What do you think?
Rate this book
The White Pill: A Tale of Good and Evil
The Russian Revolution was as red as blood. The Bolsheviks promised that they were building a new society, a workers’ paradise that would change the nature of mankind itself. What they ended up constructing was the largest prison that the world had ever seen, a Union of Soviet Socialist Republics that spanned half the globe. It was a country where people's lives meant nothing, less than nothing—and they knew it. But no matter what atrocity that the Soviets committed—the secret police, the torture chambers, the show trials, the labor camps and the mass starvation—there was always someone in the West rushing to justify their bloodshed. For decades it seemed perfectly obvious that the USSR wasn’t going anywhere—until it vanished from the face of the earth, gradually and then suddenly. This is the story of the rise and fall of that evil empire, and why it is so important for the good to never give up hope. This is the white pill.
371 pages, Kindle Edition
First published December 3, 2022
About the author
Michael Malice
14 books2,864 followersMichael Malice is the author of
The White Pill,
The New Right,
The Anarchist Handbook,
and
Dear Reader: The Unauthorized Autobiography of Kim Jong Il.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 145 reviews
March 13, 2024
Michael Malice’s The White Pill gives us a backstage pass to the rise and fall of the Soviet Union. Unfortunately, the moral degradation we discover in that far-flung realm is far from uplifting. Hell, at one point the Soviets began prosecuting children as adults just so they could ship teenagers off to the Siberian prison camps. A communist paradise indeed.
From Lenin’s revolution in 1917 to the demolition of the Berlin wall in 1989, The White Pill is the story of what happens when an idealistic young government makes promises it can’t deliver on.
--------
I originally published this review on my Substack The Unhedged Capitalist - check out that article to read this review with images and better formatting...
https://theunhedgedcapitalist.substac...
--------
Stage 1 - The Promise
To err is human, to really screw up you need a government.
In 1917 Vladimir Lenin was exiled in Switzerland where he might have remained indefinitely had it not been for the Germans. General Ludendorff, Kaiser Wilhelm’s top military official, cooked up a plan to send the provocative Lenin back to Russia. Ludendorff hoped that Lenin would cause enough internal chaos that Russia would be forced to withdraw from the war, leaving Germany to relocate all her soldiers to the western front.
Only rarely has the action of a single German been more impactful. By the law of accessory to a murder, it could be argued that by schlepping Lenin back to Russia Ludendorff indirectly enabled one of the worst human rights atrocities in history. Well done lad.
Once home, Lenin began agitating for the Marxist revolution and he quickly gained support. According to Marxist dictates; poverty, privation and perpetual pecuniary were caused by the wealthy exploiting the working class. It followed that with Lenin operating the government according to Marxist principles, conditions for poor Russians would be greatly improved. How would the new government actually work in practice? Here’s the model I use to understand the Marxist’s claim.
A Russian manufacturer (I.e. a bourgeois money grubbing capitalist) sells a widget for ₽100.
₽20 pays for labor
₽20 pays for the raw materials
₽20 pays for the factory’s upkeep
₽10 pays for various other incidentals like packing & shipping
₽10 pays for the taxes
₽20 remain after all accounts are settled. This money, otherwise known as profit, goes to the factory owner. This despite the owner doing “nothing,” according to the Marxists. Since the factory owner’s only contribution is exploitation, it’s fine for the government to murder him and his wife then ships his kids off to Siberia to freeze to death. In fact this benefits society! With the owner gone the workers can split the “extra” ₽20 among themselves and loh; a working class family can finally afford that Xbox they’ve had their eyes on.
This interpretation of the production process has, quandaries… The Marxist worldview fails to account for the characteristics that define many successful factory managers. Discipline, experience, business connections, sales skills, organization skills, insight into human psychology, technical expertise, and so forth. Dismissing these abilities as unnecessary is the strategic roadmap for Disney and the plot for Atlas Shrugged, neither of which have promising story arcs.
At any rate, I guess Lenin forgot to read my Substack because he thought Marxism would definitely probably work wonders in Russia. And if it didn’t work, well, one can always turn to violence…
Stage 2 - The clampdown
Revolutions occur in stages. The people who are most desirable in one stage may be completely unwelcome at another. For example, when a radical movement is getting started chaos is a prerequisite. Zealots, Molotov cocktail distribution specialists, blue-haired cringe-goblins: this class of fanatical people does to the social structure what Jesse Pinkman did to that guy in his bathtub… Turns it into goop! If society is a tall building, first you must deconstruct the structure to its base elements before you can rebuild it in a different shape.
If the revolution is successful, as Lenin’s was, the useful idiots must either reform themselves as cogs in the burgeoning bureaucratic state, or fall out of favor. Once the revolution has installed a new government the leaders do not want any more societal disruptions. The post-revolutionary government prefers a docile, subordinate populace that doesn’t make too many demands.
When former supporters of the revolution do make demands their protests may be squashed quite ruthlessly. This is what happened to a contingent of sailors who had zealously supported the Marxists in 1917. After several years of growing discontent with the Marxist’s broken promises, the sailors began to agitate for better food and working conditions. Nothing more than that which had been promised to them in the revolution.
In return for their insubordination, Lenin ordered a heavy artillery regiment to fire on the sailors. Thousands were killed over the course of several weeks. Here is a firsthand account of how the Russian people reacted to the famous heroes of the revolution being slaughtered by their own government.
The story continues…
The put down of this “rebellion” is the moment when many Russians began to understand the character of their new leaders. It was increasingly obvious that the Marxist government either couldn’t or wouldn’t deliver on any of its campaign promises, and the people were too scared to revolt lest the artillery be trained on them as well.
As Lenin’s power increased, many former supporters of the revolution were eventually jailed or executed.
The tendency of a post-revolutionary government to betray its champions is a point I’ve highlighted before in relation to our current societal upheavals.
Stage 3 - Living under tyranny
The power an administration needs to keep the populace in submission is inversely correlated with the economic prosperity being delivered by said government. If the regime is making everyone rich, few will advocate for its overthrow.
The Marxists, unfortunately, were not making everyone rich. As anti-prosperity spread through the land, ever greater shows of force were necessary to keep the people in check. These power displays by the Marxists manifested in several ways.
There was soft tyranny…
And mental tyranny…
We’re all aware of the Holocaust, but less well-known were Lenin and then Stalin’s despotic purges in Eastern Europe. Estimates vary, since the executioners hardly kept detailed records, but historians believe that the Marxists managed to indirectly (via starvation and exhaustion) or directly (via execution) murder more people than the Nazis. The evidence of communism’s failure is so astonishingly clear that it’s baffling to me that anyone is still advocating for its revival, even in the diluted form popular with today’s “enlightened” elites.
Stage 4 - The aftermath
While we view the Soviet Union as a historical occurrence, the reverberations of communist rule are still present throughout the former USSR. For example, an extensive internal spy network was one of the Soviet’s preferred methods of control. Millions of people reported on their neighbors, coworkers, friends and even spouses. The spy network was so prolific that it was impossible to trust anyone you met, and even your closest relations had to be kept at arm’s length.
On account of the decades of spying, an atmosphere of distrust persists in Eastern Europe to this day. For example, when I was living in a small town on the outskirts of Kiev I was fascinated by the apparently endless fence bordering the road. Each section of fence was unique, according to the homeowner’s preference, but one section invariably connected to another to form an uninterrupted barrier thousands of feet long.
I walked down streets for minutes at a time without glimpsing a single front yard. In America our fences are (generally) decorative, but in Eastern Europe they serve the explicit purpose of turning away prying eyes.
By not teaching people about Lenin, Stalin and the USSR, we’re creating conditions under which Americans may not understand how destructive the Marxists really were. This I think is a shame. While I am not of the belief that America will ever approach a Marxist level of tyranny, any step in this direction is still a battle lost.
Conclusions
In the final tally I’m giving The White Pill a 4 out of 5. My primary grievance was an extended section about anarchists. The exposition didn’t add to the motif, in my opinion, as I’m unsure what relevance anarchists have in our modern age. Apart from that thought the story progressed nicely, and Michael obviously did a great deal of research for this book.
This has not been the most uplifting of articles, so let us round out this review with a bit of humor. Even in the worst of times the Soviet citizens could always appreciate a joke, for no regime has yet been invented that can mangle the human spirit entirely.
From Lenin’s revolution in 1917 to the demolition of the Berlin wall in 1989, The White Pill is the story of what happens when an idealistic young government makes promises it can’t deliver on.
As one prominent Tcheka operative advised, “Don’t seek for incriminating evidence as to whether the prisoners took part, by deed or word, in a rebellion against the Soviet government. You have to ask him what class he belongs to, what is his origin, his education and profession. It is those questions that should decide the fate of the defendant—and therein lies the meaning of the red terror.”
--------
I originally published this review on my Substack The Unhedged Capitalist - check out that article to read this review with images and better formatting...
https://theunhedgedcapitalist.substac...
--------
Stage 1 - The Promise
To err is human, to really screw up you need a government.
In 1917 Vladimir Lenin was exiled in Switzerland where he might have remained indefinitely had it not been for the Germans. General Ludendorff, Kaiser Wilhelm’s top military official, cooked up a plan to send the provocative Lenin back to Russia. Ludendorff hoped that Lenin would cause enough internal chaos that Russia would be forced to withdraw from the war, leaving Germany to relocate all her soldiers to the western front.
The crafty Ludendorff accordingly sought “to improve peace possibilities through the internal weakening of Russia,” one of Germany’s foes at the time. This was an opportunity for Communist agitator Vladimir Lenin, who was widely regarded as a lunatic.
Only rarely has the action of a single German been more impactful. By the law of accessory to a murder, it could be argued that by schlepping Lenin back to Russia Ludendorff indirectly enabled one of the worst human rights atrocities in history. Well done lad.
Once home, Lenin began agitating for the Marxist revolution and he quickly gained support. According to Marxist dictates; poverty, privation and perpetual pecuniary were caused by the wealthy exploiting the working class. It followed that with Lenin operating the government according to Marxist principles, conditions for poor Russians would be greatly improved. How would the new government actually work in practice? Here’s the model I use to understand the Marxist’s claim.
A Russian manufacturer (I.e. a bourgeois money grubbing capitalist) sells a widget for ₽100.
₽20 pays for labor
₽20 pays for the raw materials
₽20 pays for the factory’s upkeep
₽10 pays for various other incidentals like packing & shipping
₽10 pays for the taxes
₽20 remain after all accounts are settled. This money, otherwise known as profit, goes to the factory owner. This despite the owner doing “nothing,” according to the Marxists. Since the factory owner’s only contribution is exploitation, it’s fine for the government to murder him and his wife then ships his kids off to Siberia to freeze to death. In fact this benefits society! With the owner gone the workers can split the “extra” ₽20 among themselves and loh; a working class family can finally afford that Xbox they’ve had their eyes on.
This interpretation of the production process has, quandaries… The Marxist worldview fails to account for the characteristics that define many successful factory managers. Discipline, experience, business connections, sales skills, organization skills, insight into human psychology, technical expertise, and so forth. Dismissing these abilities as unnecessary is the strategic roadmap for Disney and the plot for Atlas Shrugged, neither of which have promising story arcs.
At any rate, I guess Lenin forgot to read my Substack because he thought Marxism would definitely probably work wonders in Russia. And if it didn’t work, well, one can always turn to violence…
Stage 2 - The clampdown
Revolutions occur in stages. The people who are most desirable in one stage may be completely unwelcome at another. For example, when a radical movement is getting started chaos is a prerequisite. Zealots, Molotov cocktail distribution specialists, blue-haired cringe-goblins: this class of fanatical people does to the social structure what Jesse Pinkman did to that guy in his bathtub… Turns it into goop! If society is a tall building, first you must deconstruct the structure to its base elements before you can rebuild it in a different shape.
If the revolution is successful, as Lenin’s was, the useful idiots must either reform themselves as cogs in the burgeoning bureaucratic state, or fall out of favor. Once the revolution has installed a new government the leaders do not want any more societal disruptions. The post-revolutionary government prefers a docile, subordinate populace that doesn’t make too many demands.
When former supporters of the revolution do make demands their protests may be squashed quite ruthlessly. This is what happened to a contingent of sailors who had zealously supported the Marxists in 1917. After several years of growing discontent with the Marxist’s broken promises, the sailors began to agitate for better food and working conditions. Nothing more than that which had been promised to them in the revolution.
In March of 1921 they rebelled against Lenin’s forces, protesting in the streets and insisting upon their rights under socialism. The insurrectionists issued a fifteen-point manifesto, asking what had been promised for years by the ideology of socialism.
In return for their insubordination, Lenin ordered a heavy artillery regiment to fire on the sailors. Thousands were killed over the course of several weeks. Here is a firsthand account of how the Russian people reacted to the famous heroes of the revolution being slaughtered by their own government.
"Days of anguish and cannonading,” Berkman continued. “My heart is numb with despair; something has died within me. The people on the streets look bowed with grief, bewildered. No one trusts himself to speak. The thunder of heavy guns rends the air.”
The story continues…
With the defeat of the Kronstadt rebellion, the Bolshevik victory was now complete and total. “The time has come,” Lenin decreed, “to put an end to opposition, to put the lid on it; we have had enough opposition.” A mere nine days after Kronstadt fell, Lenin publicly declared war on those former allies who had been useful in putting over Bolshevism to the Russian people.
The put down of this “rebellion” is the moment when many Russians began to understand the character of their new leaders. It was increasingly obvious that the Marxist government either couldn’t or wouldn’t deliver on any of its campaign promises, and the people were too scared to revolt lest the artillery be trained on them as well.
As Lenin’s power increased, many former supporters of the revolution were eventually jailed or executed.
After the defeat of the Socialist rising in Vienna in 1934, several hundred members of the Socialist defense organization Schutzbound took refuge in Russia. They were welcomed as heroes, and marched past in a body in the Red Square to applause and congratulations. By mid-1937, they had been arrested and sent to camps “almost without exception.”
The tendency of a post-revolutionary government to betray its champions is a point I’ve highlighted before in relation to our current societal upheavals.
Stage 3 - Living under tyranny
The problem with communism is that eventually you run out of possible scapegoats for failure—at which point acknowledging or even noticing that something was wrong itself becomes a form of treason.
The power an administration needs to keep the populace in submission is inversely correlated with the economic prosperity being delivered by said government. If the regime is making everyone rich, few will advocate for its overthrow.
The Marxists, unfortunately, were not making everyone rich. As anti-prosperity spread through the land, ever greater shows of force were necessary to keep the people in check. These power displays by the Marxists manifested in several ways.
There was soft tyranny…
The search for truth, the urge to understand the meaning of life, is wholly alien to the younger generation which has passed through the school of the Communist Youth Organization. For them, all problems have been solved; there is a standard answer to every question. The language of these intellectually impoverished young people is larded with ready-made phrases. They quote Stalin instead of thinking for themselves; they derive their opinion from Pravda editorials. They are arrogant and complacent, and everything that pertains to them is the greatest thing there is: their country, their power, their leader. Theirs is also the greatest misery and oppression, but they are unaware of this, for they have never known anything but Soviet life.
And mental tyranny…
In the post-Stalin era, many dissidents in the Soviet Union and allied countries were sentenced to mental institutions for spurious reasons. You’d have to be insane to oppose the truth of communism, after all.
We’re all aware of the Holocaust, but less well-known were Lenin and then Stalin’s despotic purges in Eastern Europe. Estimates vary, since the executioners hardly kept detailed records, but historians believe that the Marxists managed to indirectly (via starvation and exhaustion) or directly (via execution) murder more people than the Nazis. The evidence of communism’s failure is so astonishingly clear that it’s baffling to me that anyone is still advocating for its revival, even in the diluted form popular with today’s “enlightened” elites.
