Tolstoy was an extraordinary writer, but just as importantly, he was an extraordinary human being. Late in life, after writing novels that are true masterpieces, he critically examined morality and his life. At the age of 56, he wrote ‘What I Believe’, which outlined his beliefs in pacifism and non-violence, heavily influenced by The Sermon on the Mount. The following year, he would become a vegetarian in a single afternoon, following a conversation with a friend. In the decades that followed until his death at 82, he was a pillar of idealism and love, speaking out against religious hypocrisy and the violence perpetuated by governments, including his own, greatly influencing Gandhi and later Martin Luther King, Jr.

In this book, most of which was written at the age of 80, Tolstoy wished to communicate his deepest thoughts to the world before dying. While idealistic, his comments on humanity and the ways of the world are challenging, thought-provoking, and profound, all while remaining rooted in benevolence. He may repeat the concepts a bit, but he gets them across in different ways, and one is humbled while reading. It was also fantastic to see his letter to Gandhi in South Africa at the end of this edition, written just two and half months before he died, as both men are personal heroes to me.

Tolstoy’s main points:

- Christianity, as practiced for the past 1900 years, is “pseudo-Christianity”, because it violates the fundamental teachings of Christ, who was non-violent, pacifist, and a socialist/communist. Turning the other cheek, not accumulating wealth, and loving one’s enemy are very real to Tolstoy, and he believed the real meaning of the Gospels allowed for no exceptions. He believed that the intelligentsia and rich had known of this contradiction for centuries, but hypocritically did nothing because they wished to preserve their wealth and the existing order. Some portion of the masses had also known it, but continued to follow the age-old customs and norms.

- Governmental power and the warfare which results is maintained willingly by the masses, but could be overturned through non-compliance. He quotes the French writer Étienne de La Boétie’s “Voluntary Slavery” as saying that a ruler over a great nation may have only 6 who are steadfastly loyal to them, but they in turn have 600 in their power, who in turn have 6,000, and so on, with each step in the pyramid maintained as small tyrants under a great tyrant. He believed that the masses could reject this scheme and everything that comes with it (taxes, conscription, forced labor), and just live in peace. Far from fearing anarchy, he embraced it, and in the case conscientious objection, believed that there is a spiritual basis and higher moral right to do so.

- Violence can never be condoned. Neither can the use of force over another group, or coercing them into something they oppose, because it will harden their resolve and lead to violence from them in turn, continuing the cycle. Tolstoy refers to wars as “international mass-murders”, criticizes the ‘Great Powers’ of the day for their imperialism, and the Papacy for trying to stifle Protestantism. He believed that “the admission of the necessity of resisting evil by violence is nothing but a justification by men of their habitual and favorite crimes: revenge, cupidity, envy, ambition, love of power, pride, and anger.”

- Love is the answer. Tolstoy believed this was best articulated by Christ, but recognized that all religions and philosophies had elements of mercy, brotherhood, and the Golden Rule. He lamented that those who are fundamentally good and acknowledged a moral law sometimes “regard the teaching of love, which rejects all violence (and especially the doctrine of not repaying evil with evil which flows from that teaching) as something fantastical, impossible, and quite inapplicable to life.” He believed that first and foremost, people needed to turn within and perfect themselves, rather than attempt to force others to believe differently or wage war on them.

Pretty impressive, and explosive stuff. He was in favor of non-violently overturning both Church and State, the most powerful institutions. He was not only an idealist, but also an optimist. He believed that humanity was just around the corner from taking real steps towards enlightenment, and that in the end Love must win out. He would die in 1910, and not see the century of warfare and violence which would follow on a horrific scale. It’s hard to know what his position in the face of genocide and concentration camps would be, or how optimistic he would have remained. However, what is clear, at least to me, is that his teachings and moral rectitude are a beacon of light in a dark world, that whether the absolute ideal of non-violence can ever be achieved it must become the strict default, and that humanity desperately needs this voice. ( )

A good book by Tolstoy; one of the last books he wrote. His premise is that if all people really followed the law of love we would have no need for governments and law. He's a bit repetitive here and short on actual solutions to the problems he raises, but it was still a good book and he raises good points. (I still recommend "The Kingdom of God is Within You" for a better look at his viewpoints.) ( )