On my Country and the World by Mikhail Gorbachev

 The departure of Mikhail Gorbachev yesterday remind us that there has been a time in which the western part of the world lived with relaxation the relations with Russia and that times were much better than not these ones.

That Gorbachev has been the key character of the process of liberation from the Communism it is true. 

There is also to add that, if we, part of the Western world have lived Gorbachev as a big hero, because he had set free its own population from a regime too strong and limitative, different has been the perception of Russians and part of the ex Soviet Republics. Most of that citizens will tell you that Gorbachev had demolished a great empire.

I know that these two perspectives are so different: that's why I invite you to read this book published by Columbia University Press On My Country and the World

written by Mikhail Gorbachev Foreword by William Taubman: this one is the 20th anniversary edition.

In the book Gorbachev introduces with clarity what it meant the October Revolution of 1917, seeing the process as a good step for the modernization of Russia. So, to him the revolution wanted by Lenin has been positive, also, where possible for the West part of the world. In another section it is taken in consideration his arrival and the goals of Perestroika. 

In an interesting chapter Gorbachev affirms that now it wouldn't be impossible a strong confrontation with States indepedendent like Ukraine because, writes Gorbachev "Would drag the Russian people and not only the Russian people, into bloodhsed."

Russia, to Gorbachev should search for another model seeing included of course in this new model Ukraine and other States: a sort of Federation of States, ending the chapter with this prophetic phrase: " A new Union can be created." 

Gorbachev affirms also that after the fall of the Communism there was an absence of new policies in grade to give answers to the international relations: it's difficult and it takes time to change a vision, but it was necessary to Gorbachev for the creation of a best and pacific world.

Gorbachev and arms: Europe became during the Cold War a place densely populated by the most diversified arms, and the main desire of the world at a certain point was the denuclearization of the world. 

Why this? Because these kind of arms never seen before the Nagasaki and Hiroshima's catastrophic results, appeared like the biggest phantom that needed to be defeated, although the race for always new weapons, including the nuclear ones, became an obsession for the USA and Russia: but Russia started a serious discussion on the topic: what to do? That weapons meant and means a real catastrophe for the world. 

Although a new approach with the rest of the world started to be searched from the latest years of the Stalinism, it was only at the beginning of 1980s that Russia decided to research for peace, constructive dialogue with the rest of the world: it was researched a solidariety passing through solid relationship in grade to set the world free from nuclear threats , suspicion, fear, animosity, writes Gorbachev. 

What it was indispensible to do was a relaxation of relationship with the USA: both the countries and their allied had to live a beautiful life, avoiding nuclear war and, writes Gorbachev "in guaranteeing the security of both countries, of preserving life itself for our respective people". Sure, each country had to preserve proper tradition and customs: a real change shouldn't involve the authenticity of customs, because, writes Gorbachev: "Each Nation has the right to live as it wishes. There is no other alternative." 

Building bridges meant construction from both sides. 

What anyway was done at first with the Warsaw Act (between Soviet Union and its allied) in 1985 implied a profound change: for the first time Russia emphasized principles of independence, equality and non interference in one's another internal affair. Something new, although some countries lived pretty skeptical this new decision considering that in the past Russia used in Czechoslovakia the strength for taming the population. 

But Gorbachev, was a genuine visionary. He thought that "Humanity and civilization must survive. ...This can be ensured only by learning lo live together, to get along side by side on this small planet by mastering the difficult art of considering one another's interest."

Splendid words!

In an interview in the Pravda, the official newsmagazine of Moscow, Gorbachev invited at a moratorium of the most dangerous arms, thinking also to build a Common European Home, thanks to cooperation and peaceful relations with every European country.

On July 30 the moratorium on nuclear testing, started on August 6 1985 asking to the US to do the same.

Sometimes decisions taken by Moscow were just unilateral, but in most cases the USA followed the good example of Moscow.

On climate changes, Gorbachev had clear idea 20 years ago and more: "Prognosis differ regarding the number of years remaining before worsening global problems, especially environmental probems, become catastrophic....The human race has only decades, not centuries to resolve its global problems. ...Delay or refusal....could lead to the gradual extinction of humanity."

Unfortunately, if there are realities pretty good in the world, "politicians are yet behind science" writes Gorbachev. 