Stage 4 - The aftermath
While we view the Soviet Union as a historical occurrence, the reverberations of communist rule are still present throughout the former USSR. For example, an extensive internal spy network was one of the Soviet’s preferred methods of control. Millions of people reported on their neighbors, coworkers, friends and even spouses. The spy network was so prolific that it was impossible to trust anyone you met, and even your closest relations had to be kept at arm’s length.
It thus became common for villagers to spy and inform on one another. Turning in a neighbor for having a sack of grain might be the easiest and safest way to procure food for one’s family.
On account of the decades of spying, an atmosphere of distrust persists in Eastern Europe to this day. For example, when I was living in a small town on the outskirts of Kiev I was fascinated by the apparently endless fence bordering the road. Each section of fence was unique, according to the homeowner’s preference, but one section invariably connected to another to form an uninterrupted barrier thousands of feet long.
I walked down streets for minutes at a time without glimpsing a single front yard. In America our fences are (generally) decorative, but in Eastern Europe they serve the explicit purpose of turning away prying eyes.
By not teaching people about Lenin, Stalin and the USSR, we’re creating conditions under which Americans may not understand how destructive the Marxists really were. This I think is a shame. While I am not of the belief that America will ever approach a Marxist level of tyranny, any step in this direction is still a battle lost.
Conclusions
In the final tally I’m giving The White Pill a 4 out of 5. My primary grievance was an extended section about anarchists. The exposition didn’t add to the motif, in my opinion, as I’m unsure what relevance anarchists have in our modern age. Apart from that thought the story progressed nicely, and Michael obviously did a great deal of research for this book.
This has not been the most uplifting of articles, so let us round out this review with a bit of humor. Even in the worst of times the Soviet citizens could always appreciate a joke, for no regime has yet been invented that can mangle the human spirit entirely.
One day Soviet President Mikhail Kalinin was in Moscow making a speech about how much the country had improved. He got particularly excited discussing the new twenty-story skyscrapers on Karl Marx Street in Kharkov.
A worker in the audience quietly stood up to protest. “Comrade Kalinin, I live in Kharkov. Almost every day I take a long walk on Karl Marx Street. I haven’t seen any skyscrapers.”
“That’s the trouble with you!” Barked Kalinin. “You waste your time promenading, instead of reading the newspapers and learning what is going on in the country!”
December 22, 2022
Such a fantastic read. Many times I was brought to tears, both out of horror from what mankind is capable of and out of joyous hope and optimism that mankind is redeemable.
Many of the details in this retelling of the rise and fall of totalitarian communism are not explicitly taught in public schools.
I wish all who would decide to unironically call themselves Marxist or Communist would read this book first.
Many of the details in this retelling of the rise and fall of totalitarian communism are not explicitly taught in public schools.
I wish all who would decide to unironically call themselves Marxist or Communist would read this book first.
December 30, 2022
One of my favorite history books of all time. It’s so impressive how Malice can fully immerse the reader in these complex narratives and contexts within it being a slog. It’s a very easy read actually and one of the most informative I’ve read.
January 25, 2023
I'm a big fan of the author. I wanted to absolutely love this one as much as I love his podcast appearances, the interviews he conducts on his own podcast (Your Welcome), and as much as I love his best book, Dear Reader. However, if I'm being honest, The White Pill fell a little flat for me. I'm loathe to criticize it at all (after all, I haven't written any books), but it quickly became apparent to me after cracking this one open that it was a little under-cooked.
Firstly, I would note that the title itself is kind of a niche term that people outside of certain internet circles will probably not understand. I do not think the title itself is ever explained within the book. I personally understood its usage in the context of the story, however, were I to give this book to someone older, or just someone who spends less time online, they would probably be confused by the title and its single mention at the end of the book.
The structure and execution of the text itself could have used some final editing and revision. There are times that a name, subject, or topic is introduced haphazardly or offhandedly, never to be brought up again, or an acronym is used that the casual reader might not be familiar with. Another thing I noticed is that, while much of the subject matter is deadly serious and almost academic in tone, the voice of Malice himself, at his snarkiest or most impish, would sometimes interject, often at the end of a paragraph, with a sarcastic line or humorous quip. I found that jarring, mildly off-putting, and I think it detracted a bit from the overall experience.
A nice introduction to the rise and fall of the USSR delivered with an important message of hope regarding human dignity and liberty. Those unfamiliar with the depravity of socialist/communist authoritarian regimes will be served well by the effort that Mr. Malice put into his research here. For that alone, I give this title four stars. I encourage people to read this book.
Firstly, I would note that the title itself is kind of a niche term that people outside of certain internet circles will probably not understand. I do not think the title itself is ever explained within the book. I personally understood its usage in the context of the story, however, were I to give this book to someone older, or just someone who spends less time online, they would probably be confused by the title and its single mention at the end of the book.
The structure and execution of the text itself could have used some final editing and revision. There are times that a name, subject, or topic is introduced haphazardly or offhandedly, never to be brought up again, or an acronym is used that the casual reader might not be familiar with. Another thing I noticed is that, while much of the subject matter is deadly serious and almost academic in tone, the voice of Malice himself, at his snarkiest or most impish, would sometimes interject, often at the end of a paragraph, with a sarcastic line or humorous quip. I found that jarring, mildly off-putting, and I think it detracted a bit from the overall experience.
A nice introduction to the rise and fall of the USSR delivered with an important message of hope regarding human dignity and liberty. Those unfamiliar with the depravity of socialist/communist authoritarian regimes will be served well by the effort that Mr. Malice put into his research here. For that alone, I give this title four stars. I encourage people to read this book.
February 2, 2024
By far the best book by Michael Malice (and I enjoyed them all). Must read for anyone interested in the fall of Soviet Union and for people that are black pilled about the current events. As I'm writing this, farmers are protesting in Brussels and all over Europe against EU policies that would liquidate small and middle sized farming in most of Europe in span of few years. Déjà vu.
The White Pill covers the most important people and events in the 20th century's fight against communism. It's one of the darkest books I've ever read. History was much darker than what regular people think or even can imagine.
It's very easy to read, no dry academic text, but I had issues around the middle when the gulags and torture tactics were being described. There were several chapters where I couldn't continue reading because they emotionally drained me. I had to put the book down for a few days with tears in my eyes several times.
As I was reading I was wondering when will the white pill finally come as most of the book was filled with descriptions of the darkest deeds people ever done to their fellows. Well, it comes in the last third of the book where the narrative switches to describe Reagan's and Thatcher's rise to power and their subsequent negotiations with Gorbachev.
Gorbachev is actually the hero of this book if something like that can be said without a jest. Being a victim of Stalin's whims from his early age Gorbachev knew what the regime is capable of and wanted to avoid it, it seems, at any cost. Even if it would cost the regime to fall. When leaders of other socialist countries asked him for advice or support he always chose the peaceful solution and wanted to follow the will of the people which got more and more fed up by communist bullshit.
I wish Malice would make this white pilling part longer and included more events that led to the downfall - Afghanistan is not even mentioned, Chernobyl is but only briefly and almost nothing about its impact outside of one very angry speech by Gorbachev and Gorbachev's career was also skimmed through.
I also wish the chapters would have proper titles or some additional subtitle so that if I want to look up something I know which chapter contains it. As it is, chapter names are quotes from Ayn Rand's speech about free people not understanding what it's like to live in totalitarian country. While very effective, they say nothing about the content and there's also no index to look up key words. It's not an issue for e-book version but I own hardcover copy.
So, does the white pill work or is it placebo? I guess everyone will need to form their own answer. As someone who was already short term black pilled but mid and long term white pilled it didn't do anything to change my point of view towards what's ahead but it provided excellent context to what was and can't be allowed to repeat again. I now also understand Ayn Rand's extremist position much better.
The White Pill covers the most important people and events in the 20th century's fight against communism. It's one of the darkest books I've ever read. History was much darker than what regular people think or even can imagine.
It's very easy to read, no dry academic text, but I had issues around the middle when the gulags and torture tactics were being described. There were several chapters where I couldn't continue reading because they emotionally drained me. I had to put the book down for a few days with tears in my eyes several times.
As I was reading I was wondering when will the white pill finally come as most of the book was filled with descriptions of the darkest deeds people ever done to their fellows. Well, it comes in the last third of the book where the narrative switches to describe Reagan's and Thatcher's rise to power and their subsequent negotiations with Gorbachev.
Gorbachev is actually the hero of this book if something like that can be said without a jest. Being a victim of Stalin's whims from his early age Gorbachev knew what the regime is capable of and wanted to avoid it, it seems, at any cost. Even if it would cost the regime to fall. When leaders of other socialist countries asked him for advice or support he always chose the peaceful solution and wanted to follow the will of the people which got more and more fed up by communist bullshit.
I wish Malice would make this white pilling part longer and included more events that led to the downfall - Afghanistan is not even mentioned, Chernobyl is but only briefly and almost nothing about its impact outside of one very angry speech by Gorbachev and Gorbachev's career was also skimmed through.
I also wish the chapters would have proper titles or some additional subtitle so that if I want to look up something I know which chapter contains it. As it is, chapter names are quotes from Ayn Rand's speech about free people not understanding what it's like to live in totalitarian country. While very effective, they say nothing about the content and there's also no index to look up key words. It's not an issue for e-book version but I own hardcover copy.
So, does the white pill work or is it placebo? I guess everyone will need to form their own answer. As someone who was already short term black pilled but mid and long term white pilled it didn't do anything to change my point of view towards what's ahead but it provided excellent context to what was and can't be allowed to repeat again. I now also understand Ayn Rand's extremist position much better.
April 29, 2023
As extreme as Lenin's ideology was his rhetoric; two mechanisms by which it was easy to dismiss him as being utterly unpersuasive to most people. As Lenin biographer Victor Sebestyen pointed out, “Those who disagreed with him were ‘scoundrels,’ ‘philistines,’ ‘cretins, 'filthy scum, ', ‘whores, ‘class traitors,' ‘silly old maids, ‘ 'windbags’ (one of his favourite epithets, found frequently in his writings) and ‘blockheads.'” He often went obscene, and then “his opponents were invariably ‘shits’ or ‘cunts.'” By 1917 Lenin was thus both a has-been and a joke—but still a possible troublemaker. As historian Edward Crankshaw put it, “the German government...saw in this obscure fanatic one more bacillus to let loose in tottering and exhausted Russia to spread infection”
Thus, as time went on, in one very specific way the communist system started to “work.” As one Soviet escapee later wrote:
"The search for truth, the urge to understand the meaning of life, is wholly alien to the younger generation which has passed through the school of the Communist Youth Organization. For them, all problems have been solved; there is a standard answer to every question. The language of these intellectually impoverished young people is larded with ready-made phrases. They quote Stalin instead of thinking for themselves; they derive their opinion from Pravda editorials. They are arrogant and complacent, and everything that pertains to them is the greatest thing there is: their country, their power, their leader. Theirs is also the greatest misery and oppression, but they are unaware of this, for they have never known anything but Soviet life. The members of this younger generation have neither sympathy nor understanding for their elders; there is no bond between them. If anyone puts forth a thought which does not fit into the pattern laid down by Stalin, they do not argue against it, but they react with such suspicion of the other’s true intentions and hidden thoughts that he quickly learns to keep his ideas to himself."
Most humans are surprisingly low in empathy, meaning they lack the ability to see things from other people’s perspectives. Westerners tend to think that if we were to inform on our neighbors it would only be under duress or if they were doing something objectively wrong such as harming their children. In fact this is demonstrably not the case: There is rarely a shortage of people who will trip over themselves to inform on their countrymen without any pressure or even much tangible reward other than some sort of status or a sense of “I’m doing my part.” Some quite literally just have nothing better to do. As one Stasi recruiter said, “Well, some of them were convinced of the cause. But I think it was mainly because informers got the feeling that, doing it, they were somebody. You know—someone was listening to them for a couple of hours a week, taking notes. They felt they had it over other people.” It was an easy way for low-status, obedient people to become more important than they otherwise would have been (in retrospect, an enormous incentive). Many—too many—of the Stasi’s informers weren't drafted so much as they were volunteers. “It was pitiful, actually,” the recruiter concluded. “They were hardly paid at all.”
“Consensus: “The process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values, and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects; the process of avoiding the very issues that have to be solved, merely because you cannot get agreement on the way ahead. What great cause would have been fought and won under the banner: ‘I stand for consensus?” - Margaret Thatcher
January 4, 2023
2023-01-01: 2 🌟 for the effort to write it
it's complicated. i have heard malice for months making ads for his new book. and the title. there are already quite a lot of pills. red, blue, black. so white was supposed to be the antidote of the black one.
instead i got a long story about some of the socialists. most of the socialists seem to get left out. anyway, the story is far from optimistic: death, hunger, gratuitous violence. it's depressing. and it's worse, because i know the end of the story. did malice intend to show how the us is alike the soviet era? i doubt it. he knows so little about the land and habits, and what's worse he understands less.
it's nice to have this book, in case someone cares about that history. and the title should be something along the lines of /a short history of whatever socialism/.
i mean i appreciate he is honest enough to say about that weasel emma goldman, who was skillful enough to point out how in russia /that is no true xxx/. and, like goldman, malice is weasel enough not to point that out as he doesn't want to alienate his cup and tee shirt buying crowd.
the book is a mess. it starts with rand. and he goes up to the 1960s. he continues with the 1917, and for an entire chapter he won't reach the ww2. so the text isn't even in order.
25% in, and i have already thought twice of abandoning the book.
2023-01-04: 1 🌟
i can imagine noble reasons of why malice would write a work of propaganda. but, does it matter?
malice turns out to be just another propagandist. so the bad guys are devilish. and the good guys are angelic. it starts with a dubious examination of a toxic beast like trotsky. and it goes on and on. like with the angelic medicine ”professors”. only those beasts did the same to their competition to climb to the top during those days. those were not penniless ukrainian peasants starved by the state. those were rich, dangerous men, who have done the same to anybody who contested their influence. worse, professionally were as good as doctors as they were car mechanics. because malice, as i have written above, simply can't get that world. now, is he unable to get what was going on? or he, like the the late hitchens, rationally builds a mythology to present his own blend of trotskism-whatever.
it's complicated. i have heard malice for months making ads for his new book. and the title. there are already quite a lot of pills. red, blue, black. so white was supposed to be the antidote of the black one.
instead i got a long story about some of the socialists. most of the socialists seem to get left out. anyway, the story is far from optimistic: death, hunger, gratuitous violence. it's depressing. and it's worse, because i know the end of the story. did malice intend to show how the us is alike the soviet era? i doubt it. he knows so little about the land and habits, and what's worse he understands less.
it's nice to have this book, in case someone cares about that history. and the title should be something along the lines of /a short history of whatever socialism/.
i mean i appreciate he is honest enough to say about that weasel emma goldman, who was skillful enough to point out how in russia /that is no true xxx/. and, like goldman, malice is weasel enough not to point that out as he doesn't want to alienate his cup and tee shirt buying crowd.
the book is a mess. it starts with rand. and he goes up to the 1960s. he continues with the 1917, and for an entire chapter he won't reach the ww2. so the text isn't even in order.
25% in, and i have already thought twice of abandoning the book.
2023-01-04: 1 🌟
i can imagine noble reasons of why malice would write a work of propaganda. but, does it matter?
malice turns out to be just another propagandist. so the bad guys are devilish. and the good guys are angelic. it starts with a dubious examination of a toxic beast like trotsky. and it goes on and on. like with the angelic medicine ”professors”. only those beasts did the same to their competition to climb to the top during those days. those were not penniless ukrainian peasants starved by the state. those were rich, dangerous men, who have done the same to anybody who contested their influence. worse, professionally were as good as doctors as they were car mechanics. because malice, as i have written above, simply can't get that world. now, is he unable to get what was going on? or he, like the the late hitchens, rationally builds a mythology to present his own blend of trotskism-whatever.
