Ben Gilberti
Published on Aug 18, 2019
Many thanks to Al Haferkamp, Michael Zonta and HughJohn Malanaphy for helping me with the creation of this video.
“Miracle shall follow miracle and wonders shall never cease.”
–Florence Scovel Shinn, New Thought spiritual teacher and metaphysician, The Game of Life and How to Play It (1925)
Translators: Mike Zonta, Hanz Bolen, Melissa Goodnight, Richard Branam, Alex Gambeau (called away), Clinton Lambert, Pat Lambert
SENSE TESTIMONY: Dominating people dismiss others which keeps principle from manifesting.
5th Step Conclusions:
1) Truth is the first and only Principle underlying the undismissable equality of goodness and importance self-evident in the manifestation of Oneness exemplified everywhere.
2) Truth is One Infinite Consciousness — the limitless source of Perfect Principle, that unfailingly empowers all manifestation; always overseeing and superintending, the liberation and release, of the supreme Goodness in All.
3) Truth is all there is; therefore communication is truth and cannot be in competition, or dominated by another. Truth is endless, oneness, whole, perfect, complete, oneness.
4) Truth is one as one , I am I evolving in consciousness.
5) The only mission of All One MInd Truth is Self Evident Expression of Powerful Harmonious Radiant Universal Well Being, knowing Health and Integrity are the only presence there is.
6) Truth Assents’, this Principled Handbook, Adroitly Magnificent Regency: the Act of One Infinite Mind in admitting, Agreeing, capacious capacities: the Ultimate Source, Origin, Cause: Consciousness Guardianship; I AM I, Logos Authorship.
All Translators are welcome to join this group. See BB Upcoming Events.
KamasiWashington
Published on Jun 20, 2018
‘Street Fighter Mas’, a single from Kamasi Washington’s sophomore album Heaven and Earth.
Heaven and Earth will be available on June 22, 2018 on Young Turks. http://y-t-r.co/heavenandearth
Written & Directed by AG Rojas
Executive Produced by Dinah Rodriguez & Jackie Kelman Bisbee
Line Produced by Jeremy Hartman
Cinematography by Rina Yang
Production Design by Kyle Davio
Edited by Zaldy Lopez
Kamasi Washington’s Wardrobe Designed by Alice + Louise Clothing
Costumes Designed by Tatiana Valentin
Color Grading By Gregory Reeese
Visual Effect By A52
1st AD By Robert Thoren
Gaffer and Key Grip Scott Khuu & Chris Bauer
Hair and Make-Up by Liana Mizradeh
Very Special Thanks to Banch Abegaze & Alex Fisch
Joonho Chung
Published on Mar 17, 2019
Leonard Bernstein conducts Berlioz’s monumental work at the Chapel of St. Louis des Invalides in Paris before an audience including President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing.
엑토르 베를리오즈, “레퀴엠”
1975년 나폴레옹의 무덤을 비롯해 전몰자들의 유골이 안치된 파리 앵발리드 생 루이 예배당
“프랑스 국립 오케스트라”와 “프랑스 필하모닉 오케스트라” (라디오 프랑스 필하모닉) 연합 악단
“라디오 프랑스 합창단”
스튜어트 버로우스, 테너
발레리 지스카르 데스탱 대통령 참석.
From Kultur (https://goo.gl/bKiA5L)

English director Gurinder Chadha flips through the menu of a D.C. Indian restaurant while deciding what to order for lunch on this early August afternoon. Is she craving chaat? Chicken tikka? Lobster malai?
“Jesus Christ,” she says of the last. “Or gobi matar? I love a good gobi matar.”
It’s somewhat amusing to hear, given how many scenes in Chadha’s most successful film to date, “Bend It Like Beckham,” involve the protagonist Jess’s Punjabi mother chastising the teenager for not knowing how to make aloo gobi, a similar cauliflower dish. Jess just wants to play soccer, at one point venting to her best friend, “Anyone can make aloo gobi, but who can bend a ball like Beckham?”
That was Chadha’s own story, she says, one of dodging “that box, that sweet little Indian woman who’s going to grow up, get married and cook Indian food the rest of her life.” She acknowledges the flaws in that youthful perspective, of course. Her films showcase a knack for telling coming-of-age stories with honesty and empathy, all while centering characters who might appear on the margins elsewhere.
Her latest, “Blinded by the Light,” pulls from a memoir written by a friend, English journalist Sarfraz Manzoor, who was raised by Pakistani immigrants in Luton, a working-class town north of London. The film’s protagonist, Javed (Viveik Kalra), struggles to reconcile his dual cultural identities amid racism and economic struggle in the Thatcher era. But after his Sikh classmate Roops (Aaron Phagura) introduces him to Bruce Springsteen’s music — “Bruce is a direct line to all that is true in this [crappy] world,” Roops says — Javed realizes that the singer’s outlook on life could help him shape his own.
[This ode to Springsteen and the power of music may be the feel-good movie of the summer]
Chadha herself became a fan of Springsteen while working her Saturday job in the record department of Harrods, where “this English guy with long hair and a beard” approached her to recommend she listen to “Born to Run.” She latched on to the sound immediately, mesmerized by how Clarence Clemons’s “spiritual and all-encompassing” saxophone paired with Springsteen’s “gravelly lyrics.” A live performance at Wembley Stadium in 1985 cemented her fandom. So when she happened upon a newspaper article Manzoor had written about Springsteen, she knew she had to get in touch.
“I said, ‘You and me, we’re the only Asians in Britain who like Springsteen,’ ” she exclaims.
They stayed in touch long enough for Manzoor to feel comfortable handing Chadha a rough copy of his 2007 memoir, “Greetings from Bury Park,” to see whether she wouldd want to adapt it into a film. The title, a tweaked version of Springsteen’s debut album, swaps out Asbury Park for the Luton neighborhood with a large Muslim population, Manzoor’s family among them.
In the film’s Bury Park, Javed experiences malicious othering via racist slurs and graffiti left around his neighborhood. Chadha says she has often shied away from depicting the “visceral racism” that she, Manzoor and other people of color faced in the 1980s because she doesn’t want negativity to define their stories. But she felt compelled to incorporate the trauma into this project after witnessing what unfolded after the Brexit referendum in 2016.
“All of a sudden, there were these xenophobes that sort of came out of nowhere,” she recalls, arms outspread. “That’s when I picked up the script and I did a couple passes with all my anger and frustration about what I was seeing around me, with Brexit. And that’s why the film, even though it’s set in 1987, feels so relevant to today.”
When placing such a story within an immigrant family where the parents and children don’t always see eye to eye on how to respond, Chadha says, “suddenly, you’ve got this tremendous drama and conflict to mine.” Javed finds a sanctuary in poetry and essay writing, for instance, but clashes with his father (Kulvinder Ghir), who loses his job at a factory and demands that his son pursue a more stable career. Javed understands this reasoning but, at the same time, laments the unfairness of it all. Springsteen validates his frustration.

To avoid turning “Blinded by the Light” into a traditional jukebox musical, Chadha knew she had to find a cinematic way to weave in the music. The script — for which she, Manzoor and her husband, Paul Mayeda Berges, are credited — lists Springsteen as a character’s name, his lyrics as dialogue. The singer, who had read Manzoor’s memoir and was at least familiar with “Bend It Like Beckham,” Chadha says, had given the team “carte blanche to use anything” from his discography. She didn’t want to exploit that kindness.
On the day she shot a fight between Javed and his father, Chadha decided she would substitute the actors’ audio with “Darkness on the Edge of Town,” a 1978 song about a sort of internalized dissatisfaction persisting throughout American culture. As the camera zooms in on Javed’s face, his father a few steps behind him, we hear what he hears — not his father lecturing him, but Springsteen’s words: “Everybody’s got a secret, Sonny, something that they just can’t face.”
“I couldn’t risk the audience not feeling what I want them to feel — the connection between a Pakistani kid in Luton and Bruce, in the context that he wrote those words in the ’70s and early ’80s, and how this kid is taking those words for meaning in his life,” Chadha says. “Words were critical, and I had to make sure … I didn’t just leave the song playing in the background.”
