Latest news with #Raskolnikov
Yemenat
3 days ago
- Politics
- Yemenat
Volgograd
Our second destination, according to the itinerary, was the city of 'Volgograd,' located over a thousand kilometers from the capital, Moscow. The name 'Stalingrad' became widely known during World War II, as it witnessed some of the most significant battles, lasting approximately six months according to various sources. The human casualties reached around two million, leading some to classify it as one of the bloodiest battles in the history of warfare. It is essential, from a contrasting perspective, to highlight some of the horrors of those wars and the catastrophic results they leave behind. During World War II, the United States dropped two atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of 'Hiroshima' and 'Nagasaki,' resulting in an immediate death toll of over 120,000, with more than double that number succumbing later to the effects of nuclear radiation, not to mention the injured. Most of the victims were civilians, and over 90% of the buildings and infrastructure in both cities were destroyed. Wars are terrifying and grotesque in ways that surpass imagination, and sometimes even perception. A Japanese woman who survived one of the nuclear explosions recounted her experience: 'I was twelve years old… I saw a flash like lightning, or what seemed like tens of thousands of lightning strikes lighting up at once, followed by a tremendous explosion. Suddenly, darkness enveloped the place. When I regained consciousness, I found my hair wilted, my clothes torn, my skin peeling off my body, my flesh exposed, and my bones visible. Everyone was suffering from severe burns, crying and screaming, wandering like a procession of ghosts. Our city was cloaked in utter darkness after it had just been alive.' (Source: Wikipedia) * * * In this context, we can take a moment to raise an objective critique with an ethical and humanitarian dimension concerning wars, including the conflict we are experiencing here in Yemen. It is one of the dirty wars we endure while the world's conscience remains unmoved, failing to act seriously to stop it, even though it could have prevented it from occurring in the first place. We pause here before the questions raised by Dostoevsky's novel 'Crime and Punishment': Why do we condemn the miserable student who kills the usurer in the narrative, yet not condemn the leader who sends his soldiers to death for the sake of his own glory? Why does Napoleon have the right to kill, and America the right to drop nuclear bombs, while Raskolnikov is not permitted to kill the usurer, who with her wealth could free him—and perhaps many others—from poverty? Why do we find ourselves inclined, while reading the novel, to side with Raskolnikov, the murderer of the usurer, urging him to surrender himself for justice and moral reasons? We hear the call: 'Awake… rise this very moment, stand at the crossroads, and bow… kiss the earth you have defiled. Then, kneel before the world on all fours, and proclaim loudly to everyone… Yes, yes, I have killed.' Yet, we do not demand that those who have slaughtered thousands, hundreds of thousands, and millions do the same as Raskolnikov! Why do we advocate for Raskolnikov's costly penance through hard labor for the rest of his life, while refraining from demanding punishment for those who have driven countless human beings into the hell of wars, death, and famine? What about those who have destroyed their own peoples, impoverished them, or oppressed them for ideological reasons, believing they possess absolute truth, or claiming they are the rightful owners of justice, with their actions deemed legitimate and beyond reproach? What of those who orchestrated wars, nurtured them out of greed, vengeance, or the desire for glory, or to reclaim lost glory? These questions are not intended to justify crime in any form, but rather to inquire: Why this profound absence of justice? Why does justice not reach the grand criminals as it does the lesser ones? What we need is justice for all. We require justice that addresses the major criminals before the minor ones, to deter crime and limit the atrocities being committed, ensuring that the scales and standards of justice we seek remain intact. In this regard, we can also speak of the genocide of the Native Americans, the indigenous peoples of America, and the subjugation of those who remain. We can discuss the war crimes committed by the United States in Vietnam, Iraq, and elsewhere, as well as the war crimes perpetrated by the French in Algeria and the Turks against the Armenians. All such wars involve perpetrators who refuse to compensate those nations or even apologize for the horrific wars these countries have waged against them. * * * Returning to the city we visited, awarded the title 'Hero City,' it was included in our itinerary due to its significant military history during World War II, as it marked a turning point in the war, altering the balance in favor of the Soviet Union. 