The truth is that Voltaire never said "I don't agree with what you are saying, but I will fight to the end for your right to say it". This is just "democratic" lore. And yet "demodrones" like to invoke that before they shut your mouth for daring to present a truly different point of view. The truth is that there are roughly two kind of people out there: Type A: the "extreme center" This guy thinks of himself as a democrat, pluralist, a person who defends free speech and a free debate. He also happens to be a doubleplusgoodthinking ideologue who really believes that everybody sane and decent has to agree with his views are they are self-evidently the correct ones. For him, the free discourse is really an opportunity to correct the crimethinking individual who has so clearly erred away from the truth. While Type A thinks of himself as a pluralist, he really thinks in lockstep with with all those who think exactly like he does. He sees everything through a a very narrow ideological prism. I call this type the "extreme center". They care about conformity much more than about seeking the truth. They are hopelessly lukewarm and unable of true passion. Type B: the extremist This guys just seeks the truth in the opposition of ideas. He values honesty and decency much more then consensus (which he mostly views with suspicion). The more exotic or outlandish idea, the more interested he is, especially if this idea is well substantiated. He is naturally fascinated by extremists not because he agrees with them, but because he admires their passion and logical coherence. Type B can vehemently disagree with somebody and yet respect, and even admire, this person and he wants views other than his own to be available and discussed on their merits. He is a real extremist. He cares about the truth much more than about confirming to society's latest ideological dogma. I want to remind those who complain to me about something written on another Saker blog (such as the French Saker blog being critical of Marine LePen) or those who pour scorn on Sheikh Imran Hosseins' views that the Saker Community is formed by and for "Type B" people. We are not a political party, we do not hold a single political line and we do not have to agree with, or endorse, everything we, or other parts of our community, post. While our society condemns with disdain all the authoritarian and totalitarian regimes of the past, we fail to realize that most of us have been turned into a pathetic 21st century Hitlerjugend who instead of parroting "ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer" now say "one ideology, one norm, one discourse" which, if you ask me, is just as bad.
If that is what you want, if you seek validation and reassurance - just go elsewhere as you will not find that here. If you want to be comforted in your views and if you want those who hold truly different ideas to be vilified and ridiculed - just go elsewhere as you will not find that here. If your idea of pluralism is "we all are different in the very exact same way" - then just go elsewhere because you will not find that here. What is happening in France, and in the rest of the EU, is clearly a crackdown on free speech under the cover of a campaign for free speech. Those of us who are in Europe need to find the civil courage to simply say 'no' to fear, hate and stupidity. But even those of us who are not in Europe need to find the intellectual courage to reject the "One Single Correct Thought" which is imposed on us all and also reject fear, hate and stupidity.
As somebody who was born in Europe and spent most of his life there, but who has now lived a total of 17 years in the USA, I have to say that Americans are often far more capable of real pluralism then Europeans who often still are very ideological. For all its other faults, the US political system and culture did really uphold the right of free speech for everybody, not just the "good and correct ones". In contrast, European culture is still is ideological at its core and intellectual intolerance is still mostly the norm of the Old Continent. I appeal to all my readers to show the intellectual courage to break the bonds of our society's narrow dogmatic discourse and to welcome the expression of truly different views and not the vapid, tepid and stupid pseudo-debate we are told forms the "democratic discourse" nowadays. The Saker