Springsteen’s lyrics are about unsung heroes who yearn for something better than what they’ve been dealt, a form of conflict Chadha approaches with a level of optimism that almost feels bold in this oft-cynical era of entertainment. She works to find common ground, most prominently between Javed, who pursues his writing career behind his parents’ back, and his father, who eventually comes around.
“Somehow, through the words and music of Bruce Springsteen, his philosophies and the idea of the story — this Pakistani kid discovering what life’s about — become this collective hug for us right now,” she says, a smile on her face. “Yeah, times are hard, and the struggle is always going to be there. But if we stand together, and if we empathize with each other … that’s the way forward.”
At a time when there seems to be a collective depression going on, she continues, “I hope the movie does sort of feel like a Bruce song, by the end.”
“Blinded by the Light” is now playing in theaters nationwide.
(Contributed by Michael Kelly.)

The Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius was the most famous proponent of the ancient philosophy known as Stoicism. He was also one of the most powerful leaders in European history, assuming control of the Roman empire aged 39, during the height of its power.
After a period of exceptional peace and stability during the reign of his adoptive father, Emperor Antoninus Pius, Marcus faced a series of disasters. Shortly after Marcus was acclaimed emperor, the River Tiber suffered one of its most severe floods ever, destroying homes and livestock, which led to a famine at Rome. Around this time, the Parthians invaded Armenia, a Roman ally, instigating a war in the east that would last five years. Rome’s eventual victory in the Parthian War was soured when returning legionaries spread a deadly disease throughout the empire. The Antonine Plague took the lives of an estimated five million people. To make matters worse, while the empire was struggling to recover enemy tribes along the northern frontier seized the opportunity to invade. The young King Ballomar of the Marcomanni led a vast army, which overran Pannonia and the other northern provinces. They proceeded to loot and plunder their way down the Amber Road, across the Alps, and into Italy itself, finally laying siege to the wealthy Roman city of Aquileia.
Marcus nonetheless faced these unprecedented challenges head on, with total Stoic equanimity and endurance. The Roman historian Cassius Dio therefore concluded:
[Marcus Aurelius] did not meet with the good fortune that he deserved, for he was not strong in body and was involved in a multitude of troubles throughout practically his entire reign. But for my part, I admire him all the more for this very reason, that amid unusual and extraordinary difficulties he both survived himself and preserved the empire.
After the sudden death of his adoptive brother and co-emperor, Lucius Verus, Marcus was unexpectedly left in sole command of the army. Rather than run the war from behind a desk back in the safety of Rome, he donned the military cape and boots and rode forth to battle. Indeed, Marcus stationed himself in the military camps along the front line throughout the Marcomannic War, in modern-day Austria, Hungary, and Serbia. With no military experience whatsoever, he found himself at the head of the largest army ever deployed on a Roman frontier, numbering approximately 140,000 men in total.
During this time Marcus wrote down his personal reflections on Stoic philosophy in a text that would later become known as The Meditations, one of the most influential spiritual and self-help classics of all time. Marcus opens the book with a chapter written in a different style from the rest. He lists the virtues or qualities he most admires from about sixteen different people: teachers or members of his family. In doing so, he was clearly attempting to study attitudes and behaviours worth emulating.
At the time of writing, Marcus had known three other Roman emperors in person: Hadrian, his adoptive grandfather; Antoninus Pius, his immediate predecessor and adoptive father; and Lucius Verus, his adoptive brother and junior co-emperor. It’s notable that Marcus virtually relegates Lucius Verus to a footnote, almost as though damning him with faint praise. Hadrian gets even worse treatment and is completely ignored, as though Marcus can’t think of anything positive to say about him at all. However, these omissions are all the more apparent because of the way Marcus heaps praise at length upon Antoninus Pius, his adoptive father and predecessor as emperor. Not only does he expend spend far more words on Antoninus here than on any other individual but Marcus returns to him later in the text, providing another list of his virtues and stating quite categorically that he views himself as the “disciple of Antoninus” in all matters.
