Skip to comments.How Pussy Riot Bamboozled the Media
Posted on 08/22/2012 4:31:56 AM PDT by Kaslin
If Justin Bieber or the Rolling Stones suddenly decided to stage an impromptu concert in a public place somewhere in America without a permit, would the authorities ignore it and shrug it off? Doubtful. Even buskers performing in the New York City subway system can't play without formal authorization from the city.
What about taking such a musical performance into a church? If Jennifer Lopez or Madonna just showed up in a place of worship, stripped down to their skivvies and started dancing around the altar, would that fly in any Western democracy? Not likely.
So why, then, are three young women in Russia getting so much sympathy from the mainstream media for doing precisely this inside a Russian Orthodox church?
Last week, three members of the activist group Pussy Riot were each sentenced to two years in prison for hooliganism motivated by religious hatred. The group's members are part of a larger protest group called Voina, which has previously been involved in various acts of public nuisance, including group sex in a museum and shoplifting a whole chicken from a supermarket by stuffing into an activist's lady parts.
Voina and Pussy Riot are the Russian version of the Occupy Wall Street protest crowd. Their modus operandi is to use "art" in its various forms as a cover for acting like jerks and flaunting police warnings. They exploit the sentiment that artists worldwide generally should be given more behavioral license than the general public because they've historically pushed the boundaries of free expression.
One would hope that the public is able to tell the difference between Pussy Riot and, say, Voltaire -- who was thrown into a French prison for criticizing government and the Catholic Church in his extensive body of writing. Voltaire's career was writing, while Pussy Riot's entire career consists of hooliganism with a sprinkling of poor-quality "music" thrown in. Voltaire published several novels, plays, poems and essays, and in doing so, just happened to tick off the powers that be. Pussy Riot hasn't even recorded an album. Their credibility as artists is poorly established, unlike their activist background.
Boiled down, the Pussy Riot case is just another example of the social media generation's demand for instant gratification and attention in the absence of any sustained hard work. The protesters chose the shallowest form of subversion possible, their rationale apparently being that by doing a lewd can-can-girl number in a church, they can successfully overturn the government of a G8 country. That's some serious stoner logic.
The longer game of subversion would have required them to spend years working to get into a key position within the power structure, then influencing and subverting the system to change what they don't like. The effects of such an effort would have been more organic, credible and durable.
Or, at the very least, they could have practiced for several years to hone their "art" in the event that they were serious about being artists and not just serious about being hooligans. That's why Madonna can say all sorts of nonsense from a concert stage and constantly push the boundaries of free speech without getting arrested -- because she's actually earned the "artist" label and the leeway society affords it.
Somehow Russian President Vladimir Putin has been dragged into all this, presumably because this story is sexier with a Bond villain -- and because it's always preferable to hold someone else responsible for one's own bad behavior. Pussy Riot supporters claim that Putin has the long knives out for the band because they mentioned him in a song. The idea of Putin sitting around blubbering over being badmouthed by some girls in a YouTube video certainly undermines any evil image. The smearing of Putin as hypersensitive and vindictive would have been more credible had they intelligently addressed Putin's policies without breaking any laws, or associated themselves with a larger group of activists known for flaunting it relentlessly and treating it as a joke. Pussy Riot didn't keep its powder dry.
It's not as if Putin just invented the Russian law against hooliganism. The penalty of up to seven years in prison wasn't concocted especially for Pussy Riot. In fact, the same crime of religious hooliganism in Germany carries a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment -- a year more than the sentence Pussy Riot members received.
The Western media should save its tears for those who truly deserve them.
Once again, you only see this through the filter of OWS instead of the situation in Russia. The two are not the same. Russia is facing actual repression of political views. And the Church is in bed with the fascists.
I've been in touch with a few Russians inside Russia via facebook. One is stridently defensive of Putin, pointing to his pretty pro-capitalism, pro-freedom essays.
Okay, it's easy to write one way but live another, right?
Anyways, I don't view Putin as trying to take Russia back to Communism. I view Putin as taking Russia back to Tsarism, with Putin as the Tsar.
“I dont have a lot of sympathy for groups who protest in churches. I dont care much for PRs music (Ive never heard it anyway), Im just think two years in jail for pulling a stupid stunt where nothing was damaged is a tad harsh. I wouldnt like it if Dem protesters invaded the Republican convention to stage a protest, but I wouldnt advocate two years in prison as a punishment. Three months of picking up litter or something like that would be a proper punishment.”
Play your stupid game, here’s your stupid prize.
Down to the sex in public, down to a showing of them portraying the anti-Putin opposition as a bunch of anarchic barbarians? If anything they are destroying the anti-Putin movement by giving putie proof that "see, these are my opposition, they act like scum, do you want to vote for them?"
So fascism is fine and dandy with you as long as the other side that you disagree with goes to jail.
I guess it doesn't occur to you that sooner or later, someone will disagree with YOU and want to use that same power against your political point of view.
I am going in no such tanget. Garry Kasparov, who puts his butt on the line for political rights in Russia, has declared PR to be political prisoners. Which they are.
Too many people are OK with people they strongly disagree with being persecuted for their views, failing to realize that the persecution never stops there.
If you want to not be persecuted for your point of view, you need to stand up when someone else is being persecuted for theirs. I'm sure a lot of folks in colonial America didn't think much of throwing tea in Boston Harbor, either. That was actually destruction of property.
Uh, dude, in case you've failed to follow the recent news out of Russia, there is no such thing as a legal means to protest him.
But no, they had to break the law, act like skanks and desecrate a church. I have no patience for that.
This is the nature of the church in question:
That Christ the Savior Cathedral had become a significant symbol in the political strategy of the authorities was clear to many thinking people when Vladimir Putins former [KGB] colleague Kirill Gundyayev took over as leader of the Russian Orthodox Church. After this happened, Christ the Savior Cathedral began to be openly used as a flashy backdrop for the politics of the security forces, which are the main source of political power in Russia.
So if there was a state church in the US and Obama appointed Eric Holder as its head, and that church openly promoted Obama's fascism, would you be so willing to defend it from protests?
Is that your opinion when Christians are being assaulted & killed in other countries by Muslims, sometimes with cooperation of the government?
Isn't it ironic that many of the same people who have no trouble calling Obama a dictator, etc have no problem being apologists for Putin?
Obama, reprehensible as he is, can't hold a candle to Putin in the dictator department.
If you want to define church as a pro-commie,KGB sanctioned institution then yes they desecrated a church. I think Pussy Riot should be applauded for their courageous stand for freedom and exposing this “church” and for the sham that it is.
The Russian Orthodox Church desecrated itself by allowing a Putin toady to be appointed its head. Nothing Pussy Riot could do could possibly sully that church any worse.
You are more concerned with the antics of leftist protestors than the abuse of state power to curb dissent.
Now, what if Obama declared himself to be dictator for life and used the White House as a center for cracking down on freedoms in this country? What shows more contempt for America in that case? Hedonistic skanks or the fascist with the power to end our liberties?
People are looking at this through their own filters of what is happening in America. They would be really P.O.'d if OWS barged into their Sunday services and trampled on the alter, and I would agree with them.P>But in Russia, the church has become a vassal of the fascist state. Pussy Riot had bona fide reasons to be protesting both Putin and the Orthodox Church. Whether or not we agree with their methods, they did bring attention to what Putin is doing to political dissent in his country - and they are paying with such with jail time.
And last I checked, we are political dissenters in our country, and many on the left think we should be locked up and persecuted.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.