Solzhenitsyn’s Damning History of the Jews in Russia – a Review
“The Jews accumulated wealth by cooperating with each other. (p. 31).”
“They made profits by taking the peasants’ grain to the point of impoverishing them (and causing famine), turning it into brandy, and then encouraging drunkenness. (p. 21, 24).”
“Jews forced peasants into lifelong debt and crushing poverty by requiring payment, in cattle and tools, for liquor. (p. 31).”
The translation of Solzhenitsyn’s book appears to have been done without permission from his family, and this might be why this lengthy and detailed review is no longer available on the page of the book on Amazon.com, where it originally appeared.
The book might disappear altogether from Amazon, so if you want to get your Kindle copy, act now. Otherwise you can find it on many sources on the internet.
The translator, Columbus Falco, describes the censorship of this book when it appeared in 2002:
“Published in the original Russian in 2002, the book was received with a firestorm of rage and denunciation from the literary and media world, from the Jews, and from almost the entire intelligentsia of the established order in the West…
Immense efforts have been made by the Russian authorities and also by the Western liberal democratic power structure to ignore 200 YEARS TOGETHER, to suppress it as much as possible, and above all to prevent and interdict the book’s translation into foreign languages, most especially into English, which has become essentially the worldwide language of our epoch…
The Russian authorities have to this date refused to allow any official English translation of the book to be published”. (p. 2).
CHARACTERISTICS OF SOLZHENITSYN’S MAGNUM OPUS
So what is so naughty, naughty about this book?
Most of it consists of unremarkable information that can be found in standard, non-censored texts. [For details, see comments.]
Agree with author Solzhenitsyn or not, but recognize the fact that he is no lightweight. Solzhenitsyn goes into considerable detail about many different historical epochs, and clearly has a deep knowledge of the issues that he raises. His approach is balanced. He is sympathetic towards Jews as well as critical of Jews.
The latter evident