'Volgograd' is its old name, changed in 1925 to 'Stalingrad.' After Stalin's death and the decline of 'Stalinism,' as labeled by his successor Nikita Khrushchev, the city reverted to its original name 'Volgograd,' closely associated with the Volga River, stretching along the right bank of the river for 30 kilometers Oh my God… What is that I see in the distance?! Who is this woman whose head touches the sky, wielding a sword against the heavens? What is her story? Which artist crafted this masterpiece? How did he accomplish it? And how long did it take to achieve this magnificent form we behold? The first thing that captivates you upon arriving at the outskirts of the city is the grand memorial visible from afar—a statue of a woman brandishing a sword, known as 'Motherland,' perched on a high hill. It stands as a towering figure, overlooking the city with majesty, dignity, and valor. At that time, this statue was the tallest sculpture in the world, reaching a height of 85 meters, erected in memory of the victims of the Battle of Stalingrad, fought between the Soviet Union and Germany in 1942 and 1943. The statue of the woman holding the sword became a symbol of the city. Among the city's landmarks is what is known as the 'Celestial Sphere,' along with memorials, statues, museums, theaters, concert halls, and artworks. It is also home to factories, facilities, and urban development, as well as the Volga River, the largest and most abundant river in all of Europe. The name 'Volga,' according to sources, means 'river of the east,' a title bestowed by the river basin's inhabitants since ancient times, stretching over 3,500 kilometers. As for 'grad,' associated with the river's name, it means 'city.' * * * Under the Celestial Sphere, we took our seats. The lights were dimmed… An extraordinary phenomenon transported us to a realm of wonder and amazement. I forgot I was seated in a chair; I forgot who I was and where I came from! I felt as if I were swimming in space, like a star, a planet, or an astronaut. I became lost in the cosmos, disoriented by the vastness around me, until I lost my sense of self and the familiar directions of east, west, north, and south. Everything here revolved… spinning around me until I felt dizzy. An entire hour was spent soaring among stars, planets, galaxies, and universes—a cosmic knowledge that I shall remember for the rest of my days. * * * We visited the Panorama Museum, which depicts the 'Battle of Stalingrad' during World War II, showcasing a summary of resilience and valor, and the glory of victory. Amid the many epics and heroics captured in photographs, statues, and remnants of war, what caught my eye were the impressive portraits of the Allied leaders—Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin. These were the victorious heads of state who gathered post-war to divide the world among themselves. The world became a dominion for the victors; territories were laid out on the table as spoils of war and influence, igniting a new kind of struggle among them—a Cold War that lasted for decades. Many nations paid heavy and costly prices, and some continue to pay for the victors even to this day. Even many 'deceived' communist parties in European countries like Britain and France were shocked by the results of this division, stunned to feel abandoned, realizing that the spoils of war were shared among the victors. It was jarring to see great principles reduced to mere empty words when it came to plunder. The reality was starkly different, as the world was carved up among the victors of this catastrophic and horrific war against the peoples of the earth. We also visited the remnants of a building known as 'Pavlov's House,' which witnessed an extraordinary and legendary resistance against the occupiers. A bastion of defenders stood valiantly against the invaders, engaging in fierce battles for control. Ultimately, those who held out triumphed, and the building still retains many of its walls that narrate the legend of resistance and resilience of this heroic city—a scene reflecting the ferocity of war and the bravery of its defenders.
