I wouldn't quite agree here. The Soviet condemnation of Pasternak and others was an orchestrated campaign from the top. The Soviet masses of that time were largely indifferent and the common attitude toward the state propaganda was deep cynicism or apathy. Of course, there were some lay people who "haven't read Pasternak, but condemn him", but it was either naivety or posing. Nobody saw it then but in mere 30 years the USSR would collapse.
I would compare what I see in USA nowadays to a different period in Russian history: the time before the Russian Revolution in 1917. It was a state of great turmoil, there were constant terrorist attacks against state officials and nobility (Lenin's elder brother was executed for attempting to kill the tzar), etc... yet somehow all this was massively supported by the "intelligentsia": the educated, well-off and sometimes very rich people. It was not a problem to give a shelter to "a revolutionary", to pass around leaflets, to help with money, to cover up robberies that were carried off by the radicals in search of funds, and so on. Almost all students were radical. Nobody paid any attention to a few dissenting conservative voices.
"Russia, washed in blood", "The damned days", and "The ashen horse" are the titles of some of the books that described what followed.
You are conflating different Russian political groups fighting each other into one. The issues with Russian feudalism were many which led to various groups opposing current goverment.
Russian history deserves to be approach with same seriousness as American rather then being simplified to kindergarten level.
Anyway, America now is not like russia back then at all.
I've tried once explain to American software engineers why people from east Europe and, especially, ex-USSR countries, reacts so hard against black/whitelist renaming in software: because it looks exactly as "back to USSR" for them (I'm from Russia myself but I try to reflect these knee-jerk reactions).
Looks like no one in discussion understood what I want to say, and I was named non-tolerant and "bad" as result of this try.
Please note, I didn't say anything against such changes, I've only try to explain, that people with ex-USSR/Warsaw block background could react against such changes, not because they are racists, but because it revive very painful memories in them. And, yes, as result I'm almost racist too.
I really liked how you combined “knee-jerk reaction”, “oh no, they’re not racists, they just look like racists and behave like racists, but that’s just because they were deeply traumatized” and “I don’t have anything in common with those racists”. A really enjoyable attempt to seat on two seats.
The truth is that people from ex-USSR and most of the EU countries were born and grew up in primarily white society. There’s no direct connection in their minds between the race and the name of the color. They’re not inherently racist so to speak, it’s a very American thing, that Americans tend to forget quite often.
When I think of a blacklist I imagine a list colored black, not the people of color and all the history behind it. That’s exactly why I believe these renaming attempts to be astoundingly stupid, please don’t involve the Soviet trauma bs in that.
Please, note, that English is not native language for all these people (me included). For us technical term is technical term, without emotional load. Why do we behave like racists?
> “I don’t have anything in common with those racists”
I disagree with term "racists" here, but I have many in common with these people, including knee-jerk reaction. But I force myself to stop this reaction and think like this: "It is not my native language, I can not feel emotional load of these terms, so I need to believe native speakers that it is a problem". It requires conscious effort from me, each time.
> please don’t involve the Soviet trauma bs in that.
Sorry, but I can not, because, again, I analyze my feelings and see roots of them. Yes, roots are in hate to USSR past and clear parallels which I see between USSR (or, if you want Orwellian) newspeak and changing of technical terms, which doesn't have any relation to slavery in USA ("black list" is black because it is list of crossed-out items, which makes lines in this list black, for example).
But then I say to myself: "Stop. I'm not native spaaker, I'm not living in USA, I need to believe, that is change for better, because I cannot judge by myself, as I don't have same cultural background".
Of course, all people are different, and it will be stupid to claim that everybody who live in ex-USSR ("extended") territory is the same, but I know, from discussions in mynativelanguage that many people (not all!) share these feelings.
> The truth is that people from ex-USSR and most of the EU countries were born and grew up in primarily white society. There’s no direct connection in their minds between the race and the name of the color.
The first part is true, second part is not. The people from Eastern block are well aware of the races and do have opinions about which race is how, up to certain races being inferior.
The blacklist as word is not associated with race. But they will make quick judgements about what the words and events and historical characters should mean for black or white Americans. That typically with zero knowledge of American history and race relations. You will also see people assuming native Americans history is what the movie "Winnetou" shows.
For example, when there is conflict about things like Africans complaining about not getting proper scientific attribution, you can count on eastern European people assuming African is crazy and don't deserve that.
Well, I’m not saying that they’re not aware of the races per se. I’m saying that “black” for them means the name of the color, again, not the racial reference. That’s why renaming blacklist/whitelist things is a very american-centric thing, which looks ridiculous to the most of the world outside Americas.
So, Americans rename things in American software or writing because of what those words mean to them in their own native language. Then people who have that language as second and dont really know wtf is going on ridicule them and complain about that being american-centric?
