Going to Moscow

I want to go to Moscow for Easter holidays, and I didn’t want to question the perception of individuals who didn’t give me equal treatment as well as organizational bureaucratic systems which promotes racial profiling. But things are not easy; it’s not just like getting a visa and going there.
Young friends at the university who are hard working and pluralistic and don’t have a single image of issues and narrowly defined stereotypes understands the concept of how Moscow could be fun for me.
But individuals who are burden by organizational processes and has predefined image of me provided by stereotype can’t understand why I go to Moscow. They question my sense of adventure and enjoyment.

I am filming the perception of people. The different faces of their perception and how different and the same they are.
These are so abstract concepts. My interviews with the people translate these abstract concepts by building their relationship to my daily life. You’ll see how I am getting increasingly vulnerable to human rights violations and marginalization. Specifically you’ll see here in this documentary what kind of challenges an individual faces when he wants to travel.

Stereotypical image of me by media, HR organization and governments PR is not my reality. This is the reality made by some person some where who doesn’t know me. It’s setting expectations, and a lot of the time we don’t do as expected. I might not do what it’s expected of me, but thousands of people who are potential receipiant will expect me to do this. this expectation is reflected in stereotyping. information builds a negative stereotype. No information will build a neutral stereotype if not positive.

There is a two layer of the issue. The tangible and intangible part of the issue. The tangible is about the visa. I can’t get a visa. I will use available means. The second part is intangible part of the issue.
It’s about a person. Who wants to travel, this person wants to be anyone, but he can’t, he can only be the one who he is perceived to be by the people in the society. Majority perceive me through a generalized image of stereotypes.
Majority’s image of me affects my life.

This confidence and ignorance is projected in stereotyping. We all live in stereotypes. I am not going to bore you out with bla bla reasons of why we live in them, but I will see how people project them on me as an individual which is not part of their society. The stereotype is an image: built of excessive information from the media being over simplified and individuals encounter and experiences. The stereotypes build confidence in individual and help one to think less and react natural with an unknown person or situation.
The media, the governments and the international organizations is helping individual build a stereotypical image of a Muslim who has pre-existing feelings of resentment and frustration; and the current conflict and social segregation exacerbates it and erodes their confidence in the authorities and any established system and they are at the prevailingly supporting organizations that advocate violent methods to protest injustices suffered by Muslims, including terrorism.
Human right organizations warn the majority population that experiences of discrimination and exclusion may result in Muslims adopting behaviors that further underscore their segregation in relation to the majority population. This warning in itself leaves no other option for the majority than to perceive any Muslim as a treat.
I have been to various organizations such as media outlets, HR organizations and university, the people who disseminate information or heavily depend on information to prove the point such as Amnesty international, to disagree about their coverage. Their coverage contributes to build stereotypes, and like most of contemporary stereo types these are negative image in the European public and they also predicts a stereo typical reaction of the Muslims.

the cartoon crisis

The number of deads rose to eleven in Afghanistan today as the cartoon crisis spread to the southern part of the country.

The cartoons were originally published in a Danish paper, Jyllands-Posten, after Danish writer Kare Bluitgen complained he was unable to find an illustrator for his children's book about the Prophet, because no one wanted to break an Islamic tenet banning the portrayal of his image.

I believe there have been more reasons to publishing the cartoons than what Kare Buitgen has been saying. Why would the cartoons need to be published if it’s for children illustration in Denmark’s leading daily newspaper, is Denmark a nation of three year olds?!

