree to disagree.” 🤮
What if I disagree to agree. Words are such a mind fuck.
"I believe humanity's foray into fiction began with the breakdown of the bicameral mind, and the insertion of meaningless symbols in between the subject and the seer. In short, back when people used pictographic alphabets, we were limited to discussing things we could actually see in the real world. The invention of phonemic alphabets like this one, which are comprised not of representative pictures but of meaningless letters, provides the opportunity to invent an endless stream of non-sense, the greatest of these being spelled with just a single capital letter."
Alphabet vs the goddess lecture by Leonard Shlain
https://robc137.substack.com/p/alphabet-vs-the-goddess
Or . . . we needed to create the ‘meaningless symbols’ to make sense of all that was going on in the infinite space of our minds and hearts.
The Tsar was not stupid, he knew his fate and that of his family. There was no escaping it though. All he could do was hope and it never turned his way. The substance of his family and especially those girls was a huge loss to the world.
The accidental joke in the video is quite funny, actually.
I like the word "tropes" but it is misused very often. It should only refer to figures of speech, not to commonly repeated interpretations or rumors. Perhaps it would be better to used the word "motif" sometimes. But I don't like "motif." Sound weird.
I also dislike the "truth somewhere in the middle" motif (ugh! lol)
Perhaps I'm too dogmatic to be a good skeptic. I specially dislike that one when it is said by people who clearly have stated before that there is no truth, or some other form of the same idea. And these people are often dogmacitally skeptic, which is a hopeless position.
I've commented in various substacks comment sections that the Law of the Excluded Middle formulated by Aristotle refers to a comparison between a sentence A and its negation, not-A. It does not apply when not-A is almost there but not exactly the same as not-A.
And this is the origin of this business of "you're a binary thinker bro!"
Some of those who accuse others of being binary thinkers don't realize that what they are criticizing is not the logic of Aristotle, but the corrupt custom of presenting A and B, and claiming that B is equal to not-A, and then using the razor to eliminate B. That is sophistry. Close to a strawman fallacy, but more perverse.
This is one of the favorite fallacies of university professors who want to destroy the minds of their students. Few people see it.
So, yes, it is a way to betray the audience. But when two exactly opposite ideas are presented, one of the must be true (even in fantasy), and its negation, false. Unless one formally renounces to logic, in which case, anything goes.
For example, the sentence A="Goldilocks had to choose one out of four dishes of porridge" and its negation "it is not the case that A is true", which happens to be true, even though it refers to a fairy tale.
The sentence "Not A" says nothing about the correct number of dishes of porridge she had to choose from. The readers know it was three, if they know the approved version tale as licensed by the ministry of fairy tales and electron microscopy. But if they don't know the tale or they have received a communist version of the tale were there are no dishes because there is no food and dishes are a bourgeoise vice anyway who wants them, then the readers cannot discern whether A or not-A is true, but they know (if they have a license to drive an Aristotelian Logic freight train) that the law applies in this case. No binary thinking in this example.
I especially love when they say the truth is somewhere in the middle between two corrupt, pro-war, pro-censorship, anti-science corporate-owned political parties.
Excellent illumination.
..THE INTROJECTION OF TINITUS MAXIMUS..
(For the Romanovs)
Last night the gods awoke me
Or more were working as I woke
Putting words to mighty music so
I listened as they spoke:
The maestro wore a strange guitar
That only seemed to hum
So I guessed before I went to bed
He'd given it a strum:
We walked upstream through shallow mud
Dictating and composing
His opus on a minor king whose riding-hat had fallen
Which, if replaced was kingdom saved
A strange obscure anthem:
The king agreed was quite naive and loath of ceremony
T'was only for to do his job he
Royally requires it:
They said also that though I know
Just how to read and wrote
The words obscure to music pure
I could not sing a note:
You dislike that word "tropes" because it's a conceited term for "directions".
This man survived the Bolshevik terror apparatus and lived to write about it. This is a very famous book filled with horror, and truth.
The Gulag Archipelago in three volumes
by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
https://archive.org/details/TheGulagArchipelago-Threevolumes/The-Gulag-Archipelago__vol1__I-II__Solzhenitsyn/
Publication date 1973
The Gulag Archipelago is Solzhenitsyn's masterwork, a vast canvas of camps, prisons, transit centres and secret police, of informers and spies and interrogators and also of heroism, a Stalinist anti-world at the heart of the Soviet Union where the key to survival lay not in hope but in despair. The work is based on the testimony of some two hundred survivors, and on the recollection of Solzhenitsyn's own eleven years in labour camps and exile. It is both a thoroughly researched document and a feat of literary and imaginative power.
The three-volume book is a narrative relying on eyewitness testimony and primary research material, as well as the author's own experiences as a prisoner in a gulag labor camp. Written between 1958 and 1968, it was published in the West in 1973, thereafter circulating in samizdat (underground publication) form in the Soviet Union until its official publication in 1989.
He's a great author, all his books are worth anybody's time, me humbly thinks, I also liked Cancer Ward, cheers!
I watched the movie. We have been lied to about lots of things, haven’t we. Watching the movie reminded me of a book I started reading by Fr Denis Fahey, an Irish priest who wrote in the early and mid 20th century. Fr Fahey is considered “anti-Semitic” in todays world which of course means he was telling the absolute truth. The book “The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World” can be read on archive.org here.
https://archive.org/details/faheyrev.denisthemysticalbodyofchristinthemodernworld1939_201907
A quote from the introduction: “According to the English review, The Patriot, of 20th February, 1930, after Robert Wilton (an English correspondent in Russia with intimate knowledge of Russian affairs) had written in 1920 : “ The Jewish domination in Russia is supported by certain Russians . . . they are all mere screens or dummies behind which the Sverdlovs and the thousand and one Jews of Sovdepia continue their work of destruction,” his chances in English journalism were gone. It is a well-known fact that he died in straitened circumstances in January, 1925.
On page 29 of Les Derniers Jours des Romanof, we read : “ In order not to leave myself open to any accusation of prejudice, I am giving (on pages 136-137), the list of the members of the Central Committee of the Extraordinary Commission and the Council of Commissars functioning at the time of the assassination of the Imperial Family. The 62 members of the Committee were composed of 5 Russians, 1 Ukranian, 6 Letts, 2 Germans, 1 Czech, 2 Armenians, 3 Georgians, 1 Kara'nn (Jewish sect), 41 Jews. 1 The Extra¬ ordinary Commission of Moscow was composed of 36 members, including l German, 1 Pole, 1 Armenian, 2 Rus¬ sians, 8 Letts, 23 Jews. The Council of the People’s Com¬ missars numbered 2 Armenians, 3 Russians, 17 Jews. According to the data furnished by the Soviet Press, out of 556 important functionaries of the Bolshevik State, including the above-mentioned, there were in 1918-1919, 17 Russians, 2 Ukranians, 11 Armenians, 35 Letts, 15 Ger¬ mans, 1 Hungarian, 10 Georgians, 3 Poles, 3 Finns, 1 Czech, 1 Karai'm, 457 Jews.
“ If the reader is astonished to find the Jewish hand everywhere in the affair of the assassination of the Russian Imperial Family, he must bear in mind the formidable numerical preponderance of Jews in the Soviet administration.”
I wonder if you have read Juri Lina. I would like to trace them not ethnically but how their Masonic rankings in the Brotherhoods.
I found “Architects of Deception” on archive.org. Thank you for this new lead on trying to figure out what the world is crazy and we swim in lies. My grandfather was a 33rd degree mason. I’ve been praying deliverance prayers for myself and my family. Funny, not funny. Thank you for the suggestion. I think you posted a movie by Juri awhile back because the name sounds familiar. I also bought a book from Fidelity Press -“The Truth Will Set You Free: the Case for Holocaust Revisionism” by John Beaumont. I read his article in the March 2024 Culture Wars magazine - “The Triumph of a Catacomb Revisionist”: The Case of Walter Lüftl”. Beaumont describes how Lüftl, a court-recognized expert engineer who was elected president of the Federal Austrian Chamber of Engineers proved the impossibility of the use of Zyklon B to gas people to death in gas chambers in Auschwitz in research he published in March 1992 called “The Lüftl Report.”
I want to write up Beaumont's excellent, thorough book on the case for Hcaust revisionism one of these days, as well as EMJ's "The Hcaust Narrative". Dunno if I can do them justice. "Holocaustianity" rules our politics, values, morality, outlook, today, alas.
I’m totally in favor of your project!
😊Thanks for the nudge and support!
