7 years of prison for pussy riot?

idk how much coverage this story is getting except on my facebook feed

It was the top story on the CBC News page a day or two ago. More than one celebrity, including Madonna, has spoken publicly about it.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=bbc+pussy+riot&src=IE-SearchBox&Form=IE8SRC
http://www.bing.com/search?q=ny+times+pussy+riot&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=ny+times+pussy+riot&sc=0-0&sp=-1&sk=

Fwiw:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=bbc+nasrin+sotoudeh&src=IE-SearchBox&Form=IE8SRC
http://www.bing.com/search?q=ny+times+nasrin+sotoudeh&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=ny+times+nasrin+sotoudeh&sc=0-0&sp=-1&sk=

That nytimes op-ed is just insane.

standing behind Pussy Riot only now, when it is obviously blameless and the government clearly guilty, is pure opportunism

http://www.vice.com/read/we-too-are-hooligans

*barfs*

inspiring

why the hell am I still clicking on Red State links when I won't go near Vice with a ten foot pole

But no amount of bitching, or blogging, or tweeting was making me, or any of the rest of us, feel like we were doing enough to show that we felt something about this. That we cared.

"Fuck it. Let's get tattoos."

poss. key phrase

yeah this is a hall of fame "lol privileged white kids" story

lol

He concentrated on his beer during the ouchy parts. He concentrated on his beer during the ouchy parts. He concentrated on his beer during the ouchy parts. He concentrated on his beer during the ouchy parts. He concentrated on his beer during the ouchy parts. He concentrated on his beer during the ouchy parts.

From NYT op-ed:

Pussy Riot’s fans in the West need to understand that their heroes’ dissent will not stop at Putin; neither will it stop if and when Russia becomes a “normal” liberal democracy. Because what Pussy Riot wants is something that is equally terrifying, provocative and threatening to the established order in both Russia and the West (and has been from time immemorial): freedom from patriarchy, capitalism, religion, conventional morality, inequality and the entire corporate state system. We should only support these brave women if we, too, are brave enough to go all the way.

Terrifying? I dunno, at least half of those I'd be fine with. Freedom from patriarchy? Let's go!

ha, apparently (via google translate) хулиган can mean "molester" as well as "hooligan".

OH NOES PUSSY RIOT WANT FREEDOM FROM PATRIARCHY? HOW COULD I HAVE BEEN SO BLIND?

We should only support these brave women if we, too, are brave enough to go all the way.

This is idiotic. If anything, defending freedom of expression is more meaningful when we defend the freedom of people we don't agree with.

I think the writer is at least reasonably sympathetic to their aims. The gist of the piece, as far i saw it, was that the politicians and newspapers lining up to support them would probably hate them with a passion if they tried to pull the same thing in the US, UK or France and that to only engage with their ideas as a freedom of speech issue does them a disservice.

ha, apparently (via google translate) хулиган can mean "molester" as well as "hooligan"

football molesters

to only engage with their ideas as a freedom of speech issue does them a disservice.

But what if the freedom of speech issue is what concerns you? I'd defend the freedom of speech of a Nazi sympathizer as well. Do I need to like their music too in order to oppose the jailing (because I don't especially)?

Does Pussy Riot have a manifesto somewhere? Have they spoken about all those other issues? I don't disbelieve that they might believe in all those things; I'm just wondering. This op-ed was the only place I heard about them having an all-encompassing radical ideology.

I agree that the article doesn't necessarily make a strong case but there's more than a grain of truth in saying that organs like the Daily Mail and Vice which have traditionally had fairly strong sexist and racist agendas are missing at least some of Pussy Riot's intended message while claiming solidarity with them. The freedom of speech issue probably can stand alone, though.

Voina has been involved in a lot of different actions that aren't specifically related to freedom of speech issues but i can't recall ever seeing a full manifesto. I imagine, as an art collective, they've probably got one though.

not a manifesto, but those linked statements and letters are pretty strong.

Benefit, proceeds to Pussy Riot Legal Defense Fund--will this be a trend, is it already? Hope so.

http://ih.constantcontact.com/fs071/1102000774575/img/1510.png

Sorry!
http://ih.constantcontact.com/fs071/1102000774575/img/1510.png

It's in L.A.

But what if the freedom of speech issue is what concerns you? I'd defend the freedom of speech of a Nazi sympathizer as well.

