I’ve talked about the cable news channel RT News a couple of times. It was “formerly” known as Russia Today, except that it had to “change” its name for various reasons, not the least that the only thing you’ll learn about Russia from it is how the state-controlled media portrays the U.S.—which is not much different than Soviet-era propaganda. RT has generally been a cheerleader for President Vladimir Putin; most Americans, however, view Putin as little more than a dictator wannabe who with the help of his “party” has passed laws that have circumvented “democratic” principles in the country (there have been other examples of this, like the PRI in Mexico, although not quite as blatant as when the minority party Nazis simply arrested or hounded-out opposing elected officials to gain a “majority” in the Reichstag). Putin has also been described as a “small and vengeful man” by Russian writer Masha Gessen, whose book “The Man Without a Face: The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin,” chronicles the rise of a relative nobody into the leader of a political mafia, and has amassed a personal fortune of $40 billion, through means not entirely clear.
Although Putin claims to fight corruption, he may be the most corrupt official in all of Russia, and his position of power has allowed him to destroy or marginalize others who have amassed billions through questionable means, but who lack the political power bases. Putin is able to maintain popular support by methods Republicans would admire—by establishing an atmosphere of fear and paranoia among the ill-informed. But what little news leaks out from RT about the goings-on in Russia is unfailingly pro-Putin. Putin is now allegedly promoting party-forming reform after spending a decade trying to destroy the ability of opposition parties to function effectively. It is not clear what exactly Putin’s reform plans are, except that he warns that “’All that has been done is absolutely right and we need these decisions to be fully and adequately implemented into being,’ or so he is quoted as saying, and ‘destructive forces’ could attempt to take advantage of this liberalization, but must not be allowed to do so.” So it is not exactly clear what this “liberalization” will allow, although it is hoped it is enough for “people to realize their political ambitions without taking legal recourse or to the streets.” And likely no farther; people may be allowed to have a “voice,” but otherwise cause no trouble for Mr. Big.
Putin is also of the opinion that opposition groups are “foreign agents” if they receive money from “non-governmental organizations,” but he nevertheless has “deep respect for the participants of the protest rallies – many of who are patriots – and has nothing against “revolutionary symbols”—especially the color white. However, “I felt sorry for the people who are using the technologies well-practiced elsewhere abroad.” One assumes he means that he frowns upon the use of social media, which he cannot be control unless he bans computers and smartphones.
But the real reason I am talking about this is because I was curious about how the pro-Kremlin RT was handling the Pussy Riot case, the prosecution of, and two-year prison sentence for, the three feminist/punk rockers that most of the West has denounced. RT allows Putin to be quoted as saying that the offenders should not be punished “too harshly,” but some may wonder why they are being punished at all. They had already been jailed for five months rather than be released on bail on such a flimsy charge of “malicious hooliganism” in an Orthodox church; in most civilized countries (save for Muslim countries, where someone might actually be put to death for something like this), a fine would have been sufficient. After watching the video of Pussy Riot’s “performance,” I would say that a week in stocks in a public square would be appropriate for their embarrassing recital. Of course, Putin’s claim that he “respects” the judicial system is at odds with the belief that since he was the principle target of Pussy Riot’s verbal barrage, he wants to see them off the street for as long as possible, and as an “example” for others not to follow their lead. I mean, who could tolerate the following song, punctuated by leg kicks and shadow-punching?
St. Maria, Virgin, Drive away Putin
Drive away! Drive away Putin...
The head of the KGB is their chief saint
Leads protesters to prison under escort…
Holy shit, shit, Lord's shit
Holy shit, shit, Lord's shit...
Church praises the rotten dictators
The cross-bearer procession of black limousines…
Patriarch Gundyaev believes in Putin
Bitch, you better believe in God…
What were you expecting? Woody Guthrie? Bruce Springsteen? Just like Russian democracy is still in its infantile stage, so is its youth protest movement. Take for instance the FEMEN movement in the Ukraine, whose members prance about topless in order to "develop leadership, intellectual and moral qualities of the young women in Ukraine" and "To build up the image of Ukraine, the country with great opportunities for women,” according to their MySpace page. I’m sure most observers are appreciative of their activities, although not necessarily for the reasons intended.
