International News
See other International News Articles
Title: Toronto Symphony Orchestra Goes Full Stalin [Ukainian Nazis]
Source:
LRC
URL Source: https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blo ... ny-orchestra-goes-full-stalin/
Published: Apr 7, 2015
Author: Daniel McAdams
Post Date: 2015-04-07 07:58:09 by Tooconservative
Keywords: blacklist
Views: 2809
Comments: 19
However, it was also on social media that she committed an unpardonable political crime that led the thought police in Canada to cancel an upcoming performance and offer to pay her as if she played if she would just keep her mouth shut about being blacklisted. Thankfully she refused. What was Lisitsa’s crime? As she explained today on Facebook, the Kiev native was not at all happy that a coup government had taken power in her home country and was bombing its citizens in eastern Ukraine. She was particularly incensed about mendacious and one-sided western coverage of the events in Ukraine, so she responded to many of these media outlets forcefully and persuasively. For example, when the French version of Elle magazine ran a photo shoot glorifying female neo-Nazi militia members in Ukraine, Lisitsa sent the magazine evidence of their glamorized young girl’s abhorrent ideology. The magazine did issue a written apology, but in her success Lisitsa made many enemies among those powerful individuals who back the US/UK/Canada enterprise in Ukraine. So they took to a Soviet-style whispering campaign to discredit her. The smear-bund worked among what passes for cultural leaders in Canada. She was axed from performing this week with the Toronto Symphony Orchestra due to what Symphony president Jeff Melanson claimed were “ongoing accusations of deeply offensive language.” As might be expected in such a Soviet-style atmosphere, the pianist was not even afforded the opportunity to face her accusers — or even to know who they were. “Someone in the orchestra’s top management, likely after the pressure from a small but aggressive lobby claiming to represent the Ukrainian community, has made a decision that I should not be allowed to play,” she writes, referring to her scheduled TSO performances on Wednesday and Thursday. “I don’t even know who my accusers are, I am kept in the dark about it.” Pointing out that Elle was glorifying Nazis earned her a Toronto Symphony Orchestra blacklist. Toronto Symphony Orchestra president Jeff Melanson sounds like a perfect little commie commissar when he sniffs: As one of Canada’s most important cultural institutions our priority must remain on being a stage for the world’s great works of music, and not for opinions that some believe to be deeply offensive. In other words, a musician must primarily be judged not by her talent, but by her adherence to the party line. Politics first. As the Soviet Communist Party theoretical magazine Kommunist wrote in 1954, the artist must be above all subject to an ideological test: The artist who deviates from social realism serves interest alien to the proletariat and to his creative effort. So we are “back in the USSR” in Canada, eh? Poster Comment: I tried to include two of the photos of the young Nazi woman from the linked source.
