Why Pussy Riot’s Stunt Didn’t Work

Pussy Riot’s protest (or performance, or demonstration, whatever you want to call a politically motivated public act) is something very familiar in the West. A similar act that comes quickly to mind is the desecration of St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York (throwing blood, during a service) by vandals from the AIDS group ACT UP in the 90’s. This was met by almost universal approval by the right people and as I recall, no arrests and convictions.

Occidental Dissent posted a link, which I can’t find, to a Russian explaining the significance of Pussy Riot. (H/T Heil Hizzle- here is the link) But the important thing to understand is that while the activities of Pussy Riot would be politically effective in the West, they were not in Russia, because of a fundamental difference in Western and Russian society which the members of Pussy Riot and those who encouraged them do not understand.

Attacking the church is a basic political move in English, and thus Western society. Henry VIII did not want to destroy the church, only bring it under his political control. The Church of England and its offshoots retain much of the decoration and ceremony of the Catholic church. The Lutherans also did not have a problem with this, only with issues of authority and theology. To this day there is an ongoing interest in ecumenism among these groups.

The Puritans on the other hand hated and wanted to wipe away all of the old church and replace it with something new. The stained glass, statues and candles offended them deeply and they entered churches and destroyed them. They wanted to replace the True Faith with the True Faith, and being true believers they did so.

The thing is once you have established that the current religion is not real, is not a true interpretation of the word, and can be replaced by another true interpretation any revolutionary can come along and proclaim a new faith. The Puritans have stayed on top from the beginning but they have accommodated many challengers. What the Quakers and Methodists would agree on with them is that they are seeking something true and pure. Any outward display of religiosity can be condemned as false and hypocritical.

The culture of constant undermining is a big part of Western culture. Institutions and people can always be attacked, humiliated and disgraced. Diversity training, communist self-criticism and critical legal theory all are based on this spirit.

With this in mind, a punk rock performance during a service at an Orthodox church in Moscow sounds like a daring and clever way to score political points. Had this occurred at a Catholic or Anglican church in the West the young ladies would have been the toast of the town, and stammered apologies for whatever had offended them would have been offered by the bishops.

However, Russia is not the West. There was no Reformation. There was no continuing religious dissent and revolution after the Reformation. I can’t claim to understand the relationship of the Russian people to the Orthodox Church, but on some deep level they are communal and traditional, and whether they are believers or not they recognize it as a part of their heritage. Maybe going to church is something your grandmother does, but nobody likes to see their grandmother insulted.

The Western elite leftist is whether he knows it or not an heir of Cromwell, and so desecration brings him a thrilling frisson. Followers of Western fashion in Russia don’t understand their own culture well enough to know that Cromwell and Calvin aren’t part of the intellectual landscape. I say we thank God for that.

Advertisements

About thrasymachus33308

I like fast cars, fast women and southern-fried rock. I have an ongoing beef with George Orwell. I take my name from a character in Plato's "Republic" who was exasperated with the kind of turgid BS that passed for deep thought and political discourse in that time and place, just as I am today. The character, whose name means "fierce fighter" was based on a real person but nobody knows for sure what his actual political beliefs were. I take my pseudonym from a character in an Adam Sandler song who was a obnoxious jerk who pissed off everybody.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Why Pussy Riot’s Stunt Didn’t Work

  1. Heil HIzzle says:

    The Russian of whom you spoke is intellectual Alexander Dugan. Here is the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxhxRyeX8tY. His first English-translated book, The Fourth Political Theory, is available from Amazon. I imagine you might find it interesting. Here is a summary: “All the political systems of the modern age have been the products of three distinct ideologies: the first, and oldest, is liberal democracy; the second is Marxism; and the third is fascism. The latter two have long since failed and passed out of the pages of history, and the first no longer operates as an ideology, but rather as something taken for granted. The world today finds itself on the brink of a post-political reality – one in which the values of liberalism are so deeply embedded that the average person is not aware that there is an ideology at work around him. As a result, liberalism is threatening to monopolise political discourse and drown the world in a universal sameness, destroying everything that makes the various cultures and peoples unique.”