Uh. Really? I've kinda held back from this debate because I've agree with most of what has been said - and, well, I don't post much. But this is off, IMO. I cannot defend, for example, David Irving's right to deny the holocaust which led to him being barred from Germany, where that is a criminal offence in that country. Going further still, I won't defend the right of a Nazi sympathiser in the UK for any espousal of race hate, where it is a criminal offence to incite racial hatred.

i grant nations the right to self-govern, but as an american speaking about my own country, sure, i'd defend the right of a holocaust denier to put forth that view. i don't think that erroneous thinking can be effectively countered if it isn't given the chance to present itself publicly.

in a more general (and perhaps arrogant) sense, i think that all people should be free to speak their minds in this manner.

I will totally defend assholes' right to say assholish things in public, and that goes for Nazis.

if they cross the line to specifically inciting violence, that's a different story, and is not protected free speech under the 1st Amendment.

otm

imo there is a clear and very real difference between someone saying "Jews should be exterminated" in a general sense and someone pointing at me and saying "kill that Jew over there". Both statements are personally offensive, but only the latter is a direct threat.

Inciting racial hatred can be saying assholish things in public.

hatred is not a crime

eh, not so sure about that myself. my willingness to defend free speech ends at the point where anyone's "extermination" is being called for, whether in a general or specific sense. would defend awful stuff that doesn't edge quite so close to incitement of violence.

Inciting racial hatred is - in the Uk

xp

Uh. Really? I've kinda held back from this debate because I've agree with most of what has been said - and, well, I don't post much. But this is off, IMO. I cannot defend, for example, David Irving's right to deny the holocaust which led to him being barred from Germany, where that is a criminal offence in that country. Going further still, I won't defend the right of a Nazi sympathiser in the UK for any espousal of race hate, where it is a criminal offence to incite racial hatred.

― kraudive, Tuesday, August 21, 2012 11:07 PM (14 minutes ago)

i'm not gonna spend my time lecturing germany for having that law (tho i can't see ANY good that came out of sending irving to prison), but freedom of speech means very little if it doesn't protect awful and offensive views. if we can send ppl to prison for expressing sympathy for the nazis, i don't know what we do with all the leftists down the years who've expressed sympathy for stalin (or lenin, for that matter), or all the nutjobs with confederate flag shirts.

how's that workin out for you guys kraudive. racial hatred all gone yet?

Well. That's different isn't it?

I know a lot of the UK's ultra-white Nationalists have been convicted of just that thing in the last couple of years. This law may have stopped a thuggish element overtake the marginal ultra right wing parties - they have divided into smaller bands of even more unelectable units. Unlike, for example - in France, where the Far Right have found some government.

I have the impression that in France even the leftists are racists but what do I know

LOL, yes, "Fight the power", get tattoos.

How very subversive of you guys, getting a tattoo of 'hooligan' in Russian, i bet you are celebrating by buying the best coke you can get. You're gonna get some mad punk rock sex with those new tattoos, you edgy pieces of shit.

I suppose it's easier than, i dunno, flying over to Russia and protesting outside the prison or something. Or really doing anything.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0250_0616_ZD.html

The Chik-Fil-A farrago (obv pales beside what's happening to PR) was a welcome reminder that good liberals are absolutist when affirming the First Amendment rights of disgusting people.

This law may have stopped a thuggish element overtake the marginal ultra right wing parties

at the risk of sounding glib, so what if it has and why should you need a law to punish speech used by a thuggish element?

The Chik-Fil-A farrago (obv pales beside what's happening to PR) was a welcome reminder that good liberals are absolutist when affirming the First Amendment rights of disgusting people.

absolutely. i'd never condemn anyone just for threatening to boycott a restaurant.

boycotting a restaurant isn't an infringement on anyone's First Amendment rights

i'd never condemn anyone just for threatening to boycott a restaurant.

huh?

;)

Uh. Really?

Really. Hate speech is against the Criminal Code in Canada too and I oppose this policy, preferring the US's approach in this area. (Afaik, it only gets you a fine here, not jail time.) If a Nazi skinhead band were to record an anti-Indian record and get fined for it, you can bet I'd be willing to, uh, comment on message boards and cover the issue in a class, which is the extent of my support of Pussy Riot so far.

Btw, according to Wikipedia, hate speech can get you up to a year in jail in France and denying the Holocaust can get you five years. It doesn't seem that this has stopped the Far Right from "finding some government".

The laws against inciting racial hatred are relatively rarely used in the UK (and in a majority of cases not used against white people) but there has traditionally been a link between explicit racist propagandising in specific areas and an increase in racist violence in those areas, as far as i know. The far right doesn't pose an intellectual or political threat to the country, it poses a threat to individuals with baseball bats and bricks.

http://m.vice.com/read/we-too-are-hooligans

- max

lol like many a vice "story" about "issues" this one was just another exercise in self-aggrandizement.

Are there boycotts in Russia?