Yemenat
14-06-2025
- General
- Yemenat
Hunger
Despite the presence of an internal section in the 'Proletariat' school and dormitories for all its students, the food was poor, lacking in quality and quantity. It was insufficient to fill our stomachs, especially with hundreds of students, some of whom missed their designated meals because the cooked food ran out before reaching the last student in line. The queue for meals was long, often witnessing scuffles among students due to the crowd or attempts by some to cut ahead. At times, when I missed dinner, I had to venture to the 'Diemen' trees surrounding the school to quench my hunger. Sometimes my dear friend, the kind-hearted and self-accepting Mohammed Abdul Malik Hussein, accompanied me. Together, we shared unforgettable memories, some of which I will delve into later. Occasionally, I would go to a nearby state-owned farm to study under the shade of its lush trees, stealthily plucking a few limes to sprinkle on our beans, which would ignite our appetites. Although the food was scarce, adding lime made even the little we had delightful. Yet, it barely satisfied half of what our stomachs required. In our first year, we arrived during the season for planting jujube trees, and we would go to bed hungry at night as the hours stretched heavily upon us and our empty bellies, ravaged by the ferocity of hunger. Our patience wore thin as we had nothing to deceive our stomachs, which knew us all too well, protesting and crying out in hunger's sharp pangs, while desolation surrounded us, save for a farm a twenty-minute walk away. The tents of dried sesame stretched across vast areas unlike any we had ever seen, and we resembled little birds, satiating our small crops from the abundant harvest, or alleviating the hunger that tormented us, robbing us of sleep at night and exhausting us throughout the day. The farm was neither fenced nor enclosed; its bounty was open, and the safety felt genuine. What we gathered was hardly worth mentioning, just enough to stave off our hunger, ease the tremors in our hands, and grant our weakened legs a semblance of resilience. Were we thieves that day? Or was our rebellion justifiable? Or was it merely the necessity of hunger compelling us? * * * Sometimes the line between propriety and crime is as thin as a hair, merging with everything around it until we can barely see it or distinguish it from our surroundings. It often confuses us, much like the crime intertwined with other acts in 'Raskolnikov,' the protagonist of Dostoevsky's 'Crime and Punishment.' Yet, our motives were stronger, and our crime, if we consider it such, was lesser. Still, I find myself asking after all these years: Were we righteous or were we criminals? What we did mirrored the actions of thieves, yet we acted solely out of necessity. Did they not say that 'hunger is a disbeliever'? Did some not proclaim, 'If poverty were a man, I would kill him'? And did the proverb not state, 'Poverty eradicates all virtues'? What then, when both afflictions joined forces against us? Hunger is a heavier burden than disbelief, and perhaps disbelief is not what many perceive it to be. Some have referred to it as 'sweet disbelief,' while others have called it 'disbelief of grace,' and the 'grace' here is still debatable. There exists a variety of disbelief that does not reach the blatant form, and the blatant disbelief has a Lord who punishes its bearer. * * * Why do issues of hunger and poverty, despite their overwhelming and ever-expanding presence, fail to occupy the same level of consciousness and importance among those who create them as they do in reality? Why this dissonance in awareness, where the rampant tyranny of hunger is met with meager and demeaning aid, the cost of which is recouped by its providers through a thousand means and paths? Why do the religious elites and groups distort awareness and concepts, misrepresent issues, and deviate from the paths of justice, even as they witness poverty and hunger, and the famines plaguing the world? Even worse, they seek to combat all of this with what they call zakat or 'charity'! Why do the religious and political groups in Yemen abandon their afflicted people, suffering both from their negligence and the war? Why do they forsake their moral responsibilities and legal obligations as de facto authorities, which impose upon them the duty of care for the residents and communities under their control? One of the most pressing duties is to pay the salaries of workers and employees in the state administrative apparatus, as well as retirees and beneficiaries of social security—everyone affected by hunger and ravaged by famine in a war that has reached horrific depths, its effects extending throughout. Yet, they seem to desire its continuation. As soon as political Islamist groups gain power and become de facto authorities, they abandon almost all the functions of the state, turning instead with determination to the appalling practices of looting and corruption, focusing their efforts on taxes, extortion, and humiliating their people while squandering their rights, dignity, and freedom.
