The Wrong Reasons to Back Pussy Riot

<table><tr><td>From <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/opinion/the-wrong-reasons-to-back-puss... York Times</a> - By Vadim Nikitin

From Madonna to Bjork, from the elite New Yorker to the populist Daily Mail, the world united in supporting Russia’s irreverent feminist activists Pussy Riot against the blunt cruelty inflicted on them by the state. It may not have stopped Vladimir Putin’s kangaroo court from sentencing them to two years in prison on charges of hooliganism, but blanket international media pressure helped turn the case into a major embarrassment for the Kremlin.

Yet there is something about the West’s embrace of the young women’s cause that should make us deeply uneasy, as Pussy Riot’s philosophy, activism and even music quickly took second place to its usefulness in discrediting one of America’s geopolitical foes. Twenty years after the end of the Cold War, are dissident intellectuals once again in danger of becoming pawns in the West’s anti-Russian narrative?</td><td><img title="Pawns of radical artists. Check fucking mate." src="http://anarchistnews.org/files/pictures/2012/pussyriotfans.jpg"></td></t...

Back in the ’70s, the United States and its allies cared little about what Soviet dissidents were actually saying, so long as it was aimed against the Kremlin. No wonder so many Americans who had never read Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s books cheered when he dissed the Soviet Union later felt so shocked, offended and even betrayed when he criticized many of the same shortcomings in his adoptive homeland. Wasn’t this guy supposed to be on our side?

Using dissidents to score political points against the Russian regime is as dangerous as adopting a pet tiger: No matter how domesticated they may seem, in the end they are free spirits, liable to maul the hand that feeds them.

How many fans of Pussy Riot’s zany “punk prayer” in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova’s erudite and moving closing statement were equally thrilled by her participation, naked and heavily pregnant, in a public orgy at a Moscow museum in 2008? That performance, by the radical art group Voina (Russian for “war”), was meant to illustrate how Russians were abused by their government. Voina had previously set fire to a police car and drew obscene images on a St. Petersburg drawbridge.

Stunts like that would get you arrested just about anywhere, not just in authoritarian Russia. But Pussy Riot and its comrades at Voina come as a full package: You can’t have the fun, pro-democracy, anti-Putin feminism without the incendiary anarchism, extreme sexual provocations, deliberate obscenity and hard-left politics.

Unless you are comfortable with all that (and I strongly suspect 99 percent of Pussy Riot’s fans in the mainstream media are not), then standing behind Pussy Riot only now, when it is obviously blameless and the government clearly guilty, is pure opportunism. And just like in the bad old days, such knee-jerk yet selective support for Russian dissidents — without fully engaging with their ideas — is not only hypocritical but also does a great disservice to their cause.

A former Soviet dissident and current member of the anti-Putin opposition, Eduard Limonov, knows such cynicism too well. Thrown out of the Soviet Union and welcomed in New York as a Cold War trophy, Limonov soon learned that it wasn’t the dissent part that the United States loved about Soviet dissidents, but their anti-communism. A bristly and provocative anti-Soviet leftist, he got to work doing what he did best — taking on the establishment — and quickly found himself in hot water again, this time with the Americans. Limonov concluded that “the F.B.I. is just as zealous in putting down American radicals as the K.G.B. is with its own radicals and dissidents.”

At the core of much of the media fever over Pussy Riot lies a fundamental misunderstanding of what these Russian dissidents are about. Some outlets have portrayed the case as a quest for freedom of expression and other ground rules of liberal democracy. Yet the very phrase “freedom of expression,” with its connotations of genteel protest as a civic way to blow off some steam while life goes on, is alien to Russian radical thought. The members of Pussy Riot are not liberals looking for self-expression. They are self-confessed descendants of the surrealists and the Russian futurists, determined to radically, even violently, change society.

Anyone who has bothered to see them beyond their relevance as anti-Kremlin proxies will know that these young people are as contemptuous of capitalism as they are of Putinism. They are targeting not just Russian authoritarianism, but, in Tolokonnikova’s words, the entire “corporate state system.” And that applies to the West as much as to Russia itself. It includes many of the fawning foreign media conglomerates covering the trial, like Murdoch’s News Corp., and even such darlings of the anti-Putin “liberal opposition” establishment as the businessman and anti-corruption campaigner Aleksei Navalny.

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.

Vadim Nikitin is a journalist and Russia analyst.

Comments

We are the 1%!

yeah! the new york times!

I used to worry about that Nazbol Limonov - not so much now he's just another Trotsky look-alike!

Signed Josef S

Yo, daddy! Been missing you!

- the anarcho-stalinist

Nightmare Communism!

Wear your purple shirts with pride comrades!

Fuck nightmare communism and fuck Randy Lowens. Dude totally was a douchebag and died from cancer of the asshole.

What? NEFAC still exists? I thought I sent them to McGulags a while ago.

I am the 37%

...with penile dysfunction :-/

Okay, I didn't actually realize how super awesome pussy riot was until this guy told me, thanks.

This guy makes them sound so cool. I do believe he is underestimating the appeal of obscene images painted on bridges.

Ain't that the truth!!

nah man. not one newspaper box in the street.
NEXT!

Three members of a crappy Russian band get more attention for 2 years in jail than the 50 innocent people killed by Obama's drone strikes the other day. But still some anarchists want to pay more attention to pussy riot because it is cooler within their little counter culture.

yes, and people decided to riot in response to the police murders of oscar grant, and mark duggan, and alexei grigoropoulos but not the hundreds of other police murders that were largely ignored. what's your point, fuckface?

"whats your point fuckface"

This should be an auto response to anyone with irrational, idiotic, thoughtless comments.

what's your point, fuckface?

you're just droning on and on.... LOL!

Actually last time I checked most of the people who were actively supporting Pussy Riot were people outside of the Anarchist community. I believe that's what this article represents, a counter argument to their ethics. And please, if you're the one trolling me, stop. I have nothing but support for these individuals and anyone else facing political repression. You have to get a life. You people spend hours trolling me for things that it takes 5 or 6 minutes a week to let out. I used terms like this to refer to attitudes in a specific local and specific people who I found difficult to deal with.

And even if we did spend a bit more time talking about Pussy Riot, which we haven't, at least in my little bubble, then it's because there's some communinication with them. We can point to them and say "look, we're all subceptible to fear and intimidation no matter how minor the act. This is what we go through BECAUSE we pay more atttention to drone strikes and our criminal president. But you're just a cranky ass hole and god only knows who or what you are.

The Anarchist "Community" is just a bunch of bullies who like to shame each other with ever-more finely graded illusions of self-righteousness. "Anti-Opression"? How about y'all stop oppressing each other? Do you think you could do that? "A bunch of moral nonsense/A fascist of a different kind" in the prophetic words of The Strike.

That's not always true, as someone who's dealt with attitudes in line with what you're talking about, that's overwhelmingly not the case. And if it is in the United States, than that's an American problem, but I don't deal with that on a daily basis. But I have dealt with it. But yeah, I have dealt with bullies, but than we're also in our 20's, that's usually how people in their 20's act. We should be better than that, but what you're saying is blanketed and disingenuous. I'm not a bully and neither are my friends.

You know, again, a lot of this is the Toys R Us Generation mentallity. Grow up. You have to deal with people who are not always going to look act and sound like you. It's not all contributed to this, actually a lot of the despondancy here exists because we, or at least many of us are openly persecuted. We live the life of criminals while trying to be moral and just. But any gangsta rap song will tell you, you can start out pure as gold enough shit gets on you you know what you're worth to most people. And a lot of people are more than willing and able to work with outsiders, but you'll always get drowned out by bullies and bullies desguisng themselves as victims.

I used to snort cocaine and have unprotected sex, maybe it's in my best interest to grow up. I used to lie about where I was born and desguise my personal contempt for someone as a feminist cause to protect my image, maybe I should grow the fuck up. We all got problems.

But but but... liberals are bullies too. Just that they hire cops and fascists to do the bullying for them so they can rest comfortably in their loft!

Yeah, but if we're going to reject liberal values, let's reject liberal values. There'll always be friction, and I'm not opposed to heated debates, and anger will always be prime to manifest itself. I mean, simply living under with the paradigm that "we're breaking the bonds of oppression," and a lot of the time the agent of that repression like some fucked up karmic joke is some shit for brains middle class coward in khaki pants. I don't know if the person who used the bully comment had in mind exactly what he was talking about, and it's more of a social issue within the community, but obviously it does happen. You can't impose your values on people. You can't show up to someone elses demo and denigrade them for not being what you are. Most of us aren't like that, but the only people on this fucking scroll probably are a little bit. But if you're going to reject liberal values, reject liberal values, because you're a 100 percent right. And I might be ready to argue with someone, I might be willing to dismiss someone, and given the context might be willing to express hatred toward someone, but I'm not going to go to anti-capitalist demos shouting at strangers, I"m not going to call everyone who isn't a punk an Anarcho-liberal. Yeah, there's a line that seperates "revolutioinary Anarchism" from just plain Anarchism in the abstract, but Anarcho-pacifists (not authoritarian liberal pacifists who like you said impose their values on people) have their place, and if they really believe in it, well, then more power to them. They have their place, and if anything you can draw strength from their ethics, instead of tearing them down and showing everyone how far and wide you can spread the hate.

Whoever trolled me down below go fuck yourself.

I prefer to call the liberal pacifists 'passivists', because it's a better description of what they actually stand for. You can be a pacifist, reject violence, even reject property destruction and still do some kick ass aggressive actions. Everyone remembers the black bloc in Seattle that broke windows in the shopping district and too few remember the folks that shut down the conference. Being passive and submitting to mass arrest is the problem, not just arguing against violence. If everyone out there complaining about the black bloc was doing shit like actively blocking conventions then I don't think there would be the tensions there are.

Not exactly passivists. They are what some have come to call "imagists".

Because all they do is giving themselves the impression they are doing something while they only are doing the same old bullshit rituals in thwe streets, walking slowly, chanting, expecting the Gods of Capital in skies to hear their cry so one day... one day things are gonna change, at laaast!