When Americans do the same, they are rightfully labeled as arrogant. It is same arrogance when Eastern Europeans do it.
First, it is international software. OSS is world-wide and international, not American one.
Second, people for whom English is second language, really know that it is called "censorship", no matter is intentions good or bad. This people have very recent experiences with censorship as one of main tools of dictatorship. And they are afraid, that dictatorship returns, at gut level. They could understand that intentions is good (again, they are not racists or sexists or whatever), but they hate these measures, and they don't believe that "the end justifies the means", because they remember that it was de-facto motto of dictatorships in Eastern Europe.
People in eastern Europe are way more accepting of censorship of various kinds and Americans. They also tend to be more pro-authoritarian.
So I don't think this is so valid.
What eastern european has more then that is utter shock over conflicts that arise when people speak their minds more. Plus, it is not like America did not had censorship of private kind in the past. It had. It did not had state one.
Because really, if some place is more at risk of dictatorship coming back, it is various countries in Eastern Europe. So much for people there being scared. Some are, but what others really want is strong hand to squash whatever is perceived of breaking the peace.
> When I think of a blacklist I imagine a list colored black, not the people of color and all the history behind it.
I saw on the tv news recently about some topic where government documents were redacted for press, censuring certain name with black rectangles. Is using white paper and black text, black redaction to hide the words inherently racist?
> The truth is that people from ex-USSR and most of the EU countries were born and grew up in primarily white society.
Go and tell that to in all former soviet central asian republics, to the people of native ethnicities there. I'm pretty sure most of them consider themselves asian, in the same way chinese consider themselves asian and not white. Some countries there lost considerable amounts of cultural heritage thanks to this kind of thinking. Stalin forcefully relocated thousands of people across the USSR, millions of families suffered terribly. But even if someone is eurasian, this doesn't mean that they will have "a half of white privilege", this concept doesn't exist in reality.
BTW, post like this (but much longer, with namy examples, and, alas, in Russian, which is unfortunate, as target auddience must be English-speaking) was written by my friend in FaceBook. Post has been blocked in 6 hours for "hate speech", and I swear, it was all about ex-USSR traumas which are triggered by current trends from USA, and didn't contain any hate words or any judgement of these trends.
It was like list: «USSR induce such trauma for many generations, this trauma is alive today, and it could triggered by this trend».
It is very sad.
It is generational trauma, unfortunately. I could work with it personally, but it is passed from parents to children, and several generations should pass. Current situation in Russia doesn't help, either, as it again more and more like as back to USSR...
When communism fell, streets were renamed, buildings were renamed, statues were taken down or moved.
That keept happening for years.
I am from Eastern block too. There is also this very common idea that since this word is purely technical to me, like slave, it must be purely technical to Americans too. I have seen Eastern Europeans who never travelled argue with American over interpretation of n-word.
Or that since out history had racial issues of completely different kind, American history and reactions to it must be like that too.
Yet another issue is that history communists taught was extremely good vs bad ... and we culturally have sometimes even worst shocked reaction to "Columbus might have been excessively cruel" then white Americans themselves.
Honest question, not a criticism: What do you mean by "black/whitelist renaming"? I know what it means to black or whitelist something based on it's name [IP address, domain, whatever], but I'm not sure what it means to "blacklist rename" something -- it's the "renaming" part that throws me off.
This really reads like it's overplaying its hand. Some of the concerns are valid, but it's so over the top that I can't take it seriously.
The real American Soviet Mentality is the ossification of the bureaucracy at all levels such that unsolved fundamental problems are leading to collective action because other avenues have completely failed.
What does this application actually do? Does it only show the text or does it allow visitors to play games or something more. I'm just puzzled by how often such occurrences happen nowadays.
It seems the soviet condemnation of public figures has nothing to do with what happened in USA: in the case of the USSR, the condemnation started from the ruling party, i.e. from the top, whereas in the USA case presented in the article, the condemnation started from the bottom.
And the tweet about "wokes who want to be safe over libertarian values" was indeed insulting.
I would compare what I see in USA nowadays to a different period in Russian history: the time before the Russian Revolution in 1917. It was a state of great turmoil, there were constant terrorist attacks against state officials and nobility (Lenin's elder brother was executed for attempting to kill the tzar), etc... yet somehow all this was massively supported by the "intelligentsia": the educated, well-off and sometimes very rich people. It was not a problem to give a shelter to "a revolutionary", to pass around leaflets, to help with money, to cover up robberies that were carried off by the radicals in search of funds, and so on. Almost all students were radical. Nobody paid any attention to a few dissenting conservative voices.
"Russia, washed in blood", "The damned days", and "The ashen horse" are the titles of some of the books that described what followed.