A brief exercise in Soviet logic

[Publius]

The following exchange took place between Andrei Yanuaryevich Vyshinsky, chief state prosecutor, and Nikolai Ivanovich Bukharin, economic theorist and former general-secretary of the Communist International, in 1938, as quoted in Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago 1918 -- 1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation (p. 418, Harper & Row 1974 paperback ed.):

Vyshinsky: "Is it true that every opposition to the Party is a struggle against the Party?"

Bukharin: "In general it is, factually it is."

Vyshinsky: "But a struggle against the Party cannot help but grow into a war against the Party."

Bukharin: "According to the logic of things -- yes, it must."

Vyshinsky: "And that means that in the end, given the existence of oppositionist beliefs, any foul deeds whatever might be perpetrated against the Party?"

Bukharin: "But wait a minute, none were actually committed."

Vyshinsky: "But they could have been?"

Bukharin: "Well, theoretically speaking."

Vyshinsky: "But for us the highest of all interests are those of the Party?"

Bukharin: "Yes, of course, of course!"

Vyshinsky: "So you see, only a very fine distinctions separates us: in the interest of discrediting for the future any idea of opposition, we are required to accept as having taken place what could only theoretically have taken place. After all, it could have, couldn't it?"

Bukharin: "It could have."

Vyshinsky: "And so it is necessary to recognize as actual what was possible; that's all. It's a philosophical transition. Are we in agreement? ... Yes, and one thing more, and it's not for me to explain to you, but if you retreat and say something different during the trial, you understand that it will only play into the hands of the world bourgeoisie and will only do the Party harm. Well, and it's clear that in that case you yourself will not die an easy death. But if everything goes off all right, we will, of course, allow you to go on living. We'll send you in secret to the island of Monte Cristo, and you can work on the economics of socialism there."

Bukharin: "But in previous trials, as I understand it, you did shoot them all?"

Vyshinsky: "But what comparison is there between you and them! And then, we also left many of them alive too. They were shot only in the newspapers."

Note: Edited to clearly show who is speaking when.

Personally, this excerpt is singularly amusing and characteristic of absolutist and totalitarian thinking. Also of interest is the prevalence of this kind of thinking, if not this particular train of thought (few are ever so blunt with their obfuscatious "logic" as Vyshinsky, however).

There are no doubt many that see no flaws in Vyshinsky's argument about possibilities and facts. What in his thinking strikes you as being most egregiously offensive?

P.S. -- Nikolai Ivanovich Bukharin was shot in 1938. It was in the newspapers.

Publius

[SyntaxVorlon]

I'm not at all surprised at this. Though I am a communist, I believe that the USSR still had to much czarist philosophical baggage and ideological fallacies. This country was not industrialised to a modern state until Stalin used prison labor remember, and all the social advancements made by women and workers, the overall totalitarianism that pervades russian government throughout history still held back basic human rights. The same philosophies, though minimized, plague the Kremlin today. The Russians may have changed their structure around but with Stalin and subsequent leaders of the same style, remained(and remains) the nation of the Czars.

[kojikun]

P.S. -- Nikolai Ivanovich Bukharin was shot in 1938. It was in the newspapers.

Ahh, but only in the newspapers.

[Publius]

That, and in the base of the cranium.

[HemlockGrey]

Though I am a communist,

Sucks to be you.

[weemadando]

Though I am a communist,

Sucks to be you.

SILENCE! - You Imperialist Capitalist Swine!

Anyhow, as a friend put it: "When your a poor uni student, communism sounds great, but when you become a rich man, communism sucks arse."

[jegs2]

Communism works only for those who are in charge. Greed's a real bitch, ain't it?

[Enlightenment]

Communism works only for those who are in charge. Greed's a real bitch, ain't it?

Sounds just like the contemporary flavors of capitalism...

[Exonerate]

My friend's grandfather was a communist official in China or something...

[C.S.Strowbridge]

Though I am a communist,

Sucks to be you.

Good thing your argument is free from the burden of logic.

[Peregrin Toker]

There are no doubt many that see no flaws in Vyshinsky's argument about possibilities and facts. What in his thinking strikes you as being most egregiously offensive?

Vyshinsky appears to be incredibly paranoid about opposition to the communist party. No wonder Bukharin was executed the same year.

[jegs2]

Communism works only for those who are in charge. Greed's a real bitch, ain't it?

Sounds just like the contemporary flavors of capitalism...

...except for the fact that capitalism doesn't attempt to hide it's true nature...

[Enlightenment]

...except for the fact that capitalism doesn't attempt to hide it's true nature...

You mean the 'American dream' and other rabid rants about equal opportunity and the potential for the serfs to rise to the middle are nothing but my own halucinations?