Solzhenitsyn: The Insufficiency of Materialism
May 7, 2008 by Christian
We are now experiencing the consequences of mistakes which had not been noticed at the beginning of the journey. On the way from the Renaissance to our days we have enriched our experience, but we have lost the concept of a Supreme Complete Entity which used to restrain our passions and our irresponsibility. We have placed too much hope in political and social reforms, only to find out that we were being deprived of our most precious possession: our spiritual life. In the East, it is destroyed by the dealings and machinations of the ruling party. In the West, commercial interests tend to suffocate it. This is the real crisis. The split in the world is less terrible than the similarity of the disease plaguing its main sections.
If humanism were right in declaring that man is born to be happy, he would not be born to die. Since his body is doomed to die, his task on earth evidently must be of a more spiritual nature. It cannot unrestrained enjoyment of everyday life. It cannot be the search for the best ways to obtain material goods and then cheerfully get the most out of them. It has to be the fulfillment of a permanent, earnest duty so that one’s life journey may become an experience of moral growth, so that one may leave life a better human being than one started it. It is imperative to review the table of widespread human values. Its present incorrectness is astounding. It is not possible that assessment of the President’s performance be reduced to the question of how much money one makes or of unlimited availability of gasoline. Only voluntary, inspired self-restraint can raise man above the world stream of materialism.
~ Alexander Solzhenitsyn, “Havrard Commencement Address,” 1978
I remember reading this in the late ’90s when Clinton was being impeached despite overseeing relatively cheep gas, a balanced budget, and no wars. Reading this speech really muddied the waters for me. I thought it was so powerful. He spoke with such authority. But now I realize that there’s more to it. AS was coming from the philosophical materialism of Soviet Marxism into the material consumerism of the USA. Both are vacuous.
Am I missing something by not seeing the rest of the address? What say you Christian?
I don’t think you’re missing much. Although AS was very hard on Western liberals who are open to Marxism. He was very outspoken against Marxism and Terrorism and says that we need to be adamantly against both. But, he feels that we lack courage and character in the West and that we do not offer a viable alternative to the corruption of Soviet Communism.
Not sure if this was what you were after.