Breaking the Rules for Bukovsky
We don't make fun of specific nationalities here on Ricochet, nor do we indulge in conspiracy theories. But when Vladimir Bukovsky does it, and when what he says is genuinely worthy of wide notice, we do.
Let me start with a fresh Polish joke about a conversation between two pigs in a barn:
Pig #1: “You know, I cannot believe that they are feeding us and looking after us just because they are kind. They must have some ulterior motive. In the end, they will probably kill and eat us.”
Pig #2: “Oh, stop this. To hell with your conspiracy theories!”
The debate about the 1989 revolutions over the past 20 years has been developing along more or less the same lines.
A few years ago, when Iliescu was still the president, I mentioned in an interview to a Romanian newspaper that he and his ‘National Salvation Committee’ were secretly backed by Moscow. Even at that stage, the evidence was already overwhelming, so I felt free to refer to that as an established fact and did not expect any controversy. But suddenly, Iliescu went out and threatened to sue me for libel in a Romanian court. I replied I would be happy to have the evidence tested in court, but invited him to sue me in Britain – after all, we have the most draconian libel laws in the world. Iliescu calmed down and soon lost the election.
The best line in this discussion is simply inadmissible by any stretch of the Ricochet protocols. You'll just have to read it.
- Comment (5)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: Breaking the Rules for Bukovsky
The best line wasn't that [expletive] bad. Or maybe I don't fully get the CoC?
Re: Breaking the Rules for Bukovsky
Stop it, Pilgrim, or we will both get in [expletive] trouble.
May '10
Re: Breaking the Rules for Bukovsky
Very interesting stuff, Claire. I have always been fascinated by these things. I remember seeing a youtube clip with a Soviet defector, telling the American interviewer that upon visiting the Berkeley campus he felt that the Soviets did not "lose" the Cold War as much as people think. Supposedly there were a lot of plants that stayed low and kept spreading misinformation long enough that a good chunk began to believe it, hence the massive Red Menace in higher education today. Wait... am I allowed to say that?
Edited on Sep 27, 2010 at 8:40amJun '10
Re: Breaking the Rules for Bukovsky
It wasn't just an economic system that made the atheist Soviet leaders so ruthless. Maybe I'm biased, but the main reason that I don't trust atheists in positions of power is, they don't believe that anyone is looking over their shoulder. There's no part of them (on the inside) fighting temptation just for the sake of their soul. If atheists are fighting temptation, armed with what? A good upbringing? Based on being polite and fair? It's not enough. The risk of public embarrassment is never enough, when the temptations are great. Especially if you don't believe you'll be caught. And most people don't believe they'll be caught. The first step in any criminal conspiracy is to believe that you won't get caught, or by the time you do get caught, it won't matter.
May '10
Re: Breaking the Rules for Bukovsky
No specific nationalities? So do we get the green light on mocking Scandis as a whole, just not Norwegians?