integer on Sat, 3 Jun 2000 09:22:22 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] (no subject) |
>You say that since Serbia is still involved in a war, it is understandable >that independent media has been largely eliminated. What war are you >referring to? There are sanctions against Serbia, is that what you are >referring to? But it seems to me that the main reason the Milosevic >government has largely eliminated independent media is to silence opposition >to the government from within the country itself, not to avoid foreign >propaganda, though the government is very big on the notion that foreign >propaganda seeks to have its way inside the country (hence the justification >for eliminating independent media). > >Undoubtedly there is considerable such foreign propaganda. But the students >are seeking independent media, not foreign media. Whatever the problems are, >eliminating independent media will not solve them. > >The students are protesting the lack of independent media. This would be a >good thing to do, were there little independent media (and that is the case) >regardless of whether a country was at war or not. > >Also, I am far more inclined to trust the inclinations and stance of a >student movement than many other information sources within or outside >Yugoslavia. Student movements have a history of basically leading the way >toward justice during times of injustice. It is a beautiful and delicate >thing. This power is, in part, due to the natural shield they enjoy by >virtue of being young and idealistic and otherwise powerless (tough to >oppress or slaughter the lambs, tough to oppress or slaughter the young, >tough to slaughter the future, tough to silence young citizens). > >They are demanding three basic things: elections, open universities, and >independent media. Regardless of the complexity of the situation, these >three demands are warranted and much to be desired. > >The universities have been shut down by the government and a law has been >put into place that forbids 'political activity' on campuses. This would >seem to be a move to quell the student protests. > >The Milosevic government of course maintains that the reasons for their >oppressive actions are grounded in aggression from outside. But it does seem >to be the case that, instead, they do not enjoy sufficient support within >the country to maintain power without such measures. The war and the >sanctions have provided the government with justification for silencing >independent media. The student movement appears to be considerably harder to >silence. In part this is because it is 'grass roots' amid the citizenry. > >I agree that the situation is in many ways confusing and complex. But I >can't agree with your justifications for the Milosevic government doing what >it is doing, regardless of NATO etc., and I think the students deserve >support. > >Have you checked out the student site at http://www.otpor.com ? > >It seems to me one of the truly significant web sites. This so called >information revolution holds the promise, often empty, of international >communications toward deeper understanding and a better world. The role of >the Net in the student movement is significant, and we can access it >directly via their site, and can support them significantly via our own web >sites by putting The Fist, their symbol of resistance, on our sites and >linking The Fist to otpor.com or wherever you think it will help. > >There are graphics on otpor.com of the fist and there are graphics at >http://www.vispo.com/TheFist/Students.html of The Fist. > >As you said, Thomas, further discussions are welcome. I am by no means fully >informed on the situation, do not consider myself an expert, and seek >dialogue also concerning the situation in Yugoslavia. > >Regards, >Jim Andrews >http://vispo.com > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-nettime-l@bbs.thing.net >> [mailto:owner-nettime-l@bbs.thing.net]On Behalf Of Thomas Temme >> Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2000 4:02 PM >> To: nettime-l@bbs.thing.net >> Subject: <nettime> NATOsevic > >> The same problem goes for the mails being concerned about media-rights and >> students freedom in Serbia right now. In my point of view Serbia was >> driven into the role of the bad guy and into the Kosovo-conflict by >> history and the NATO for reasons I am not absolutely sure about. There is >> a new book published in Germany by General a.D. Heinz Loquai _Der >> Kosovo-Konflikt: Wege in einen vermeidbaren Krieg - Die Zeit vom November >> 1997 bis Maerz 1999_ in the Nomos-Verlag. (The Kosovo-conflict: Ways into >> an avoidable war). Heinz Loquai is a German general of the Bundeswehr who >> shows on which unreliable basis the so-called facts about massacres that >> led Germany and the NATO into the aggression against Serbia were and how >> these facts were used by politicians. Also there were descriptions in >> German leftist newspapers that the CIA and the German equivalent, the BND, >> were fighting about who may give more tons of weapons to the peace-loving >> Kosovo-Resistance-Army throughout the ninetees. >> >> Besides that point, even though I have empathy for oppressed democrats, >> media-activists and students in Serbia, the media is not free in any >> country involved in a war. And Yugoslavia still is in a war. The Western >> media during the war in Kosovo were not free to send what it wanted, but >> fortuantely Western media often even worked better on a purely ideological >> basis for the cause of the NATO than it could if forced to. >> >> I find it difficult to simply show solidarity with people who work for a >> good cause like democracy, if it is one in the western way, or like free >> media in a situation as is in Serbia, and to forget about the history of >> these good causes. If we just assume that the NATO is partly responsible >> for the situation of the Serbian state, good or not, and that a state's >> main interest is to maintain its souvereignity, we could conclude that the >> NATO has driven Serbian government in a situation where it has to oppress >> certain democratic rights in order to survive. Shortly later the >> inhabitants of the NATO-reigned states, in a kind of second invasion, >> start showing all kinds of solidarity with the oppressed. Could we maybe >> still call this a part of the war, a war with different means? >> >> Excuse me if I did not make my point all clear. Further discussions are >> very welcome under tomtem@gmx.de >> TT _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold