129
Russian Court Jails Woman for Wearing 'Extremist' Rainbow Earrings - The Moscow Times
(www.themoscowtimes.com)
this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2024
129 points (100.0% liked)
news
23454 readers
639 users here now
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Not directed at you OP, but just a general observation: I still don’t understand why so many Western leftists see things in such a black and white manner. This is especially true from my interactions with Americans in general, it’s almost always “the good guys” vs “the bad guys”, nothing in between.
You can absolute support Russia’s anti-imperialist goals while rejecting all their other reactionary views. The same can be said for support for the anti-imperialist causes of the Palestinians, Iranians, Lebanese, Algerians etc. You don’t have to like them, you just need to acknowledge that this is a historical process that is inevitable.
In my opinion, this is where the strengths of Marxism-Leninism lie, which provides a scientific and materialist lens to understand the world. The question to ask is not: should we support reactionary Global South countries against Western imperialism? The questions we should ask are: why have progressive movements that had proliferated throughout the 20th century across the Global South been largely obliterated? What was the historical and the objective process that had led to the demise of progressive politics and left-wing movements, and the rise of conservatism in the Global South, especially after 1990? What are the root causes underlying these symptoms and what is the process required to cultivate the very material conditions necessary to enable the growth of left-wing political movements in the Global South?
Like medical sciences, scientific socialism allows us to separate the root causes of the disease from a collection of symptoms, thus enabling us to find ways to cure the disease instead of merely treating the symptoms.
I think Vijay Prashad wrote something about Russia like its viewed in the West as either the Vatican or hell... not hell, he uses a different word, its a much better phrase than I'm able to remember. But the point being that dichotomy between the source of moral authority, or the opposite (I guess alluding to Moscow as the fourth Rome).
On this particular topic, my own view is that Russia is restricting the rights/priviledges of what they term the 'international' LGBTQ movement, because I think the west uses wealthy urbanite associations of that kind in Russia (particularly St Petersberg/Moscow) for spying activities. At the same time, Putin has said (though ofc its necessary to examine what is done, not just what is said) that the LGBTQ community is part of Russian society, and shouldn't be attacked or victimised - this is probably because as a legalist ruler he wants to be in compliance with various legal obligations, and also doesn't want internal conflict. I think he isn't particularly opposed to the restrictions, because of the support it wins from the Orthodox church.
I wonder also with this particular topic, how much of the impetus for these kind of anti-progressive movements is to do with political kompromat. Certainly I don't think most of the elite, like aristos or capitalists for example, really care about sexual preferences, but rather its a useful political tool if the masses (are persuaded to) consider it immoral. Like with the 'Lavender Scare' in the US, but then I've also seen a CIA testimony saying that they (I paraphrase) 'like homosexuals because they're useful' referring I think to the usefulness of having something over someone. I suppose I mean, I wonder how much (alongside other factors) the passage of anti or pro LGBTQ laws is to do with wanting a political weapon, or alternatively as a kind of disarmemant treaty among the ruling classes.
Have you read this report titled Woke Imperium: The Coming Confluence Between Social Justice & Neoconservatism? You might find it interesting.
Excerpt:
I haven't - although I think having read the intro that I've seen it quoted without attribution. I will read it!
Its reminiscent of a lecture I watched about the British Empire in India (I forget the name, but can probably find it again if you're interested), where the lecturer drew a parallel between the colonial concept of 'empty land' (like in Australia, ignoring the people who were living there, or indeed the US), and a similar concept used to justify conquest of obviously more populous and urbanised places like India, one example being with this kind of accusation about women - that the people there were 'savages and weren't treating their women properly' (betraying of course the accuser's view of women, as property without agency), and that a 'white coloniser' would have a better idea about how to 'treat women' (property, like land) than the native inhabitants. I suppose related to the liberal and religious concept of the civilising 'burden' of the coloniser. But we have seen this used very recently, with Afghanistan.
In any case, thanks for the link!
Yeah it’s written by one of those realist think tanks (personally I have some issues with the realist takes despite their seemingly rational argument but this paper is quite clinical and objective from a materialist standpoint and makes compelling argument for the case it is presenting).