It never occurred to me that I might find myself in the role, even indirectly, of advertising for Benetton. But one should never renounce anything completely. Since this is a story about love and hate, I should say outright that I am neither for nor against the controversial Benetton ad that portrays Pope Benedict XVI kissing an Egyptian imam. The image prompted the Vatican to lodge a protest and to demand that the clothing company, Benetton, should cease using it in its advertising campaign. The important thing here is that the majority of the world public has not yet gotten around to understanding what exactly the Vatican’s objections are.
A case of misunderstanding
It is not so important whether or not Pope Benedict XVI ever kissed Ahmed el Tayyeb, the imam in question (the images in the ad were spliced together). Roman Catholics should feel offended by the mere fact that the image of the head of their church was used for advertising purposes without his permission. The point seems to be totally clear.
The Japanese emperor, for example, enjoys the same standing in his country as does the Pope in the Catholic world. Both are human, but also godly. No one in Japan would publish the photographs of the emperor or emperor-related society news without the most serious consideration of all the consequences involved. Printing his image on stickers or, even worse, on sake ads or other useful products would be absolutely out of the question. It matters less whether laws, if any, permit this. Laws or no laws, the effect would be the same.
Here’s another example. I once described the appearance of a Thai crown prince, explaining how tall he stood, the expression on his face with his characteristic heavy-set jaw, and so on. A savvy man immediately told me that I would never have gotten away with this in Thailand. The royals should not be discussed in public, period. The portraits of the king and the queen (and the princes) are in almost every house or office, but this does not mean that it is permissible for anyone to photograph them from behind a corner or publish the snapshots right and left. And it goes without saying that you cannot use them in ads.
In short, we still live in a world where far from everything is for sale. Thankfully, there are subjects that you can’t just stick on a banner, even with the best of intentions. This is a plus for the world.
Now back to the kissing story. In general, those who heard about it understood it in their own way. The standard reaction was that the Catholics don’t want posters showing the pontiff embracing a Muslim.
And this reaction is a minus, as it demonstrates where relations between the followers of these two world religions stand in our day and age. But plus or minus, it is clear that the modern world is in trouble.
The inexplicable
What is the source of hate – or to put it more fashionably, of “intolerance,” or “extremism?”
For example, Russian Deputy Prosecutor General Viktor Grin reported statistics for the last five years stating that registered extremist crime had grown threefold and is continuing to rise annually. By all appearances, Russia has the same problems as the rest of the world.
To my mind, you cannot find a rational explanation to issues of this nature. At least we must not allow them to be explained by Marxists or other economically-minded sociologists. Marxists tend to see everything through the prism of economics, saying that this or that revolution was preceded by an unprecedented exacerbation of “the sufferings of the popular masses.”
Were these sufferings a characteristic feature of life in such prosperous (in comparison with their neighbors) countries as Tunisia and Libya? Why, then, was there a surge of extremism in certain highly prosperous countries, where some people occupy Wall Street, while others begin publishing (for no clear reason) the Department of State’s classified diplomatic correspondences? Mr. Assange and his multitude of supporters – had they, too, been going hungry?
In general, we shouldn’t rack our brains trying to determine where this intolerance comes from. It comes from nowhere. But it must be opposed, that’s certain, because it is destructive in nature as well as extremely silly and ugly.
Let me give you some more fresh examples. It is not quite clear why St. Petersburg is emerging as the capital of intolerance in Russia. It simply worked out that way. How should we understand St. Petersburg’s controversial local law that bans what it terms “the propaganda of homosexuality” (and that has sparked a nation-wide debate)?
After all, it is patently clear that the law cannot be implemented, and if someone tries to do that, serious conflicts will ensue. Again, why is it St. Petersburg lawmakers in particular that are in so much of a hurry to introduce ever new smoking bans? Have they taken their cue from America, where the anti-smoking campaign has long lost its rational core and turned into a civil war between smokers and non-smokers?
But let’s return to our kissing story. What lengths can Moscow residents go to in their opposition to mosques? (Muslims make up no small part of our society.)
Homosexuals, incidentally, may not be a huge proportion of the population – they number between 5 and 10% of any country at any point in its history – but they live among us and are human beings like everyone else. Moreover, we shouldn’t believe that they are characterized by any special tolerance. They are as aggressive as those who are attempting to ban them.
Again, we are witnessing madness against writers, our best writers, such as Zakhar Prilepin. Like Boris Akunin before him, his books are being checked over for extremism. It is certain to come to absolutely nothing. But how can we allow this to happen?
In the move from theory to practice, we need some tools that are harsh enough to do away with all those democratically accepted acts that are aimed at making life intolerable for one group or another.
As for democracy, the 15th-century religious wars in Europe, which were accompanied by mass-scale slaughter and executions of heretics, were quite democratic in the sense that one side or the other enjoyed popular support.
The company in question, incidentally, has been known over the years for combining its advertising with propaganda for a beautiful new world in which all people kiss, love, and tolerate each other. How could they make such a blunder!
What I would advise is this. The ad condemned by the Vatican should be replaced by another, featuring a homosexual kissing a woman. First, who knows, he might like it, and second, these ads could even be placed in St. Petersburg.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s and may not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti
