Said Masha Gessen, with stunningly perfect clarity, quoted in "Why Masha Gessen Resigned from the PEN America Board/A conversation about balancing free-speech commitments in an era of war" (The New Yorker).
२५ मे, २०२३
"I think that free expression is a complicated, broad, nuanced field, and I’m not a free-speech absolutist."
"We make decisions about speech and expression all the time, and that’s the job of a free-expression organization. The question of whether a festival should feature both Ukrainian and Russian writers is a perfectly legitimate one, and it raises all sorts of other questions: is it O.K. for them to speak in the same spaces, or for them to speak in different spaces on the same topic, or in different time slots?
But that’s not what happened. What happened was that both Russian and Ukrainian writers were invited. And then, when the Ukrainian writers arrived and said, 'We can’t speak at the same festival with Russians,' the Russians were disinvited. To disinvite them is not just impolite, but it’s also basically saying, 'Look, we thought your expression was legitimate and desirable until other people said it wasn’t.' That, I think, violates the principles of free expression. A free-expression organization can’t be in that business of saying, 'We don’t want you to speak because someone else doesn’t want you to speak.'"
Said Masha Gessen, with stunningly perfect clarity, quoted in "Why Masha Gessen Resigned from the PEN America Board/A conversation about balancing free-speech commitments in an era of war" (The New Yorker).
Said Masha Gessen, with stunningly perfect clarity, quoted in "Why Masha Gessen Resigned from the PEN America Board/A conversation about balancing free-speech commitments in an era of war" (The New Yorker).
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५२ टिप्पण्या:
It's only average clarity and it won't apply to woke mobs if it's the New Yorker.
This is not about speech, but about common courtesy, etiquette. It is also about diversity (i.e. color judgment, class-based bigotry) doctrine that normalizes color blocs (e.g. "people of color"): racism, sexism, ageism, etc.
This meme in a nutshell.
Also applies to Target and AB as much as free speech. Hell...could be applied to almost any modern culture scuffle.
Polite golf claps…but yah, that isn’t and won’t be part of a policy at New Yorker
Maybe President Woodrow Wilson has something to say...does the world need a league of united nations? Should there be a place for people to come together to discuss life-or-death conflicts and thereby minimize harm for all? What if WWI was followed by an open discussion of the ability for Germany to pay for its invasion of France? Might the world have avoided the rise of Hitler and sidestepped WWII? Might more attention have been paid to Stalinism and more Russians been saved from death too?
Juicy irony. Utopian dreamers routinely move away from an optimal-but-imperfect solution...because "change"...because "the outcomes were not exactly equal for everyone and didn't make my pain of loss go away."
While the American elite are trying to quash alternative voices about Ukraine (as they did with COVID), it is strikingly easy to find out how they rest of the world views what we've been doing the past two decades.
I'll sum the prevailing global attitude as such: They admire our economic dynamism, they respect the firepower of our military, but they have lost all belief in the USA as a force for democracy, pluralism or morality.
n.n said...
"This is not about speech,"
Yes it is.
Those virtues you mention are personal virtues. When they are pushed by the collective they are no longer virtues but mandates. To be transgressed at your peril.
The right, non-asshole thing to have done would have been to say to the ukes "sorry you feel that way. We'll miss you at the conference. And by the way? Go fuck yourselves."
John LGKTQ Henry
Were the Russians pro-war? Is just being Russian a crime now?
“I’m not a free speech absolutist”. Then you already gave the inch that was needed for those opposed to free speech to take the mile.
I remember when the left use to not broad brush blame the citizens of a country for the things their leaders did. Now it is all they do. It is like the left decided to embrace and carry forward George W. Bush’s you are either with us or against us to say either your leadership is with us or everyone of you is against us.
This is how every organization that is not explicitly on the right eventually becomes a leftist organization: the good people leave once they figure out that the bad people are running the joint.
"It's only average clarity and it won't apply to woke mobs if it's the New Yorker."
You've caught the DeSantis virus: "woke mobs."
I think the Ukrainian writers missed a chance, to present themselves in a more civilized, more appealing light possibly, than their Russian counterparts, and I wonder if the fear was that they would be criticized back home for mixing with the enemy so they bailed on the opportunity.
There was a story a few years back at the Miss Universe pageant (formerly owned by Donald Trump) where Miss Iraq had her picture taken with Miss Israel and the Iraqi woman got into huge trouble back home because of it. I think she pretty much had to flee Iraq and now lives elsewhere. Anyway, Miss Iraq was braver than writers from the Ukraine.
This is the stupid shit that’s killing publishing. Injecting politics, the worst kind of performative exclusion, into a literary forum is to lower the discourse by restricting access to approved ideas. Pre-approved by skanks like this writer is referencing, who none of us believe has any great moral standing by wrapping themselves in the Ukrainian flag. At the height of the Cold War when our actual existence was threatened by the Soviet Union we never cancelled Russian art, we didn’t freak out over Tchaikovsky or classic Russian literature. Art stood apart from politics.
Or progressives were simply posers playing a game I didn’t understand as a child. But I believed in the power of ideas, that great art could come from anywhere. Sting believed it, singing that the “Russians love their children too.” Maybe this writer still believes in art. Althouse does. I do. I hate performative exclusion. And I am not buying the “good” Ukraine PR that the shady former comic has managed to cultivate. Skepticism has served me well so far and we can’t afford to finance other people’s war.
Sally327 bringing the truth. Nice.
My mother told me that when the Nazis occupied Holland, where she lived as a girl, they hung curtains over the name of Mendelssohn in a concert hall in her town, because he was Jewish. She did not tell this story in an admiring way. What happens if they do take the Russian speaking areas of Crimea and Donbas, places that had been part of Russia for 200 years, places where millions of Russian speaking people live? They revere Stephen Bandera, which should be a major red flag, err maybe red and black flag. it's genuine blood and soil fascism. It should be stood up to. Freedom of expression is the least of it. It's amazing to me how many people in the US are willing to forgive eine kleine naziism.
I actually own a volume of short stories by a Ukrainian writer, about Ukraine; I bought it years ago. It's called "Good People Need Not Fear," which is one of the most chilling titles I can imagine.
Why are citizens of Russia allowed into other countries for any reason these days? Other than as asylum seekers fleeing Putin's government, of course. Sort of looks like approval of Russian neoimperialistic war crimes to not tell them, "Stay home until you get Putin & the military to stop misbehaving in your country."
"I think the Ukrainian writers missed a chance, to present themselves in a more civilized, more appealing light."
I "missed a chance" to be six foot nine and play in the NBA too.
Why are citizens of Russia allowed into other countries for any reason these days? Other than as asylum seekers fleeing Putin's government, of course. Sort of looks like approval of Russian neoimperialistic war crimes to not tell them, "Stay home until you get Putin & the military to stop misbehaving in your country."
"Free expression is complicated" is the long version of when your special friend says 'it's complicated' before breaking up.
The Ukrainians should have been told:" That's too bad, let us know if you change your mind.".
People need to think ahead a little. If the invitations were to be contingent on both parties accepting, they should have said so up front. Or sounded out the Ukrainians and Russians informally before issuing invitations. But they probably couldn't imagine that someone might decline.
n.n said...This is not about speech, but about common courtesy, etiquette.
It would have been ok to not invite the Russians in the first place? I disagree. Inviting and then disinviting adds rudeness and betrayal to the Russians' grievances, but to not invite them, if motivated by the desire to not include Russian voices, would have been anti-free speech. Too, not instead of.
To those criticizing the New Yorker. Sure, they probably deserve it. But they still printed something right here and deserve credit. Plus, if you want to use it against them in the future, it will mean more that it was printed in their pages.
