Natasha,Ricky Gervais,CIA and Freedom of expression
There has been a recent controversy in Sri Lanka over a remark made by a standup comedian that offended the Buddhist religion and sparked debate among liberal bubbles in Sri Lanka about freedom of expression.
There are a few things to say about free expression. For starters, it is not universal. Others' liberties should not be violated in the name of freedom of expression. If freedom of expression is universal, then we should allow rape and pedophilia(Which is not far-fetched given that there is already a debate in the United States about whether pedophilia is a sexual orientation) because they are also forms of expression. But no decent society will allow it for the obvious reason.
People have different value calibrations. As a result, cultural police figures such as Ricky (another comedian) have no right to police the cultural values of others. The irony is that person is from the same country that once controlled vast colonial lands. So Ricky has the same attitude as his forefathers. Just because they were born in a country where people do not believe in religion does not imply that they should be treated similarly in other countries.
Liberalism, which is also a religious belief, does not exist in any country; it only exists in the minds of believers. Liberalism is the ideological underpinning of free market economics. They believe that markets should be unregulated. As a result, both left and right liberals believe that the cultural commodity market should be unregulated. However, from an objective standpoint, it should be obvious that the cultural commodity market should be regulated as well. In some cases, it should be regulated even more than other markets because it may have higher social externalities than other markets.Cultural commodity markets should be highly regulated in order to maintain social harmony and avoid misinformation.
The greatest hypocrites are the left liberals. Because they claim to be opposed to free market economics but support market deregulation. Because most left liberals are either involved in cultural commodity markets or consume massive amounts of cultural commodities due to their elevated social status. They are similar to Dhammika Perera (a Sri Lankan businessman) who wants to de-regulate markets but also requires state subsidies for his companies. So liberals both left and right are “podi Dhammikas”.
People who are liberals look upon the principles of Marxism as abstract dogma. They approve of Marxism, but are not prepared to practice it or to practice it in full; they are not prepared to replace their liberalism by Marxism. These people have their Marxism, but they have their liberalism as well - they talk Marxism but practice liberalism; they apply Marxism to others but liberalism to themselves. They keep both kinds of goods in stock and find a use for each. This is how the minds of certain people work.(Mao-Combat Liberalism)
The person and organization involved in the incident were both MEND/IREX recipients. The reason such CIA-backed organizations target organic institutions is not unique to Sri Lanka. This has been done successfully in Libya and Ukraine. First, you attack organic institutions, reducing their social power, and replacing them with their own synthetic eco-system comprised of NGOs and other pro-US opinion makers.
In the Case of Ukraine The Orthodox church has always believed in haromy with Russia. However, CIA funds were used to attack the Church. And the rest, as they say, is history. So Natasha's actions were not an accident; they were part of a deliberate project to solidify the justification for neoliberalism and western imperialism.