January 7, 2023
Wow! Holy crap…this book is such a great read. It is dark and depressing and when you’re about to just give up on humanity, the guts and unbelievable actions of just a few people give hope and reassurance that we’re not all monsters…
The tragedy that was the Soviet Union and the iron curtain is beyond comprehension.
While mostly dark, this is a book of hope and it’s amazing…
The tragedy that was the Soviet Union and the iron curtain is beyond comprehension.
While mostly dark, this is a book of hope and it’s amazing…
January 13, 2023
An entertaining primer on the rise and fall of the USSR, as well as an incendiary airing of dirty Soviet laundry. It boggles the mind that virtually none of this is taught in American government schools. That is, until the mind catches up.
Anyway, my only substantial gripe with The White Pill is that it is in desperate need of a copyeditor.
Anyway, my only substantial gripe with The White Pill is that it is in desperate need of a copyeditor.
April 13, 2023
A stark reminder of how terrible a place the world can be when power goes unchecked and the people, no matter who they are, are silenced.
February 22, 2023
I normally finish a book with a very clear idea of what I want to say about it. In this case I'm not so sure. As a history, it was very useful. It offered a lively and occasionally witty account of some of the worst and most insane aspects of the rise of communism, pulling no punches in its portrayal of the mind-crushing horror of the communist machine.
It did an equally good job of chronicling the monster's fall, providing vivid accounts of the pantomime villains as they tried and failed to cling on to their wealth and power.
But I think it let itself down in the middle. There was a huge gap where either not much happened, or nobody wrote about it. I would have liked to have learned more about the Brezhnev / Andropov era.
There was something about the writing style that I found occasionally tricky. It could have been long sentences, or just something about the choice of phrasing, but I noticed myself re-reading a lot more paragraphs than usual.
Ultimately, I was disappointed because I wanted more of an emotive argument. I got this book after watching the author on the Chris Williamson Podcast (Modern Wisdom ep 575) and he had a great ability and passion for story telling. I wanted more of that personal slant in this text, even if it was reserved for the last chapter. I wanted - just for once, for somebody to sum all this up, connect the dots and tell me what to make of all this. I wanted a "white pill" that was easier to swallow.
Where the book excelled was in charting the simultaneous developments in Anglo-American and Soviet history. It was especially useful to see the cheerleaders for communism in the west, such as Emma Goldman. For me, I would have been even more happy if this was the whole focus of the book - specifically a story about the apologists for communism in the west, and how they eventually either came to realise and admit the horrible truth, or not, as the case may be.
It did an equally good job of chronicling the monster's fall, providing vivid accounts of the pantomime villains as they tried and failed to cling on to their wealth and power.
But I think it let itself down in the middle. There was a huge gap where either not much happened, or nobody wrote about it. I would have liked to have learned more about the Brezhnev / Andropov era.
There was something about the writing style that I found occasionally tricky. It could have been long sentences, or just something about the choice of phrasing, but I noticed myself re-reading a lot more paragraphs than usual.
Ultimately, I was disappointed because I wanted more of an emotive argument. I got this book after watching the author on the Chris Williamson Podcast (Modern Wisdom ep 575) and he had a great ability and passion for story telling. I wanted more of that personal slant in this text, even if it was reserved for the last chapter. I wanted - just for once, for somebody to sum all this up, connect the dots and tell me what to make of all this. I wanted a "white pill" that was easier to swallow.
Where the book excelled was in charting the simultaneous developments in Anglo-American and Soviet history. It was especially useful to see the cheerleaders for communism in the west, such as Emma Goldman. For me, I would have been even more happy if this was the whole focus of the book - specifically a story about the apologists for communism in the west, and how they eventually either came to realise and admit the horrible truth, or not, as the case may be.
April 6, 2023
A great book about communism history, thinking and its effects around the world. ✌️I rommended it for sure.
April 7, 2023
Utopia is hell.
I can't help but think of how much of the Soviet atrocities were enabled by sympathetic American intellectuals. Our current level of ignorance on this history suggests we have yet to fully wash the blood of our own hands from the destruction of life that occurred behind the iron curtain.
From the book:
"By 1918 the Bolsheviks code on marriage, the family and guardianship envisioned a withering away of the family itself at some point in the future. Preferring one's children over others smacked of bourgeois values and inequality, both between families and within the family itself. No parent could do as good of a job educating their children as the government could. Indeed, it made perfect sense, the same government was going to educate, if not re-educate, the entire adult population as well. Love for one's children was narrow and irrational, which state educators were not. Why not speculate about a world where women gave birth, return to the workforce, and had their children raised in a colony by caretakers far better trained in child rearing than their birth mothers ever were?"
I can't help but think of how much of the Soviet atrocities were enabled by sympathetic American intellectuals. Our current level of ignorance on this history suggests we have yet to fully wash the blood of our own hands from the destruction of life that occurred behind the iron curtain.
From the book:
"By 1918 the Bolsheviks code on marriage, the family and guardianship envisioned a withering away of the family itself at some point in the future. Preferring one's children over others smacked of bourgeois values and inequality, both between families and within the family itself. No parent could do as good of a job educating their children as the government could. Indeed, it made perfect sense, the same government was going to educate, if not re-educate, the entire adult population as well. Love for one's children was narrow and irrational, which state educators were not. Why not speculate about a world where women gave birth, return to the workforce, and had their children raised in a colony by caretakers far better trained in child rearing than their birth mothers ever were?"
January 4, 2023
AMAZING! I love this book, it's been both heartbreaking and inspiring. It's so easy to get caught up in the drudges of our modern existence that it's incredibly easy to forget what our forefathers struggled through. Being reminded that we have survived much worse with significantly worse odds is very uplifting! Thank you Michael! The good guys can win!
March 6, 2023
As a russian reading is was particulary painful, but Michael did a great job of unmasking dark spots of communism history. His humor is unmatched : " dark humor in urssr was like food - not everyone got it". Listened to this as audiobook, and just ordered a physical copy as well and will be reading it again and again.
January 5, 2023
I enjoyed it, however it was largely just filled with selected highlights of Communism in the 20th century, with few original takes or interpretations that I could discern. Occasionally, I found the imagery to be bland and uninspiring. The Kindle edition was filled with typos.
March 21, 2023
I’m not rating the book on likability because this read like a history book. Basically facts of what happened, how the Soviet Union came to be what happened in the middle and how it ended. Based on that it was an informative book for sure. I learned a lot I didn’t know so definitely worth reading if you are interested in this time in history. Virtually no commentary which is fine, I was really only interested in the facts of history. Not sure what genre this book falls into but I’m placing in in the history category. It’s also a slow paced book, I found it difficult to read fast as I wanted to.
March 28, 2023
A brief history of the rise of the Soviet Union and its fall.
So many millions killed and to think it was just over 30 years ago when the Soviet Union finally collapsed.
Western Media was covering for the mass suffering then and still thinks communism/socialism is a great idea today. The communist party even changed its name to Democratic Socialists in many Soviet Bloc countries as times suddenly changed.
For all that changes, much remains the same in the world.
So many millions killed and to think it was just over 30 years ago when the Soviet Union finally collapsed.
Western Media was covering for the mass suffering then and still thinks communism/socialism is a great idea today. The communist party even changed its name to Democratic Socialists in many Soviet Bloc countries as times suddenly changed.
For all that changes, much remains the same in the world.
February 7, 2023
A fantastic but difficult read. Malice takes his readers through the horror of the Soviet experiment and its apparently sudden collapse. He applies this history to the modern struggle against encroaching authoritarianism and explains why people should be "white-pilled" about the conflict. The concept of the "white pill" is the idea that victory over evil is not impossible and triumph of the enemies of freedom is not inevitable. This is not a wholly optimistic worldview as, of course, Soviet subjects had to endure starvation, purges, gulags, torture, and many other atrocities before the USSR finally collapsed under the weight of inevitable economic and political failure. But the point is that fatalists, doom-and-gloomers, and "black-pilled" people are wrong to give up the fight against a growing and pervasive state when victory can still be had. It's a heart-breaking but ultimately inspiring book, and it's an easy recommendation from me.