I was reading some of the Muslim newspapers and weblogs in reaction to this incident and there were two reasons which were most commonly spread. The more extreme writers believed it’s another manifestation of Western–Christian hostility toward Islam. They claimed the western “Politicians and the media have a tendency to see Muslims only as criminal, anti-social elements and as potential rapists” This could be seen in the irony of the cartoons, where the media connects the most prominent Islamic character with backwardness, bomb and criminality.
The other reason was, it’s also connected with a lot of home issues which still remains unsolved in Europe, such as freedom of expression. The traditional European censorship comes to a dead end with the rise of right wing governments in power.
Twentieth century history of the Scandinavian countries has had a reputation for being peace-loving and harmless.
That might still be true. But the perception among millions of Muslims has changed; the cartoons are not only breaking the ban and insulting, but it’s also provocative and hostile. Many Scandinavian’s has realized that their reputation is at risk and latest figures shows that almost 80% of the Danes regret the action of Jylland Posten. Many Muslim governments have demanded an official apology from the Danish government, I believe if the Danish government responds positively that would make a big difference.
The polish daily Rzeczospolita decided to republish the cartoons the other day, following the lead of many other papers in France, Germany, and Norway. This is after Jyllands-Posten apology, which admitted that their right of free expression has insulted some other people.
This clearly means that Rzeczospolita realizes the reprint of Mohammad’s cartoon portray is a provocative action, but they still want to go ahead with it. This brings up a good scenario for the polish government; will they allow the cartoons to reinforce their commitment to western values at the cost of exacerbated relationship with the Muslim countries and Muslims inside Poland. Poland is especially interesting to picture in this crisis as it has deep rooted Catholicism tradition and it’s currently ruled by PiS, a socially conservative party who is more toward religious values.
The sentiment of the Scandinavians as very secular societies where religion has never been much important is understandable, but Poland is even more religious than ‘classical countries’ such as Italy. How would a very religious European country insult to another religion? Will Poland standby if Rzeczospolita publishes similar cartoons of Jesus.

The tenet banning of Mohammad’s portrayal in Afghanistan also led to an over exaggeration of the caricatures. No one knew what was originally drawn and this is where the rumors start. rumors of the picture which has gone around Kabul is more obscene.
But even if the presumed cartoons were published I believe violence and attacks are no way to go.
I wonder how would Mohammad (pbuh) reacted if he was around. It has been said he was a very tolerant person with a very good sense of humor, and if he could have understood the Danish sense of humor, he would have set a good precedent for a lot of his followers.

Freedom of expression and information access has been one of the deadliest phenomena since volatile peace has return to this country in 2002. Protests in May 2005 against the alleged insult to Quran in Guantinamo brought at least 15 causalities.

آيا اروپا واقعا به آزادی بيان اعتقاد دارد و آن را رعايت می کند؟ ... شايد اگر دقت کنيد، در ‌می‌ يابيد که برخورد اروپا و غرب با آزادی بيان مانند بسياری از برخوردهای ايرانيان، متناقض است و غرب در رفتار خود کاملا عمل متناقضی را از خود بروز می دهد.
بعنوان مثال، می‌توان به مساله‌ هولوکاست در غرب اشاره نمود. اينجانب هولوکاست را نفی نمی‌ کنم اما آيا اروپاييان برای ارايه نظرات مخالف خود پيرامون هولوکاست از آزادی بيان لازم برخوردارند؟
kazemzadeh.blogfa.com
نه محمد، ما سانسور نمی کنيم ... - همه چيز درباره آمريکای من - ۵ فوريه
... به نظر می آيد هربار "جهان اسلام" از چيزی رنجيده می شود، حتی چيزی خيلی کوچک، عکس العمل بسياری از آنان خشونت است. پرچم ها يا اشياء و حتی ساختمان ها را به آتش می کشند، غارت می کنند، انسان های بی گناه را می کشند و خواستار اعدام "توهين کنندگان" به باورهايشان می شوند.