Progress unfortunately, if helped the human race, viceversa has created problems because of the massive abuse of natural resources as if the man would be the king of the world and these resources can't be used forever. 

Gorbachev, was also convinced that the human drama and the drama of nature should be of equal concern to us, and it is true. Old people here said that when environment is under stress man can't find peace.

Peace in Europe to Gorbachev 

"A joint future or peace won't never exist at all. A reliable basis for such coooperation exists in the common roots of European culture and a common history, as well as an undeniable common interest in peace and stability, adding that a joint future and continent wide-security require above all, profound and widely ramified cooperation on a Europe-wide basis in the main spheres of life."

Well, this one was a wise man. I have always appreciated Gorbachev. I lived him as a western person,happy to see Eastern countries more relaxed. I understand also the point of view of Eastern people.

May the words of Gorbachev resonates strongly: this man was a  Russian with a clear vision of interconnession between Russia and Europe and the USA because of the beauty and survival of the world: someone who thought that decisions had to be taken by the main protagonists for keeping the world a safe place where to live in: a man who had clear in his mind that climate changes needed to be resolved. A man who truly loved this old world and had a clear vision of what he wanted: a best world for everyone.

It's shocking that we are returned in a Cold War.

I just hope that it will end soon for the good of Humanity.

The writing-style of Gorbacev is pretty Russian: so, it is calm, meditative, he doesn't rush, but wants to be absorbed by the reader. This book can be read by everyone and I highly suggest it to everyone. If you lived when Communism fell, you will remember the joy of that moment in our part of the world: if, differently you have been born after that fact, you will read a wonderful book written with the heart by the man who tried to change the world for better.

Let's also add that Gorbachev was a pacifist, and that he aborred every kind of use of arms.

I thank Columbia University Press for the physical copy of the book.

Anna Maria Polidori 

 

Yara!

There are  three children's books by Yossi Lapid pretty discounted these days because of the Amazon Rainforest Day thus September 5: they are the three books written and illustrated on Yara, a little indigenous of the Amazon Forest.

Written by Lapid and illustrated by Joanna Pasek, they are extremely beauty because of the splendid messages addressed to children in every book. 

We all know the cruciality of the Amazon Forest, the lung of the world, devastated by horrible actions of men, who, just for business are killing the forest and well, themselves and ourselves.

Said that, in these children's books there are stories that will let think a lot children and adults. 

In the first children's book, Yara's Tamari Tree,

we see our little heroine saving a tree, pretty important and rare for the forest: after few years from this event Yara falls sick. She will be cured with the material taken from the tree she had planted. 

In this case we see that having close to us a lot of trees can be of crucial importance for our existence. 

In the second children's book called Yara and Purr, Y

ara will discover somewhere a little monkey who had lost his father, wounded somewhere. The little monkey driven by Yara will find his father with great relief. The existence of these monkeys in general is pretty good, but sometimes there are obstacles or incidents because of the most diversified reasons. It is a joyous children's book, with stunning, paradisiac illustrations. The tale focuses in the joy, happiness of a life well-spent: for using the words by Yossi 

Deep in the jungle,

where the river turns east,

A small group of monkeys

are having a feast.

They are purring together,

their life is so good,

They are safe and content

in their beautiful wood.

It's the meaning of the existence. 

The third children's book will let us think a lot. Yara and the Yellow-Headed Parrots is a story of necessity, read by Yara with great versality.

You know: there are horrible men who would want to buy also special and pretty rare animals. One day, a young man with a kid in need, he suffered of an important ilness but he didn't have money for curing him, spotted this nest of rare birds, and thought that if he would have captured and later sold to someone these parrots he would have been in grade to buy with the money made, medicines, pills to his kid.

Yara discovered the young man and started to talk to him. She suggested him another person, an healer: she would have resolved the problem of his kid, leaving alone the parrots, so beautiful and precious.

The young man agreed that this one was the best thing to do, saving his kid and at the same time the existence of these parrots, pretty rare at the moment in the Amazon Forest.

Three children's books this ones plenty of joy, freedom, happiness: that happiness in strong fusion with nature, forest, and connection with wild animals and healers, special people in deep connection with the forces of nature: children's books at the same time with strong messages vehicoled with lightness and a good smile so that children will learn that, if the world is so beauty, as seen in these books (oh, believe me, they will fall in love for the Amazon Forest) it will be important to keep it...Beautiful, don't you think so?

Highly recommended!

I thank Yossi for the copies of the books.

Anna Maria Polidori 

La Vita Fuori di Sé by Pietro Del Soldà

 Every book by Pietro Del Soldà is tremendously interesting. In this new book published by Marsilio La Vita fuori si sé

Una filosofia dell'avventura, the meaning of adventure in the existence of human beings seen with the eyes of old and more recent thinkers.

An adventure defines a specifical moment of our life: it has a beginning and an end: it is crucial what there is in the between: adventures creates new worlds, new meetings, new sensations and new experiences. Adventures are the ones that will make the difference after all in the enterity of our existence because thanks to them we learn. 

What there is to break is the sense of normality, repetitivity that most of us research to find some certainty: this one is an error. Men, every man should be more corageous and should try to launch himself in many always new adventures.  

What is an adventure? The possibility to find again the essence of ourselves: it is discovery. 

The launch into the unknown: oh, wonderfully brutal! like the one of the reporter from Polland, Ryszard Kapuscinski: there was still the Communism and no one could travel with freedom in Europe. Oh, but, yes, Ryszard was so curious. Every time he was close to a border he fantasized on the land that there was close to him: I understand him. When we visited Prague in 1989 we lived it genuinely as the best adventure of our life-stile, understanding that this one was a special trip into the unknown and still, it is the strongest experience I have every lived with a trip. 

Ryszard was curious. Curious to see the rest of the world: it was wonderful: he afforded per few hours in Rome, finding that he was inadeguate for the place: his clothes, his character, everything (and discovered a man who donated him some clothes more close to our society): then went in India! But there is also another story, the one of Hugo Barine and his fights for the poorest ones of his country. It didn't end well.

Covid-19 changed the perception of the house lived now as a nest, as a protective place where to stay and where there are not dangers: the outside world is lived like a jungle. The ecommerce attracted a lot people who tended to buy a lot of stuff during the lockdown ad they are still continuing. But...It is not the best behavior, this one admits Pietro. People should escape from their comfort zone for trying constantly new adventures. After all, in this phase, world is not boring at all, unfortunately.

A book with many more reflections from Plato, to Erodoto, passing through Georg Simmel and many more.

Let's pretend to live adventures: after all, they are the salt of the existence!

Highly recommended book.

I thank Marsilio for the physical copy of the book.

Anna Maria Polidori 

Aliocha by Henri Troyat

 Oh, you'll cry, reading Aliocha

by Henri Troyat, believe me, you will. This book is in fact a story of a friendship between two teen-agers, 14 years and the beauty that a good friendship can brings in the life of people.

Alexis is Russian and he is in Paris with his parents, Georges Pavlovitch and the mother, Helen Fedorovna. They escaped away after the Russian Revolution and they have lost more or less everything. They live in a little house, and they don't have anymore a lot of money as in the past. Alexis when in Russia, studied french thanks to a  private teacher: once arrived in Paris becomes a passionate of french culture and literature. He is so good, that, one day, once returned home he tells to his parents that he is one of the best ones of his classroom. But their parents are worried because of what they are seeing. They hope that the departure of Lenin will bring back a government similar to the one that there was before the advent of the Bolschevic and they can return home:  of course it's not said.

Alexis is pretty hurted and irritated to see his parents lost in a distant past, distant country and where possible, distant problems and culture. In France they have everything: there is a musical language, there are books written by so many remarkable authors, great food: why eating continuously russian food, reading russian books? Oh, it's intolerable!

In his same classroom there is a tender, cute, sweet teenager Thierry Gozelin. He is so rich, lives in a  beautiful house, but mainly, he is a beautiful mind. Thierry has read much more than not what done by  Alexis: Alexis starts to exchange ideas on authors and books with him and Thierry finds Alexis interesting. So interesting that one day he asks him if he wants to spend some time with him to his house.  The two friends have a loyal confrontation regarding russian literature: Alexis, called Aliocha by his parents, rejects with all himself russian language, literature, food, religion... Simply because enough is enough and the past is over. He is irritated to see that not just his parents but also the Russian friends of his parents are researching their past in a different country. 