Ukrainian-born, North Carolina-dwelling pianist Valentina Lisitsa is an impressive talent. Most recently she released albums of Rachmaninov Concertos and works by Liszt on Decca Records. She is known for developing a massive following with the savvy use of social media like YouTube. In 2012 she sold out the Royal Albert Hall in an event that was also live-streamed to 100,000 people. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: TooConservative (#0)
(Edited)
What do people expect? Wear a swastika or call people "nigger", and you are going to get smashed. And if you rise to defend Naziism and racism against blacks as matters of free speech, you're going to get smashed too, because in truth the wars and all of the bloodshed means that no, those two particular ideas are not really free to express themselves. Too many of our people died fighting those ideas. If new people want to continue to express those old enemy ideas, then they're goint to keep getting put down - publicly - and made an example of, to keep those old demons from rising again. There is no free speech for Nazis or for racists against blacks. And there shouldn't be. Those two ideologies attacked us and killed over a million of our people. They're not entitled to equal voices in the marketplace of ideas. And whoever takes up those causes should expect to be harrassed, discriminated against and beaten down with all of the force of the public. After all, Naziism and racism against blacks was all about the strong beating down the weak. Well, the Nazis and black racists are the weak ones now, and they deserve to enjoy the full benefits of their ideology - delivered to their faces and asses. And they will get them too, because most people care more about smashing down Nazis and racists than they do about free speech. Once upon a time, people made the mistake of letting those two cancers grow. We paid a dear price for it. Cancer does not have the right to live. There is no "equal rights" for cancer. You save babies. You abort cancer. By choosing to stand up for Nazis, she permanently limited her career prospects. There are plenty of other people who can play an instrument as well as she does. That goes for any other thing that any Nazi or black-hating racist does: they are UTTERLY replaceable, and they will be replaced. So, if you're an old racist or an old Nazi, rage away. Nobody cares. Nobody will cut off your Social Security check. Yet. But if you're a young Nazi or a young racist, you adhere to an evil ideology that has no place in our society, and if you defend it, then YOU have no place in our society, and you are going to be made to eat dog shit for the rest of your life, just like you'd like to do to Jews and blacks. It's not a game, it's a war. And you're the losing side. If you want to be a dead end jihadi for the "cause" of Naziism or racism against blacks, by all means step forward. It is necessary to occasionally skin some of your type alive in front of everybody else to send the signal that, really, there is no free speech for Nazis or people who say "Nigger", and there never will be again. So if you've gotta go there, expect to die professionally. Because you will. The vast majority of us will make sure of it. Suppressing THAT is more important than the First Amendment. And it will remain so. Because a million died in the Civil War, and 100 million died in World War II, and it's not a game, and we're not going to suspend judgment and execution for theoretical nonsense. There is no freedom of speech for Naziism or racism against blacks. The First Amendment does not protect them. Cockroaches and cancer do not have rights.
You misread the article entirely, maybe the first time I've ever seen you do that. She was condemning the glorification of this Ukrainian Nazi woman by Elle magazine as some patriot hero of Ukraine. And she dug up those damning photos and other info about the Nazi element behind the Kiev coup government. And for accurately exposing this magazine for praising a Nazi woman, she's been blacklisted in Canada.
She is being persecuted for oposing Nazis. Do they look the same to you?
The Nazi tats are kind of a giveaway if the swastika on the T-shirt isn't enough of a clue.
BTW, yes, there is.
I misread the article. That is my error.
We're all guilty of browsing internet tidbits like a salad bar from time to time. I knew you had just misread. It's obvious the pianist is being blacklisted for opposing the outright Nazi elements of the Kiev regime and glorifying young Uke Nazi women as some sort of heroines which is truly repulsive. I'm not sure they'll succeed in silencing her. She seems pretty scrappy but you might expect that from a devotee of Rachmaninoff and Liszt, both of them scrappy, smart and spirited musicians of their day.
Well, I usually take care. But you're right: I browsed, saw buzzwords that pissed me off, and launched. And you rightly called me out on it. If I could delete my post, I would. I withheld judgment on the German pilot until the facts where in. Here, I did not even read the facts. I saw "Nazi" and I saw a girl wearing swastikas, and I saw somebody bleating about free speech, and I bit down, hard, without the facts. It was dumb and I have been around the block enough to know not to do that. I suppose that, now that I've completely trashed the girl, I have a duty to go back and read the article carefully, and publish a thoughtful correction. Otherwise what I wrote would just stand there and be wrong. Too bad for me, because I'm not really interested enough in the subject to really WANT to go read carefully. But if you're going to go on the Internet and BELLOW, then you'd damned well better not be being an emo-boy. It better be based on something real. As it stands, I bellowed loud and long, and was full of shit, and I don't even know WHY, because I didn't read the article carefully enough to known that. ABJECT FAIL on my part. No excuses. So I'll go back and read and post something thoughtful before I write anything else to anybody on anything. I owe the truth, and maybe the girl, that much respect.
It doesn't rate sackcloth and ashes. LF is still just a chat board after all.
