Comment Home / Reviews & Opinions

Solzhenitsyn: Democracy Cannot be Legislated

The collapse of the Communist regime in the Soviet Union has unleashed great potential for the good of its long-suffering people. At the same time, these dramatic changes now underway in that vast collection of disparate republics also pose immense dangers. The danger signs are many and obvious, including an institutional vacuum due to the breakdown of the old regime; the flourishing of corruption, crime, and joblessness; the prospect of hunger; and general destitution in the absence of a functioning institutional basis for an orderly and civil society.

There is much soul-searching about the right way to rebuild the ruined institutions, especially those of governments. Solzhenitsyn has written a thought-provoking article about this subject in which he forcefully argues that democracy in Russia must have local roots and people to tend it.

Warning against the "ultimate peril" of anarchy, Solzhenitsyn reminds his readers that after three-quarters of a century of what he describes as "a cannibalistic period" and "a state of semi-barbarity," the solution will not be found in a hasty adoption of new government systems, nor by simply "adopting the way it is done in the West" as quickly as possible. While the entire state structure must be reshaped, Solzhenitsyn insists this rebuilding can only be done by careful, step-by-step measures. He makes the following points:

  • The destruction of souls by communism cannot be cleansed away without repentance by those who have devoted their lives and careers to serve an evil totalitarianism.
  • The future Russian union will need democracy. But democracy is accompanied by a tendency toward superficiality, manipulation, and abuses of many kinds. Therefore, it requires for its success a certain level of "political discipline."
  • Democracy cannot be established from above but must be established by patient and careful construction, beginning at the local level. It is at this level that voters can be informed and able to check on the character and performance of the elected officials.

The crux of this brief article by Solzhenitsyn concerns the truth that we in the West are in danger of forgetting. He reminds us that true freedom and a just society cannot exist merely by means of technical and structural changes. Instead, a just and free society depends on the moral and spiritual calibre of its people. Thus, democracy cannot thrive in the absence of a willingness to serve a greater good than our own selfish appetites.

Solzhenitsyn is a prophetic figure because he has understood the truth that has been cruelly suppressed under Communism for all these years. The danger facing the Western democracies is that the suppression of this truth is taking place here as well, although more gradually and subtly. Solzhenitsyn's message, summarized in the following quotation, is equally valid for the emergence of democracy in Russia as for its survival in the West.

The strength or weakness of a society depends more on the level of its spiritual life than on its level of industrialization. Neither a market economy nor even general abundance constitutes the crowning achievement of human life. If a nation's spiritual energies have been exhausted, it will not be saved from collapse by the most perfect government structure or by any industrial development: a tree with a rotten core cannot stand. This is so because of all the possible freedoms the one that will inevitably come to the fore will be the freedom to be unscrupulous; that is the freedom that can be neither prevented nor anticipated by any law. It is an unfortunate fact that a pure social atmosphere cannot be legislated into being. (Alexander Solzhenitsyn, "Our Own Democracy," National Review, September 23, 1991, p.44)

Could it be that Solzhenitsyn's observation about the indispensability of a "nation's spiritual energies" is very much pertinent to the present debate on constitutional reforms in this country? Something to think about.

Harry Antonides Harry Antonides
Harry Antonides is the founding editor of Comment. ... read more »


Add Your Comments


Copyright © 1974-2012 Cardus. All Rights Reserved.

| More

Feature Essays

  1. If Wishing Made it So: Teaching Students to Make Change

    May 14, 2012 | Gloria Stronks and Julia Stronks

    Parents and teachers want children to have the skills to make a difference. But what can we teach to help them survive their teen years, 20s, and 30s with convictions and charac...

Reviews & Opinions

  1. Do Not Open—No User Serviceable Parts Inside

    May 22, 2012 | David Greusel

    Why do so many of us have to work where the windows don't open? Engineers, architects, and lawyers have their reasons, but must workplaces be less humane than homes?
  2. Morality, markets, and Michael Sandel

    May 18, 2012 | Nick Spencer

    In Santa Ana in California prisoners can buy a cell upgrade. In Dallas, Texas, underachieving children are paid to read books. These are, alas, some of the saner and less offens...

Six Questions

  1. Saying "there is not enough time" is heresy

    May 2, 2012 | Stephanie Gehring

    SIX QUESTIONS . . . The new culture I am making is an attempt to say hold still and look at this.

Cardus Blog

  1. Plus ca change

    May 22, 2012 | Peter Stockland

    On today's 100th day of protests by Quebec students, Journal de Montreal columnist Richard Martineau offers a scabrous depiction of his province. Citing former Laval University ...
  2. Broken Union

    May 18, 2012 | Josh Reinders

    When the Quebec student protests started, my earliest feelings were of sympathy. These were fellow student, with whom I felt a kinship. Finally someone had taken up arms against...

Print Issue

  1. March 2012: Legacies
    Comment Magazine - Legacies Our culture does not know how to deal with legacies. We either treat the dead with some combination of awe and fear, or we think of our forebears as unworthy of remembrance, to ...