    Dugan is an “anti-Atlanticist,” meaning he is smart enough to tell the West and its moral degeneration to go to hell. I’m no communist, but there is something to be said for imprisoning (and maybe even torturing and murdering) those who listen to Madonna.

  2. fnn says:

    You left out this part:
    http://mat-rodina.blogspot.com/2012/09/russian-liberals-are-hoot.html

    Or this gem from Musician Frank London. “It looks like the Church is not separate from the State in Russia. The Church is using the State to impose its opinion shut up critics.”

    How so bright guy? Because they want trespassers who disrupted a Church service, desecrated Church property to be punished? You twits have every right to stand on the street corner and voice your mindless babble, you do not have a right to use Soviet tactics (yes these were exactly out of the late SU’s play book on destroying religion) to disrupt, oppress or push around worshippers, exercising their rights.

  3. Miss C says:

    I find it not surprising that lefties support the, er, ladies of Pussy Riot, but decry the actions of the Egyptian Coptic director of the anti Islam video supposedly responsible for the attacks on our embassies. What is sauce for the goose does not taste good on the gander to liberal persons’ highly “nuanced” palettes. Had Pussy Riot invaded a mosque and gotten up to their offensive antics in front of some of Allah’s faithful servants, the so-called defenders of free speech would not make so much as a peep in Pussys’ favor.

  4. oscar the grinch says:

    Undermining is part of Western culture, but the Russians know nothing about it?

    Have you lost your effin’ mind?

    Russia from 1917-1989, in case you’ve forgotten, experienced the greatest “undermining” that has ever happened in any Christian society. Even the French Revolution by comparison was reversed as fast as you could say “Napoleon.”

    And yes, Communism was a religious revolution. Actually, it was the revolution of two religions: the religion of the eternally evil Jews, and the sucker gentiles whom they duped with the fake Marxist religion they made up for them, for the purpose of destroying Christianity.

    It’s a miracle the Orthodox Church has survived such carnage. Why, it’s almost as if it were cosmic evidence of some, oh I don’t know, enduring truth of some sort or another. But rest assured, at this very moment the eternally vicious Jews are right back at the drawing board, trying to cook up yet another sociopathic scheme to attack the goyim with. It never ends.

    • What I’m saying is that the kind of protest, and its intended social effect, depends on a dynamic in Western society that doesn’t exist in Russia. Pussy Riot and their handlers have a Westernized mentality and don’t see this. To the extent there has been a hostile KGB/YKW attack on Russia it has been through the introduction of gangster capitalism. Such people wouldn’t bother with anything as foolish as interrupting a church service.

      • Heil Hizzle says:

        The guy chastising you above is somewhat of a fool. The hoi polloi usually think the dissidents and political rabble-rousers in their midst are fools, at best tolerated; think the white working class reaction to “Occupy” and you basically have your average Russian agrarian reaction to Marxism early in the 20th century.

        The main reason the Left (Jews, communists, Fins, whatever you want to call them) gained power in the late teens and 20s is because after the loss of several million men (as well as the surrender and suicide of incompetent generals like Samsanov), the peasants in the trenches had finally decided that a system based purely on heredity and not at all on meritocracy was going to lead to their annihilation. Thus, their choices were continue to get stacked up in the trenches like cord-wood while the cuckold with the hemophiliac son eats his caviar, or turn those rifles around.

        They obviously went too far in the other direction, but you have to understand that if you don’t put your hand on a stack of Bibles and declare “It was the Jews’ fault 100%,” you can expect people to tell you you’re “out of your effin’ mind” or maybe even a Jew yourself. You’ve got as much chance convincing them otherwise as telling an Alex Jones listener that 9-11 was an outside job.

