Freedom, yes! And don’t forget the slaves in slave-state China

Friday, February 11, 2011   E-Mail this story   Free Headline Alerts

Lev Navrozov emigrated from the USSR in 1972.

About a week ago, I saw Russians in the United States watching a CNN live report from Egypt, showing chaos and scenes of unrest and uncontrolled violence between protesters (demanding immediate transition from autocracy to democratic freedoms) and pro-government supporters.

In his speech to the troubled nation, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak did not show any signs to immediately step down. All he promised was that he would appoint a new cabinet, would not seek re-election set for September, and would personally steer the nation to political changeover.

In Cairo, Mubarak’s half-concession speech was angrily rejected by the government protesters, who demanded that Mubarak step down immediately.

Let me remind you of what happened to the “October Revolution” of 1917 in Russia, after Stalin had eliminated all those who surrounded him and could challenge his dictatorial powers. What did Russia achieve under the tsars?

(1) Russian literature, which was valued by literati all over the world, minus poetry, which demanded the impossible effort of translation;

(2) Russian classical music;

(3) Russian painting;

(4) Scientific and technological discoveries of genius.

What has Russia lost? Everything it had achieved under the tsars.

Stalin was interested only in the latest weapons. Not to lose his power, he converted Russia into a closed space for the maintenance of all those born in Russia and treated as psychiatric patients, taught to believe that Stalin was God, whose way was the only way to keep Russia as a divine land.

Stalin died in 1953. Yet the preservation of Russia as a “land of divine miracles” continued.

Yes, Mao is said to have killed more human beings (80 million?) than did Stalin, but the population of China surpassed that of the United States by one billion people, while the population of Russia was never more than a quarter of it, and so Stalin’s killings were “thicker” than Mao’s.

The history of mankind is no mystery. A human being wants to live, which means to eat and not to perish from cold. In a slavery state, he or she achieves this by becoming a slave, though the word “slave” has now fallen out of use. There are slaves, as they were 1,000, 10,000 (or 100,000?) years ago, but to use the word is improper.

Under dictatorship, apart from slaves, not called slaves, there are male and female workers and “specialists,” some of whom are indispensable and paid accordingly.

Originally, the owner of a country owned at least part of its population as slaves, whatever word or silence was used to denote their status of being slaves. It had been assumed that certain pronouncements reflect the thoughts or even intentions of those from whom those pronouncements come, and if such pronouncements are penalized, they will disappear from the minds of slaves.

And here comes the paradox. In Great Britain, with its widest freedoms, the monarchy is reliably stable. The British know that no system of justice, no church, no monarch can accuse them of anything until and unless the accusation has been corroborated in court of law by witnesses under oath to say the truth, all the truth, and nothing but the truth.

This paradox of history is no less paradoxical than any other paradox. When slavery was a widespread national practice, the word “slavery” was used just like any other ordinary word. Now “slavery’ is a forbidden practice and is a forbidden word globally, and hence a forbidden practice may flourish without any derogatory meaning.

The forthcoming global battle for the ownership of the world will be between slavery led by the “People’s Republic of China” and the democratic countries.

If the world continues to be a mixture of democracies and tyrannies, wars will no doubt continue, for tyrannies will consider themselves more powerful until their power has been taken away from them by the democratic forces inside their respective countries. This final battle for the world will occur, the only question is when.

The future must be freeing of the world from evil dictatorial regimes, not its enslavement by the existing dictatorships.

   WorldTribune Home