April 17, 2023
i only read this book because my bf asked me to. he rated it 3.8 ⭐️ but i would give it a 2. the only reason being: i like smut and this is not that
May 8, 2023
Very good summary of 20th century Communism rise, terror, and collapse. For history lovers for sure. Also tells the tale with quotes of the horrible western press coverage of communism. But there is a happy ending DDR, Warsaw Pact, and USSR all rid themselves of communism. Gorbachev is a very decent human (not a saint), but at least refused to send in the tanks against most unarmed peoples, except Lithuania. The first USSR state to secede.
December 21, 2023
This was an insightful read. I’m not sure the exact or intended audience and all the entry points for this book, but it's an important part of history to know and understand. I think those well-versed in the historical events can glean additional perspective, as well as those just learning will appreciate it. If too unfamiliar, some may find it slightly more challenging to place events within their respective context. If well-versed, you may find it more of a reiteration of what you already know with varying grades of perceptive commentary. Would make an excellent book club read.
That said, I think for those wishing to gain a bit of pretext as well as setting and nature of the oppression can watch a recently uploaded YouTube video that may help to supplement and frame events since there are layers of complex perspective to be sorted out: Gulag: The History by Best Documentary
The Story
The beginning sort of reads like a compare and contrast, and later, a near persuasive essay for an English 101 writing assignment. Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, was thought-provoking. Just was not what I expected at first. Was lacking way of direction and tying up at points, though I started to appreciate it more as the beginning chapters went on. In the end I wasn’t sure what the book wanted to be. I knew where it was going, was well-researched and covered a lot of ground for a 371-page book. But I wanted either more author assessment and contribution of original thought by way of philosophical stance with near and far projections or supporting testimonials with more emotional connection to the concluding elements as outlined in the book.
And actually university and high school students could make for an elaborative response to a book with a premise like this by sorting out a related topic of interest and expanding upon. Perhaps such will be outlined in a subsequent book in a narrowed-down form, focusing on a singular theme such as rivalry, leadership styles, population or individual isolation, working conditions, suppression on musical or literary expression, proposals and impact of “emancipation” goals for women, or even the hyper-specific ideas of communal living and shared spaces.
Because as “white pill” as it was, in self-referential terms, mostly in reflective tone near the end, as it was for an event-based historical account, there was less to be gained from a visionary sense. Just barely touched upon at the end. Part of the issue I think was organizational and the way it was written.
Perhaps intention was on the responsibility of the reader to make that connection, but pairing knowledge and experiences with overall readership experience will be greatly variable, notably this day and age. Where there was not much to gauge as a reference or starting point for those who may just be learning the events in history and understanding the nuance, because of the complexities. Though the major themes were explained well.
I thoroughly enjoyed reading through. There is much to be discussed, even in exercise of my own thoughts, and I do find a lot of value in pondering, especially if chosen for one of my book clubs picks.
It certainly didn’t coat or shy away from the horrific nature of torture along with psychological disturbances and influences of those who carried out such orders. I think it could have provided a bit more rounded-out view incorporating the psychological components of the human condition. Both the enticing, incentivization, and vulnerable ways that society behaves under such circumstances. Could have showed more of how in their viewpoint, with action or inaction, how people would typically be categorized as uninformed, suppressed, oppressed, overwhelmed, forced beyond control, hopeless, or doubtful, leading to their gruesome journey and endpoints that are difficult for anyone to even begin to explain. Such details would make for additional uniqueness to such book.
Where I suppose what was missing was how it left out some of the other vulnerabilities, objectives, incentives, and “advantages” on behalf of the leaders and party members who supported them. Such as productivity goals or the race for industrialization, shame or saving face, etc… It touched upon but didn’t depict intent or outcome differences as much as I thought it might. Some elements were certainly there, but I think it could have been elaborated upon. To make for a stronger case, a redemptive plan or way of curtailing a road of destruction in moving forward with idealistic notions as they become more actionable suggestions. Whether to stay the course or to change. How to change.
For instance, in regard to the commentary piece about achieved by means of equality, I think the harnessing of ideology and pursuit of power is deeper than that in any case and could have been expounded upon. Or for another instance, a deeper dive into exploring the why of book burning, such as suppression of independent thought and pursuit in order to eliminate aspects of culture for a more in-line, easily controlled, productive means in view of human capability, response and reaction, pain, and imposing loss of forethought, dream, fantasy, joy, and loss of hope. Whether impact on behalf of an individual or how even more superficial means by way of collective society in much greater numbers can be used to achieve considerable influence. How broad the spectrum of differences with further division to greater means of polarity plays out, along with some specific examples.
Although it provided a fair assessment of journalistic coverage and public perception of the time, it was more from what I would categorize as a very U.S.-centric and possibly more historic view of partisan politics in most cases. Which is completely fine. But it might be important for readers to frame, understand, and distinguish how political affiliation and alignment with loyalty to leadership and partisan lines is widely different amongst countries and how definitions and viewpoints have changed a bit over time, so I’m not sure it was always a fair comparison and proper label to apply as they were written out. Pending the demographic and interest of the reader. At least not without more provision of background and rationale.
Of course, these aspects make for excellent discussion points about the book.
I appreciated the framing around politics in general and notable formation of government with additional subgroups and regimes. There were some fascinating tidbits, sometimes finding them becoming directional, almost for another book about a separate topic at times, but I enjoyed the renewed interest along with some pointing out of notable contradiction of leadership/regime, as well as referential humor for some of the more drier parts of the book.
I was appreciative of the lesser known parts of history surrounding the details of the Chicago Haymarket Square rally and incarceration of those who remained unknown in association with the killings that took place.
Anecdotes. Two thoughts on this. First there is a piece that notes how a reliance on anecdotes instead of “data,” as declared in the book, would be somehow inferior or less scientific. This is not necessarily the case in research. You can certainly have one person with one singular experience, being incredibly valid and impactful. As a case study. Where then if you have a few, then you have a series, a small data set. Then if more, then your data expands to a more robust study, but is never non-existent. There is definitely added validation with increased quantity, but to discount altogether, as freely as a personal story could be told, is just that. So in second point, adding a more personal story from some of those who experienced the events and their prospective outlook by way of testimonial, to support the premise of the book, actually may have helped to close some of the gaps I noted already about this book.
Maybe there will be more to come.
The Writing
The authorial voice. Not always delineated, nor consistent, I'm not sure how to describe. Personality that's for sure. Conveys ideas well, with little surprises and aha moments here and there. It's this occasional interjection of a comedic, reflective tone from the author, to where if I hadn’t understood his speaking personality, I’m not sure if others would understand or be as amused at such in writing going in unaware. I find this in the other books as typical, but this one with a different kind of liberty. Rather hilarious at most points. But I love satire. Others may not, I’m not sure. I sometimes find it my barometer of knowing a subject really well if I can pick apart subtle or overt contrast and opposition, reference, impersonation, folly, over a more serious theme and tone. Or embrace as a stylistic approach to mainstay writing when appropriate. Sometimes even in foresight, which becomes reading satisfaction and joy.
Utilizes a lot more direct quotes rather than summarization. Which is fine, as I do appreciate this sometimes for direct and complete reference. Particularly ones that I would have been inclined to look up independently. But found myself wanting a bit more author interpretation, meaning, and application to make for complete thought to support the premise of the book.
However, I would have liked some of the quotes to be dated or inserted in better arrangement. In chronological order or by subject matter according to the timeline of the book. Namely since some were more retrospective in their nature as a reflective statement, which would serve better as part of conclusion of thought or end of book, rather than part of driving the narrative forward. Which was not strictly chronological in the first place. The entire book could have been reorganized for better emphasis, namely for purposes in supporting the catchy title and premise of the book. Or rearranged a bit differently to highlight the emotional connection and appeal of “the white pill” notion rather than a more cerebral historical timeline of events that sort of left me wondering, “What now and what next?” Because otherwise leads to falsely optimistic, invalidating idea of a more U.S.-centric, Westernized comparison of “It could be worse.”