Thank you. I had no idea that my prejudicial image of the last tsar was informed by propaganda. And yes, the lazy, all-purpose formula that truth is always in the middle is infuriating. In a murder trial does truth always reside at some midpoint between prosecution and defense? Nonetheless, about the Russian Revolution, there is the alarm raised by Dostoyevsky in his final speech at the Pushkin monument, his seeing a cataclysm to come and hoping that a return to the Russian Orthodox Church would avert it. As you probably know, Dostoyevsky wrote The Devils about the revolution he saw coming. And, as you no doubt also know, Tolstoy wrestled his whole life with the great disparity between the extremely wealthy like himself and the peasants. At the end of his life he left his vast estate in a donkey cart--ran away from home to be a pilgrim. He only got as far as a nearby railway station before he was swamped by admirers and died there. The Russian Revolution was not all foreign meddling. I am grateful, though, for the correction about Tsar Nicholas II. I didn't know how little I knew. What a blessed and tragic people.
I can believe this about Nicholas II. I think he was betrayed by his cousins. Especially George V, who declined to rescue his cousin Nicky for fear of criticism from some in the UK (I forget the details, but there was initial talk in Britain of rescuing the Romanovs from the Bosheviks at one time).
The Romanovs were a kind people. Nicholas and Alexandra genuinely loved each other as few couples in the world have done. Empress Alexandra's sister (her doppelganger!) became a nun in the ROC, stayed close to the royals, and was well-known for her many acts of charity and deep piety. (There's a video about her in this series.)
Alexandra herself was a good and brave woman, and she and her lovely daughters all truly cared for and nursed injured soldiers over a few years, steeling their delicate female natures against the awful pain they had to witness, sometimes assisting at surgeries. too. That work is not for the faint-hearted. And it was not done for any "photo ops," either, as the royals all do these days. And Alexei, the only boy--how does a mother not feel crushed at the thought that her son might die with every physical injury he sustains no matter how minor?
Going off on a tangent, the Bolsheviks were actually inspired by the success of the bloodthirsty French Revolutionaries in toppling the aristocracy and monarchy and values of family, faith, honor, noblesse oblige (it is a good thing, that), in favor of "reason," secularism and state power. Do look into the Vendee massacre in NW France to see what atrocities were committed by the Revolutionaries en masse against the poorly armed and organized Catholic farmers. It was only in the late 70s or 80s that France accepted these bloody events as a 'genocide' thanks only to the student dissertation of Reynald Secher -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynald_Secher -- that opened up this long-hidden crime in French history.
First major feature film in France about the Vendean uprising -- was unexpectedly successful last year:
https://remnant-tv.com/video/1091/vanquish-or-die-the-true-story-of-the-vendee-uprising-an-independent-film--1?channelName=RemnantTV
What Russia had under the Tsar was a form of anarchy, where people ruled themselves.
The royalty had luxury but they were indebted to the people.
I joke sometimes that democracy is worse than a dictatorship because in a dictatorship the people know who is responsible for doing or not doing something.
In modern democracy there's a lot of fingers pointing elsewhere.
Please tell me what the unintentionally brilliant moment was at time 8.41. I've listened to it several times but can't pick up on it.
Same here
Czar Nicholas was the only European subject that fascinated my father who otherwise focused his interests on western history. I have always felt that Nicholas was too nice, too polite--and that he was dealing with historical forces in Russia that began in 1830. And, Peter the Great, Catherine, Alexander 1--all had an extremely strong hand and I think Nicholas wanted to be a kinder monarch. But I will look at the film. He is certainly tragic. His grandfather was assassinated in the 1880s, and then his son of course was a hemophiliac, and Rasputin was raging about the court with Alexandra's blessing, I've always imagined he felt beleaguered and somewhat adrift. My father's interest in him likely stems from his role as a lynchpin--history turning on a dime--the millions who died because he died and then the concomitant reverberations which ensued through the world in the 20th century spreading destruction and fear in their wake.
Why no study or discussion, in US public schools, of the "Russian" Revolution??
Or of Solzhenitsyn?
_______________________
Was Nobel Laureate Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn an Anti-Semite?
""You must understand, the leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators."
- A. Solzhenitsyn
You can easily, and affordably, get any other book by Solzhenitsyn, who is NOT suppressed in the U.S., on Amazon, wherever. Except the one you are referring to ("Two Hundred Years Together"). I wonder why?
Thankfully, available on archive.org