They also are always attacking the black bloc because of their messing up with some perceived, blurry notion of a "public image", or for not being trashed by the authoritarian media, regardless to the fact that they only are accountable to Power and not the "people".

Now listen here: I don't give a fuck about "the people". I only care about all those who will follow or keep building up on my/our tactics and actions. What "the people" are doing every fucking god-given business day of the week is fucking WRONG, no matter why they are doing it.

So I don't have sympathy for slaves, only for those who liberate themselves from slavery. Collaborators are more dangerous than cops.

problem here is that when you say 'slaves' what you really mean is dark people and anyone who doesn't submit to your media brainwashing.

Not exactly passivists. They are what some have come to call "imagists".

Imagism is a type of passivism. It's all just people taking symbolic actions in the hopes that others will interpret it correctly. That's being passive. They say that they oppose black bloc actions because they think it ruins the image of the movement or the protest or whatever, but really they're scared of actual actions, because they run off when there's situations where people are actually confronting the police or breaking windows. That doesn't happen because they have moral problems with the situation, for the most part, it's because they're emotionally uncomfortable with the situation. That's passivism. Passivists want to take symbolic action that inspires others to direct action. It's the same thing when they want to pass laws telling the police to do this or that. Democracy is a passivist system, it encourages passivism and requires it to function.

This is why we see the actions of Gandhi and MLK recast as being passivist. Not that I'm endorsing them, but the methods they used were not passivist. They didn't go sit in the street and get arrested. Indians wanted the right to make salt from the ocean so they went and did it. It was pacifist because they didn't fight back against the police, but they also didn't stop because the police tried to stop them. You can see some awesome footage of salt marchers marching and the cops trying to beat them and they just keep on marching and making salt.

Again, I don't want to deify Martin or Gandhi, but they were effective at some things. Things that scare the shit out of passivists.

Now listen here: I don't give a fuck about "the people". I only care about all those who will follow or keep building up on my/our tactics and actions.

"The People" is pretty obviously a made up thing that people use to make what they're doing seem more right, or what other do less right. But to dismiss everyone who doesn't do what you think they should is a bit absurd. If your resistance ad actions don't actually change anything then all they are is symbolic, despite all the justifications you may want to give.

Yes, your tactics, the tactics of a narcissist. Someone read a book and it all went to his head. Of course, these tactics haven't really been tested in 40 years and without mass support of people who are trained and organized and ready to take control of society you have nothing but you exorcising your inherent right to resist. which is fine. I understand your mentallity, but you express yourself like some back alley hustler. You sound like a pimp in all the worst sense of the word. I'm not saying your sympathy means a shit, but plenty of shitty people with shitty politics die innocent every day. Do you only support them out of an abstract notion? Is there really no heart to what you do?

There's a difference between doing what you think is right and just being a dick. Both are going to be a violation of a boundary, but the spirit with which you conduct your life, the spirit with which you carry out your actions will be the spirit in the end. Despondancy breeds despondancy, cynisism cynisism. Blind hope is a drug as well but sympathy is something that is an inherent need in every human being. I believe to not be able to sympathize is to be a sociopath. Just saying. I wouldn't be too proud of being so proud.

*"As long as you gotta sit-down philosophy, you’ll have a sit-down thought pattern, and as long as you think that old sit-down thought you’ll be in some kind of sit-down action."*

- Malcolm X

Egg-fucking-zactly. That's what I'm talking about. My original comment definitely came from a direction of working with people who would ignore what malcolm actually said and did, but that's the shit right there.

if you take A news trolls to be the voice of the anarchist community you need to go outside and realize that many of us are sincere people who work hard on our own projects and don't sit around shitting on other people's lives via the internet. meet some people who aren't 19-23 year old feminist (or insurrectionist) ideologues. we who bust our asses on radical projects for no pay just because we want to see the world become better might not have the loudest voices, but there is a reason for that.

"we who bust our asses on radical projects for no pay just because we want to see the world become better"
Well there's yer problem right there. Stop trying to save everyone, Jesus.

Better to work out of altruism than just fall into the trap of being a bitter middle class American.

Definitely a better life yes.

Know what you're talking about:

A guide to Pussy Riot's oeuvre

By MANSUR MIROVALEV, Associated Press – 3 days ago

MOSCOW (AP) — Given how world famous Pussy Riot has become, people are sometimes surprised to learn that the entire oeuvre of the women's punk band is made up of six songs and five videos.

Badly recorded, based on simple riffs and scream-like singing, the feminist singers were dismissed by many critics and listeners as amateur, provocative and obscene.

But the performance and release of each song's video mirrored important steps in the rise of the opposition movement in Russia that protested Vladimir Putin's return to power as president.

By Friday, when three members of the group were convicted of hooliganism for performing a "punk prayer" in Moscow's main cathedral in February to protest the Russian Orthodox Church's support of Putin, it was clear the group also has won support around the world, including from stars such as Madonna and Paul McCartney and Amnesty International.

The band consists of at least 10 members who always performed in balaclavas so the identities of only the three who were convicted are publicly known.

Here is a guide to Pussy Riot's songs, including one released Friday just hours before the Moscow court sentenced those three members to two years in prison.

"RELEASE THE COBBLESTONES"

The group's first song and video are released on Nov. 7 — the anniversary of the 1917 Bolshevik revolution.

A month earlier, Prime Minister Putin announces that he and his protege, President Dmitry Medvedev, will swap jobs, giving Putin the top government post again. The announcement is followed by regional elections that the Kremlin's United Russia party wins by a landslide. Observers and government critics cry fraud, and online protests soon become widespread street demonstrations.

The Pussy Riot song recommends that Russians protest the upcoming parliamentary elections — and throw cobblestones during street protests because "ballots will be used as toilet paper," the group said on its blog.

The song's most quoted line says that "Egyptian air is healthy for your lungs/Turn Red Square into Tahrir" — the focal point of Egypt's uprising that toppled President Hosni Mubarak in 2011.

The song's video is compiled from footage of band members singing and twanging guitars from the top of subway and trolley cars. The blog says the group was formed after its members "understood that after the Arab Spring Russia lacks political and sexual liberation, boldness, a feminist whip and a woman president." From the very start, the group's members do not disclose their real names and sport their now trademark balaclavas and brightly colored miniskirts.

"KROPOTKIN VODKA"

Dedicated to Pyotr Kropotkin, a 19th-century Russian prince and one of the founders of anarchism, the song advocates the "toppling of the Kremlin bastards" and "Death to prison, freedom to protests."

It is videotaped during the band's unannounced performances in posh restaurants and boutiques, during which band members uses fire extinguishers to put out fires they have started.

The song's video is released on Dec. 1 , three days before the parliamentary elections, which trigger the largest civil protests in Russia since the Soviet collapse.

"DEATH TO PRISON, FREEDOM TO PROTESTS "

The song is recorded in mid-December, days after the first anti-Putin protests break out. As many as 100,000 people turn out in the frigid cold for demonstrations demanding free elections, and the streets of Moscow ring with cries of "Russia Without Putin" and "Putin Is a Thief."

The band performs the song on the roof of a pre-trial detention center where opposition leaders and activists are held.

"PROTESTS IN RUSSIA, PUTIN CHICKENED OUT"

The band's breakthrough performance takes place in a part of Red Square where czarist Russia once announced government decrees. During the performance, eight Pussy Riot band members are briefly detained.

Reacting to such rallies, Putin promises to allow more political competition and to take steps to ensure the transparency of the upcoming presidential election. Medvedev proposes a law to restore the direct elections of governors.

"HOLY MARY, DRIVE PUTIN AWAY"

Before the now-historic stunt at Russia's grandest Orthodox Cathedral that led to Friday's conviction, band members try to play at Moscow's Epiphany Church but are taken away by security guards. The 41-second performance at Christ the Savior, during which five band members high-kick, dance and kneel, whispering "Holy Mother, Drive Putin Away," is interrupted by guards.

The Russian Orthodox Church's initial response is mild. An outspoken cleric known for his liberal views calls it a "legal outrage" during Shrovetide week, when church tradition allows and even encourages carnival-like escapades and jokes.

But the band then releases the video with an actual song — with screeching guitars and an angry chorus urging Holy Mary to become a feminist. The song also claims the church's leader, Patriarch Kirill, venerates Putin instead of God.

"PUTIN SETS THE FIRES OF REVOLUTIONS"

Pussy Riot's latest song is played Friday afternoon by one of the band members who had escaped arrest from the balcony of an apartment building that faces the Khamovniki court building in central Moscow where a judge was reading the verdict.

The balaclava-wearing young woman also throws out compact discs containing the song. Hours later, the band's supporters dance to it near the court building — before police push them away, detaining several people.

The song mocks Putin for his alleged cosmetic surgery and urges him to marry Alexander Lukashenko, the authoritarian leader of neighboring Belarus.

The chorus says: Russia "takes to the streets to say goodbye to the regime."

Recent rallies have drawn smaller crowds than those in December, but polls have indicated that Putin's popularity is dwindling during his government's crackdown on its critics and the opposition.

Yeah and a lot of that waining noteriety is being manifested in the political persecution of the band Pussy Riot. Yeah, their music sucked. I agree with you. But their politics from what I gather didn't, and they're being persecuted for it. Take up arms against that you have to take up arms against most of the people who frequent pages like will probably feel the same way. It's like if you called my sister a whore because she passed out drunk at a party and was taken advantage of. Yeah, there are more open forms of exploitation, but that's my sister, we're probably going to have a problem.

Thanks, bro

Whoa someone should post this as an article or something.

Anatoly Chubais as Malcolm McLaren

Only one member of Pussy Riot, Riot, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, was connected to art group Voina. According to Wikipedia, she and her husband "lived with the group as squatters in an automobile garage."

Good job NYT, and I'm not totally convinced this isn't an FBI stunt.

