New Pink Floyd single this Friday

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

 SteveG wrote:

Yes, Roger is on the good side, but it's more of a surprise to me than a given. And that speaks volumes about the man.

I wouldn’t say he is on the good side, per se. But I don’t think it’s greatly surprising. He’s far more consistent than a lot of people assume, because of how he tends to be portrayed in the media. Going back to his original, often lengthy, diatribes is often necessary - because it can often paint a quite different picture from that which is reported in the media.

Waters is almost a Lennon “Imagine” like idealist. I suspect he would rather imagine there were no countries, and nothing to kill or die for. A lot of what he says is idealistically pragmatic, and often probably unachievable. But while there are countries, Waters has consistently come down on any invasion or occupation of one sovereign country by another (with the media making much of his views about Israel and Palestine). But he is, above all, about people over countries. He always emphasises that it is the leaders that he has the problems with. And he always gives historical context that shows why a leader might feel able to take the actions they do. This, more than anything, is where Waters is often misconstrued if people see only parts of what he has written.

In terms of Ukraine, I have seen a lot of people state that Waters is a hypocrite, for now standing with Ukraine, when he stood with Russia during the original 2014 invasion of Crimea. However, that’s based entirely on his pointing out the historical problems of borders, and that historically speaking, Crimea has been Russian far longer than it has been Ukrainian. He perhaps made a foolish comment by suggesting that as there more Russians living there than Ukrainians, and as the borders had been so arbitrarily imposed by foreign powers, then he could understand why Putin invaded. But that was more to do with his dislike of the way countries are arbitrarily created and changed over history, to suit the victors or those with the dominant hegemony. He had also criticised Putin for the invasion, and called him out for being a gangster (or whatever terminology he was using back then - I would need to Google to find out).

I’m no great fan of Waters. He can be a first-class cockwomble and t**twaffle, and he says some amazingly crass and dickheadish things. But I think, as twisted as it might be, he has a good heart - and just wants the world to live in peace. I was definitely not surprised, the way many seemed to be, when Waters came out on the side of the Ukrainian people, and very much against Putin. To me, that was standard Waters.

As was his urging people not to demonise the Russian people just because of their “gangster” leader. And that is something I wish more people would do. Because I am seeing so much anti-Russian sentiment - and that is not helpful at all.  It is possible to be pro-Russian people, and anti-Putin. Waters doesn’t like Zelenskyy, either. (Then again, I’m not sure if he likes any world leader.) So he is also consistent there. He is for the Russian and Ukrainian peoples, but not their leaders.