Posts: 52,158
Threads: 2,794
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
1
I think is absolutely wrong for force someone to denounce someone as a condition of employment or residence, whatever, whether or not there are any potential threats of violence.
Is she speaking out in favor of Putin?
Campaigning for him, somehow?
This action sounds like something to be expected of some despot, or despot wannabe.
Or a Hatfield.
Or a McCoy.
You're either for me or agin' me, so swear your allegiance or be reformed.
Posts: 31,030
Threads: 2,688
Joined: May 2025
Agreed with the majority here. This debate is roiling the art world, with the possibility of cutting off art from the public for past transgressions. As if individuals don't have the capacity to process their ownthoughts on the matter.
Posts: 32,462
Threads: 3,127
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
Public people will always be scrutinized and held to a different standard. You — we — can complain that’s not “right.” That’s our luxury.
Posts: 23,017
Threads: 575
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
2
Concern for threats to family back in Russia if she speaks out fully would be a legitimate concern. But I would hope that she could privately confide with the Met that this is the case. The Met could hint at that with some very general language when they are questioned about her. But who knows.
Posts: 52,158
Threads: 2,794
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
1
Requiring a 'loyalty oath' in secret is as bad as requiring it to be public.
That's smacks of requiring US citizens to line up for a parade and wave American flags.
'You're a good citizen, Citizen?
Prove it.
Posts: 31,030
Threads: 2,688
Joined: May 2025
Perhaps we could dig up some of those tents that were used for Japanese U.S. citizens....