Alright, I've read the article. My comments were true, as far as the professional destruction of Nazis and anti- black racists: those people do get ostracized. But my directing those comments at Ms. Lisitsa was absolutely wrong in every sense. For SHE was CRITICIZING the Nazi elements that overthrew the government of her country, not supporting them. The pictures posted with the article were not OF Lisitsa, but rather of a girl in the Ukraine who had been praised to high heaven by the Western media. Lisitsa was opposing that girl, and people who think like her, and I came in like a blunderbuss and shot friendly fire at her. How could this have happened? Simple. It happened because I was a hair- trigger hothead who did not actually take the time to CAREFULLY READ what I was commenting on. Instead, I saw a few words, saw some photos, and launched an opinionated screed based on bile, piss and wind. I denigrate people who do that sort of thing to ME all the time, and here I am doing the exact same thing. So, Ms. Lisitsa, if you ever read this. I am sorry. I maligned you and identified you with the people you hate, because I'm a blowhard jackass who likes to hear the sound of his own voice. I should take this as an object lesson in practicing what I preach, and in never shooting off my mouth until I know, for sure, what I am talking about. I have damaged by credibility in doing so, and it DESERVES to be damaged. You were wrongly prevented from playing in Toronto, and I'm glad that you did not keep quiet about it. Obviously you have integrity. Obviously sometimes I don't. I'll work on it.
Not that much. A chat board really isn't like writing for a newspaper or magazine. Chat is just chat. Of course, I do know you take your writing seriously so if you really want to pull out the sackcloth and ashes and start ripping your clothes, have at it. : )
On LF I have talked about talking to God, and I've talked about miracles that I personally experienced. These experiences were vital in turning me into a theist, and central to my particular miraculous-evidence-all-can-see approach to God. Given that God is, and what we do matters, I consider theology to be the most important thing of all knowledge. And given that so much of what I speak of is rooted in scientific analyses that are hard to read, such that people have to take my word for it that I'm telling the truth, when I behave like a jagoff and spew bile at somebody who is actually on my SIDE in an issue, because I could not be bothered to take the time to READ CAREFULLY, it calls into question my entire credibility. I recently had a fairly bruising set of discussions with one of our compatriots whom I like over a conflict in Scripture. (Specifically, God tells Moses that the name YHWH he was telling him, but that Abraham never knew it, but Abraham actually formally NAMES something "YHWH sees" in Genesis, a clear and unmistakeable use of the word. So Scripture conflicts irreconcilably on that point. It may on others, but it certainly DOES on that point. And THEREFORE one has to decide what to do, GIVEN THAT Scripture DOES conflict. One cannot honestly continue to assert that Scripture never conflicts, "if properly understood", when presented with a clear case where it DOES.) So, we went through idiom. We went to the Hebrew, and to the pictographs. The conflict is real. A very important part of my argument was the methodical, mechanical, nail-by-nail proof of the reality of the conflict, closing off all dodges and exits. It is important that people admit that the Scriptures DO REALLY CONFLICT, because otherwise they cannot read them properly. To be able to carry that argument, I have to be precise, I have to be knowledgeable, and I have to apply knowledge that others don't have. They have to believe that I am knowledgeable, and that I won't just make up crap in order to make my point. Because I know and see so much, I see it when Christian ministers make up crap and foist it over on their audience, and it makes me mad. For me to be credible, for people to TRUST ME when I speak of things that are of momentous important, that would force a change in theological view if accepted, when they are based on knowledge and learning that I have and they don't, I HAVE TO ALWAYS BE HONEST, ABOVEBOARD, AND BE SEEN AS RELIABLE. I can be passionate - and I AM passionate about certain evils - but I cannot ever lie. Not ever. Nor can I commit any