FBI? No, it's the CIA that's got undercover journalists working for major news outlets. The New York Times should be almost entirely staffed with them by now.

Yeah, you're right. Also - I support Pussy Riot in a general way, since at this point there's no way to actually know these things.
I find their performance as artists not super-impressive (Voina is Very interesting tho) but obviously am against them being persecuted in any way by the Russian state. (The church is supposedly begging for Putin to have mercy on them - perhaps true - perhaps good cop/bad cop politics.)

That all said, again, the whole thing reads like a CIA stunt to me! The Cold War is back, and it's hotter than ever!

At least during the good ol' days of the Cold War, you got the liberal capitalists Vs the old-school socialists.

Now it's just authoritarian capitalists up against each other, fer mom's sake! I think this is way more like pre-WW1 times, where Russia was discreetly allied with rich Western nations, but somehow they manages to set up phony rivalries, that ended up with a major war. We're also very close to such a scenario.

But about Pussy Riot, I think it's necessary to support them as anarchists, but by doing what they did in Russia, meaning subverting the most sacred institutions of power. In North America, I suppose that'd be shopping malls, TV stations, banks.

This. Except I'd say lose the shopping malls from that list. Think of what places you'd get two years in prison for playing a loud, offensive song at and you've got a start to the list.

Exactly, it's not going to be churches. Get thee heads from up thee assholes, and hit the real cathedrals of Power!

911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB

s/job/joke

I'm amazed something this decent got into the NYTimes. And what's with all the weird comments?

its the internet.

Oh yeah, blame it on the "baaad baad Internet" for actually allowing people to post comments and even becoming the media, fuckface.

I wasn't saying that it was good or bad, that's your assumption.

You mean like YOUR comment?

It's not "decent", it's shit. There's no single reference to anarchism aside from Kropotkin (that they don't even connect with anarchism).

Are u a Trapwire bot?

you misunderstand, this poster was talking about the original article (the one critizing liberal support of pussy riot by tlaking about their anarchist roots) - not the fluff piece just posted as a comment (pussy riot's oevre)...yes that latter piece was indeed terrible, i think we can all agree!

"Unless you are comfortable with all that (and I strongly suspect 99 percent of Pussy Riot’s fans in the mainstream media are not), then standing behind Pussy Riot only now, when it is obviously blameless and the government clearly guilty, is pure opportunism."

Obama/Clinton are grinning at this.

It seems as if there are people happy to say they aren't supporting Pussy Riot because they have too much mainstream support as if it's a cause that's not underground enough.

That's so bullshit. Death to prisons! Free Pussy Riot!

such analysis as this by vadim nikitin is the standard ‘backwards’ analysis of Western civilization in terms of ‘what things do’; in this case, ‘what pussy riot has done’ and ‘where they are coming from’ etc.

the greater reality is not in terms of ‘what things do’ but ‘what does things’. the conditions of the living space, as arise from the relations amongst people and place, shape the development and behaviour of the inhabitants. it makes little sense to try to understand the behaviour of individuals that are ‘cooked up’ in the development- and behaviour-warping relational pressures of control freak sovereign states, as if these behaviours are ‘coming from out of their own interiors'; i.e. from the intellection and purpose of notional 'independently-existing organisms'. these behaviours are firstly the product of the development-distorting relational dynamics of a central authority controlled living space. in a space characterized by free associations/relations, the pussy riot group behaviours would neither be the same, nor would there be a reference frame of the obedient herd to make them stand out as anomalous.

the turbulence of the atmospheric flow-space is the source of the development and dynamics of the hurricane, call it 'pussy riot' or 'katrina'. the hurricane is not a 'thing-in-itself' that is the animating source of the 'stirring up' of the space it is included in.

in the physical reality of relational space rather than in the 'imaginal' absolute space that is the delusional standard of our dysfunctional authoritarian society, it is not about ‘what things do’; it is about ‘what does things’. analysis like this one by nikitin, that seeks to explain the behaviours of pussy riot starting from pussy riot, is nonsense.

So, I've been here a while and you've been here a while and I'd like to make an honest request. Can you not do shit like use the word 'imaginal' unless you explain at least a tiny bit what it means? Seriously. I'd like to respond to you but when you drop these bad imitations of bad translations there's not much I can respond to.

it's a urinal of imagination. duh.

ok, 'imaginal' is a crappy choice of words. i won't dispute that. it just 'fit into the flow' a bit better than 'schaumkommen' or 'appearances' or etc. as i said;

"in the physical reality of relational space rather than in the 'imaginal' absolute space that is the delusional standard of our dysfunctional authoritarian society, it is not about ‘what things do’; it is about ‘what does things’."

what i am saying is that the 'causal model' or 'doer-deed' model of western civilization looks for answers in terms of 'what things do' or 'what people do' out of the context of the pressures/influences of the spatial-dynamics they are included in. so why did the slave strike the slave-master? where did the nastiness in the slave come from? is he a misanthropist? nobody else is doing such nasty things. everybody else says the slave-master is a kindly man whose benificence is to be appreciated. the american slave-masters are far better than the russian slave-masters.

