Professor: Dr. Wilson

Arguments against the topic

Download 29.11 Kb.
Size29.11 Kb.
1   2   3   4   5   6
Arguments against the topic:

Team three members presented excellent critique papers stating that the Soviet labor camp and terror existed before Stalin’s regime. According to John, “Lighting never strikes from a blue sky. Stalin’s terror could not have existed without certain preconditions. First of all, terror had been part of the Leninist system from its inception. The Bolsheviks called the regime the “dictatorship of the proletariat” and believed that as revolutionaries they had to be hard and pitiless.” 1 They mainly focused that it would be impossible for Stalin to start the concept labor camp and gulag from scratch.

John further focused that there was flaw in communism and Stalinism was the blemish of communism. John said, “The first two symbols, the incompetent and poorly constructed wall, are symbolic of Marx, and the ideology of communism, are the direct attacks on the communist ideology. Here Solzhenitsyn is claiming the wall, communism, due to the incompetence of the builder, Marx, was fundamentally flawed from its inception. Consequently, any attempt to fix the fundamentally flawed from its inception. Consequently, any attempt to fix the fundamentally flawed wall, communism, would be futile. The final character in the passage, Ivan Denisovish, symbolizes the idealized Soviet worker during the revolution. Ivan, the ideal Soviet worker, is no naively blinded by a desire to prove his own handiwork he cannot see that the original wall, communism, was beyond saving. His efforts to mend the work of the incompetent mason are in vein. The wall’s exterior might have appeared straighter, sturdier, and renewed after houses of Ivan’s grease. But, the core of the wall, communism, has not changed, it is still based on the fundamentally flawed work of the incompetent mason, Marx.”2

Team three made another clam that Solzhenitsyn was not criticizing Stalin by his choice. He wanted his work to be published which made him to write against Stalin. Richard argues, “Solzhenitsyn openly wrote some elements to imply he was supporting Communism while criticizing Stalin, just enough to get the novel approved for publication. However, Solzhenitsyn used literary techniques such as symbolism, irony, metaphor, and simile to suggest without actually saying so that he opposed Communism, not just Stalinism.” 3

Team three further claimed that Alexander Solzhenitsyn was found guilty of picturing Stalin as a villain in his literary works. According to Jeff, “Solzhenitsyn had been proud of his position in the Soviet armed forces, experiencing the front lines during World War II. The camaraderie that the men shared was something that he welcomed, having never known his father who had died before Alexander was born. So it was both tragic and traumatic for Solzhenitsyn to be torn from the army and sent to a Gulag, having been found guilty of writing negative opinions about Stalin in a personal letter.”

They concluded that since there is nothing written about the Soviet Siberian labor camp created by Lenin and how it was functioned it was the fault of communism as a whole. Stalin just gave the continuation of existed labor camp.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6

The database is protected by copyright © 2020
send message

    Main page