*I* was an American living in another, non-fighting country when we went after Iraq. I interacted with people from all over the world, many who were absolutely opposed to what America was doing. I'm so happy I was granted grace by them, not to be held accountable for what my country was doing (if they thought it was wrong). In turn, I didn't hold anything against them for what their country did.
I think that's the better way to treat people. Punishing Russians for Putin is just incredibly wrong.
You've caught the DeSantis virus: "woke mobs."
Diversity, incels, toxic masculinity, white privilege, rape culture, affirmative discrimination, "burdens", political congruence ("="), xenophobia, "people of color"... it's either contagious, or properly characterized.
Makes sense, although I am an absolutist...
Those virtues you mention are personal virtues.
"free speech" is a virtue of personal character.
Ukranians are a bunch of rubes.
What they should have done was let the Russians come, and then disrupt the event: screaming, jazz hands, air horns, maybe throw in some BLM slogans for good measure - the whole nine yards.
And then when the Russians complained that the space they had been given to speak in good faith had been utterly cooped and subverted, shake their heads in somber sadness that Russians just don't understand the American virtue of the free speech of rowdy folksy dissent.
Slav on Slav
Haven’t we all seen situations where a couple divorces, and both are invited to a party thrown by friends? If one former spouse demands that the other be disinvited, while the other is fine with both attending, isn’t favoring the more tolerant person the reasonable thing to do? It’s not really a freedom of expression issue.
Especially in the case of authors, it’s likely that their works will involve no expression about the current conflict: it’s not expression that is at issue, but national identity.
When 'they' do it, nuance.
nuff said
You've caught the DeSantis virus: "woke mobs."
We can agree, it is a social contagion.
You've caught the DeSantis virus: "woke mobs."
And you've caught the NYT illness - referring to belief in DeSantis as a "virus!"
Althouse said: "You've caught the DeSantis virus: "woke mobs." Apparently you think the term "woke mobs" is inaccurate. So what term would you use? Or do you object because you think the term is derogatory? Personally, I use it precisely because it is derogatory. I think they've earned the contempt of anyone who actually believes in free speech. I will admit that the term might be misapplied in this circumstance because it seems to be the invited Ukrainian writers who objected rather than the usual set of deranged twitter warriors. Also, I don't think the term is exclusive to Mr. DeSantis. I'm pretty sure I've seen it used by others.
MayBee said...
*I* was an American living in another, non-fighting country when we went after Iraq. I interacted with people from all over the world, many who were absolutely opposed to what America was doing. I'm so happy I was granted grace by them, not to be held accountable for what my country was doing (if they thought it was wrong). In turn, I didn't hold anything against them for what their country did.
I think that's the better way to treat people. Punishing Russians for Putin is just incredibly wrong.
5/25/23, 8:44 AM
THIS^^^
MayBee said...
*I* was an American living in another, non-fighting country when we went after Iraq. I interacted with people from all over the world, many who were absolutely opposed to what America was doing. I'm so happy I was granted grace by them, not to be held accountable for what my country was doing (if they thought it was wrong). In turn, I didn't hold anything against them for what their country did.
I think that's the better way to treat people. Punishing Russians for Putin is just incredibly wrong.
5/25/23, 8:44 AM
THIS^^^
I don't want other countries blaming me for what Biden is doing to the world.
Collective punishment is one of the three holy sacraments of the Church of the Left, along with abortion and buggery.
""A free-expression organization can’t be in that business of saying, 'We don’t want you to speak because someone else doesn’t want you to speak.'" Said Masha Gessen, with stunningly perfect clarity."
But not complete clarity. That would require seeing through the pretenses of the pose of "free-expression organizations." When progs are involved, political preference prevails.
"*I* was an American living in another, non-fighting country when we went after Iraq. I interacted with people from all over the world, many who were absolutely opposed to what America was doing. I'm so happy I was granted grace by them, not to be held accountable for what my country was doing."