the point is that behaviour does not originate within the 'doer of the deed', it originates within the dynamic of the space the person/s are included in. so, it makes no sense to ask 'where is pussy riot coming from', ... it makes more sense to ask where is the society that they in coming from. but notice that western civilization's system of justice never put itself on trial. it is 'the people versus pussy riot'.

in other words, when one frames the behaviour of pussy riot in absolute space, one can only look to them for the animating source of their behaviour. this is 'appearances' [imagination]. if one acknowledges that space is relational, one acknowledges that the society must be put on trial 'in toto', it is delusional to split apart the behaviour of the inhabitant from the dynamic of the habitat [it is a delusion that depends on imposing an absolute space and absolute time reference framing]

"it makes more sense to ask where is the society that they [are?] in coming from"

and this society is coming from the "dynamic of the space the person/s are included in", right? why does this make more sense than the "dynamic of the person/s in the space that they are included in"? i don't see this as some "absolute space" as you say, it can change and be changed by various factors, but it does provide some sort of "agency" for real existing humans. whereas you state the "dynamics of space" provide the basis of human actions. this is the tired cliche of people being products of their environment. you sure spin a lot of text to arrive at such a mundane conclusion.

you ask;

“this society is coming from the "dynamic of the space the person/s are included in", right? why does this make more sense than the "dynamic of the person/s in the space that they are included in"?”

my answer is; --- there is no such thing as ‘the dynamics of the person/s’ out of the context of the dynamics of the space they are in. this is ‘mach’s principle’. the person is a dynamic form within the dynamics of the space he/she is included in, he/she does not have 'his/her' own internally jumpstarted dynamics.

scientific thinking reduces the dynamics of relational space to ‘the dynamics of things-in-themselves’ by imposing an absolute space reference frame on our mental modeling of dynamics. this is NOT ‘physical reality’ as Mach, Poincaré and others point out, it is ‘idealization’ that depends implicitly upon the imposing of ‘absolute space’.

as poincaré says, “it is nonsense to say ‘the earth rotates’”. many people ‘don’t get this’ (bertrand russell ‘didn’t get it’ when he read poincaré’s ‘science and hypothesis’).

by the same token, “it is nonsense to say ‘dick and jane ran up the hill’; i.e. it is nonsense to speak of dynamics in terms of ‘what things-in-themselves do’. there are no ‘things-in-themselves’.

PHYSICALLY, the world is a continually transforming relational space, according to relativity and quantum physics, and the dynamic forms that appear to our visual observations, to be local, material ‘things-in-themselves’, notionally with their own behaviours [as in your; “...dynamic of the person/s in the space that they are included in"?”].

the notion of ‘persons’ having ‘dynamics of their own’ is ‘idealization’ based on visual observations. just as we can see the form of the tornado approaching us, as if it were a ‘thing-in-itself’, it is nonsense to say ‘the tornado moves’. it is nonsense to say ‘the hurricane moves’.

but most people accept such statements because the discourse of western civilization is built upon the ‘idealization’ of ‘things-in-themselves’. nietzsche puts it this way;

“Our judgement has us conclude that every change must have an author”;–but this conclusion is already mythology: it separates that which effects from the effecting. If I say “lightning flashes,” I have posited the flash once as an activity and a second time as a subject, and thus added to the event a being that is not one with the event but is rather fixed, “is” and does not “become.”–To regard an event as an “effecting,” and this as being, that is the double error, or interpretation, of which we are guilty.” – Nietzsche, ‘Will to Power’, 531

all the while that dick and jane were running up the hill, the world was transforming and they were included in the transformation and the transformation of the relational space we live in is the PHYSICAL REALITY. these ‘nonsense’ language games that we play, constituted in terms of ‘what things-in-themselves do’ are convenient over-simplifications that our cultural habit is to confuse for physical reality.

it is more convenient to say ‘the tornado moves’ than to say, the atmospheric flow-space has a ripple in it. the physical reality is the latter, not the former. persons are ripples in the transforming spatial-plenum. to say that they ‘do this or that’ is the same as saying that ‘lightning flashes’ or ‘the tornado moves’ or ‘dick and jane ran up the hill’ or ‘the earth rotates’. in calling them ‘nonsense’, poincaré is saying that while they are convenient ‘representations’ of dynamic, they are not physical reality. the physical reality is that there is one world dynamic, that all local dynamic systems are included in. the local dynamics systems are resonance structures within the one world dynamic, they are not ‘things-in-themselves’. it is our scientific-analytical mode of inquiry that imputes ‘things-in-itselfness’ to them.

ok, i have ‘spun a lot of text’ to comment on your response. but let’s be clear. i am saying that ‘it is nonsense to say ‘dick and jane ran up the hill to fetch a pail of water’. by saying this, i am making them jumpstart authors of their own behaviour, but they can’t be because they are dynamic forms within a continually transformation relational space. the dynamics of space not only shapes the behaviours of dick and jane, it creates dick and jane. dick and jane are NOT ‘things-in-themselves with their own behaviour and neither is the ‘earth’. it is nonsense to say ‘the earth rotates’.

