EKIP– Expert Club for Economics and Politics A Different Opinion
A Bulgarian translation of the novel "In the First Circle" by Alexander Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008) was recently published. The story is based on his life experience and concerns one of the so-called sharashkas - secret Soviet camps, where imprisoned scientists work on intelligence or military projects. It describes the disappointment of a young Soviet diplomat with the duplicitous policy of his country, which leads him to betrayal. Everything is intertwined with human tragedies and downfalls, with dignity and despair, with love, dreams, courage and irony towards Stalin.
The book is highly politically incorrect towards the socialist regime in Soviet Russia. A close reading shows that it hardly fits into the modern notion of political correctness. A brief presentation and analysis of the two nuances of the political incorrectness of the novel "In the First Circle" is the main content of the proposed text.
Politically incorrect for O'Bose the late socialism
The political-economic system of socialism has long been studied, but Solzhenitsyn presents its model in an understandable way. Here we will focus on his view of the severely distorted socialist market, individual economic rationality, and corruption, and compare it with data from Bulgarian economic history.
Communist agitators promise the abolition of private property and the liquidation of market mechanisms, which are replaced by state pricing and centralized planning. Their application leads to the emergence of chaos and numerous commodity shortages. Even in the warehouses of the sharashka there is an “eternal” shortage of materials. Solzhenitsyn describes the existence of an unregulated, spontaneously arising “black” market. While the city shops are deserted, on the “black” market in the almost hermetically closed Soviet Union one can find “ everything invented - up to American chewing gum, pistols, textbooks on black and white magic”. The effective demand is huge, and the supply is limited, not least because the traders are treated as speculators and calculate the risk of persecution and imprisonment into the selling price. Therefore, prices on unofficial markets are incomparably higher than official ones, and the state salary is not enough for purchases there.
The expectations of the ideologists of socialism and communism are that with the abolition of private property and the market, a new, better person will be born. He should not be driven by selfishness, envy, the pursuit of profit and greed. Soviet reality refutes utopia. The book depicts high-ranking representatives of power - diplomats, military, prosecutors, representatives of the secret services, etc. They are excited by their high salaries, access to scarce goods, the opportunity to enjoy various privileges such as housing, company cars and other similar benefits. Their behavior is economically rational and consistent with the way society is organized. Solzhenitsyn, probably independently, arrives at the idea that a new exploitative class is emerging in socialist society. It consists of the ruling elite. Political power provides it with exclusive access to the resources of the national economy and its representatives take advantage of them without hesitation. Even a sincerely believing communist who has fallen into the trap reluctantly acknowledges the existence of such a class in the USSR.
Solzhenitsyn also draws attention to other (easily forgotten) features of socialist everyday life. One of the most sympathetic characters in the book, who grew up entirely under socialism and does not remember Russia before its imposition in 1917, declares that in the USSR “ nothing gets done without bribery.” Even in the strictest regime of swift, effective, and brutal punishment, where there are no large private corporations colluding with governments to make big profits, corruption exists. It has become a way of life, and with its help the most ordinary goals of life are achieved.
Solzhenitsyn's hero does not exaggerate that the feeling of corruption in the conditions of a one-party communist dictatorship was universal. In the mid-1980s, the Bulgarian party and state leader Todor Zhivkov stated that " Bribery has taken a permanent place in our lives and causes serious moral and material damage." In the everyday life of socialist Bulgaria, the following were bought by bribing the relevant responsible persons: obtaining Sofia residency (i.e. the right to legally live in the capital), the opportunity to buy a new home (in the normal case, one would have to wait for years), installing a telephone exchange, a "favorable" court decision, employment in what were then prestigious and lucrative positions such as a bartender, etc. The Bulgarian economist Georgi Petrov notes that towards the end of socialism in Bulgaria, salaries in trade, catering and tourism were abnormally low. He notes that “ only those who are able to secure additional income beyond their wages by robbing the state or buyers can work there.” Part of this extra income is shared by such individuals with their superiors and with the authorities whose main task is to control the economy. Supposedly free medical care turns into endless waiting in lines in front of medical and dental offices, and this leads to “ an increasingly widespread illegal payment for the use of certain types of medical services.” Solzhenitsyn’s observation of widespread corruption is not a fiction and is not limited to the Soviet Union.
Politically incorrect – then and now
“In the First Circle” is not just an exposition of the shortcomings of Soviet socialism. The author’s insights touch on some of the “sacred cows” of modernity. We will touch on only two of them: the role of the state and (in)equality. The end of the socialist regime and the collapse of the USSR in 1989-1991 brought a short-lived retreat from faith in the omnipotence and benevolence of the state. Gradually, however, state power is again being offered as a universal remedy for all social ills. Growing social inequality, according to many, is a serious contemporary academic and political problem. It is pointed out as a shortcoming of modern society. Its existence generates apocalyptic visions of the future.
Solzhenitsyn's view of the powerful state machine is conditioned by the knowledge of what it does to man, to his dreams, personal pains and goals in life. Tyrannical power, in his opinion, dulls people, and grand promises of a beautiful future end with the imposition of worse and more evil masters. His statement that " unfortunately for people and fortunately for governments, man is so structured that there is always something to take from him " is a brilliant insight. Every tyrannical power is based on this. Even in the most difficult conditions, small gifts can turn an honest person into a traitor and informer. For Solzhenitsyn, the state is an insensitive, cold mechanism. It perverts one of the most important evangelical principles - in the state, the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing, which makes it a monster. The state is "shy" in its admissions of mistakes made. Those in power and those seeking power promise honesty, but when they get to power, they turn out to be mere scoundrels, driven only by their personal interests.
The most extreme are the shortcomings of state power in wartime. In the words of one of the characters in the novel, it “ puts everything that thinks under the legal power of stupidity.” Unusual for a convinced Orthodox person like Solzhenitsyn, it sounds like the statement that the Orthodox Church in Russia was unable to resist the state and as a result “ a country has emerged – one sided. A slave country!” The analogy with other Orthodox countries seems risky, but it is not without reason.
The Bolsheviks in Solzhenitsyn's book believe that universal equality, the lack of privileges in income and status are worth the sacrifices. They literally mean the presence of human victims to achieve the dreamed ideal. Dreams and nobility often justified the tendency to sacrifice the life, property and honor of others. The main character of the novel expresses thoughts about equality, which characterize not only the specific situation in the USSR in the 40s and 50s of the 20th century. According to him, equality and a full life are found " in every good pigsty ", and such equality cannot lead to the improvement of people's moral qualities. The words are startling and sobering to utopian thinking. Life in a pigsty is safe, somewhat orderly, devoid of the inconveniences of personal choice and freedom, but it is still life in a pigsty. And the pigs there are raised to be used ... as food for the masters.
Why is it important to read Solzhenitsyn?
Solzhenitsyn has never been undisputed and well-received by everyone. To this day, rumors spread about him, fabricated by the Soviet secret services to compromise him. His Russian nationalism and Orthodox faith distance him from the secular and pseudo-liberal West, which accepted him when he was expelled from the USSR in 1974. Still, Solzhenitsyn is among the intellectual heroes of the 20th century. Because of his morality, resilience and incorruptible talent in the face of the sinister model of socialism. And because in his works he makes observations and conclusions that are valuable not only for the past socio-political and economic system.
The novel "In the First Circle" is not entertaining and requires an investment of time to read and comprehend. But the encounter with Solzhenitsyn and the nuances of his political incorrectness are worth the effort. Only in this way can we ensure that his works are never banned again, as was the case in the USSR and in Bulgaria during the years of real socialism.
