by Al Benson Jr.
Several years ago, in a market of all places, I got into what could be called a lively discussion about the demise, or lack thereof, of the Soviet KGB, Russia’s Committee of State Security. The young man on the other side of the discussion, who had lived in Russia, confidently told me the KGB had been disbanded and that was that—no more secret police after the Berlin Wall came down. I disagreed with him, which did not endear me to him. His claim to having lived in Russia was, no doubt true, but having read all that I have over the years, along with all the knowledgeable people I have talked with, convinced me that he, like many others, didn’t really know what he was talking about. He was only parroting an establishment line he had been fed and had never bothered doing any homework about the subject. Seeing that he worked for the market we argued in, a couple of his co-workers moved to restrain his “enthusiasm” about the subject, possibly afraid I might complain to the manager about him. I probably would not have, but they didn’t know that.
Like many people today, he had learned everything he thought he knew from television and the “news” papers. More informed sources, even today, disagree with him.
Lawrence Kohn, in an article on http://pjmedia.com for November 2, 2013, made a couple penetrating observations. He stated: “Vladimir Putin’s out-maneuvering of President Obama following the Syrian chemical weapons attack has led some to ask if Putin is reviving the Cold War purportedly won by the U.S. The question itself reflects a lack of understanding of the unbroken continuity of Cold War behavior by Moscow since the transition from the Soviet Union to the ‘new’ Russia. In Russia the KGB was never disbanded following the advent of the Yeltsin regime in December 1991 despite a number of name changes and reorganizations. The decision by the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) in December 1992 to substitute for the celebration of the first anniversary of the service the celebration of the 72nd anniversary of Lenin’s CHEKA reflected the unbroken continuity of the power and status of the Soviet secret police…The dramatic events between Gorbachev’s last year and Yeltsin’s first, portrayed world-wide on television, although exhibiting peculiar aspects such as Gorbachev’s ability to broadcast a video while under house arrest and the KGB coup plotters’ failure to cut Yeltsin’s communication lines, masked the strategic continuity between the Soviet Union and Russia.” In other words, folks, nothing has changed behind, or in front, of the Iron Curtain but the names. Changed names, same game.
Shaun Walker, writing in theguardian http://www.thegurdian.com for October 6, 2013 has observed: “The FSB is much more than just an ordinary security service. Combining the functions of an elite police force with those of a spy agency, and wielding immense power, it has come a long way since the early 1990s when it was on the brink of imploding. Today’s agency draws a direct line of inheritance from the Cheka, set up by Vladimir Lenin in the months after the Bolshevik revolution, to the NKVD, notorious for the purges of the 1930s in which hundreds of thousands were executed, and then the KGB. As the Soviet Union disbanded, the KGB was dismembered into separate agencies,…As the 1990s wore on the agency got back on its feet and in 1999 Boris Yeltsin asked its then director, Vladimir Putin, who had recently been catapulted into the top job after a career in the service’s lower echelons, to become prime minister. With Putin as PM and then president, much of FSB’s power was restored. Many of his former KGB colleagues ended up in senior positions in government or at the helm of state-controlled companies…” Like I said, the names change but the game stays the same. I wouldn’t expect my young Russian debater to have grasped all of this. It’s interesting, though, that these articles have all come out just last year, which shows that the KGB isn’t exactly dead news.
In recent months, I have read books by Arkady Shevchenko, Peter Deriaban, and Stanislas Levchenko—all ex-KGB case officers and all defectors from the Soviet Union to the free world. Years ago I read a book by Anatoli Granovsky called I Was An NKVD Agent and I read a couple written by John Barron, who worked for Reader’s Digest, on the KGB.
I mention all of these to make a point. And that is that, without exception, all of these men openly testify to the moral corruption of the Soviet secret police. The Russians that defected that I have read about had major problems with their consciences after years in the KGB. They got to the point where doing the subversive work they did literally made some of them sick—in soul as well as in body. That’s not to say that they were all totally virtuous. Like all human beings they were sinners and, at times, did some things they would have been better off not doing. However, even taking that into consideration, the climate they found in the KGB and in the Soviet Union in general was so completely corrupted that their consciences rebelled at some point and they could take no more. And, again, this is not to say that all American (so-called) security agencies are all as pure as the driven snow either, especially not in recent administrations. It seems that the more this country travels down the road to socialism the more corrupt we get here.
The late Presbyterian theologian, R. J. Rushdoony observed in this book Law and Liberty that: “Take away God’s standard of righteousness from the law, and you strip the law of justice and reduce it to anti-law. Without justice, the law becomes a form of theft. Stripped of justice, the law becomes an instrument of extortion and oppression in the hands of whatever group of men control it…And today, because God’s righteousness is despised, the nations of the world are becoming robber states and lands without justice…With socialism, or legalized robbery, the appetite for robbery is only increased.”
And Rushdoony continued: “As a result, while socialism calls itself the workers’ state, it is, in actuality a robbers’ state, wherein the robbers live off the workers and insist that the workers thank them for this new paradise! Nowhere are workers more oppressed than under socialism, and yet they are continually asked to hail, praise, and thank the thieves who live off them.” That’s the way it is under socialism and Marxism. Does any of that sound remotely familiar to the citizens of America? Rushdoony is not bashful about labeling socialism as theft and he is correct. Unfortunately in our less sane day, many Christians have been brainwashed into labeling it as compassion, which shows that they have been educated in such a way that they are not capable of telling the difference between liberty and slavery. It’s like “1984” has arrived and “freedom is slavery” and “less is more.”
Did Rushdoony do what many Christians today seem to be in favor of, accepting socialism as the new wave of “Christian compassion?” He most assuredly did not. In fact, he stated: “Basic therefore to every resistance to the criminal syndicate states are two things: first, personal faith in Christ as Savior, and, second, God’s righteousness as the foundation of civil order, of law, and of justice. Apart from this, we are merely fighting humanism with more humanism…” So Rushdoony recognized the fact that socialism should be resisted—a position that many Christians today would consider “unloving.”
And he recognized that when true justice is taken out of a court room, “that court simply becomes a political tool whereby one class oppresses another, and justice is replaced by injustice. This, of course, is the theory of Marxist law, for communism uses the law and the courts as a tool for the dictatorship of the proletariat and the oppression of all who in any way oppose, disagree with, or fall out of the favor of the totalitarian state.” So Soviet courts and law are the intended and end result of radical humanism. And this is why many rebel against them, and against a godless humanist system that uses its secret police and its military to promote a worldview that can only be considered anti-Christ.
So what can Christians do? For one thing, they can work to learn the truth about socialism and Marxism and then they can expose that truth to those willing to listen (Ephesians 5:11). They can learn to recognize socialism in this country when it rears its ugly head, often at the local level as well as the national level and they can oppose it where they find it. That might mean going to your local town council meeting and speaking out against the UN’s Agenda 21 program if it has been introduced into your area as it has in many places around the country. But, no matter what the Lord leads you to do (and if you are sincere, He will lead you) you need to always remember that you can only do it effectively in His strength and not your own.
I’ve never forgotten what a Presbyterian pastor told me awhile back when I told him I had some problems with loving my enemies. He knew who I meant and he said “You love them by opposing the evil that they do.” That’s a different answer than you get from most humanistically-trained Christians in our day, but it’s one I can identify with. The Marxists still run Russia and its secret police—no matter what they call them today. And we have the Marxists in this country also, many in Washington in positions of power, and they want to turn this country into the same “workers’ paradise” that Russia is and has been. The ultimate question there is, will the Christians let them? The answer to that is yet to be determined.