meanwhile, you say;

“you state the "dynamics of space" provide the basis of human actions. this is the tired cliche of people being products of their environment. you sure spin a lot of text to arrive at such a mundane conclusion.”

that is not what i am saying. people are not ‘products’. people do not exist [as things in themselves] . people , the earth etc. etc. are resonance structures within a continually transforming relational space. as ralph waldo emerson says in ‘the method of nature’, the individual is like the chute of the cataract; its form persists and stays more or less the same, not because it is a ‘thing-in-itself’ but because it is a resonance feature within the flow [it is its relationship with the dynamics it is included in].

we teach our children that ‘dick and jane ran up the hill to fetch a pail of water’. we teach our children that ‘the earth rotates’, ... just as we were taught these things by our ‘educators’. but it is nonsense. it sounds good and solid because our language games synthetically make it sound good and solid.

we can make a metal globe and model the earth and we can hold up the metal globe and spin it on ‘its own axis’ and we can say ‘the earth rotates’ which completely ignores the physical reality that the earth is a resonance feature with the relational dynamics of space. ‘lightning flashes’, ‘the earth rotates’, ... it is all the same Fiktion/nonsense. we invent a word and so declare the existence of a ‘thing-in-itself’ which then gives us the basis for adding a verb and declaring that the ‘thing-in-itself’ has ‘its own behaviour’ so that we need never return to the dynamics of space or ‘suprasystem dynamic’ within which dynamic forms aka ‘local systems’ are continually gathering and being regathered. they are not ‘physically/really’ ‘local systems-in-themselves’. dynamics forms, rather than being ‘things-in-themselves’, are ‘dimples in the flow-continuum’, ‘ripples in the spatial plenum’. you say;

“you state the "dynamics of space" provide the basis of human actions. this is the tired cliche of people being products of their environment. you sure spin a lot of text to arrive at such a mundane conclusion.”

the ‘phraseology’ ‘people are products of their environment’ in western civilized discourse, implies that people are ‘born’ as ‘things-in-themselves’, and once they are born as ‘inhabitants’, they are mutually exclusive of their habitat. in the machean view, inhabitants are resonance features within the habitat. they are mutually inclusive in the manner of the storm-cell in the flow of the atmosphere.

sure i have ‘spun a lot of text here’. poincaré spun a lot of text on this same philosophical issue and bertrand russell ‘didn’t get it’, so did that prove poincaré wrong? not at all, his views have never been ‘brought down’, they have just never been ‘popular’ to the same extent as the standard view of western civilization that accepts ‘the earth rotates’ and ‘dick and jane ran up the hill’ as ‘physical reality’, not seeing that it is ‘idealization’ that can’t be confused for reality without degenerating social dysfunction (as it is currently doing).

so emile please explain why only these few, maybe 12, members of pussy riot exist, and everyone in russia is not doing the same thing.

if you start from a position of environmental determinism, then everyone in that environment/society should be doing the same thing. but they aren't. explain.

I am not talking about ‘environmental determinism’, I am talking about the dynamics of a relational space wherein physical reality is given by Mach’s principle; “the dynamics of the habitat are conditioning the dynamics of the inhabitants at the same time as the dynamics of the inhabitants are conditioning the dynamics of the habitat”.

You can see that this is true of ‘convection cells’ in a flow-space or hurricanes, tornadoes, whirlpools etc. The cells and the flow are not mutually exclusive. Their dynamic relation is given by Mach’s principle. Now, our common Western custom, aka ‘scientific or rational thnking’, is to re-render these dynamics in terms of notional ‘things-in-themselves’ with ‘their own powers of authoring ‘their’ development and behaviour. We say ‘hurricane Katrina is growing larger and stronger’, ... but the physical reality is that the flow has a dimple in it and turbulence in the flow is such as to intensify the ‘dimpling’ in the flow.

The ‘flow’ is purely relational and it is primary. The dynamic forms in the flow are locally visible flow-features. They are continually gathering and being regathered in the flow. I am talking about every’thing’ including people. As Mach, Bohm, Schroedinger and others observe, ‘local material systems’ are NOT ‘things-in-themselves’ but resonance features in the flow [in the continually transforming relational space].

Ok, pussy riot’s behaviours are neither purely ‘their own behaviours’ nor are they ‘purely determined’ by the dynamics of the habitat they are inhabitants in. They are in ‘conjugate relation’. Similarly, the behaviours of hurricanes Katrina and Rita are not purely ‘their own behaviours’ nor are they ‘purely determined’ by the dynamics of the habitat they are inhabitants in. In both cases, the inhabitants are ‘participants in shaping the habitat-dynamic’, ... BUT pussy riot and/or ‘Katrina and Rita’ are not the only participants in shaping the habitat-dynamic. There are many other ‘weather cells’ and in the case of pussy riot, there are government officials and the general public who are also participants in the shaping of the habitat dynamic which is, at the same time, shaping the behaviours of the inhabitants.

