Another view of "Czar Vladimir"

Mikheil Saakashvili, the former president of Georgia, has an interesting op-ed in today's New York Times. In "Czar Vladimir's Illusions", we see a different view of Vladimir Putin. I found it fascinating so I'm providing a link to enable you to read it for free. (The NYT has gotten crabby about page views recently.)

Here's how it begins:

NEW YORK — As the Winter Olympics begin in Sochi, a close Russian ally in Ukraine is suppressing and shooting pro-democracy protesters. 

One could be forgiven for thinking that the hour of triumph for autocrats and the retreat of democrats is at hand as the world gathers to celebrate the shining rule of Czar Vladimir.

Veddy inteddesting. And good morning, ya'll. Big snowstorm settling over my area (New York) right now. If I disappear, it means we lost power. Don't worry. I'll be back.

Russia: going, going...gone?

There's a sad article in the New York Times about Russia's return to its authoritarian past. Putin is back in power, which means jackboots, truncheons and detentions for dissenters.

Here is a longish excerpt from the article:

  When testimony began in the trial of the activists from Pussy Riot, Mr. Terekhov served tea as his workers watched prosecutors request seven-year sentences for three women who had lip-synced a crude anti-Putin song at an Orthodox cathedral. The judge ultimately sentenced each to two years (one was released early).

  He described the atmosphere in the room as one of “black humor, like sarcasm. Laughter through tears.”

  ...“From the point of view of international PR, if earlier Russia was associated with balalaika-matryoshka-caviar-Gorbachev-perestroika, now of course we have to add Pussy Riot,” Mr. Terekhov said, his distaste apparent. “Balalaikas, bears — they were fun. They were something you could joke about. But this is some sort of marvel from the Middle Ages.”

Russia is slipping into a dictatorial nightmare. Observing this from elsewhere is painful -- I can't imagine what it's like to actually live through it. Without freedom, life is a sham. I wish the Russian people well. Their situation is a tough one.

Rightwing world swings rightward

It's hard to believe the stories I read these days. It's like everyone is running full-speed toward an authoritarian wingnut world.

MADRID (AP) — Spain is considering a ban on photographing, filming or reproducing images of police and state security forces who are on duty.

Interior Minister Jorge Fernandez Diaz said the government is considering prohibiting the capture, playback and processing of images, sounds or data of security forces while "in the exercise of their functions."

Deputy Prime Minister Soraya Saenz de Santamaria said after months of television and Internet scenes of sometimes violent clashes between police and demonstrators, a balance had to be struck "between citizens' right to protest" and the need "to uphold the integrity of state security forces." 

What a wingnut comparison! Uphold citizens' rights and you lose the "integrity of state security forces." What he's saying is "show the abuse by police and no one will respect them anymore." And we have to protect the police, right? So to hell with all these civilians with cameras. Toss them overboard and let the police do whatever they want.

We've seen the same authoritarian impulses in police in the US. Thankfully, the courts seem to be siding with citizens' rights on this issue, at least of late. But every society is only a hairsbreadth away from swinging to the right. These bans won't work, mind you. You can't stop people from recording government attacks. Just look at Syria. Images will always surface. The internet is the end of tyranny. It is the ultimate equalizer. All hail the net!

The "God is Dead" guy is dead

I came across an obituary this morning:

Theologian William Hamilton, a member of the Death of God movement of the 1960s that reached its peak with a Time Magazine cover story, has died in Portland, Ore. He was 87.

I remember that Time Magazine cover. The issue came out when I was a senior at the odious Archbishop Molloy High School in brain-dead Queens. That very morning, the Marist Brothers who taught us rushed into our classrooms, holding the issue up and pointing at it as if it was a picture of the devil himself.

They had a stern message for the students: "Tell your parent to cancel their subscriptions to Time magazine immediately!" It was an ultimatum, not an option. We were compelled by the lord jeebus to do this.

I was 15 or 16 at the time and I remember thinking, "What dimwits! Like people can't say things in magazines unless they comport with your illusions." I was already an outspoken atheist (including in religion class, much to the Brothers' consternation). I guess this was the first wingnut thing I observed up close: the inability of these clerics to read something without blowing up. Apparently the whole world had to cowtow to Roman Catholics. Sounds like today's Muslims, doesn't it? I mean, okay, they didn't incite us to riot. But there was no room for non-Catholic opinions in the world. This was made clear to us.

It was a seminal moment for me. I always thought the school was run by nitwits, but now I had confirmation. Thanks, Marist Brothers, for helping me to see Catholicism as the authoritarian, narrow-minded cult that it really is.

This is what's wrong with the New York Times

The New York Times headline blares: "Ecuador grants asylum to Assange, defying Britain". Of course, what it should say is "Britain threatens to storm Ecuadorian Embassy in London". That's the story.

But the New York Times always sides with authoritarian American interests. Apparently, it cannot do otherwise.

And this is our "paper of record". We are doomed.

Piggish Timmy Dolan tries to control others, again

Today on NY1, I found this story:

Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan is blasting the Obama administration's decision that requires many church-affiliated institutions to cover free birth control for their employees.

(Snip)

Dolan, who heads up the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, says the government has never forced individuals and organizations to buy something that violates their conscience.

See, here's the thing, Timmy. You're the employer, not the person wanting to use a contraceptive. And you're not "buying" it, you're reimbursing the person for a medical expense. It doesn't matter whether your conscience is "violated" because you're not the person who uses the contraceptive. See how that works: you/them. Different, see?

It is the decision of the employee whether he or she wishes to use contraceptives. It's the employee's choice, not yours. So your conscience doesn't enter into this in any way.

I hope I've managed to clarify this matter for you. Your tendency to want to control others (women, gays, etc.) is piggish, immoral and authoritarian. See? Don't worry. You can thank me later. Oh, and you're going to love Xmas Carol. I wish I could watch your facial expressions as you read it. Try to record video of yourself as you enjoy the book, and then put it on YouTube. Okay? Thanks, Timmy!