Again, overall, I think somehow it could have been reorganized a bit. By certain subject matter or strict timeline. Albeit great chapter titles. But either to create more of a story arch or added emphasis by way of personal story or take on a more academic approach with incorporation of statistics showing a trajectory of favorability. For example the propaganda piece, as mentioned, was self-referential. Some of the surrounding context was a bit overworked and uneven. Yet not enough in detailing the granular tactics of media in radio, writing, and film as per way of showing the false but “glamorous” social benefits such as those depicting the condition of the camps and prisoners detained there. Which some aspects were true, namely by means of achievement by rerouting of principle, others merely a façade.
Needed a round of copy editing.
Would have liked some photos. People, scenery, propaganda news clippings, and some maps.
I loved the inclusion of etymology of many words provided. A glossary of terms would have also been a nice touch as some readers may be less versed in some of the political vernacular as to be understood in the book in contrasted view of the people then and people of today, whether by definition or shifting perception. Along with which policies and principles each falls under. Slightly touches upon, but not at all points. Even simple in-text definitions or quotes of “good” and “evil” or “liberalism” amongst others noted by the many philosophers of past. Offering differing perspectives or just a select few, such as by Locke by way of conformity or disagreement, Dostoevsky, or even just a bit about “law” and “order.”
Will look forward to more from this author.
Blog post
That said, I think for those wishing to gain a bit of pretext as well as setting and nature of the oppression can watch a recently uploaded YouTube video that may help to supplement and frame events since there are layers of complex perspective to be sorted out: Gulag: The History by Best Documentary
The Story
The beginning sort of reads like a compare and contrast, and later, a near persuasive essay for an English 101 writing assignment. Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, was thought-provoking. Just was not what I expected at first. Was lacking way of direction and tying up at points, though I started to appreciate it more as the beginning chapters went on. In the end I wasn’t sure what the book wanted to be. I knew where it was going, was well-researched and covered a lot of ground for a 371-page book. But I wanted either more author assessment and contribution of original thought by way of philosophical stance with near and far projections or supporting testimonials with more emotional connection to the concluding elements as outlined in the book.
And actually university and high school students could make for an elaborative response to a book with a premise like this by sorting out a related topic of interest and expanding upon. Perhaps such will be outlined in a subsequent book in a narrowed-down form, focusing on a singular theme such as rivalry, leadership styles, population or individual isolation, working conditions, suppression on musical or literary expression, proposals and impact of “emancipation” goals for women, or even the hyper-specific ideas of communal living and shared spaces.
Because as “white pill” as it was, in self-referential terms, mostly in reflective tone near the end, as it was for an event-based historical account, there was less to be gained from a visionary sense. Just barely touched upon at the end. Part of the issue I think was organizational and the way it was written.
Perhaps intention was on the responsibility of the reader to make that connection, but pairing knowledge and experiences with overall readership experience will be greatly variable, notably this day and age. Where there was not much to gauge as a reference or starting point for those who may just be learning the events in history and understanding the nuance, because of the complexities. Though the major themes were explained well.
I thoroughly enjoyed reading through. There is much to be discussed, even in exercise of my own thoughts, and I do find a lot of value in pondering, especially if chosen for one of my book clubs picks.
It certainly didn’t coat or shy away from the horrific nature of torture along with psychological disturbances and influences of those who carried out such orders. I think it could have provided a bit more rounded-out view incorporating the psychological components of the human condition. Both the enticing, incentivization, and vulnerable ways that society behaves under such circumstances. Could have showed more of how in their viewpoint, with action or inaction, how people would typically be categorized as uninformed, suppressed, oppressed, overwhelmed, forced beyond control, hopeless, or doubtful, leading to their gruesome journey and endpoints that are difficult for anyone to even begin to explain. Such details would make for additional uniqueness to such book.
Where I suppose what was missing was how it left out some of the other vulnerabilities, objectives, incentives, and “advantages” on behalf of the leaders and party members who supported them. Such as productivity goals or the race for industrialization, shame or saving face, etc… It touched upon but didn’t depict intent or outcome differences as much as I thought it might. Some elements were certainly there, but I think it could have been elaborated upon. To make for a stronger case, a redemptive plan or way of curtailing a road of destruction in moving forward with idealistic notions as they become more actionable suggestions. Whether to stay the course or to change. How to change.
For instance, in regard to the commentary piece about achieved by means of equality, I think the harnessing of ideology and pursuit of power is deeper than that in any case and could have been expounded upon. Or for another instance, a deeper dive into exploring the why of book burning, such as suppression of independent thought and pursuit in order to eliminate aspects of culture for a more in-line, easily controlled, productive means in view of human capability, response and reaction, pain, and imposing loss of forethought, dream, fantasy, joy, and loss of hope. Whether impact on behalf of an individual or how even more superficial means by way of collective society in much greater numbers can be used to achieve considerable influence. How broad the spectrum of differences with further division to greater means of polarity plays out, along with some specific examples.
Although it provided a fair assessment of journalistic coverage and public perception of the time, it was more from what I would categorize as a very U.S.-centric and possibly more historic view of partisan politics in most cases. Which is completely fine. But it might be important for readers to frame, understand, and distinguish how political affiliation and alignment with loyalty to leadership and partisan lines is widely different amongst countries and how definitions and viewpoints have changed a bit over time, so I’m not sure it was always a fair comparison and proper label to apply as they were written out. Pending the demographic and interest of the reader. At least not without more provision of background and rationale.
Of course, these aspects make for excellent discussion points about the book.
I appreciated the framing around politics in general and notable formation of government with additional subgroups and regimes. There were some fascinating tidbits, sometimes finding them becoming directional, almost for another book about a separate topic at times, but I enjoyed the renewed interest along with some pointing out of notable contradiction of leadership/regime, as well as referential humor for some of the more drier parts of the book.
I was appreciative of the lesser known parts of history surrounding the details of the Chicago Haymarket Square rally and incarceration of those who remained unknown in association with the killings that took place.
Anecdotes. Two thoughts on this. First there is a piece that notes how a reliance on anecdotes instead of “data,” as declared in the book, would be somehow inferior or less scientific. This is not necessarily the case in research. You can certainly have one person with one singular experience, being incredibly valid and impactful. As a case study. Where then if you have a few, then you have a series, a small data set. Then if more, then your data expands to a more robust study, but is never non-existent. There is definitely added validation with increased quantity, but to discount altogether, as freely as a personal story could be told, is just that. So in second point, adding a more personal story from some of those who experienced the events and their prospective outlook by way of testimonial, to support the premise of the book, actually may have helped to close some of the gaps I noted already about this book.
Maybe there will be more to come.
The Writing
The authorial voice. Not always delineated, nor consistent, I'm not sure how to describe. Personality that's for sure. Conveys ideas well, with little surprises and aha moments here and there. It's this occasional interjection of a comedic, reflective tone from the author, to where if I hadn’t understood his speaking personality, I’m not sure if others would understand or be as amused at such in writing going in unaware. I find this in the other books as typical, but this one with a different kind of liberty. Rather hilarious at most points. But I love satire. Others may not, I’m not sure. I sometimes find it my barometer of knowing a subject really well if I can pick apart subtle or overt contrast and opposition, reference, impersonation, folly, over a more serious theme and tone. Or embrace as a stylistic approach to mainstay writing when appropriate. Sometimes even in foresight, which becomes reading satisfaction and joy.
Utilizes a lot more direct quotes rather than summarization. Which is fine, as I do appreciate this sometimes for direct and complete reference. Particularly ones that I would have been inclined to look up independently. But found myself wanting a bit more author interpretation, meaning, and application to make for complete thought to support the premise of the book.
However, I would have liked some of the quotes to be dated or inserted in better arrangement. In chronological order or by subject matter according to the timeline of the book. Namely since some were more retrospective in their nature as a reflective statement, which would serve better as part of conclusion of thought or end of book, rather than part of driving the narrative forward. Which was not strictly chronological in the first place. The entire book could have been reorganized for better emphasis, namely for purposes in supporting the catchy title and premise of the book. Or rearranged a bit differently to highlight the emotional connection and appeal of “the white pill” notion rather than a more cerebral historical timeline of events that sort of left me wondering, “What now and what next?” Because otherwise leads to falsely optimistic, invalidating idea of a more U.S.-centric, Westernized comparison of “It could be worse.”