      • It’s a failure to acknowledge reality that leftist movements don’t appear as response to real problems. The trouble is they have been hijacked by people with other agendas.

  5. Heil Hizzle says:

    “the eternally evil Jews, and the sucker gentiles”

    In boxing fandom there is a phenomenon known as “nut-hugging.” It is when someone like Larry Merchant extols the virtues of Manny Pacquiao ad nauseum, or when Max Kellerman won’t shut up about Pernell Whitaker. Well, forgive me for nut-hugging Thrasymachus for a moment, but look at the above quote from Oscar, and pay especial attention to the second half of the sentence:

    “Sucker gentiles.” You’ve once again been proven right, as in your previous “Anti-Semitism/Anti-Whitism post.” The Pat Buchanan/Joseph Sobran school of foreign and domestic policy holds the view that white gentiles (except for a select elite) are stupid, dumb cattle who are led by the nose by Neocons (rather than their own prerogatives which might make them hate muslims). It’s an odd position for a white nationalist to take, that Jews are smart and white men are dumb, but it’s the position of Oscar and a lot more nominal white nationalists.

    I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that I would let Marc Levin, Mark Steyn, or Michael Savage into my lifeboat a hell of a lot faster than I would let Chris Matthews, Lawrence O’Donnell, or anyone with the last name Kennedy into my boat. Full stop.

    • Zany Gray says:

      “I would let Marc Levin, Mark Steyn, or Michael Savage into my lifeboat…”

      Well if you did, then it wouldn’t remain “your” lifeboat for very long.

      Hope you can swim! You’re gonna need to!

      • Zany Gray says:

        Oh, and btw — thanx so much for drowning and sacrificing your life, to save a chosen!

        In gratitude they’ll dedicate half a park bench to your memory, somewhere about thirty miles in the vicinity of Yad Vashem.

        Just, you know, not one of the _nice_ park benches.

        You understand.

      • Heil Hizzle says:

        The Jooz are keeping the white man down. And the white man be putting sterilizing chemicals in the Popeye’s chicken to keep a nigga from reaching his goals. Ya feel me?

  6. RS-prime says:

    > They obviously went too far in the other direction

    Yeah, talk about frying pan/ fire, whew. Interesting perspective you give though.

    • Ground Control says:

      “The Jooz are keeping the white man down”

      Wow, you comically mis-spelled “Jews” as “Jooz”, and thus your sarcasm now prevails! Reality is not real, your sarcasm is! All because you spelled a word differently than normal!

      It’s like you’re some kind of genius or something!

      • heil hizzle says:

        Okay, you want a treatise on why I think the Jews are intermediaries rather than top dog in the anti-white hierarchy. I’ll give you the Cliff’s Notes, since this isn’t my blog and I doubt I can sway you one way or the other.

        I have all of Kevin Macdonald’s “Culture of Critique” on my shelf, as well as Duke’s “Jewish Supremacism” as well some Sobran and other titles. Let’s take a couple of myths, that Jews run pornography (and its most transgressive forms) as well as the belief that they start all the wars. After dealing with the myths, I’ll say what I believe is true of the Jews.

        Pornography: The most famous Jewish pornographers are Al Goldstein and Steven Hirsch, of Swank and Vivid Video respectively. The most famous non-Jewish pornographers are Larry Flynt, Hugh Heffner, and Bob Guccione. The latter three have been far more influential in terms of attacking traditional western norms than the first two (who are more content to sit on their piles of cash). The campaigns of both Flynt and Heffner to smear and attack anyone right of center are legendary. Guccione was actually studying for the priesthood before he became a porn baron, and made the execrable film Caligula. Japan has a very extreme, violent, and scatological porn industry that is completely separate from anything that could be attributed to Jews.

        War: It’s a basic trope that the Jews start the wars or run them. Nial Ferguson has written a multi-volume treatise on the House of Rothschild, who came to power by parlaying their textile business into a loansharking operation during the Napoleonic wars. They got rich by making loans, at lower less usurious rates than the Italians. By the beginning of the 20th century their money was in bonds. The value of bonds is negatively effected by war, and thus they had much to lose from starting any conflicts.

