260
submitted 4 months ago by girlfreddy@lemmy.ca to c/world@lemmy.world

Swedish human rights activist Anna Ardin is glad Julian Assange is free.

But the claims she has made about him suggest she would have every reason not to wish him well.

Ardin is fiercely proud of Assange's work for WikiLeaks, and insists that it should never have landed him behind bars.

“We have the right to know about the wars that are fought in our name,” she says.

Speaking to Ardin over Zoom in Stockholm, it quickly becomes clear that she has no problem keeping what she sees as the two Assanges apart in her head - the visionary activist and the man who she says does not treat women well.

She is at pains to describe him neither as a hero nor a monster, but a complicated man.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 255 points 4 months ago

How dare she not view the world in stark black-and-white terms!

[-] Chee_Koala@lemmy.world 125 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

She's throwing out the whole playbook and trying this new thing the hipsters are calling: "Nuance" . This lady has some balls, what's next?? CONTROLLING YOUR EMOTIONS???

[-] OldManBOMBIN@lemmy.world 23 points 4 months ago

I love me a lady with huge balls.

[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

I would assume most rapists aren't government whistle blowers and their victims most likely have no reason to hold a nuanced view.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

A(n actual) Christian deacon who believes in forgiveness????

ObViOuSLy HeS iNnOcEnT!/1!

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] lurch@sh.itjust.works 58 points 4 months ago

She just seems to believe in due process and fairness. Obviously, what happened to Assange so far hasn't been either.

[-] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 4 months ago

I mean her case was investigated and he was freed to leave the country afterward. It didn't come back with a vengeance until it could be used as a means to put him where the US could get at him.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 44 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

What about the 3rd man, who espouses his organization isn't an arbiter of information, and yet, repeatedly prevented Russian leaks from being published? 🤔

And with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, where is wikileaks now?

Cozy Bear really appreciated having such a loyal publisher, I imagine.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 65 points 4 months ago

This, to me, is less important than the fact that this woman is publicly talking about how someone can do a bad thing but still be a public good, something not talked about enough in a world where when someone does something bad, it makes people ignore everything else they're doing.

[-] negativenull@lemmy.world 35 points 4 months ago

I have struggled with this a lot in recent years. For example, I grew up with Ender's Game as my favorite book. Orson Scott Card is a racist/misogynistic/etc POS, and it has tainted my view of his books. People are experiencing this with J. K. Rowling right now.

I like to think I can keep the artist separate from their art, but it's hard.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 25 points 4 months ago

I dealt with that as a kid with Roald Dahl because he was super antisemitic, but he also wrote amazing children's books. I guess for me it depends on how much they put such ugliness into their work. Lovecraft, creative as he was, had no problem being racist in his writings and I just can't read them even though I love the mythos. Dahl didn't do that.

Card and Rowling are somewhat different cases because they didn't start by writing terrible things, but they got to the point that their ugly beliefs began to seep into their books.

[-] negativenull@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

Dahl is another great example. I loved his book as a kid, and still read them to my kid now.

[-] SpikesOtherDog@ani.social 5 points 4 months ago

Me too, but I couldn't get through Great Glass Elevator. I try my best to voice all the characters, and I couldn't get through the president's phone calls with China, even toned down.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The Rowling shift is a gut punch in particular for me because I also long admired her specifically. A single impoverished mother writing her drafts on napkins while taking the train to work. Her work for Amnesty International. Her fierce rejection of right-wing extremism and fascism...I remember saving her Harvard commence address as being the most powerful one I've ever heard. The road to hell is paved with good intentions? I don't know. Frustrating because INFJ-to-INFJ I relate to her personality type.

Meanwhile her books were incredibly impactful of my upbringing and my relationship with my mother as well.

Controversial though this may be I don't view her as some evil anti-Semitic trans-lynching nazi in lieu of her views. Misguided, sure, but in the aggregation of all she is I'm still struggling with the mixed bag of her character. Maybe that's my own cognitive dissonance; maybe it's hers.

Edit: Side-note, Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow were incredible books. I'm only heartbroken that the opportunity was missed to have Anton Yelchin cast as Ender in a better film adaptation we shall never see.

[-] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The worst part with Rowling is she just keeps doubling down, and directly uses her money and influence to make other peoples lives worse.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago

I was with you until you called her misguided. She is way beyond misguided at this point. She's gotten so hateful that even Elon Musk told her to tone down the anti-trans bigotry.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/elon-musk-jk-rowling-trans-obsession-rcna151323

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Sure, substitute whichever word you'd like in place of misguided. I'm not sure if that changes the rest of my points. Especially within the context of this entire thread discussing nuance and not painting people in black-and-white.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

I wouldn't substitute any word in that case because there is absolutely no excusing her at this point. Her actions are indefensible. Love her books, fine, but she is a horrible, horrible person and her bigotry does not deserve to be excused by calling it misguided or anything else but bigotry. If she said about black people what she says about trans people, that wouldn't even be a consideration in terms of talking about her.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Well now I'm a little confused. Did I find a point of cognitive dissonance in you? In one breath you defend Assange under fire for sexual assault and to consider nuance, but this is too far?