To Thierry the point of view of the friend is not correct: after all, being an emigrated means having a priviledged point of view: and plus, he shouldn't forget Russian: Russian literature is beautiful. Thierry asks to Alexis if he has read War and Peace by Tolstoi. Alexis replies, no: Thierry will tell him that, yes, maybe the book is not properly short, but deserves the reading, and if read in Russian would be better.

To Alexis this requests, this simple idea is unthinkable. Once arrived the summer-time the teenagers will spend some time together in vacation. Alexis really enjoys the time spent with Thierry. Thierry knows his destiny and he is pretty disenchanted regarding his future, distant or close, but accepts his limitation with the joy of his age and the wisdom of his soul.

Unfortunately during the vacations the first signals of a deterioration of the health condition of his friend. Alexis returns to Paris and thanks to letters he continues to describe to his friend what it is going on, what he is reading and when school starts, what it is going on at school as well. If at first Thierry answers back immediately, later tells to his beloved best friend that he is too sick to write properly a letter. 

Then, one day, Alexis finds her mother sat in the kitchen with an opened letter in her hands, and tells him that Thierry is dead. The shock for Alexis is great, and days and months passes by without any importance. He has lost the best friend of all the Earth, the one with which exchanged opinion on literature and readings, and sunny funny facts of a daily base.

Friendship also when interrupted brings seeds of love, and one day Aliocha notices three tomes of War and Peace, written by Tolstoi and in original language. He brings them in the kitchen. His parents are curious: Aliocha hasn't never manifested the desire to understand their culture: does he wants to read that book?

Yes, replies Aliocha, in Russian. Exactly as Theirry would have wanted from him. 

Anna Maria Polidori 

Le Jardin Merveilleux by Pavel Cech

 Le Jardin  Merveilleux

by Pavel Cech published in the french version by Grund.fr  is a children's' book that I recently bought online. Oh, the story is simply wonderful but, where possible illustrations are more divine than not the story. They are in grade to transport you in different ages, beautiful places, narrating a story that it is simply, simply enchanting. Julien is little, loves fantasy, and the discovery of material in grade to transport him in a different world. Using also marbles he can looks at a diversified and more colored reality. But more than playing with schoolmates, more than using marbles or old books, what fascinates him is the discovery of the old part of his city. And once, exploring the old part of the city, he notices an hidden place bringing him to a garden plenty of wonders. A garden with a sad history behind as told to Julien his granny...Once grow up Julien leaves his city, big, modern and old for the big world, but the curiosity for that magical garden remains in his soul and when old, with a solid position decides that it is time for trying to see if the garden is still there. Yes, there is, but everything is changed and silent. Old Julien returns home discomforted. While he leaves, a little kid of Julien's same age notices a door bringing him to an illuminated garden, where he discovers plenty of fascination a magical world.

Oh, what a children's book. If you can buy this one for your children it's the best of the best! I can assure you!

Anna Maria Polidori 

The Idiot by Fedor Dostoevskij

 One of the most important and controvertial classics of Russian Literature, The Idiot by Fedor Dostoevskij

must be read for the intensity expressed on thematics regarding life, existence, church, and much more and for that controvertial pact that there is between two men, when in love for the same woman. 

It's a book rotating on the character of the Prince Myskin, returned to Russia after a long time spent in Switzerland for curing his epilepsy. A thinker, in particular, the prince expresses with great strenght ad originality his ideas and immediately arrived in Russia falls in love for the disgraceful but beauty Natas'ja Filippovna. 

This girl grown up by a sort of tutor, is not a saint:  she understands the beauty, ingenuity and good heart that there is in the prince, embracing him, illuding him but at the same time living conflictually her feelings for him.

She wouldn't want in fact to love him, but her idea is to save him from...her. 

She is not for him, she thinks: she is a disgraceful girl: where, the prince could go with her? 

Natas'ja is also in love for Rogozin, a pretty obscure man with which Myskin will exchange a beautiful, beautiful dialogue at a certain point, and where the two, will exchange their crosses, embracing a common destiny and a common faith regarding the Filippovna. 

Your pain will be my pain: your cross will be my cross, said this exchange of objects.

The Prince doesn't love the idea that Natas'ja escapes away with Rogozin. Rogozin is not clear, he lives in a sad, mysterious house, plenty of sadness: does she want this destiny for her?