Memri
27-02-2025
- Politics
- Memri
The 10th Anniversary Of The Murder Of Russian Politician Boris Nemtsov
It is very easy to understand who is a real politician and who is pretending. On February 27, 2015, on the Bolshoy Moskvoretsky Bridge in Moscow, 100 meters from the Kremlin, opposition politician Boris Efimovich Nemtsov was killed. The names of those who ordered the murder are unknown to this day. They were pushed into a background of many other killers that we have learned about over the past three years. There is largely only one reason for this: Whoever did the investigation were the killers. There are no other reasons for failing to find the murderers, and real politicians talk about this openly. And those who pretend to be politicians simply do not remember or look away. On February 27, 2015, on the Bolshoy Moskvoretsky Bridge in Moscow, 100 meters from the Kremlin, opposition politician Boris Efimovich Nemtsov was killed. Today's Troubles Are The Result Of The Indifference Of Those Who Claimed Leadership They are constantly being amazed: "Oh, Russia is conducting a so-called special operation!? [1] You don't say! Oh, Russia is silent to the news of severed heads in its own pretrial detention centers? How could it be?" – Simple! One murder opens the way to everything else – and [there will be] no surprises. If a person is ready to murder for his own petty nasty goals, he will commit any other crime. And how laughable, how shameful it was to hear, every time: "No way that the authorities will commit murder" – Yes, they will! Of course, they will! They decided that they are allowed to do anything. And they have been doing it all this time, [2] and there is no crime that they have not already committed – but still one of the first remains the murder of Boris Nemtsov. It's similar to Raskolnikov. [3] He did not kill the old woman to get rich. He needed something completely different: to understand whether he has limits, or whether he can do whatever he pleases. In Dostoevsky's novel, Raskolnikov understood everything: One cannot do that. Wherein the collective Raskolnikovs in Russia came to the conclusion that yes, one can! And everything they have done since then is explained by this. The murder opened the way to permissiveness. No one punished the murderers, neither conscience nor the court. So, one can continue. And thanks to them, we learned a lot about ourselves. We agreed that Russia would be ruled by murderers, and after that we should not be surprised by anything: neither war, nor lies. Some people simply accepted that anyone could be murdered without consequences. And "anyone" means any of us, any of the Ukrainians… just anyone. Previously, we shook our fists at the sky, lamented… but each year it was evident that the fists are getting weaker, while the sky is pressing harder. And now all that remains are the Berlin opposition marches that political emigrants organize – useless, with limp fists. "We are the power here!" shout the Russian oppositionists from Europe. "No!" say the people, "You could have become the power in Russia when Boris Nemtsov called for unity. But you just became emigrants." The Russian opposition lost and now we are all paying the price. Today's troubles are the result of the indifference of those who claimed leadership, but in the end got scared of their own shadow. Troubles are the result of the willingness to come to terms with criminals in power, with the fact that murderers rule. What Would Our Russia Be Like With Nemtsov As President? Why, could Nemtsov have saved Russia? I will not use pompous words, over the years they start to resemble varnish on an icon, the paint behind it is almost invisible. There is one simple truth: Boris was not part of the elite. The current emigrant democracy is a fight for the rights of specific democrats. Ask such a fighter – what do you really need? And they will answer you honestly: some need money, some an office, while some a place on TV. That is why they do not want war to end; it is easier to fish in troubled waters. And Boris, he had both broad public recognition and real deeds "on the ground." After all, he was the former vice-premier, the first governor of the Nizhny Novgorod Oblast of Russia and almost the successor of the first president of Russia Boris Yeltsin. He gave up all the political privileges given to him. He gave them up easily, because he did not want to be a friend to cannibals, [4] a friend to those who either order murders or know about them and remain silent, to those who unanimously vote for all the vile [bills] in the State Duma [the Russian parliament]. And this is not holiness at all – this is a sense of self-respect. This is what dignity means, when you do what you yourself think is right, and not what you are ordered to do, not what is beneficial right now, in the moment. So, how can one negotiate with such a person? Pray tell! How can one bribe [such a man]? Conscience is not for sale. [5] Let me add that not every politician knows how to talk to people, to just go out and talk, without preparing in advance. Honestly, I cannot recall Boris Nemtsov insulting an ordinary person or simply being rude or pushing away anyone with arrogance. That never happened. It is not my task in this text to present Boris as a saint, but he behaved in a way that others do not. He remained a normal person among the Raskolnikovs. That is why people with great trepidation created a public memorial on the bridge where the politician was shot, calling it "Nemtsov Bridge." That is why they have been honoring his memory for the last ten years. Sometimes I wonder with regret: What would our Russia be like with Nemtsov as president? Russia is now melting like sugar in tea. While Boris, who easily parted with power, was the country's chance for the first voluntary change of the supreme ruler in its [modern] history. A change according to the rules, not according to 'ponyatiyam [criminal code of conduct].' [6] Russia could have actually become Europe. After all Europe is not the euro, as many people think, and not Schengen visas; it is the political culture, with which everything begins. Europe begins with the fact that politicians take the people into account rather than just constantly use them. Russia had this chance and lost it. The quiet small man from the Russian FSB, [7] Vladimir Putin, turned out to be more important, more profitable. Everything was decided for the people, not by them. Tell me, was that murder not also revenge for this? For the fact that the successful presidential candidate could not forgive the people's love for the failed one. [8] It is like a reflection in a crooked mirror that cannot forgive the original for its ugliness. Okay, all these are words, but here are the numbers: Boris Efimovich Nemtsov collected 1,000,000 signatures against the war in Chechnya, 1,000,000! What politician can do this now? We were steamed to the bone in a blood-bath. [9] Some openly welcomed the war, some rode into Europe on it, some kept quiet, while some were imprisoned. But no one could or wanted to organize anti-war resistance. Why did Nemtsov manage to do this at the time? – Simply because he believed in what he was doing. He did everything absolutely sincerely. And today's politicians are still trying to guess how their actions may affect their careers and bank accounts. The account may be big, but the people are small. They cannot win, and they are not even trying. But Boris Nemtsov wanted, knew, and could. Because Everything Begins With Consent To The Crime It is all strange. I remember now how he was going down to the Moscow metro to hand out leaflets. No, he did not then organize a pre-election meeting with himself, he simply did everything without anyone's tutelage. On the one hand, this is a very natural thing to do, but on the other hand, who else does that? Who talks directly to people, works, and expects nothing in return, not a tour for American money, nor a place in a European cabinet through connections? Do you think Russian politicians are capable of appearing in public without security if they previously worked as a high-ranking official? They are all aware of a "people's love" for them and they are afraid of the people, after all they have reasons to be afraid. Boris was not afraid of anything, because he had nothing of which to be ashamed. All decisions were his own, not imposed. No one could buy him. A film was made about Nemtsov after his death, "The Man Who Was Too Free." A good title! It is very true. Freedom is not loved now, it is feared. Three years ago, 400 deputies of the Russian State Duma voted for war, that is, recognized the Luhansk People's Republic (LPR) and Donetsk People's Republic (DPR). There was not a single free person [in the parliament]. That is how our government has degenerated. And who will tell how those shots on the bridge affected us? How many people realized that if they killed Boris, the former governor, the successor of the first president of the Russian Federation, then they would definitely trample ordinary people, us, without even noticing. How many people have traded their freedom for comfort and lack of conscience? Once again, it's simple: Boris was not afraid. He knew what could be done and it was simply shameful to complain in front of him. And when he died, it turned out that opposition politicians essentially had no one else to look up to. He died and everyone finally realized the scale of his character. The blow was dealt correctly: The ugly reflection reached the original. Now people are forbidden to even remember Boris Nemtsov. The people's memorial on the bridge where the politician was killed is constantly being destroyed. Instead of a procession in memory, one cannot even lay flowers now, and if one strives to do it, it can be done only under police escort. They even deny us memories. So, who murdered Nemtsov? What are the suspects? Will this someone ever be punished for the crime? No matter how it was orchestrated – a written order, an oral order, or just a silent nod – this murder is terrible. Many of us in Russia, following the precepts of murdered politicians, still try not to remain silent, not to nod, and to overcome fear. Because everything begins with consent to the crime. My deep respect and eternal memory to Boris Nemtsov and to all the people of the world killed for their own beliefs, whom even death could not break. These people will remain in our hearts forever. *Elvira Vikhareva is a renowned Russian opposition politician based in Russia. In 2023, she was poisoned with heavy metal salts. [1] The Special Military Operation is an official term for the war in Ukraine. [2] i.e., committing extrajudicial killings [3] The main character of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky's novel "Crime and Punishment" [4] The politician possibly references and paraphrases the title of Soviet film "A Friend to Foes, a Foe to Friends" [5] A common Russian expression meaning either commitment to ideals (more often), or the impossibility of returning a lost conscience for money. [6] "Po ponyatiyam" and "ponyatiya" are a common expression from Russian criminal jargon, meaning "according to unwritten rules of conduct," or (according to) "unlawful agreements," "criminal traditions." [7] The FSB – Federal Security Service of Russia. [8] The author possibly hints at personal rivalry between Vladimir Putin and Boris Nemtsov. [9] The author refers to repressions against Russian opposition.