Likewise I was living in Europe when we were bombing Serbia in the 90s. I remember sitting in my in-laws garden and seeing the jets flying overhead on the way to their bombing runs. Nearly all the locals were against what the US was doing. I walked through anti-US/NATO demonstrations on the way home from work every week. Thankfully nobody held me responsible. The worst that happened was that someone spray painted "Yankee go home" on a building near my apartment.
I first read "absolutist" as "abolitionist," I guess that's in the zeitgeist right now.
Given the abysmal decline of free expression in America, you'd think Masha Gessen would have resigned from such an ineffectual organization long ago. He was born in the Soviet Union under Brezhnev and Andropov, the most retrograde neo-Stalinists since Stalin himself. Granted, Gessen was but 24 when the USSR finally collapsed, but as a Russian writer, surely he was aware of the pale of silence the KGB enforced against his predecessors. Could he not see familiar patterns taking shape here? The American people have a much more urgent complaint against the enemies here at home, enemies without reverence for the nations founding principles, to be much impressed by Gessen's resignation over Unkraine's long-simmering resentments against her historic oppressor. He's a day late and a dollar short, as the saying goes.
n.n said...
Those virtues you mention are personal virtues.
"free speech" is a virtue of personal character."
Yes it is.
The United States is not at war with Russia.
Good for her.
Free expression in Europe means 3 yrs in prison for questioning NATO narratives.
https://news.yahoo.com/supporter-russian-aggression-sentenced-three-160200534.html
In the US, it means being thrown in prison for demonstrating in DC, and having a "terrorism enhancement" tacked onto your prison sentence for questioning the elections.
Freedom is gone, the fascists have won. The "white supremacist" with the Nazi flag who drove the U Haul into the White House must have had an inconvenient identity, and now the whole story is being hushed up, and the charges dropped to harming property valued over $1,000 dollars. Imagine if he had been wearing a MAGA hat.
That, I think, violates the principles of free expression. A free-expression organization can’t be in that business of saying, 'We don’t want you to speak because someone else doesn’t want you to speak.'"
Yes to both. And can't be in the business of saying "we don't want you to speak because *we* don't want you to speak" and/or "because we don't like what you say". Over the last few years we're seeing a growing movement against free expression. And that troubles me greatly.
I read stories of invited speakers who are disinvited, or awards that are unawarded, because some people object, and I always shake my head at the narrowness of it. Yet in this case, I am sympathetic to the Ukrainians, whose cities are smoldering ruins. For them to sit at table with Russians would require a level of magnanimity that is rare. I wouldn't have it.
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said, "the United States is not at war with Russia."
Absolutely. It's just a bunch of guys on our payroll using US military equipment to invade Russian territory and attack Belgorod while saying Putin needs to be assassinated. Their English isn't half bad either.
Oceania has never been at war with EastAsia.
Two Ukrainian writers, who serve in Ukrainian military, demanded and obtained cancellation of a separate Gessen's panel about 'writers in exile' featuring two Russian and one Chinese dissidents. Basically, pro-Kiev/pro-war group silenced anti-Putin/anti-war group of writers and also damaged PEN freedom of speech credentials.
I don't know if Ukrainians are happy about that, but I am certain Putin must be positively gleeful. His enemies cancelled his critics, and he also got an opportunity to make fun of PEN failure to conduct free speech forum.
They should have been invited and then shouted down, Stanford Federalist Society style, right Professor? You supported the students who interrupted and attempted to disrupt the judge who was invited to speak there, took a "who's to say what should count as free speech, maybe the heckler's have just as much right as the speaker" in that case, remember?
I'm still trying to work out the rules involved, and I'm sure they must be clear and consistent since the Nice People are very principled when it comes to free speech. Apparently it's a violation of the free speech ideal to not invite speakers that some in the audience will oppose/don't want to "platform," but it's not a violation once they're invited by someone else to try and block them from coming in, to heckle and disrupt them while they're speaking, shout over them so that they can't actually be heard, etc.
Seems like a very small distinction to me (don't come vs. come and not be allowed to actually speak) but possibly I'm just not as smart as the Nice People.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा