S03.E10: Stingers

[AGuyToo]

A new episode is about to begin and it might render what I'm about to write moot, but for the sake of continuing the discussion, three points:

 

1) When Paige offers "You're a pacifist" to Pastor Tim, he responds: "Yes, but are killing and dying the same thing? And didn't Jesus choose to die? I mean, he could have gotten away. He knew they were coming."  His response is all about rejecting killing but not dying. Nothing he says suggests sympathy with killing.

 

2) My comments about "causal" and "determinative" were in response to this paragraph in your post:

 

"

For instance, Apartheid has become an issue this season and while Paige's part is to push for divestment, that's not a nonviolent struggle. In fact, anti-Apartheid activists tried nonviolent resistance and it didn't work. Not everyone was like Ncgobo, but they weren't averse to destroying property etc. And there were many riots.

"

 

I don't think the historical record supports the statement that anti-apartheid activists "tried nonviolent resistance and it didn't work." Too many conflicting things were happening to say what worked and what didn't work.

 

3) We'll have to agree to disagree that "People also choose [nonviolence] because it's the best strategy and if it's not effective they move on to other things to reach their specific goal." I would argue that such people were never really practicing nonviolence. I realize this runs the risk of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, but I think it's true. Nonviolence has power only to the extent that people believe in it and live their lives by it and convince others of its value. If nonviolence is just one of several tactics -- and especially if killing the Bettys of the world is also considered legitimate -- then it loses all power.

 

As I remember it he *did* question the pacifism label and refuse to own that title. His example was strictly about Jesus not fighting the Romans and therefore choosing to die for something, but when Paige said "Because you're a pacifist" (for why he was protesting the war) I swear I remember him not owning that name, even if he didn't specifically talk about whether or not he'd kill for something. Didn't he question whether to call himself that? Yet if his only point was that he would be willing to die for something there's no reason to hesitate to take that term--there's nothing in pacifism that says you won't die for something. It seemed very specifically written that Tim didn't want Paige to simply conclude he was a pacifist, I assumed because he did actually like the idea of being a fighter. Seeing those worlds "I will not fight, I will not die," even if he understood what they meant in the context of Vietnam, didn't appeal to him--that feeling was the core of the story for him.

 

I don't think that if Paige is influenced by her parents this means she's just listening to anybody and changing her beliefs accordingly. She is a young person just starting to understand the world and as such it's imo unrealistic to assume that the beliefs she has now that are heavily influenced by Pastor Tim must be her true beliefs forever. Even Elizabeth who works so hard to reject any other influences than her early ones has come to change a little because the world is complicated. Her parents aren't just introducing her to other philosophies, they're opening her up to whole corners of the world that are unfamiliar to Paige, who was uncomfortable just being in a bad neighborhood. There is a war going on in front of Paige's eyes and her parents are part of it.

 

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "causal" here or by my saying it's determinate or an experiment. I'm not saying it determines anything. I'm just acknowledging that there was violent resistance along with nonviolent resistance and that some people who advocated the latter at first came to believe the former was also necessary, not saying that the violence was the thing that won the struggle. Right now Paige seems to be of the opinion that nonviolent resistance is almost a magic bullet and sees anything else as just part of the problem, but the reality is more complicated everywhere. Paige's own role in the anti-Apartheid struggle is nonviolent and comes in the form of trying to influence her government to divest--that's an effective thing. But if someone in South Africa feels they need to physically fight the oppressor, does she think they're wrong? She has a very different experience of the world than her parents who grew up in the shadow of WWII in the USSR. 

 

 

 

That's not everyone's argument for it at all. Nonviolent resistance can absolutely be an effective tactic that yields good results in the short and long run. One can also argue that it's more morally defensible than violence and will benefit humanity more, but that's not necessarily why everyone has done it. People also choose it because it's the best strategy and if it's not effective they move on to other things to reach their specific goal. And they consider that morally defensible. I believe that most people who are most associated with nonviolent resistance were keen strategists very much in control with how their actions would effect their goal. 

Edited April 8, 2015 by AGuyToo

[sistermagpie]

Ah! I totally missed that line of Pastor Tim's. In that case I agree, he's owning that he won't kill but doesn't like the thought that people are saying he wouldn't die for something. You're right--totally forgot the line. I have been reading it exactly wrong this whole time. (Well, he's still a douche either way, imo, but he's a self-identified pacifist.) This is what happens when you don't go back and check.

 

 

I don't think the historical record supports the statement that anti-apartheid activists "tried nonviolent resistance and it didn't work." Too many conflicting things were happening to say what worked and what didn't work.

 

 

Okay, I think this is semantics but there were certainly individuals that came to believe that nonviolent resistance was not the thing that was going to do it, and there was also violence and eventually Apartheid ended. We can't say whether continuing with only nonviolence would have wound up with the same result or if more violence would have done the same. I didn't mean to say that nonviolence failed and that's that. I'm saying it's complicated and I don't think Paige is at the point yet where she could really confidently tell somebody rioting there that they're just misguided.

 

We will definitely disagree that people who practice nonviolent resistance as a strategy and who would switch if it didn't work are not practicing non violence. That seems like judging it as a philosophy more than a tactic. A person whose priority is the goal would, I think, put that above performing nonviolent resistance for its own sake. There's just very obvious benefits to it as a strategy. I just think a lot of those people were there to get results even if they didn't happen right away. If it wasn't going to work why do it? And would participating in those kinds of protests mean they would also refuse to fight in, say, WWII?

 

Philip and Elizabeth, for instance, would no doubt say that when Hitler invaded their country non-violent resistance would simply be surrender and therefore they would fight for their country. Even if I take him at his word that he's a pacifist, I think Pastor Tim would find that situation less complicated than protesting Vietnam. And even if he himself wanted to choose nonviolence he might be happy other people were there to fight.

Edited April 9, 2015 by sistermagpie

[gwhh]

I was thinking for some reason when Phillip told Paige not to tell anyone or they could go to jail.

All I could think of the episode where Peter Tell his Wife Lois one day when he off to work: Remember what I always tell you, if I come home in the middle of the day and catch you having sex with someone, I'll kill you both!

I always found that line so funny from that show and it just come out of no where!

Philip would say if I come home middle of the day and found you with the FBI. I would kill you both!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0576919/?ref_=ttqt_qt_tt

Edited April 15, 2015 by gwhh

[Anela]

Did Zinaida plant something in the bathroom? Was that Stan's doing, or is she really a spy? I watched it last week, but it was overshadowed by the big reveal with Paige.

[John S]

Did Zinaida plant something in the bathroom? Was that Stan's doing, or is she really a spy? I watched it last week, but it was overshadowed by the big reveal with Paige.

YES - She planted something.

[Umbelina]

She planted the intel to Arkady that someone from the KGB confronted her in the hotel room. 

[JBravoEcho09]

And yes, they should have had a cover story ready all along... Children of people who died in death camps, defectors, witness protection, something. Not that I wanted them to lie now, but the notion that they thought their kids would never wonder why they had no relatives and why freckling travel agents had emergency calls and had to run out is preposterous.

 

 

Oddly this episode really hit home for me in an unexpected way.  They may have been surprised about the amount and intelligence of the questioning, I don't think they were caught flatfooted.  I think they were caught at a crossroads.  It actually reminded me of coming out to my parents.  When they ambushed me with a phone bill that had the same number over and over again (my ex), my mind was racing through my cover story.  It would have totally been plausible, but I had been thinking about coming out to them for months, and I just couldn't bring myself to lie more.  It wasn't like I had to do it, I just knew it was time.  Even if it felt forced, it was still my decision to tell the truth.  I think P&E's reaction to Paige was very similar.

[SlovakPrincess]

Holy shit!! I'm not sure I buy that her parents would fold that quickly and tell Paige the truth. Perhaps they felt they might as well because the Rezidentura would eventually demand she be turned, anyway? But damn good acting, all around. Holly Taylor especially did such a good job.

