Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Charles Colson
Introduction
Two men, now deceased, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the Nobel Prize-winning Russian author and critic of the Soviet system, and Charles Colson, the once-infamous Nixon attorney who became a committed follower of Jesus argued that the West has forfeited its responsibility to uphold moral virtue. "When a government starts an earnest fight against terrorism, public opinion immediately accuses it of violating terrorists' civil rights." Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1978). Two powerful essays by two very different individuals have challenged humanity to reflect on their moral obligation.
Discussion
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
One of the most influential speeches of the 20th century was delivered by Solzhenitsyn at Harvard University's Commencement on June 8, 1978. Acknowledging Harvard's motto "Veritas", "Truth is seldom pleasant; it is almost invariably bitter." Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1978). Although his political references are somewhat antiquated (communism vs. the West), his cultural, social and moral critiques are as thought provoking today as they were a decade before the iron curtain fell. And he did not mince his words.
His message was deep and wide. He challenged the West's decline in courage and its legalistic life, short sightedness, loss of willpower and humanism. He even claimed "the press has become the greatest power within the Western countries, more powerful than the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. One would then like to ask: By what law has it been elected, and to whom is it responsible?" Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1978)
Some of his most sobering insights, though, came when he addressed the direction of freedom. "The defense of individual rights has reached such extremes as to make society as a whole defenseless against certain individuals. It is time, in the West, to defend not so much human rights as human obligations." Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1978)
Solzhenitsyn continued, "Destructive and irresponsible freedom has been granted boundless space. Society appears to have little defense against the abyss of human decadence, such as, for example, misuse of liberty for moral violence against young people, motion pictures full of pornography, crime and horror. It is considered to be part of freedom and theoretically counterbalanced by the young people's right not to look or not to accept. Life organized legalistically has thus shown its inability to defend itself against the corrosion of evil." Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1978)
Anyone who lives in a culture without an "objective legal scale" faces the dire unpredictability of its leaders. Solzhenitsyn experienced that under communism and called that society "A terrible one indeed" but he also said, " a society with no other scale but the legal one is not quite worthy of man either. Whenever the tissue of life is woven of legal relations, there is an atmosphere of moral mediocrity, paralyzing man's noblest impulses." Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1978)
He ended his speech by referring to the "disaster" that has befallen the West. He did not describe it as a world war disaster but rather "the calamity of a deprived spiritual character or influence and irreligious human consciousness." Even in 1978, he believed humanity had "approached a major turn in history." Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1978)
No wonder his essay generated a huge reaction. With a full and wide view of insight, Solzhenitsyn challenged that graduating class to accept its moral obligation.
Colson
Colson's challenge however must not be ignored. He stated "Humanity must be careful not to blame innocent Americans for murderous attacks against them. At the same time, let's acknowledge that America's increasing decadence is giving aid and comfort to the enemy. When humanity tolerates trash on television, permit pornography to invade their homes via the internet, and allow babies to be killed at the point of birth, humanity is enflaming radicals." M. Stoda & G. N. Dionisopoulos (2008)
No one person wants to think that any part of their American way of life could possibly hinder how humanity is perceived by other cultures. Humanity would like to think they are a beacon of light in a very dark world. And, in many ways they are. But in other ways, their way of life can be very dark. M. Stoda & G. N. Dionisopoulos (2008)
Humanity must not assume the problem is freedom. The problem is the effects of freedom without responsibility and without moral obligation. And when the West honors freedom but dishonors morality, some parts of their world get very upset. And so should humanity. Colson calls this matter of United States self-indulgence "an urgent priority." And he ends his essay with these words, "If our cultural deterioration continues unabated, the West may no longer be a joke but an ugly reality." C. W. Colson (1992)
Conclusion
In conclusion, Solzhenitsyn and Colson similarities was has been depicted as attempting to describe the line separating evil and good in the human heart, Solzhenitsyn and Colson also had this to say: "This line shifts. Inside humanity, it wavers with the years. Even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained; and even in the best of all hearts, there remains a small corner of evil. And only the Christian worldview gives humanity the ability to see things even human nature as they really are. And now in 2015, humanity needs to open their eyes and ears and ponder what they are seeing and hearing. Humanity has a moral obligation to respond.