gross errors in presentation of the facts and thereby sacrifice my credibility as a knowledgeable person. Few people indeed will jump forward and say "I believe you talked to God!"; I wouldn't be so trusting of somebody else who said it. But if I am consistent, and honest, and aboveboard, in all things, year after year, and admit when I don't know, and admit when I am wrong, at the very least I will establish that I am person who can be believed and trusted - maybe crazy, maybe delusional, maybe schizophrenic, but honestly so: I believe what I am saying, at least. So, what happens when I shoot off my mouth and come down in a ridiculous place on a short article that I didn't read carefully enough? I've dug a pit in front of my own feet! I've damaged my own credibility! I've violated my OWN standards, and for what? To vent some spleen at Nazis and racists. What a fool! God said not to judge, and to withhold judgment. I did so on the German pilot until there were more facts. But here, I HAD the facts, if I'd only read them. If my reading comprehension is THAT BAD, then how can I POSSIBLY be trusted when I am arguing Hebrew idiom and translation? Truth is, my reading comprehension isn't bad. Truth is, I went off half cocked, didn't really read the article - skimmed - saw buzzwords - saw a Nazi chick in pictures - and then launched a tirade. I was an idiot, and the implications of my idiocy on my credibility are far reaching. If SOMEBODY ELSE with whom I have been engaging in a long-running duel were to do such a thing, I would sieze on it as a very good reason, an EXAMPLE, of why my interlocutor's judgment is not to be trusted. Why, just today I finally had enough with the bitching of an old man who won't listen, and told him I was done discussing things with him. To then go and do EXACTLY THE SAME THING MYSELF is disgraceful, and makes a monkey out of me - hoist on my own petard. If I want to teach what it is important to teach, I cannot lose control of myself and fly off the handle like that, and be a jerk, and write foolish things. Otherwise I damage my ability to speak on ANYTHING. It's just a chat board, but it's a chat board where people who can find a clear empirical pathway to God, if they look and discern. But if I go and behave like just any other half-witted jackass, I wreck my credibility for the really important things - important to ME - that I have to say. If people are going to attack me because they don't like what I have to say, it's far easier for ME to bear it when I know that THEY are emoting and, basically, doing what I did this morning on this thread. But if I MYSELF go and do the same damned thing, what does that make me? A fool. If I could delete what I wrote, I would. I can't, so I have to face it. And I have no sterner critic than myself: I have to be BETTER THAN THAT, if I'm going to be talking about God.
Human. Like the rest of us.
Mostly human. (I'm Basque, after all.)
A deft and unanticipated use of the race card. Nice recovery and well-played.
You Catholics run on guilt! Tua culpa, tua culpa, tua maxima culpa.
Guilt, Bran and a cup of cold humility: It's what's for breakfast
Nice find with that vid. I do wish they'd focused more on the actual issue, the way that Elle mag glorified that young Naziette.
#2. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
By choosing to stand up for Nazis, she permanently limited her career prospects.
#3. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
(Edited)
What do people expect? Wear a swastika or call people "nigger", and you are going to get smashed.
#4. To: A Pole (#3)
(Edited)
#5. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
There is no freedom of speech for Naziism or racism against blacks.
#6. To: TooConservative (#5)
#7. To: Vicomte13 (#6)
#8. To: TooConservative (#7)
#9. To: Vicomte13 (#8)
#10. To: TooConservative (#0)
#11. To: Vicomte13 (#10)
I have damaged by credibility in doing so, and it DESERVES to be damaged.
#12. To: TooConservative (#9)
(Edited)
LF is still just a chat board after all.
#13. To: Vicomte13 (#12)
But if I MYSELF go and do the same damned thing, what does that make me?
#14. To: TooConservative (#13)
Human. Like the rest of us.
#15. To: Vicomte13 (#14)
Mostly human. (I'm Basque, after all.)
#16. To: Vicomte13 (#8)
#17. To: A Pole (#16)
#18. To: Vicomte13, TooConservative (#17)
#19. To: A Pole, Vicomte13 (#18)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]