It’s crystal clear that, even a decade or more after his demise, Marcus was still turning to his adoptive father’s memory to find a guide and role model, particularly in relation to his duties as emperor. Marcus, in other words, was carefully modelling the leadership qualities he saw exemplified in the emperor Antoninus Pius. Although Antoninus wasn’t a Stoic, Marcus saw him as naturally embodying the sort of virtues Stoics wanted to cultivate. This seems to have been a common practice. For example, Seneca had earlier written:
We can remove most sins if we have a witness standing by as we are about to go wrong. The soul should have someone it can respect, by whose example it can make its inner sanctum more inviolable. Happy is the person who can improve others, not only when present, but even when in their thoughts! (Moral Letters, 11.9)
I’ve combed through the various remarks Marcus makes about the traits in his father he most admired and discovered that they fall under a handful of broad headings. We can view these as some of the characteristics Marcus associated with the ideal leader or ruler:
Marcus mentions that he admired the emperor Antoninus Pius for being mild tempered. He was famous for the air of serenity that accompanied his presence. Hadrian, by contrast, was notoriously volatile and quick tempered — he made people nervous. Marcus tells us that he suffered from a temper himself, which he struggled to control, so it’s tempting to imagine that he wanted to be more like Antoninus and less like Hadrian in this regard.
Marcus also said that Antoninus always seemed to be cheerful and satisfied with life. He therefore came across as very natural and agreeable in conversation, and Marcus even calls his adoptive father “sweet-natured”. He also noted that Antoninus kept very few secrets and those he did concerned matters of state. He perceived him as a genuinely pious man, while nevertheless above superstition. He had a calm and reassuring presence and it was pleasant dealing with him. It may surprise many people to know that Stoics, like Marcus, were often cheerful and pleasant company.
Antoninus would research his decisions meticulously beforehand, minimizing the likelihood he’d have to change course at a later date. He’d therefore find himself able to stick to his original plan of action more consistently than other rulers. He wasn’t content with a superficial understanding but sought to think through his decisions very carefully, even anticipating events in the distant future. Marcus says his adoptive father would usually examine the problems he faced one aspect at a time as if he had ample time, proceeding vigorously and in a focused, organized, and determined manner. He would never allow an important decision to be made until he was satisfied that he’d given it enough thought to understand what was at stake. Once he’d determined the most rational course of action, though, he would act accordingly, ensuring that it was put into practice. He seemed to enjoy working and was therefore able to labour patiently at things for long hours, even returning to work immediately after recovering from severe bouts of headache.
He was also very prudent and conscientious in managing both his own affairs and those of others, and careful to avoid wasting public money. He was likewise cautious about putting on crowd-pleasing spectacles or constructing public buildings. He sincerely respected the institutions of his country. He wasn’t desperate for change, for its own sake, but content to remain in the same place, working consistently on the same tasks. This was quite the opposite of Hadrian who constantly travelled and sought novelty and stimulation. Marcus admired this because Stoicism teaches us to value strength of character, and virtue, first and foremost. That leads to a hard-working attitude because taking pride in what you do is more important than avoiding discomfort.

Marcus said that Antoninus helped cure him of pride and affectation and showed him that he could live in a palace almost as if he were a common citizen, minimizing the trappings of imperial office. Antoninus was neither pretentious nor pursued acclaim. He was above flattery himself and put a stop to it at court. He didn’t try to win popularity by heaping praise on others or showering them with gifts. He had a natural lack of interest in empty fame and instead focused on doing what was actually required rather than what would win him admirers.
However, he showed loyalty and consistency in his friendships. He sought genuine friends rather than being seduced into flattering others to win fairweather friendships. He treated people justly, giving them what they deserved, and never imposed unreasonable demands on his companions. This indifference to flattery was integral to the Stoic philosophy followed by Marcus Aurelius. It’s easy to be mesmerized and lured off course by fame but the wise person remains aloof from these things and committed to doing what reason determines to be the right course of action.