        I spent a year in Iraq, and during that year I cataloged pretty much all the major players in war profiteering, from Boeing to Lockheed Martin to Raytheon to General Dynamics, to Kellogg Brown and Root. Most of the big shareholders, CEOS, and Key Personnel pf these outfits aren’t Jews. Ex-CIA intel analyst Michael Scheuer who wrote the book on Bin Laden (literally) and embarrassed Bill Maher on his own show. He said Yes, Israel has a major influence on America and that we shouldn’t be paying in lives or defense dollars to save them, but that the Saudis actually exert a much greater influence on American foreign policy than Israel.

        Most evangelicals don’t support Israel because they are brainwashed Goyim at the mercy of the brilliant Jews. They do it because they look at a large portion of the rest of the Middle East and conclude that, hey at least these guys aren’t cutting off their wives hands when they drive the car, and our holy book has their book in it, so we’ll go with them.

        We can go on about what I think the Jews really are, but I’m afraid it might be pointless.

  7. Pingback: Links & Ladies: November 2, 2012

  8. Pingback: LIGFY – November Savings Time | Society of Amateur Gentlemen

  9. Fr. John+ says:

    “…the peasants in the trenches had finally decided that a system based purely on heredity and not at all on meritocracy was going to lead to their annihilation. Thus, their choices were continue to get stacked up in the trenches like cord-wood while the cuckold with the hemophiliac son eats his caviar, or turn those rifles around.”

    This statement itself is (to coin a phrase from a children’s movie) “utter Bullshevism.”

    You are using Marxist Soviet propaganda statements, to prove… umm, well, Marxist Soviet propaganda!

    Better you should speak to someone, or listen to someone who has knowledge (and even better yet, first-hand experience of) Russia, Holy Orthodoxy, the Symphony of State and Church in Byzantine thought and praxis, and who could at least direct you to a book or two that might point out the utter bestial nature of Jews who ruled the peasants, who then turned on the Czar, causing/committing the sin of Regicide, in the Bolshevik uprisings from 1905-1929.

    Like an Orthodox priest. Like me, for instance. But that might mean you’d have to re-learn your Weltanschauung, and that’s ‘too HARD’ for most Amurricans.

    Same thing with a foolish statement such as this: “Most evangelicals don’t support Israel because they are brainwashed Goyim at the mercy of the brilliant Jews.”

    Sad to say, Yes, they DO!

    Dispensationalism is an age-old heresy, that had NO credibility prior to 1830, and even then, did not go ‘mainstream’ until a Jewish man underwrote a failed politician/lawyer, and bigamous man named Cyrus I. Scofield to ‘pen a bible’ with ‘explanatory notes’ that NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD, had made the Bible less useful to the Church, and gave more authority to those who spurn the Christian religion, as it has with the Dispies of modern memory (Bakker, Falwell, Swaggart, Roberts, Robertson, et al.) in their lust for the whore of hell, the race of the AshkeNAZIS.

    In the first case, I would recommend ‘Russia’s Catacomb Saints’ to learn of the evil of the Jews against the White Russians.

    In the second case, I would recommend “Scofield and his amazing book” as well as any of the writings of IVP author, and Anglican Evangelical, Stephen Sizer.

    For when you begin to analyze heresy, it’s best to know who’s the heretic, first.

    This column is very good. I only wish the comments were more informed.

    • Heil Hizzle says:

      “You are using Marxist Soviet propaganda statements, to prove… umm, well, Marxist Soviet propaganda!”