But...Having chosen Rogozin, the prince at first will ask to Aglaja Epancin if she wants to become his wife. Aglaja is another conflictual girl. She starts to receive letters in fact from Natas'ja where Natas'ja asks her to accept the court of the Prince, marrying him. Aglaja appears confused for the words used by Natas'ja, with which later, and for very different reasons, the prince will break-up the relationship with her, preferring to the Epancin Natas'ja Filippovna, she will live a direct, and strong confrontation.

Oh, the prince is so happy that he will marry the Filippovna, the woman of his life. Everything is ready for the marriage: the day is arrived. The prince thinks that maybe something horrible can happens: the Filippovna ready for going to the church will see the eyes of Rogozin somewhere, asking him to save her.

And, oh, yes, Rogozin saved her: he brought her in his house, for then killing her.

Why this? Because of his aeternal jealousy against the prince. The prince understands that something horrible happened in the while. He knows Rogozin and the horrible profoundity of his houl projected at the killing of Filippovna, as also guessed by the same Natas'ja in several passages, by the prince and the same Rogozin. He waits and waits, till at the moment in which Rogozin brings him home, letting him show the lifeless body of Filippovna and explaining him how he killed her, adding also that there hasn't been a great dispersion of blood. Yes, there are comical passages in tragedies as well. The prince hugs Rogozin, starting to caress Rogozin. Both in tears and desperate: the police men will find them in that conditions. 

The prince's good health will precipitate and will return forever in Switzerland without to recover anymore.

Why reading this book?

Because it will let you think. It's also a story of an assassination.

The beauty mentioned by Fedor is not the common external beauty, but the beauty emerging in the character of Myrkin, the prince. Myrkin is under many ways the mirror of the beauty: it's a beauty this one passing through the beauty of a soul: it is synonime also of pain, sufferance and it is not this one a beauty used as a tool of visibility: everyone of course researches beauty, and so the company of the prince, although the prince with his originality of thinking will create a lot of internal conflicts in these people of the russian elite, with ideas pretty accepted and solid, putting in them where not sufferance, conflict and doubts.

This one is also the beauty of the acceptance of the horror. 

Yes, because....The prince knows what could happen to Filippovna because of the tremendous jealousy of Rogozin: Rogozin knows that probably will kill her: Natas'ja imagines it: and no one will be in grade, let me add and underline this point, to avoid this murder: a series of personal choices and events will bring the protagonists at this final and crucial point of no return. 

And here we insert another thematic dear to the writer: the one of compassion. In Dostoevskij there is not the solidity of law that can heal the pain of what committed, no: there is only compassion: compassion as co-participation of the pain lived by the protagonist of the horrible murder, caressed by the same prince in tears, for what he had done. 

It's a book this one, that, story apart, for the profoundity of the thematics treated thanks to the dialogues of the prince with the rest of the protagonists of the story will open your brain! 

Anna Maria Polidori 

 

On Stalin's Team The Years of Living Dangerously in Soviet Politic by Sheila Fitzpatrick

 On Stalin's Team

The Years of Living Dangerously in Soviet Politic by Sheila Fitzpatrick is a new book by Melbourne University Press of great actuality.

In this book it is taken in consideration not just Stalin but also all that people with which he interacted with: a team who made the difference. 

Most people think that Stalin had taken largely the final decisions alone, and in part it was true: but every decision was also shared and discussed by Stalin with his team of trusted people. Which was the main difference between Mussolini, Hitler and Stalin? 

Stalin didn't want to operate alone, as the other two dictators did, specifies the author. No: he interacted largely with these trusted people: they weren't in contrapposition with him of course, but each of them occupied specific fields and with great competency.

Every issue was discussed with Stalin, who tended to organize meetings, but also informal encounters with them all.

During the decades of power of Stalin some of these members died: one, replacing a member of the team was Khrushcev.  

The final years were hallucinating and Molotov and Mikoyan saved their skin because of the death of Stalin as we will see later.

The team from a certain time at that part talked largely of the post-Stalin: also, with a certain worry. What would have happened? But the team had prepared the succession of Stalin and so the transiction after all hasn't been so traumatic: the writer underlines, for the Russian standard. 

There is to add that after Stalin's death, the team decided to remove, physically remove, Beria, because of his ambition.

Stalin was at the same time charming and cruel writes the author: Fitzpatrick defines in this biography in particular Stalin and his men, looking at the dictactor through the eyes of his own team. These people were scared and fascinated at the same time by their leader. 

Everything started with Lenin and his Bolshevik current, in grade to defeat the one created by Trosky. Lenin was one of the ones who decided for the extermination of the Romanov. He hadn't never forgotten that once the tzar had killed one of his brothers.

At that time the character of Stalin was still hidden by other people close to Lenin.Lenin had spent the years before the war in Europe, Italy as well, with other people who would have later driven the revolution with him. 

The years of Lenin weren't long. He suffered of several stroks in 1922: survived in poor conditions other two years but for sure who took decisions were the members of the Politburo, so for naming someone Trotsky, Stalin, Zinoviev, Kamenev. 

Stalin became general secretary of the party. Lenin in the while, also if infirm, tried to let know his voice: Stalin and Trotsky were the most powerful and able men, but Stalin appeared to him too rude for being secretary of the party. Once dead in 1924, what it was done was not to create factionalisms: Trotsky at the end was pretty marginalized. 

Stalin became the new leader: plenty of ego and in love with several women, his team wasn't too diversified: it was composed mainly by Russians: there was a lack of intellectuals,  and no Jews.Two of the members of the teams that we want to remember for different reasons were Molotov and Voroshilov: the second born in Ukraine in a very poor family, worked in the Donbass mines when he was 10 years: at 15 years worked in a factory and when 17 joined the Revolutionary movement and then the politician career. Trotsky and his men continued during the years an opposition but there wasn't anything to do: Trotsky was forced to leave forever Russia for Turkey: although the country loved a lot was Germany, Germany refused to help him.

Once Trotsky over, it was clear something: that that men had an immense power in their hands. Just them. And Stalin so thought that a revolution was the best thing to do: it was in fact necessary to build a socialist system in the shortest possible time, accellerating also the process of industrialization.

Anyway, problems for Stalin and his team were different ones: in 1928 grain although aboundant fell fall below expectations.

Stalin in a trip in Siberia concluded that the only thing to do was to use the force to get the grain out of the villages. It was the beginning of strong repressions that meant the forced collectivization: for the peasants it means less and less money but forced grain deliveries.

If people tried opposition, they were deported. Five million of peasants during this period were deported. The State fought also against priests. They were massively arrested. This battle started in 1928 ending up only 5 years later. Being pretty firm in this battle, the rest of the team fell admired for their own leader. The process of industrialization necessary because Stalin felt a lot of competition with the western part of the world.

Exportation of grain became an important voice in Russia. Of course there were people who tried to sabotage Stalin: if Stalin had problems with peasants, priests, in the cities, the main problems were intellectuals.

Ukraine gave problems and there was a certain embarassment in taking strong measures against engineers seen as that part of bourgeois not loved by people because Kaganovich thought that the central government of Ukraine could be considered too lax. 

But internal problems for Stalin were also others: some of the people of his team, the right part, started to protest, and simply Stalin couldn't permit it.

Anyway, later after the Cultural Revolution, Stalin searched the most students, Communists, proletarians.

The chapter three maybe it is the most beautiful one because describes Stalin and his men privately: what they loved to do in their free time, sports, etc, their wives, children and much more.

In the while, in the Soviet Empire during the 1930s celebrations passed also through the reintroduction of uniforms and decorations and a new folklore associated to Stalin was borning: several foreign intellectuals fell fascinated by him. 

An example? H.G. Wells who wrote that he hadn't met any other man more decent and honest: although the big, great and good impressions received Wells anyway remained skeptical regarding the repression and violence used in Russia. This success with a lot of reporters, intellectuals of the Western countries had been lived very well and with suprise by Stalin and the rest of his team, considering the sense of inferiority felt with foreigners when they had to deal with them.

Plus Stalin and the team didn't speak at all any foreign language and it meant a lot to them. Stalin tried, but strangely didn't learn any language fluently. He did some short trips in Western Europe, but brief moments that couldn't make a great difference. Something that must be signaled: the languages that Stalin would have wanted to learn included esperanto as well. 

Spies and fear of them were a problem for Stalin and the others, diffident of that west part of the world that they didn't know too much and that they considered sometimes hostile: the problem became serious when Polland spied Ukraine during the years of the famine like also the idea of attacks from foreigners countries.

When some members of the team had to attend cures,treatments, they went in western countries like Switzerland, Stalin included, sometimes: these visits in the west part of the world had to be approved.

