The Spiritual Basis for Good Government
Although most readers of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago draw strong political conclusions from it – for example, the evils and excesses of totalitarianism, the dehumanizing indoctrination, etc. – Solzhenitsyn himself denied that Gulag was a political statement. Instead, in Pauline fashion, he blessed prison for being a part of his life, because it led to a deep examination of his conscience, to a serious reflection on his weaknesses, and, as he put it, to a nourishment of his soul – and he considered Gulag to be a documentation of the process. Still, certain basic political implications of Gulag (and other of his works) are inescapable.
For example, when he said in no uncertain terms that the trials and problems confronting mankind are basically spiritual in nature, he was also saying, in effect, that political solutions are not the answer. Indeed, we can see in the present day that as government burrows (and borrows) further into the minutiae of our lives, most of its “solutions” for us are not only counterproductive but even harmful.
Another assumption made by most people who are familiar with Solzhenitsyn is that after leaving Russia in exile and living in the West for nearly 20 years (primarily in Vermont), he became an advocate of democracy. But this wasn’t true either. In his 1978 commencement address at Harvard, he stated that he could not recommend democracy for a post-communist Russia because of the crime, pornography, “vulgar music,” the inexorable pursuit of pleasure, and spiritual emptiness that he observed here. He said: “Through deep suffering, people in our country [Russia] have now achieved a spiritual development of such intensity that the Western system in its present state of spiritual exhaustion does not look attractive.”
Solzhenitsyn’s conclusion was that democracy and freedom fail because the people fall too easily into decadent ways. (He referred to democracy as “a surrogate faith for intellectuals deprived of religion.”) His preference was an authoritarian government that would keep order and minimize excesses. It would be, he said, a benevolent type of authoritarianism – one that would be non-despotic, non-ideological, and provide support for man’s spiritual quest. For example, he expressed admiration for Spain’s Franco, who governed with “firm tactics” but permitted basic freedoms and kept his country Christian in the face of moral decline in the rest of western Europe. Also, when he returned to Russia, he supported Putin early in the latter’s presidency.
What about his statement that democracy and freedom fail because the people fall too easily into decadent ways? More specifically, he makes the case that Americans have too much freedom – i.e., there are so many options and distractions that spiritual life is neglected – and therefore freedom needs to be reined in by a “benevolent authoritarian.” (Actually, the decadence in America is far worse now than during his 20 years in Vermont, which ended in the 90s.) Let’s examine his point.
Solzhenitsyn was surely naïve about whether an authoritarian government could continue to be benevolent long term, but he was right about the fundamentally spiritual nature of mankind – and its neglect. Trouble is, in virtually every society today, most people are non-believers or “weak” believers and too easily lose their spirituality (and themselves) in the material world. In today’s America, we who are believers need to deal with this basic issue, first by recognizing that there are no political solutions to what ails us as a nation.
Basically, we have God-given free will, and if we’ve heard the Gospel, we can choose to believe and thereby be free from sin – or we can choose to reject belief. That’s true whether we live in a libertarian society or we are imprisoned, like Paul – or like Chuck Colsen, who had to go to prison to gain that spiritual freedom. It’s a level of freedom that can’t be taken away by any government. Indeed, under our Constitution, it’s the government’s task to protect that freedom and its unobstructed exercise.
But freedom from the chains of sin through the Blood of Christ doesn’t mean you can then do anything you want (i.e., keep sinning). It means you are free to do good (holy) things that glorify God – things that help your neighbor, things that help your church and church family, and things that once embarrassed you (like sharing the Gospel). And that’s really the crux of the matter – this true freedom doesn’t happen without Jesus.
Of course, a non-believer would scoff: “What kind of freedom is that, where you can just do good things?” The answer is simple: if you are truly a believer in Jesus, good things are all you want to do – and every time you carelessly veer from that path you feel the need for repentance.
If all Americans were true believers in Jesus, democracy would work just fine – with a few general rules to choose leaders, guide the use of resources, etc. But our founders understood the inherent wickedness of men, particularly those not held in check by belief in our just God – and they wisely created a constitutional republic with checks and balances and a separation of powers. That was a time when the great majority of new Americans were believers. As we know, today only a minority of us are true believers, and some factions of our current government would like to stamp that out.
In conclusion, we point out that a telltale symptom of America’s spiritual malaise is the rise of godless socialism, with over 200 openly socialist candidates running for office at all levels of government in the upcoming midterms – compared with 54 in the 2024 elections. The results of all these races, especially at the national and state levels, will say much about how far we’ve fallen, and how fast.
Be sure to vote in this midterm – and start praying now for a nationwide Christian revival.
Norbert J. Kuk