      Uh, no. I think I’m stating cause and effect. If you don’t think the war radicalized people, well then I will reciprocate by throwing mud and calling “bull” in kind (though I can’t fabricate as clever a portmanteau as “bullshevism.”) The Czar certainly exerted more force over the peasants than Jews, and he did not so much brutalize them as neglect them in the trenches, handing them off to Rennenkampf and an aristocratic general staff which was incapable of comprehending how industrialization had drastically changed the war. (The Industrial Revolution hadn’t yet reached Russia. Was that the Jews’ fault?)

      “Better you should speak to someone…who could at least direct you to a book or two that might point out the utter bestial nature of Jews who ruled the peasants…”

      Even better, you could employ some reading comprehension and see my previous post, where I allowed that I had read books which deconstructed Jewish power, and weighed them against other books, and then made my decision after factoring in my own personal experiences and observations. Books written about a subject are not, ipso facto, proof of the position advanced in said book. There are many books written by people with advanced degrees from the finest schools who say that race is not real. That does not make their statements true.

      I lived in Darmstadt, Deutschland for several years, and am familiar with ” Weltanschauung” so your empty insult means nothing to me. You seem to be implying that regicide is inextricably part and parcel of what Kevin Macdonald calls the “Jewish evolutionary strategy.” I wonder, how many regicides which occured absent Jews I would need to proffer as evidence that these machinations of revolution, and rebellion, are not explicitly Jewish in nature? I would hazard I could provide a thousand instances, and that would not be enough. Thank God I don’t need you, nor do I need to convince you of anything. But it is entertainment, of a low sort.

      “This column is very good. I only wish the comments were more informed.”

      I certainly agree. Your argument about “dispensationalism” shows the fundamental blindspot, and irrationality of those who are so wholly incapable of comprehending what the Jew really is, and are thus too inept ultimately to even hate him correctly.

      The vast majority of the Jews involved with Wall Street perfidy, from Blankfein to Geithner to Bernake, as well as those involved in Neocon warmongering, from Wolfowitz to Pearle, are secular Leftists who are about as familiar with the Torah or Talmud as a Rabbi is with pork. If you concern yourself with ecclesiastical matters because it relates to your vocation, go to thy work, but religion has fuck all to do with Jews in this context, though I’m sure you have a fetid basketful of esoteric red herrings to learn me good.

    • Christian subservience to Jews is a post-WWII thing I think. The whole “Jesus was a Jew”, etc. Caused by Holocaust politics.

      My regard of this is that to say Christianity comes from Judaism is only partially correct. What we think of now as Judaism is the beliefs of the Pharisees, whom Jesus opposed vehemently. The religion of the Pharisees is not the actual religion of the Old Testament.

      • Heil Hizzle says:

        Again, I yield the floor re: ecclesiastical matters to you and Friar John, since a) it is not my field, and b) the Jews in this context worship nothing besides a larger state, in order to force allegiance among the rabble to a central authority, and a strong central authority to bail them out of financial and military imbroglios because they know they have us by the balls due to the theory of “moral hazard.” It’s complex, and only tangential to the problem in my opinion.

        You recognize this, Hunter Wallace recognizes this, Jared Taylor recognizes this, James Edwards recognizes this, and even Kevin Macdonald does from time to time. Yet when I point it out, I am apparently mucking up the comments section. David Duke (and a certain number of white nationalists) will never ever recognize that the Jew does not ultimately call the shots. To acknowledge this would be to admit that betrayal by our kind is the main problem, not the meddling of a paranoid minority that hates itself at least as much as it hates us.

      • White Protestants in general are very reluctant to identify other white Protestants as the problem. Southern white Protestants like Wallace can do it easier because they see how this played out in the Civil War. What Wallace doesn’t understand, and what the northern white Protestants who can’t see the treachery of others is that the alliance between the abolitionists and Midwestern whites was tactical and situational.

  10. I’m curious to find out what blog platform you are working with?
    I’m experiencing some minor security issues with my latest
    blog and I would like to find something more safeguarded.

    Do you have any solutions?

  11. This sitе was… how do I say it? Relevant!!
    Finally I’ve foսnd something that helped me. Kudos!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s