During the trial, the following courtroom banter was reported by a journalist named Lidia Vasilevskaya; the repartee between the judge and defense lawyers is particularly illuminating in a trial that The Guardian labeled as “theatre of the absurd”:
Defendant Alyokhina: I am feeling unwell and cannot participate in the process, we’re not getting enough sleep, we’re exhausted.
Judge Syrova: The doctors said you’re fit to participate in the process, we shall proceed.
Alyokhina: In that case we all refuse to take part in the process entirely. Please dismiss us.
Judge Syrova: Proceed with questioning the witness.
Lawyer Volkova: Are you kidding me?
Judge Syrova: Proceed with questioning.
And:
Ugrikov (a witness who says the girls were praying to Satan and not the Virgin Mary): By the way, do you know what Pussy Riot means? I can tell you.
Gallery: Please, don’t!
Ugrikov: I have a photo copy of a dictionary page! ‘Pussy’ is derived from ‘pus.’ This is horrifying. This means purulent riot.
(The Riot girls are laughing in response)
Judge Syrova: Defendants, you find this funny?
Defendants: Yeah!
Judge Syrova: You don’t seem to be feeling sick.
Defense lawyer: You are not qualified as a medic to decide on that.
And:
Judge Syrova: Question overruled. Don’t force the witness to…
Attorney Polozov: Think?
Attorney Volkova: Justice is non-existent here, so you can do whatever you want.
Judge Syrova: This is inappropriate conduct.
Attorney Volkova: You’re telling me that?
Well, we can at least say this for the Russian judicial system, as opposed to the U.S. system: In Russia, turning the courtroom into a vaudeville performance is perfectly permissible. Only the quality of the justice served is not quite as amusing.
While RT’s website has posted stories that are “unbiased” on the subject, on television they have stayed true to their anti-American and anti-West bias. The U.S. and the West are “using” the Pussy Riot trial to avoid discussing their own “civil rights abuses.” As usual, RT dredges-up a fringe character named Robert Naiman, who comments on foreign policy, to make this point, sort of. “Because they are young, because they are women, because they are rock musicians – these all make the case more appealing to Western public opinion. So it is not surprising,” he says. “The Western media love to play the role – especially the mainstream media – of kind of an attack-dog: we’re a vigorous defender of human rights when a US policy is not implicated. But when we talk of Bahrain – that’s a part of the empire, and the US media response tends to be rather muted.” To insure “balance” in the discussion, an Austrian political professor added “For many Europeans, and even more so for people in the US, there is still that old stereotype of Russia being an enemy, an alien society, a barbarian society. So in addressing the problem between Russian religious and political leadership and these three young women, you can always refer to this traditional stereotype. You don’t have that in the Bahraini case.”
It was further pointed out that Germany is a worse offender than Russia, where a person can be sentenced for up to three years for “misdeeds against religions or ideologies including acts of hooliganism inside houses of worship are punished with up to a three year imprisonment or a fine.” It was not noted, however, that these statutes were promulgated to combat continuing anti-Semitism, which is also still a problem in Russia. In 2010, Russian authorities merely considered it “malicious hooliganism” when a homemade bomb exploded outside a Russian synagogue; neo-Nazi David Duke also lived in Russia for a time ten years ago, promoting his book “The Ultimate Supremacism: My Awakening on the Jewish Question.” According to the ADL, “In Duke’s eyes, Russia presents an unmatched opportunity to help protect the longevity of the white race, since he predicts that ‘racially aware’ parties could achieve political influence there. He believes that Russia’s ‘sense of racial understanding’ will unleash a trend internationally.” However, save for committed anti-Semites, Russians, when they noticed him at all, found Duke’s presence to be an embarrassment (as did the Czechs in 2009, when Duke was kicked out of the Czech Republic for "denying or approving of the Nazi genocide and other Nazi crimes" and "promotion of movements seeking suppression of human rights," according to one Czech media source I can’t pronounce).
All-in-all, an interesting excursion outside the CNN/FOX/MSNBC orbit. But I’m still learning nothing about Russia for RT News, besides what they want us to know—about us.
No comments:
Post a Comment