Nice idea, but wouldn't it send the wrong message to the socialist utopian government of Burma?
I don't understand.
1.) The color for international socialism is red. 2.) The dictatorship government of Burma.....is socialist.3.) Couldn't the wearing of red be interpreted by the Burmese gov't as a sign of international support?
I see the possibility to misinterpret the meaning. But I think that with a global media explaining all over about the meaning of the red shirts, the possibility is pretty low. As far as I don't know anything about how well the Myanmar's military Junta follows international press and what is told about Myanmar/Burma in media, I can only make guesses about the Junta's interest in these kinds of things.
which leads me to ask the following question: I wonder why the international media has totally neglected the political ideology of this overtly oppressive socialist government? If it was a far right dictatorship, it would be well known.
Don't be paranoid. There's no conspiracy with the Junta and let's say BBC, CNN, FOX[sic] or any other well known media.
Not paranoia, just an observation of traditional "knee jerk" reactions from the Left leaning media.even more so in the Finnish media, where "former Marxists & Leninists" still hold sway.what else could explain the complete lack of mention of Che Guevara's murderous past in the Finnish media these past few days?
Many socialists, including me, are against Myanmar/Burmese Military Junta. The leftists/socialists/anarchists/communists/liberals aren't one big oneminded group like some would like to think because some people sees the world as black and white. They see people around them as either enemies or friends. There's no middleground there.Three questions arises:1) So if media forgets to say that Bush's government makes crimes against humanity by breaking Geneve agreements, media is Right leaning?2) Who are former Marxist and Leninists? Are they still? 3) Could the lack of mentions of Israel's stateterrorism this week explain why Finnish media is so interested in it's own past this week and the week before?
HAHAHAHA.....come on Jaakko, you can do better than that.NOBODY in the media is mentioning that the Junta in Burma is socialist, at least not here in Finland.1.) Where have you been? The Finnish media rehashes on a daily basis the "human rights violations" (real and imagined) of the Bush admin. Just last night we had another documentary telling how evil the US is in its War on Terror campaign in Afghanistan.2.) I'll give ya one that I know of for sure, Hannu Reime. He already personally admitted to me that the label "activist journalist" that I gave him on my blog is "too lofty of a title" for his humble journalism. Besides, I've got sources that have been on the inside of YLE, and they reaffirm my claim.3.) The highly charged and false label of "state terrorism" is a ruse used by those, who are upset over the hard time they have in explaining the Palestinians' policy of intentional indiscriminate murder of Israeli civilians.Even a Leftist journalist knows a line not to cross...at least overtly.
Well if the journalists are clever enough to understand that ideologies can be used for good or bad. Giving that also good and bad needs defining.But if you feel any better, there's discussion about the matter going on: Hs-keskusteluThere are also many referrences of bad socialism in finnish media. Zimambabwe and Libya has been mentioned many times as socialist dictatorships. 1) Yep, but it doesn't mention human rights violation in every change they get. For example this one: "Hollywoodin käsikirjoittajat uhkaavat lakolla.".Following your logic this means that Helsingin sanomat is Right leaning biased media. They are telling how unions try to destroy the economy of USA, but fails to mention that current administration is kidnapping people around the world, torturing them and occupying sovereign states.2) With what proof do you label one journalist as a marxist or a leninist. And even if somebody can be academically be singled out as a supporter of certain ideology, should he/she be banned out of media for a thoughtcrime. Aren't people allowed to have the freedom of speech and freedom of thought?3) State terrorism is a term to describe human rights violations done by state. Kidnapping, torture and political assasinations are these types of things. Israel has done all these things.But this does not mean that killing civilians (Israeli or not) is a good thing. If you critise one party, it doesn't mean that you are bowing to some direction. Unless you think that "either you are on our side or your against us" is basically good rhetorics.