Western journalists sometimes were considered spies, but there is also to say that Stalin and his team were also affectionated to most of them and they wanted to do good impression: an example is the Paris Exhibition of 1936: everyone was impressed by Russia and its talents!

Stalin of course continued to feel a lot of competition against the West, desidering the collapse of that system because of its own contradictions, loved to saying. 

In 1935 Russian grain in doubt for Italy because of the Abyssinian war. Stalin said speaking about Italy and France vs. Germany and England: " The stronger the quarrel between them will be, the better for the USSR. We can sell grain to both of them, so that they can quarrel. It's not in our interest that now one of them beats the other. It's in our interest that their quarrel is as long as possible, but without a quick victory for one or the other." 

Russia tries its best for being an integral part of Europe. For example with the Spanish Revolution. An intellectual wrote to Stalin: it was necessary an anti-fascist organization.

Another beautiful initiative organized was the Congress of the Defence of Culture in Paris in June 1935, attended by Foster, André Gide, Aldous Huxley, Bertold Brecht, Walter Benjamin, with Russian writers as Isaac Babel, Ehrenburg and Boris Pasternack, in this case a non-communist one.

Plus European intellectuals were invited in Russia to see "The Soviet Experiment" and a lot of them afforded there. George Bernad Shaw, as remarked in the book by Sigizmund Krzhizhanovsky Countries that Don't Exist by Columbia Press, appreciated Stalin a lot; then to Russia also the sisters Webbs, André Gide, Paul Robeson from the USA. Most of these intellectuals remained enchanted by what they saw, and by the same Stalin, so, apart a critic, and the removal of the final part of the work by the Webbs, at first: Soviet Communism: a New Civilization? (became Soviet Communism) inviting intellectuals of other countries who didn't know the Communism was a big success.

Stalin would have continued to be a patron of intellectuals, writers and artists.

Internally, Stalin had to cope in the 1930s with the great purges, that meant a moment of great tension in the country. Not just unknown people were arrested, but also personal friends of Stalin's team, and no one survived in the Trotsky family remained in Russia: also the first wife of Trotsky was killed. Oh, in the while Trotsky was now in exhile in sunny Mexico.

Time passed by and the last World War was approaching. If at first Russia looked with curiosity at what was going on, then seeing that certain territories of their interest were under the lenses of Hitler, they decided to enter in war. It was a brutal war, but at the end Russia and USA became the most powerful winners and the world became  divided in two blocks: one democratic and another one, Communist.

Molotov started to be known and appreciated after the second world war conflict. Many russian politicians travelled in the world for being known; Stalin did it, as well.

If the members of teams didn't speak any foreign languages, they tried to give a best education to their own children although results not always exceptionals. 

In 1945 the first heart attack of Stalin, and the first discussion on succession, something that, naturally soon or late would have happened. Stalin, with the years tended to spend always much more time in the South of the Soviet Empire because sick: he was also becoming old. When Novikov, an Ambassador of the USA, returned to the USA, told that Stalin was ageing and that these big responsibilities on his shoulders became too many. Personal tragedies and his loneliness didn't pay. 

He became irrational, requesting things that couldn't be done for the good of the country: no one listened to him and so he gave up, understanding maybe that he was weak. There was a very dangerous heavy attack in 1952 against Molotov and Mikoyan considered too close to the USA. There was great panic. These members and friends tried their best to meet Stalin again but, simply, the leader was losing his mind and considered with a certain hate also people of his own family!

The end of Stalin created the condition for the beginning of a new era marked by Khrushchev.

I personally hadn't read any books on Stalin, like also I haven't read any books on Hitler, Mussolini or other dictators, but I admit that I really enjoyed reading this book. Written taking in consideration the point of view of Stalin, first of all it was possible thanks to the author, to investigate his existence, his choices, in decades crucials for Europe and Russia. Plus, I found absolutely urgent the reading of this book because of what we are experiencing. In part I modified my schedule because of the European war that we are experiencing. The understanding of countries, their thoughts, can create the possibiliy for a return to a frank dialogue.  

I am so sorry with you Melbourne Univeristy Presss for the long delay but reading a pdf with the big heat we experienced was impossible. I will absolutely accept next time the physical copy! 

Highly recommended book! A book for everyone, clear, simple.

Anna Maria Polidori