I have been studying Hezbollah since 1995 and I don't recall Hassan Nasrallah ever delivering such a strongly worded warning as what he did today at the "Prophet Loyalty Rally". I might be mistaken, but I see several unprecedented elements in his speech today: 1. First, he clearly and unambiguously threated the USA and its Empire by stating that the consequences for releasing the full movie "Innocence of Muslims" would be extremely severe. The Americans seem to be so afraid that they began burning classified materials in the US Embassy in Beirut. 2. Second, he demanded that all the websites which would be showing the movie be shut down by national governments. 3. Third, he demanded nothing short of a worldwide legal ban on blasphemous attacks against the major figures of Islam, Christianity and Judaism. 4. Fourth, he warned any nominally "Muslim" leader who would not do their utmost to support these steps that they would be considered inadequate. 5. Fifth, he indicated that all of these demands were non-negotiable and that the Islamic world would have to choose between humiliation and martyrdom, in other words, that the price to pay for insisting on these terms did not matter. This is, in my opinion, nothing short of amazing and even somewhat disturbing. One one hand, in a world ruled by an Empire with no other morals than hedonism and greed, with no sense at all of right and wrong and whose arrogance and hubris has exploded beyond anything imaginable, it is deeply moving and exhilarating to see that somebody has finally dared to say that "enough is enough" and that there will be a real price to pay for such infinite arrogance. On the other hand, I am disturbed when I see a political and religious figure like Hassan Nasrallah (whom I immensely admire) take it upon himself to set demands about what should be done not only inside the Islamic world, but globally, world-wide. For all my numerous and recent articles condemning what I call "modern blasphemies as a quintessential hate crime", it is unclear to me by what authority Hassan Nasrallah would have the right to decree that, say, Papua New Guinea or Paraguay would have to ban a movie or shutdown a website. I would have felt more comfortable if Sayyed Hassan had invited all the countries of the world to ban insults to the religious figures central to any major faith, but what I heard today sounded less as an invitation than as an ultimatum and that is problematic to say the least. Finally, I profoundly believe in the right to freely choose between right and wrong. That right, as far as I am concerned, was granted to mankind by God in the Garden of Eden already, and I am therefore fundamentally opposed to censorship. I find any attempts at censoring the Internet as particularly dangerous because if/when the technological tools to do so are developed with the express purpose of fighting that which is fundamentally bad, the very same tools can then be used to suppress what which is fundamentally good. I have to stress here that I am basing all of the above on the on-the-fly interpretation of Nasrallah's speech by Press TV, which one can hardly consider an official position of Hezbollah. I also am not sure as to whether Hassan Nasrallah has the rank and authority to make such global statement in the name of his followers or whether he should have waited for an official position on this matter by his spiritual guide Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Whatever may be the case, it sure looks like there is going to be hell to pay for the US Empire for is systematic lack of even minimal respect for that which other nations or religious hold for sacred. In that sense, what is happening today is a much needed wake-up call for the rest of the planet indeed. What I see here is what I would call a "return of the sacred" and I welcome it with all my heart. That sense of sacred is, I strongly believe, a central characteristic of the truly civilized human being (as opposed to the only technologically advanced one but with the conscience and morals of an amoeba) and while the Western world, terminally brainwashed by secularism and Masonic propaganda, thinks that it can "de-sacralize" the rest of humanity it appears that these attempts are resulting into some rather nasty blowback. If the translation by Press TV is correct and if, indeed, Nasrallah's reaction is a bit over the top and raises all sorts of delicate issues with its "planetary scope", I still can't say that I feel very sorry for those who, by design or by crass ignorance, never bothered to contemplate the potential consequences of their actions or their allegiance. The issue of freedom of thought versus blasphemy is an important and complex one and, at least so far, the utter lack of anything worthy of being called "thought" in the imbecile movie which triggered it all does not quite call for a discussion of it. However, Hassan Nasrallah's speech might provide an excellent opportunity to ask the right questions about how to deal with true thought which might still be perceived as blasphemous by some. Your thoughts? The Saker
Two high profile freedom of speech cases are unfolding these days, the one of the Pussy Riot sentencing in Moscow and the granting by Ecuador of political asylum to Julian Assange. I would argue that both cases are in many ways if not similar, then at least comparable to each other. After all, in both cases we have college drop-outs breaking the laws of major power and in both cases the offenders have become something of a symbol of resistance to the power of the state and the right to free speech. There are also some very important differences between these two cases, crucial ones, I would argue, which would also make it reasonable to view these cases as not similar, but rather polar opposites.
