暴动小猫、普京治下的俄罗斯以及东正教会

朋克乐队”暴动小猫“在莫斯科一家教会的反普京表演是“仇恨宗教的流氓行为”还是“艺术地表达政治立场”? Olga Shvarova讨论了这个案例。

2012年2月21日,全女朋克乐队“暴动小猫”在俄罗斯莫斯科东正教救世主大教堂的祭坛前演出了一首歌。这首歌曲的灵感来自对神圣处女的一个祈祷, 借助神力要求普京撤职。同年3月,乐队的三名成员因“仇恨宗教的流氓行为”,未经审判就被拘捕,现在面临高达7年的有期徒刑。乐队成员们的审判前拘留延长六个月,直到2012年7月, 乐队的三名成员才被正式起诉, 国际特赦组织认为这三个成员都是政治犯。

在这情况下,俄罗斯的公众舆论出现了分歧。俄罗斯东正教主教基里尔的负责人谴责乐队亵渎神明。民意调查显示,42%的莫斯科人同意他的看法。许多人认为有关罪行很轻微,当局过度反应,任意惩罚人民。普京的支持者和政治反对派成员签署了一封公开信,呼吁立即释放暴动小猫的三名成员。2012年8月,三位乐队成员被判处两年监禁。

继续阅读:


评论 (8)

读者须知:自动翻译由Google翻译提供,虽然可以反映作者大意,但不一定能提供精准的译意。

  1. I agree with Malcolm that as far as the politics is concerned, the Pussy Riot case is just a tip of the iceberg and we may never find out about the real actors of that “big game”, or the real motives (although the Russian press did make an attempt). However, the case is significant by itself. It is probably the first time when the government openly supported the church and refused to consider the case as simple hooliganism, and the church reciprocated by banning anyone, its own members of the clergy included, who was showing any sympathy for the girls. In a way it shook the very principles of a secular state allowing the judge to base the charges on the references to the Ecumenical Councils and church practice, and to use deliberately “parochial” church language in order to explain the gravity of the crime. At the end of the day, the church won the game and among the most important results were the amendments to the Law on Education (which included mandatory teaching of religion and possibility for collective worship at state schools), and to the Criminal Code which introduced long prison sentences for blasphemy and desecration of the places of worship (although the last ones are still under consideration).

    • I cannot agree more with Malcom about the existence of a boomerang relationship between Russia and the West, which was demonstrated very clearly by Russia’s response to “Magnitsky list”. But I also think that the Pussy Riot campaign had very significant implications, not only in political sense but in creating the adverse atmosphere for freedom of expression in the country in general. The long-term effects of the case could be unfavourable to the freedom of expression in cases when the expressed opinion may be interpreted as blasphemy. I expressed my point of view in detail it in the team blog – it would be most interesting to have your comments on it: http://freespeechdebate.com/en/2012/09/russias-convergence-of-church-and-state/

  2. I am a lobbyist/campaigner for a number of NGOs and activist organisations; one of which being Amnesty International UK. Amnesty has, at least in my humble opinion made a disproportional campaign effort regarding this campaign. However many such campaigns are disproportional, and from a number of organisations; particularly since 9/11 with these campaigns being fought one government against another in a tit for tat manner. Human rights campaigns are being used by state actors with surreptitious agendas as propaganda. The US and UK are highlighting the wrongdoing of: Russia, China, Iran and South American countries with governments with a socialist bias; whilst openly violating human rights themselves. Russia, China and Iran violate human rights and campaign against western counties; playing the same role in reverse. I believe these interrelationships between counties are very complex and in many instances there are ‘friend-enemies’ even where there is actual conflict. I don’t believe the “Pussy Riot” issue or human rights campaign has any real intrinsic value; those involved are puppets in a far bigger game they do not understand or even know of.

  3. I am struggling to find a sense in this article that a church is anything different to the road outside. The prison sentence was of course too harsh but would the author agree that the action of Pussy Riot was nevertheless, at minimum, anti-social behaviour or hooliganism? It is easy for celebrities to champion the band now that they have received an exaggerated sentence but what is the correct state response? Or are we just happy with the age of freedom also being an age of religious desecration?

    • I apologise for my naivety but when exactly did this “age of freedom” begin? Who exactly is free and to what extent? Seems like the majority are in the same position as ever, with cash replacing food and keep, unemployment and starvation replacing the whip.

    • I would disagree that Pussy Riot’s intention was to desecrate the Russian Orthodox religion itself. Rather, it was a criticism of the Church being intertwined with the state, and commanding a power which, in the age of freedom, is unfounded. However, I agree that the actions of Pussy Riot could be classified as ‘anti-social behaviour’; in any case their sentence was too harsh, and at most warranted a fine.

  4. Today Pussy Riot band members, Maria Alyokhina, 24, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, 22, and Yekaterina Samutsevich, 29, were convicted of hooliganism motivated by religious hatred, and sentenced to 2 years of penal colony. The were pro-Pussy Riot demonstrations in Moscow, Kiev, Paris, Belgrade, Berlin, Sofia, London, Dublin and Barcelona. The band had vocal support from politicians and celebrities, including Madonna and Paul McCartney, who spoken in defense of the principles of free speech. The critics of the band were also demonstrating in Moscow. One of them was quoted on the BBC News website, saying: “Shouting and screaming and spreading hate in Church is unacceptable and is contrary with Christian ethics.”

  5. The prosecution insists that the case is not political and demands 3 years of penal colony for Pussy Riot. The final hearing is scheduled next week, on 17th August.

以任何语言评论

精选内容

向左划动浏览所有精选内容


“言论自由大讨论”是牛津大学圣安东尼学院达伦多夫自由研究计划下属的学术项目。

牛津大学