And since when do we care what Elon Musk has to say? He called someone a pedophile, too, remember? Should we jump on the bandwagon with that just the same?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

Love her books, fine, but she is a horrible, horrible person

I am literally talking about separating someone from her work. I don't know how I could have been clearer on that point. But that doesn't mean what she says is in any way excusable or defensible. Bigotry is bigotry.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Okay I see what you're saying, I think. I went back to re-read your comment:

This, to me, is less important than the fact that this woman is publicly talking about how someone can do a bad thing but still be a public good, something not talked about enough in a world where when someone does something bad, it makes people ignore everything else they’re doing.

So your general perception of Assange is that he is an irredeemable rapist asshole who's done good work and you respect his accuser for distinguishing those in the same respect you view the character of Rowling as irredeemable and a hateful bigot who's done good work. Do I have that correct?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

Yes. I feel that if someone has done good work, even if they are a horrible person, acknowledging the good work is the right thing to do. Even if they wrong you personally. That makes it much more difficult, but I still think it's something that needs to be done.

My former best friend ripped my mom off for drug money by lying about what he needed it for and is now in prison for possessing meth lab equipment. He's a horrible person in a lot of ways. But I will still acknowledge the good things he did as good things (he was always willing to give someone a place to stay if they needed it and for as long as they needed it, for example) even if he has done things I can't forgive him for.

I guess in my view, the bad has to far outweigh the good if you're going to ignore the good and I think that, while I also have a lot of criticisms about what he has done with Wikileaks, especially around the 2016 election, I also think that Wikileaks- at least when it began- did a lot of good. And credit does go to him for that despite anything else. His victim in the article seems to agree.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Fair enough. Thanks for the elaboration and discussion.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 5 points 4 months ago

Exactly the same way I felt reading your comment when you inserted astrology for nerds into it!

How could you ruin your previous work so profoundly?

load more comments (15 replies)
[-] meleecrits@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

I had the same experience with Scott Card. I loved the Ender books, the books about his older brother trying to be a good person when he was a "bad child" really resonated with me.

I was so disappointed when I looked him up and saw how hateful he really was.

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 months ago

I was a big fan of the Belgariad growing up... that one is fucking rough.

[-] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Uuh what? What did Eddings do? (Genuine, I don't know)

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago

Honestly, it's pretty fucking rough so I don't want to post it here - if you Google "Eddings abuse" you'll get the results.

[-] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 4 points 4 months ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Eddings

TL;DR: child abuse of their adopted children in the 1970's.

[-] nexusband@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

I like to think I can keep the artist separate from their art, but it’s hard.

You can't, but in some cases the art stands for itself without the artist. Basically, you can separate the Art from an Artist, but not the Artist from the Art. (if that makes any sense...)

[-] rammer@sopuli.xyz 5 points 4 months ago

I had the same experience with Arthur C. Clarke.

He moved to Sri Lanka to dodge all the accusations of pedophilia. It was all hushed up. As was the custom at the time.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

That's fair. That isn't where my own head is currently but I do appreciate nuance for once. People can be complicated, and I'm certain she knows the real Assange better than most.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] febra@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago

I still see absolutely no reason to lock him up. Just because he's biased towards one side that doesn't make the crimes of the other side any better. Ideally, yes, he should publish everything. But that's not the case. And it's still irrelevant.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 10 points 4 months ago

And with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, where is wikileaks now?

I mean what do you want him to leak? Everything is out there for everyone to see.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 15 points 4 months ago

If you're saying this tongue-in-cheek to note that it's flatly obvious that Putin is a corrupt imperialist tyrant, true I agree. But there is always more damaging information to be revealed not just to the world but internally to the people of Russia within the echo-chamber. For instance, more on Putin's personal finances. More on Aleksandr Dugin, Putin's neo-nazi Rasputin, etc.

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 12 points 4 months ago

Did Assange ever have access to that information? I admittedly don't know the details but I don't tbink he was ever in that kind of position.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 29 points 4 months ago

Speaking to Ardin over Zoom in Stockholm...

That place does seem to have a certain effect on people.

[-] Thteven@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)
[-] kamiheku@sopuli.xyz 6 points 4 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
260 points (91.4% liked)

World News

39019 readers
2328 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS