Changed my book to 'DARKNESS AT NOON' by Arthur Koestler

I was suppose to be reading "THE ELECTRIC ACID KOOL-AID TEST" but instead I read "DARKNESS AT NOON" by Arthur Koestler. It was written in 1941. It opens with quotes from Machiavelli's DISCORSI and Dostoevsky's CRIME AND PUNISHMENT. The author explains that the central character is based on a composite of people that he knew and what happened to them. The author was born in Budapest, educated in Vienna, a communist in 1930's, disillusioned with party in 1938, captured, sentenced to death, released, arrested, released, goes to England, writes, dies in 1983. This book is written to reflect what happened after the Revolution in Russia, during the 1930's. It's central character is named Rubashov, and he is arrested and put into prison, where he is urged to write a confession. The person who is in charge of the prison has been a friend and a comrade during the revolution. Why is Rubashov imprisoned, for very much the same reason our author was imprisoned, disagreeing with the Party. Rubashov was a leader in this Party, but started seeing things he disagreed with, killing of people because they had a different vision than the Party. Though he let people die to save his neck on several occasions. I remember taking my Soviet Studies class in the 1970's, we studied Russia and the revolution but I do not remember studying about the Oppositionist party. Those who felt that the Party had taken a turn from being for the people and had become a dictatorship. The people who were suppose to raise to the top still became trampled. It was a very eye opening book, similar in a way to the book "ONE DAY IN THE LIFE OF IVAN DENISOVICH" by Solzhenitsyn. When I had read that book I learned all about the Siberian labor camp, now I learned about a different type of prison. The difference is in the cell type and the circumstances of imprisonment. In fact it made me want to read Solzhenitsyn's book again. If you have not read either book I suggest that you do. There were several quotes that intrigued me in "DARKNESS AT NOON", "The ultimate truth is penultimately always a falsehood. He who will be proved right in the end appears to be wrong and harmful before it...But who will be proved right? It will only be known later..." My husband sometimes say, "Do the deed first, then ask for forgiveness later," or something to that effect. I think of war and how war crimes are determined. The losing side always pays for the what they did wrong, but sometimes the winning side has done the same thing as the losers, but the winners do not have to pay for their wrongs. To be even more specific, we gave arms to Iraqi's but then we found out the person we supported was a monster. We thought we were doing something right, but in hindsight it became a disaster. A disaster we are still paying for with innocent lives. Okay, maybe I should not read anymore political books, my next book is GRAVITIES RAINBOW in addition to rereading ONE DAY IN THE LIFE OF IVAN DENISOVICH.