So in order to organize this issue in my mind, I decided to make a little table comparing and contrasting the Pussy Riot and Julian Assange cases. This is, of course, hardly an exhaustive comparison. Think of it rather as a "back of the napkin" kind of quick review:
And yet, looking at this table, I find myself wondering how a Russian "performance group" (that is what they call themselves) like Pussy Riot became the almost instant mega-hero of so many Western public figures. Do you think that I am exaggerating? Then check out this list of Pussy Riot supporters I found on Wikipedia:
Kate Nash, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Sting, Peter Gabriel, Cornershop, Faith No More, Alex Kapranos of Franz Ferdinand, Neil Tennant of the Pet Shop Boys, Patti Smith, The Beastie Boys, Refused, Zola Jesus, Die Antwoord, Jarvis Cocker, Pete Townshend, The Joy Formidable, Peaches, Madonna, Genesis, Tegan and Sara, Johnny Marr, Courtney Love, Iiro Rantala, Propagandhi, Anti-Flag, Rise Against, Corinne Bailey Rae, Peter Hammill, Kathleen Hanna, Björk, Paul McCartney, Yoko Ono, British comedian Stephen Fry, Reykjavík Mayor Jón Gnarr and Warren Kinsella. A letter of support from 120 members of the German parliament, the Bundestag, was sent to the Russian Ambassador to Germany, Vladimir Grinin. The letter referred to proceedings against the women as being disproportionate and draconian. On August 9, 2012, 400 Pussy Riot supporters in Berlin marched wearing colored balaclavas in a show of support for the group.
To this, I would add the very intensive and, frankly, totally over-the-top coverage of the Western corporate media of the Pussy Riot trial.
Amazing, no? Could it be due to the quality of actual "musical performance" (called "punk prayer") which got these ladies arrested? Well, judge for yourself:
And to get a full "appreciation" for their artistic "talent", here is the translation of the lyrics:
St. Maria, Virgin, Drive away Putin
Drive away! Drive away Putin!
Black robe, golden epaulettes
All parishioners are crawling and bowing
The ghost of freedom is in heaven
Gay pride sent to Siberia in chains
The head of the KGB is their chief saint
Leads protesters to prison under escort
In order not to offend the Holy
Women have to give birth and to love
Holy shit, shit, Lord's shit!
Holy shit, shit, Lord's shit!
St. Maria, Virgin, become a feminist
Become a feminist, Become a feminist
Church praises the rotten dictators
The cross-bearer procession of black limousines
In school you are going to meet with a teacher-preacher
Go to class - bring him money!
Patriarch Gundyaev believes in Putin
Bitch, you better believed in God
Belt of the Virgin is no substitute for mass-meetings
In protest of our Ever-Virgin Mary!
St. Maria, Virgin, Drive away Putin
Drive away! Drive away Putin!
While I cannot disagree with some of the ideas contained in this screed (the Moscow Patriarchate is, indeed, both highly corrupted and totally controlled by the Kremlin, and "Patriarch" Gudaev is a scoundrel and crook of the worst kind), it is rather obvious to me that the real intention of this performance is not to denounce any wrongs, but to achieve a maximum shock effect. In fact, the Pussy Riot collective is nothing but the latest re-packaging of the infamous "Voina" ("war" in Russian) performance group which became famous by such "events" as organizing group sex flash mobs in public museums or having sex with a frozen chicken in a supermarket. You probably think that I am jocking, right? Nope, and to prove this, I am (reluctantly) posting these (deliberately small sized) photos of these "events" here. And if you think that I am exaggerating something, you can click on these photos for a better view of these "events" or you can even follow the following links for a full series of large, non-pixellated, and rather nauseating photographs:
If the first of these events was supposed to be some kind of statement about (then) President Medvedev, the second one - entitled "why was the chicken f*cked" and "tale about how the c*nt fed the war" - did not even carry some vague message of any kind.
It is rather obvious these ladies, whether packaged as "Pussy Riot" or as "Voina", have no other message and no other purpose than to offend, disgust or shock. Their sole stroke of genius was to add to their usual sex-centered "performances" an anti-Putin and anti-Orthodox message. Here, they really struck gold as that got them an overnight hero status in the West. And that, in turn, says much more about the West, than about these sexually frustrated and otherwise dysfunctional women.
Indeed, while the western elites are lining up behind Pussy Riot, a putatively civilized western country like the UK is acting like some kind of comic-book Nazi regime, writing threat letters to a sovereign country like Ecuador:
For all the diplomatic verbiage wrapped around it, this is a crude, mobster like, letter of blackmail. Furthermore, and as I already mentioned in my commentary yesterday, there is absolutely no precedent in recent history to the kind of behavior shown by the UK in this matter. In fact, ALL of the Assange case is one never ending exercise in bending and abusing the law for the purpose of persecuting Assange: from the ridiculous allegations of non-protected sex, to the Interpol Red Notice, to the categorical refusal of the Swedish prosecutors to interview Assange in the UK, to the British refusal to give any guarantees of non-extradition and, finally, the the British threats to storm the Ecuadorian embassy - its all totally without precedent.
Compare that, again, to the case of the Pussy Riot prosecution in Russia which is very much in line, or even less severe, than what is considered the norm in most western countries (check this excellent and detailed legal analysis by Alexander Mercouris for more info).
It is true that what is at the core of both issues is free speech. It does not matter whether speech is intended to be political or in support of some noble ideal, or whether free is used to offend, insult or shock. Speech is speech regardless. However, why is it that the western elites do not support all forms of hate-speech like they do support Pussy Riot's?
Would anybody seriously suggest that if these ladies had organized their performance in, say, a French synagogue, the western elites would all rise up in their defense? Of course not. So what is going on here?
Furthermore, speech is not the same as opinion. If, at least in theory, western societies do not limit the expression of opinion, they all limit the freedom of speech be it for national security reasons, repression of hate crimes, liable laws, etc.
So let's cut through the crap here and set the record straight: the West's support for Pussy Riot is not due to to their opinions about Putin or the Moscow Patriarchate (such opinions can - and are - frequently and freely expressed in Russia), and neither is it due to some unconditional support for free speech, which the West also restricts (much more so than Russia, I would argue).
The sad truth is that the West's support for Pussy Riot is, in reality, nothing more than yet another expression of its rabid hatred for anything Russian or Russian Orthodox. And if that means erecting a small group of sexually dysfunctional women into a banner for freedom, so be it!And that if that also means looking away from the obscene and outrageous persecution of a real hero for freedom like Julian Assange by the US Empire and its vassals - then so be it also!
In a paradoxical way, Pussy Riot are a perfect symbol of what the West stands for, just as Julian Assange has become a symbol for what Russia - and all the other nations on earth which refuse to submit to the US Empire - stand for.
I see some poetic justice here, a form of karma, really. The modern, post-Christian, pagan, West, with all its boundless hypocrisy and arrogance, has sunk to a gutter level of ideological warfare, openly supporting the sick and pathological and persecuting the noble and courageous. I also find it quite beautiful that a small country like Ecuador has dared to do that which all the otherwise self-enamored countries of Europe could not: show some true courage, dignity and self-respect.
Truly - to each his own hero and his own villain.
Epilogue (provisional):
So Pussy Riot got themselves two years in jail. I would have preferred that they be given 5 years of community service (you know, actually doing something halfway productive for their fellow Russians), but that would immediately turn into yet another media circus, so I guess the judge made a good call.
As for Assange, his future will depend on the courage, or lack thereof, of the rest of the Latin American countries. Ecuador cannot, by itself, prevail in a contest of wills against Uncle Sam's Poodle, but if this case sufficiently polarizes the public opinion in Latin America, the resulting public outrage might have some financial consequences for the UK and that might well force it to find some civilized and mutually acceptable solution to this embarrassing situation. It would be nice if Russia or China also helped, but I am not holding my breath here - these two are not known for their altruism.
One more thing:
I apologize to anybody offended by the crude photos I posted today. First, I assume that we are all adults here, but more importantly, and just like in my two articles about the "homo-lobby" (here and here), I feel that it is important to show things for what they really are and not just stick to abstract concepts. It is one thing to discuss "sexual diversity" or "freedom of speech" and quite another to see a half-naked "man" with feathers or a woman publicly sticking a frozen chicken into her vagina. A crude, disgusting, pathological and grotesque reality needs to be shown for what it is, and not for what its supporters want it to be.
PPS: Here is the Ukrainian version of support for Pussy Riot:
Topless Protester Cuts Down Cross in Kiev
Activists from the Ukrainian feminist group Femen cut down a wooden crucifix in the center of the country’s capital, Kiev, on Friday in support of members of the Russian punk band Pussy Riot whose trial on hooliganism charges comes to an end today.
A video posted online showed a topless blond Femen protester wearing red shorts, with the words “Free Riot” scrawled across her chest and arms, cutting the cross with a chainsaw and then pulling it down using a rope pulled by two other activists, and then posing with her arms extended crucifix-style.
The cross was put up on a high hill near Kiev’s downtown Independence Square during the 2004 pro-democracy Orange Revolution to commemorate the victims of political repression under Joseph Stalin.
“By this act, Femen is calling on all the healthy forces of our society to mercilessly cut out of our brains the rotten religious prejudices which dictatorships rely upon and which prevent the development of democracy and women’s freedom,” the Segodnya daily quoted the activists as saying.
First, go to Amazon.com (not Amazon.co.uk or Amazon.fr or any other Amazon site) Then click on "Gift Card" on the top of the page Then click on "Email" at the "Ways to Send" menu Finally, choose a card and amount. That's it!
Cash by snail mail:
The Saker PO Box 711 Edgewater, FL 32132-0711 USA
Free Novels (PDF) for Saker Blog Supporters
e-book in *PDF* format - not paperback!
How to contact me:
Main email address: vineyardsaker@gmail.com (for example to be included in the "Saker's friends" low volume mailing list) Alternative/backup emails: vineyardsaker@mail.ru thesaker@unseen.is
Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known. If ye continue in My word, then are ye My disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free
Holy Gospel according to Saint Matthew (10:26) and Saint John (8:32)
Trust not in princes, nor in the children of men, in whom there is no safety. His breath shall go forth, and he shall return to his earth; in that day all his thoughts shall perish.
Holy Prophet and King David (Psalm 145:3-4 according to the LXX)
To love. To be loved. To never forget your own insignificance. To never get used to the unspeakable violence and the vulgar disparity of life around you. To seek joy in the saddest places. To pursue beauty to its lair. To never simplify what is complicated or complicate what is simple. To respect strength, never power. Above all, to watch. To try and understand. To never look away. And never, never to forget.
Arundhati Roy
Thou shalt not be a victim. Thou shalt not be a perpetrator. And above all, Thou shalt not be a bystander
Yehuda Bauer
In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act
George Orwell
Each small candle lights a corner of the dark
Roger Waters
I am prepared to die, but there is no cause for which I am prepared to kill. I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. Strength does not come from physical capacity. It comes from an indomitable will.
Mahatma Gandhi
I am for truth, no matter who tells it.
Malcolm X
Globalize the Intifada!
Lowkey
I am a pessimist by nature. Many people can only keep on fighting when they expect to win. I'm not like that, I always expect to lose. I fight anyway, and sometimes I win.
Richard Stallman
Truth is treason in the empire of lies.
Ron Paul
Dieu se rit des hommes qui déplorent les effets dont ils chérissent les causes
Protect Freedom - Join the Free Software Foundation!
Quenelle Epaulee
No to Internet censorship!
Save the Internet from corporate greed!
GNU/Linux distributions I recommend:
Debian, the Universal Operating System Mint, the easiest to use distribution Xubuntu, distribution for older hardware Knoppix, general purpose distro on live-CD Puppy, small size distribution and live-CD Tails, the privacy and security oriented distro Ubuntu Studio, distribution for artists Trisquel, the 100% free softwaredistro