Again, overall, I think somehow it could have been reorganized a bit. By certain subject matter or strict timeline. Albeit great chapter titles. But either to create more of a story arch or added emphasis by way of personal story or take on a more academic approach with incorporation of statistics showing a trajectory of favorability. For example the propaganda piece, as mentioned, was self-referential. Some of the surrounding context was a bit overworked and uneven. Yet not enough in detailing the granular tactics of media in radio, writing, and film as per way of showing the false but “glamorous” social benefits such as those depicting the condition of the camps and prisoners detained there. Which some aspects were true, namely by means of achievement by rerouting of principle, others merely a façade.
Needed a round of copy editing.
Would have liked some photos. People, scenery, propaganda news clippings, and some maps.
I loved the inclusion of etymology of many words provided. A glossary of terms would have also been a nice touch as some readers may be less versed in some of the political vernacular as to be understood in the book in contrasted view of the people then and people of today, whether by definition or shifting perception. Along with which policies and principles each falls under. Slightly touches upon, but not at all points. Even simple in-text definitions or quotes of “good” and “evil” or “liberalism” amongst others noted by the many philosophers of past. Offering differing perspectives or just a select few, such as by Locke by way of conformity or disagreement, Dostoevsky, or even just a bit about “law” and “order.”
Will look forward to more from this author.
Blog post
March 11, 2023
Not that it matters much, but Emma Goldman was born in Kaunas (LT), which makes her not Russian-born, rather Jewish-Lithuanian born in occupied Lithuania... It doesn't changed a lot, but still some.
So, even though on paper that doesn't change much to the story Malice is telling, but... it makes, in my opinion, a difference in a person's life to be born and living your childhood in a country that is being occupied and suffering? I believe this little detail might bring a little more context on what lead for her to seek for escape in USA. She wasn't living in a free country. (not to mention not the best general situation concerning family matters). Things add up.
Although I haven't finished the book, so I might be wrong that it is not there.
So, even though on paper that doesn't change much to the story Malice is telling, but... it makes, in my opinion, a difference in a person's life to be born and living your childhood in a country that is being occupied and suffering? I believe this little detail might bring a little more context on what lead for her to seek for escape in USA. She wasn't living in a free country. (not to mention not the best general situation concerning family matters). Things add up.
Although I haven't finished the book, so I might be wrong that it is not there.
April 11, 2023
White-pilled
I’ve read a lot about Soviet and Russian history. Some of it is dry and challenging. This book is not. It has led to a pile of books appearing on my desk as I have a strong urge to follow up on some of source material.
It’s the first book I’ve read that juxtaposes the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact with what was happening concurrently in the UK and USA; that added a lot of context for me that I hadn’t thought about before.
I was born in 1971 in the UK, so I was aware of some of what was going on geopolitically and politically—thanks, largely, to Spitting Image—but I was much more interested in BMX and booze.
I would really have liked for the story to have gone further forward, through Yeltsin’s presidency and into Putin’s era. Is the white pill still a possibility? I hope Malice is researching for the sequel!
I’ve read a lot about Soviet and Russian history. Some of it is dry and challenging. This book is not. It has led to a pile of books appearing on my desk as I have a strong urge to follow up on some of source material.
It’s the first book I’ve read that juxtaposes the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact with what was happening concurrently in the UK and USA; that added a lot of context for me that I hadn’t thought about before.
I was born in 1971 in the UK, so I was aware of some of what was going on geopolitically and politically—thanks, largely, to Spitting Image—but I was much more interested in BMX and booze.
I would really have liked for the story to have gone further forward, through Yeltsin’s presidency and into Putin’s era. Is the white pill still a possibility? I hope Malice is researching for the sequel!
April 28, 2023
Great book
Hard to explain Michael Malice but this book is worth your time. So much was said and there is so much more that could be said. He succinctly runs through all the issues with the USSR and Communism which we should know and never repeat.
Hard to explain Michael Malice but this book is worth your time. So much was said and there is so much more that could be said. He succinctly runs through all the issues with the USSR and Communism which we should know and never repeat.
January 30, 2023
Michael Malice has masterfully crafted the tale of the 20th century.
Taking us through the depths of corruption and hell that mankind has inflicted upon itself to emerge on the other side with a clear understanding of "hope" and the conditions of victory.
The text is perfectly titled "The White Pill".
Thank you, Michael.
Taking us through the depths of corruption and hell that mankind has inflicted upon itself to emerge on the other side with a clear understanding of "hope" and the conditions of victory.
The text is perfectly titled "The White Pill".
Thank you, Michael.
April 25, 2023
I wanted to get white pilled, and that didn't really happen. However, the history is interesting, even if I didn't know that was essentially all I was gonna get.
March 24, 2023
Good history and facts, but kinda slow
I enjoyed this book, especially towards the end, but it was a little too slow. It took me a long time to get through it but I did. I would still recommend it to those that like history, into politics, or liberty-minded.
I enjoyed this book, especially towards the end, but it was a little too slow. It took me a long time to get through it but I did. I would still recommend it to those that like history, into politics, or liberty-minded.
January 9, 2024
I endured this book because it was gifted to me by a co-worker but I really don't understand what the point of the book was. What is the white pill? What is the red pill? What is the black pill? Who gives a shit? None of these questions were addressed or even asked in this book. Malice only used the phrase "the white pill" once and it was in the last sentence of the book.
I had to do a little research on Malice to get a better understanding of what the thesis of this book might be. Boy oh boy was that a miserable experience. I've come to the conclusion that Malice calls himself an anarchist as a clever way to differentiate himself from all the other right-wing grifters who share the same opinions as him. When he's not shamelessly promoting his book, he appears to spend most of his time making fun of John Fetterman for having a stroke, simping for Joe Rogan, and complaining about the government infringing on his right to yell at restaurant workers during a global pandemic. I believe the message of the book was that communism was bad, but Thatcher, Reagan, and Gorbachev were heroes. Really deep, intellectual stuff.
BUT, in all fairness, the book did have really large text which made it an easy, quick read.
I had to do a little research on Malice to get a better understanding of what the thesis of this book might be. Boy oh boy was that a miserable experience. I've come to the conclusion that Malice calls himself an anarchist as a clever way to differentiate himself from all the other right-wing grifters who share the same opinions as him. When he's not shamelessly promoting his book, he appears to spend most of his time making fun of John Fetterman for having a stroke, simping for Joe Rogan, and complaining about the government infringing on his right to yell at restaurant workers during a global pandemic. I believe the message of the book was that communism was bad, but Thatcher, Reagan, and Gorbachev were heroes. Really deep, intellectual stuff.
BUT, in all fairness, the book did have really large text which made it an easy, quick read.
January 25, 2023
This book was amazing. This is a book that really tears at the heart strings as you read it. There were multiple quotes that stuck out that really added weight to the emotional toll of the book. This book doesn't leave you guessing as to what evils transpired. Make no mistake what took place in those jails, prison camps, school houses, etc - it's all dark. With quotes like, "The darkness will always outnumber the stars." (P.206). You are taken straight to the basement of depravity with all its grit on full display. Even when the evil is so depraved it attempts to reconcile and legitimize its horror through rhetoric yet the author doesn't let up so easily by saying, "Rhetorical questions are perhaps of use rhetorically, but they do not affect reality in the slightest." (P.157)
This book reminds me very clearly of the adage. When one is traveling through hell, the quickest way out is to keep going. There is no turning back. Just always remember, regardless of how bad things get, that your opponents are not as impressive as you think and that all will be well.
This book reminds me very clearly of the adage. When one is traveling through hell, the quickest way out is to keep going. There is no turning back. Just always remember, regardless of how bad things get, that your opponents are not as impressive as you think and that all will be well.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 145 reviews