For example, the dynamics of a bunch of greedy inhabitants can condition the dynamics of the habitat such as to engender ‘robin hood behaviours’ in other inhabitants. This dynamic cannot be understood in terms of ‘what things do’, but it can be understood in terms of Mach’s principle where some of the inhabitants condition the dynamics of the habitat in such a manner as to condition the behaviour of other inhabitants via the mediating medium of the relational space. That is, some of the inhabitants shape the relational space dynamics such as the accessing of game and foodcrops; i.e. closing down the accessing which was formerly available to many and making it accessible only to the few]. These inhabitant dynamics condition the habitat dynamics in such a manner as to induce new ‘robin hood’ inhabitant dynamics. This conditioning is done through the mediating medium of the habitat-dynamic.

The behaviour of the robin hood bands are neither purely ‘their own behaviours’ nor are they ‘purely determined’ by the dynamics of the habitat they are inhabitants in. They are in conjugate relation.

Now, if you would like to see pussy riots’ behaviours the way that a judge does, and/or vadim nikitin does, in scientific/rational analytic terms, you will say that pussy riots’ behaviours and/or robin hood bands behaviours derive purely and solely from their internal intellection and purpose. when you do this, you notionally split apart [in a mutually excluding logical fashion] the dynamics of the inhabitants from the dynamics of the habitat. now pussy riot and robin hoods men must explain ‘their purpose’, as if their behaviour ‘jump-started’ from their own ‘independent-thing-in-itself interior’.

as if the dynamics of the other participants are not conditioning the dynamics of the habitat in such a manner as to induce robin hood behaviours and pussy riot behaviours. That is how Western justice works. It is based on scientific/rational thinking which is in the ‘idealized’ terms of ‘what things-in-themselves do’.

However, if you accept Mach’s, Poincaré’s, Nietzsche’s, Schroedinger’s view that space is relational, you will say that the judge, the government, the police and the prosecutors as well as pussy riot are participating in conditioning the dynamics of the common habitat they all share inclusion in, which is, at the same time conditioning the dynamics of they, the inhabitants. As we know from experience, if some of the inhabitants condition the habitat dynamic by monopolizing access to the land and fencing it off, this, at the same time, conditions the behaviours of other inhabitants [it induces robin hood behaviours]. Space is the mediating relational medium here. Western justice defends the right of a minority class of property owner to monopolize access to the land. Since Western justice sees people as ‘things-in-themselves’ with ‘their own internal process driven and directed behaviour’, Western justice will impute full and sole cause of the robin hood behaviours to the robin hood men. The habitat dynamic does not even exist in Western justice and the scientific view because space is NOT seen as relational as in Machean physics, but is instead assumed to be an absolute, fixed empty and infinite Euclidian operating theatre populated by ‘things-in-themselves’ such as people with their own locally originating, internal intellection and purpose-driven and directed behaviours. That is why the judge, prosecutor, police and government do not see themselves as having any involvement whatsoever in the pussy riot or robin hood behaviours; ... how could they, if people are things-in-themselves with their own internal intellection and purpose driven and directed behaviours?

That is, if the dynamics of space are not a mediating influence on inhabitant behaviours, Western justice is logically correct in assuming that the judge, prosecutor, police and government have nothing whatsoever to do with the emergence of robin hood and/or pussy riot rebellious behaviours.

The reason why an oppressive class of inhabitant ‘gets away’ with oppression in our society is because the scientific view, as Western justice is based on, sees the behaviour of the individual as coming from nowhere else but the internal intellection and purpose of the individual, since the individual is modeled by science as a ‘thing-in-itself’ that inhabits an absolute fixed, empty and infinite Euclidian operating theatre. Justice then becomes the job of managing the behaviours of individuals and justice is blind to the conditioning of the living space [conditioning of the habitat dynamic] by a greedy or power-over-others seeking class of inhabitants.

Pussy riots’ and ‘robin hoods’ behaviours do not simply come from their own internal intellection and purpose as if they are ‘things-in-themselves’ as science portrays ‘organisms’. their behaviours are inductively shaped by the dynamics of the habitat that are conditioned by all of the inhabitants including the powerful influence/conditioning from a class of inhabitants that seeks control over the rest. This is the Machean view that acknowledges the relational nature of the dynamic space we share inclusion in. Machean justice would put the judge, prosecutor, police and government ‘on trial’ for ‘conditioning the dynamics of habitat’ in such a manner as to cultivate imbalance and dissonance and thus to provoke behaviours that seek to restore balance and harmony, such as the behaviours of pussy riot and robin hood.

Mach’s principle; “the dynamics of the habitat are conditioning the dynamics of the inhabitants at the same time as the dynamics of the inhabitants are conditioning the dynamics of the habitat”.

Mach invented the circle jerk?

emile invites us all into his ongoing game of soggy biscuit here on @-news.

Oh dammit all the fancy words , just luv and respect say a helluva lot, let's keep it simple and down to earth, it's the anarchist methodology, oops, the anarchist way.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
CAPTCHA
Human?
n
t
y
M
x
k
C
Enter the code without spaces.
Subscribe to Comments for "The Wrong Reasons to Back Pussy Riot"
society