But can I just say what an asinine idea it is for P and E to have to turn her into a spy at all? It's just asking for these second generation spies to become double agents for the U.S., torn between a country they've always called home and parents they'd no longer trust.

Stan is starting to suspect Martha! The scene at the end where Stan noticed Paige acting strangely was pretty awesome, too.

Candy bar lady really is a spy. And they're going to figure out Oleg went after her. Uh oh!

[Roseanna]

On ‎2‎.‎4‎.‎2015 at 6:15 AM, soapfaninnc said:

I'm maybe a year older than Paige's age. There's no way in heck I am going to believe a girl raised in America at the time Paige has been is going to calmly accept that her parents are betraying the country she was born in. I was personally scared to death of the Russian - thanks in large part to my mother who screamed in the middle of the living room that Reagan was going to get us all blown up when he was elected in 1980.  (Not exactly the thing to say in front of an anxiety riddled child. I lay awake many a night listening for the sirens and its the reason I don't react to politics in front of my kids in an over the top manner) 

I don't think that it's not about exactly accepting, its chosing between your parents or your country. But "betraying your country" is an abstract matter whereas betraying your parents is very concrete. Actually, the duty to betray your parents as "people's enemies" was the Soviet ideal, at least under Stalin.

It's possible that Paige doesn't wholly believe it, or more likely she wants to learn more. 

Maybe she even realizes that if she called FBI or even talked to Stan, she wouldn't be believed. "Her parents are Russian spy - yet again a crazy teenager who resents her parents and wants to revenge on them."  

[Roseanna]

On ‎3‎.‎4‎.‎2015 at 1:45 AM, SlackerInc said:

And BTW, the Soviet war in Afghanistan is IMO as justifiable as any military intervention you could name (including the Allies in WWII).  The central government that the Soviets came in to support was extremely progressive in trying to wipe out a lot of the medieval bullshit in the hinterlands, and support modernism, women's rights, etc.  This was not cool with the ultrareligious patriarchs, and that was who threatened to (and ultimately did) drag the country back into the Dark Ages.

As a member of a small country, I can't accept the principle that great powers "a right" to intervene militarily. More than that, the motive of intervention is seldom noble values, they are only propaganda to conceal real interests. And in this case the Soviet interest was not to begin a military adventure as it had troubles enough both at home and abroad.  

In the case of Afghanistan history really does teach:  it's a country well suited to guerillas, so it's foolish to try to conquer it.

Comparing with the WW2 is foolish. It was Hitler who invaded Poland, attacked the Soviet Union and declared the war to the USA.   

On ‎5‎.‎4‎.‎2015 at 6:59 AM, AGuyToo said:

Paige is a believer in nonviolence.

 

I think that is the essential issue. More than her Americanness, more even than her Christian identity, that is the issue that will make it impossible for Elizabeth to recruit Paige into the KGB or convince her that the KGB mission is correct.

 

We've learned a fair amount about Paige in these last three seasons. She favors nuclear disarmament; she is horrified by racism and racial hatred; she is saddened by poverty and wants to eradicate it; she is inspired by those willing to sacrifice themselves for the sake of peace and justice. And she believes that nonviolent resistance is the path to a better world. (In fact, she is so irritatingly verbose on the subject that Philip is tempted to respond with a punch in the face.)

 

Confronted, as Elizabeth was last week, with Betty's question -- "[Do] you think doing this to me will make the world a better place?" -- Paige would say no. Young as she is, she would say no with conviction and without hesitation. In order to get Paige to join the KGB, Elizabeth has to convince Paige that the correct answer was yes -- that killing Betty was justified, that Betty's life and those who loved her weren't important enough to stand in the way of THE CAUSE. No way Elizabeth can do that, no way Paige lets her get away with that.

 

That's the thing -- Elizabeth's and Philip's work is suffused with violence: they kill combatants, they kill bystanders, blood covers everything they do. If you really believe in nonviolence, whether you're a Christian or a Gandhian or something else, you cannot abide Elizabeth and Philip. Even if they're your parents, you have to say no.

 

From what we've seen of Paige, I think she has the strength to say no.

 

On ‎5‎.‎4‎.‎2015 at 6:15 PM, sistermagpie said:

I think Paige has the strength to say no too and can't imagine her doing otherwise at the moment--but I don't know if she's really experienced enough to be firmly attached to nonviolence yet. Meaning just that she's simply never faced anything that really required violence--nor has she really experienced nonviolent resistance. Paige isn't getting battered in the head and injured at her protests without fighting back, and even Pastor Tim, interestingly, didn't want to completely identify as a pacifist in the dinner conversation. Paige eagerly labeled him such when he was telling his story about protesting the war, but then he asked if he really was. Of course his example was saying that he would die for something like Jesus did, but he was also not ready to just say he was a pacifist.

 

For instance, Apartheid has become an issue this season and while Paige's part is to push for divestment, that's not a nonviolent struggle. In fact, anti-Apartheid activists tried nonviolent resistance and it didn't work. Not everyone was like Ncgobo, but they weren't averse to destroying property etc. And there were many riots.

 

So while I love that Paige is firmly and openly against crime and violence as a means to an end, I also like that her pov just as firmly comes from living in a world far removed from it. For her it's easy to be nonviolent just as it's an easy choice not to be a drug dealer.

 

 

Yup. I'm exactly Paige's age and while I never idolized Ronald Reagan I never was attracted to a church group either! Which brings up an upcoming historical issue, which is Ronald Reagan specifically addressing evangelicals to discourage them from joining the nuclear disarmament movement. I don't see anything in Paige that would make her change her mind because of what Ronald Reagan says but I wonder if the show will deal with a shift there. Because while I believe that Paige sincerely believes in the politics she has now, I'm not sure she would have been entirely closed to a church that had slightly different views if that's the one she'd wandered into.

 

Also her discussions with her parents should be very different now that they can give their own views. Elizabeth will quite possibly turn her off with her own defenses of the cause at times. I imagine Philip will still want to keep quiet to not manipulate her, but that might make him an even more powerful advocate if she presses him. Because Philip does take violence very seriously and doesn't see things in black and white, but still doesn't seem to see nonviolence or church as the answer. He seems to see the world as full of bad people that prey on others.

I agree with Sistermagie. That someone is for non-violence at the age 15, doesn't guarantee that she is also that, say 5 years later.  It doesn't depend only on the character of the person but also what age she lives and what she experiences.

Lets imagine Paige saw police shot Pastor Tim - how would she react? 

On ‎6‎.‎4‎.‎2015 at 3:54 AM, BetyBee said:

They are her parents, but they are liars and her whole life with them has been a lie.  Henry is her brother and their relationship is 100% real at this point.  He is the only person in the world who has been through what she's been through with these parents.  They will still (hopefully) have each other when their parents are gone, just like any siblings.  I know P&E love their children, but the have done them a terrible disservice and things are only getting worse. 

 

On ‎6‎.‎4‎.‎2015 at 4:32 PM, shura said:

 

I don't think Paige's whole life with her parents has been a lie. I would say most of what she has experienced with them is, in fact, real. All their family activities (I'm assuming they must have done things together as a family), teaching her to ride a bike, staying home with her when she was sick, going to her recitals and volleyball games (or whatever sport it was that she dropped), etc. She knows (even if she is questioning it now) that they love her, and it is real. It's just that there is this extra part she used to not know about, which actually has not been part of her life, that's a huge lie. If we count what she hasn't experienced as a part of her life, then her relationship with Henry is not technically 100% real either, since Paige doesn't know about his secret hiding places, for example.

I agree with Shura. 

I notice that Elizabeth didn't tell Paige a fact that would have hurt her most: that she didn't want children and that they were boen in order to streghten their parents' cover on the orders of KGB. I think it was a right decision, especially Elizabeth learned to love her children.