تقدس و آزادی بيان - فرنگوپوليس - سيما شاخساری - ۳ فوريه
من فکر می کنم که مقوله هايی مثل "آزادی" و "دموکراسی" و "سکولاريسم" در دنيای امروزی ما شکل تقدس به خود گرفته اند. يعنی سکولاريسم در خود به مذهب تبديل شده و بعضی از حاميان آن تا حد بنيادگرايی هم می روند.
... و اين کارتون ها هم در مقطعی از تاريخ و در مکانی چاپ شده اند که جو ضد اسلام و مسلمانان باعث شده که مهاجران مسلمان مورد تبعيض و تنفر جوامعی که در آن زندگی می کنند قرار بگيرند. ... نمی شود تحت نام "آزادی بيان" خشونتی که اين کارتون ها در سطح ملی و فراملی به همراه دارند را ناديده گرفت.
... بنيادگرايی مذهبی، تصوير آيينه ای بنيادگرايی سکولار است. حالا خشونتش چه به اسم آزادی بيان باشد چه به اسم محمد، چه به اسم مسيح، چه به اسم شيوا، چه به اسم موسی.
farangeopolis.blogspot.com
کاريکاتورهای توهين آميز و جنگ هويت - مداد - حسين نوش آذر - ۳ فوريه
اعتراض يکپارچه و گسترده مسلمانان جهان به دولت دانمارک و تحريريه روزنامه "يولاندز پستن" نه تنها در اعتقادات مذهبی مسلمانان ريشه دارد، بلکه بيش از هر چيز از بحران هويتی نشان دارد که از شروع انقلاب اسلامی در ايران هر دم بر ابعاد آن افزوده می شود.
جنگ های اخير با ابعاد جهانی و فرا ملی در خاورميانه تنها جنگ ميان غرب و جهان اسلام نيست. اين جنگ ها، جنگ هويت است. مسلمانان استعمار شده در يکسو قرار دارند و مسيحيان و صهيونيست های استعمارگر در سوی ديگر.
www.medad.net/wpm
فرهنگ افراطی نرنجاندن - BuzzMachine - جف جارويس - ۵ فوريه
من اغلب از اين ناليده ام که آمريکا به فرهنگ نرنجاندن تبديل شده، جايی که هر چه ممکن است موجب رنجش کسی شود را نبايد گفت ...
... آيا ما نبايد بيشتر، از عکس العمل خشونت آميز در مخالفت با بيان يک عقيده ناراحت شويم تا از ابراز آن عقيده؟ آيا نبايد اين موضوع را بيان کنيم؟ ... آيا ما - دولت ها، ناشران، روزنامه نگاران، شهروندان - مرعوب خشونت شده ايم؟ ...
آيا روزنامه نگاران آمريکايی برای ابراز همبستگی با ناشران اروپايی بايد اين کاريکاتورها را منتشر می کردند؟ ... آيا اين تصاوير بخشی از داستان نيستند که برای فهميده شدن بايد به نمايش در می آمدند؟ آيا حقی برای ديدن آنها هست؟ آيا مسئوليتی روزنامه نگارانه که آنها را در گزارش ها نشان دهيم وجود ندارد؟
وقتی اهانت، به گناه و جرم تبديل می شود و موجبی برای مجازات و حتی خشونت، هيچ وقت مشخص نيست که خط قرمز کجاست؟ اما زمانی که ابر

for Katowic victims

It’s snowing outside - like usual
I opened the window and touched to see if it was cold
In deed, I felt you; i felt the coldness of your body
I felt all the cold concrete rubbles coloured with cold white snow
Closed the window
I saw a man putting a new ad on the board across the window
I want them to put a big white pigeon
You know which one I am talking about
The one you liked the most
Yes, that one ;-)
The one you liked too much and decided to soar with it without farewell
We wondered where you went … Magda and Łukasz was looking for you
The dog misses you too… I saw him drunk last night; he had lost his second rotten tooth
Want to clear all roofs from snow
But usual story… my muscles can’t help me … I am a blind in the dark …bothered but not afraid
Today we mourn for you… flags half masted and decorated with couple of black ribbons
Wanted to tell you we’ll remember you after today too
If man does nothing because he feels not like it… then that causes the triumph of even concrete over us
our diminutive act could have prevented your sudden departure… this is no chaos theory
Maximum respect!!!

cultural metaphore

On Christmas eve with a friend of mine, we went to join some student-mates in the hostel and it didn’t take very long until the entire room was dragged into a closed conversation, and no matter how hard all of us in the room tried to change the conversation topic we ended up talking about poles and poland and we were going round and round, reiterating ourselves and making no sense.

I happen to see the folks again and inevitably the same thing; we talked about Poland with the same ultra-subjective critical scrutiny.
Sometimes these conversations make you wonder and think where it’s rooted; and I think it’s the sweeping generalization. This one is the stereotyping which is a cognitive need to schematize and interpret with a negative tendency.

To escape from the seemingly no-exit situation of interpretations I do think we need to sacrifice our perspectives- a seeing through of those structures which, by their very nature, tend to resist being seen through. Through this radical sacrifice, "The multiplicity of actual human empirical spaces for man’s [woman's] interaction and communication may be made possible. However, I do realise this solution only applies to a very limited number of people, specifically in the case of our student community, quite significant number of individuals are ready for this radical sacrifice, but even within this group a substantial number of them needs an external jolt or force to direct/help them break the resistance of the structures confining them seen through.
Openness is not just enough to achieve this; academic students are often open just for the sake of openness. There is an obsession of openness and freedom. But quite often this openness restrains individual from sacrifice; the popular misunderstanding is that freedom of choice and open conscious do help in making radical sacrifice. Open communication with locked perspective scares off foreigners. I’ve noticed when western students are being open with students from Far East it really doesn’t help to build trust and other forms of cultural capital. It’s perhaps because there is no shared perspective.
The driving force and jolt for this sacrifice is crisis quite often. This program of emancipation requires that we not only acknowledge crisis as an element of man's life, but that we uncover its presuppositions. Crisis, in this view, may lead either to despair or it may engender a radical reorientation or the kind of orientation/activity which will make knowledge transparent to itself.
Obviously, crisis is not the only medium for cultural communication emancipation, or we would have had very rare intercultural communication; as we are building a conservative view here in Europe and typically enough conservative societies do not fancy crisis.
Like I said before, we are open in Europe for the sake of openness. There is an increasing lack of knowledge and imagination. Europe’s socio-economical problems are directly linked with its intercultural and perception problems. In countries like Italy and Germany people are accustomed and habituated to good standard of living, where social costs and wages are high, but the productive outcome is usual; in an economy which is generated more than 70% from export. This makes it hard for Europe to compete with other emerging nations in Asia which produces the same product for local markets in a way lower cost.
Coming back to radical perception; it’s hard for Europeans to make radical changes, which goes against it’s tradition of building on existing intercultural communication knowledge. It’s supposedly the best and Europe has been exporting it for centuries. I want to point out that 'other' ways of knowledge becomes the possibility for emancipation and radical constitution. I’ve noticed with imaginative and emancipated students one could talk about anything and do anything and they are relaxed enough to grant you such a climate.
It is principally through dialogue and communication, that crisis can become a catalyst for change, because it involves, "fundamental realignments of value and perceptions among the participants." This means that cross-cultural communication can become part of a systematic effort to desensitize one's embodied/invariant ways of knowing- the way out of the no-exist world of interacting with one's projections.
Authoritative and confirmative cultures where variety is doomed unacceptable, one is expected to maintain habitual conversational behavior and gestures. Usually, hierarchical culture is this kind of invariant way of cognizing or imagining.
Programs for emancipation are not concerned with individual’s socially dominant cultural background; emancipation is not targeting mainstream intercultural communication.
It’s so when we have to communicate in an intercultural space we don’t have to change and communicate on there frequency, where concepts are unilaterally perceived and humor is not shared. The danger is the predominant context for interpretations and interactions with other cultures is your own standards; this is another discussion where and how to promote communality and where and how to maintain differences for building a pluralistic environment through communication.

I have also noticed that international students in a multi-cultural environment over along period of time are less keen to communicate cross-culturally. This creates repetitive humans. I’ve noticed some of them; there are some with whom you could only drink and some other nerds with whom you could be intellectual. Some of them get habituated to one place, the TV room, kitchen or corridor, others get habituated to each other and they stick together as they were glued together from top to bottom.