Antoninus didn’t consider himself superior to anyone and was happy to listen to whoever had potentially useful information or advice. Nevertheless, he would very carefully study the manners and actions of others to determine their character. He honoured true philosophers, but was not easily led by pseudo-intellectuals. He was ready to give way to experts on matters of law or ethics, or those who were more skilled speakers, without any envy or resentment, and he helped competent individuals to advance in their careers. Moreover, Antoninus never listened to slanderous gossip and didn’t indulge in idle complaints about others himself. Marcus was impressed by how his adoptive father tolerated freedom of speech in those who opposed his opinions and, indeed, rather than being indignant he was extremely pleased whenever anyone could show him a better way of looking at things.
Antoninus was therefore neither timid nor aggressive; neither a sloppy thinker, like the Sophists, nor a pedant. He would challenge other people’s views where necessary but was also willing and able to accept criticism from others. For example, Marcus says his adoptive father endured a considerable amount of criticism for being too cautious with regard to public expenditure, etc. He patiently put up with individuals who blamed him unjustly without blaming them in return. In The Mediations, Marcus quotes an old saying from Antisthenes: “It is kingly to do good and yet be spoken of ill” (7.36). In his play Hercules Furens, the Stoic philosopher Seneca likewise wrote “’Tis the first art of kings, the power to suffer hate.” A truly wise leader, in other words, must be able to ignore insults and be tolerant of criticism.
Marcus was impressed by how little was necessary to satisfy Antoninus, in terms of his lodgings, bed, dress, food, servants, etc. He looked after his own health in a simple down-to-earth way, without becoming overly-preoccupied with diet or exercise. When he had access to luxuries he enjoyed them without any reservations but when he didn’t have them he didn’t want them. Marcus says that like Socrates, Antoninus was able both to abstain from, and to enjoy, those things which many are too weak to abstain from and cannot enjoy without excess. However, to be strong enough both to bear abstaining from desires and yet sober enough to enjoy satisfying them without excess is the mark of a perfect and invincible soul, he says. In other words, this sort of moderation and self-discipline was integral to Stoic philosophy and its conception of leadership.
Socrates himself had long ago made the point that, on reflection, nobody with any sense would rather entrust the care of their loved ones to someone reckless who lacks self-control than to someone self-disciplined and moderate. He concluded that these are obviously traits we should desire in any leader because it’s impossible to act consistently in accord with wisdom if we lack self-control. Marcus clearly saw Antoninus as embodying the sort of self-mastery required for a leader to live consistently in accord with wisdom and justice.
The Historia Augusta portrays the emperor Antoninus’ character as a ruler in a way that’s broadly consistent with Marcus’ personal notes on him in The Meditations:
In personal appearance he was strikingly handsome, in natural talent brilliant, in temperament kindly; he was aristocratic in countenance and calm in nature, a singularly gifted speaker and an elegant scholar, conspicuously thrifty, a conscientious land-holder, gentle, generous, and mindful of others’ rights.
It adds that he “possessed all these qualities, moreover, in the proper mean and without ostentation”, and was praiseworthy in every conceivable respect. Moreover, “for three and twenty years [Marcus Aurelius] conducted himself in his [adoptive] father’s home in such a manner that [Antoninus] Pius felt more affection for him day by day, and never in all these years, save for two nights on different occasions, remained away from him”. By all accounts, therefore, Antoninus was both an excellent father and a role model to Marcus, especially in his capacity as a leader and the emperor of Rome.
See my latest book, How to Think Like a Roman Emperor: The Stoic Philosophy of Marcus Aurelius, for a more in-depth discussion of Marcus Aurelius’ life and use of Stoic philosophy.
WRITTEN BY

WARSAW — By the standards of Western advertising, Coca-Cola’s billboard campaign in Hungary was pretty tame.
Three couples are shown enjoying a soda, smiling and seemingly in love. One picture shows a man, a woman and a Coke; another two women and a Coke; and a third shows two men and a Coke.
“Love is Love,” is the campaign slogan. But in the current climate in Eastern and Central Europe, where “L.G.B.T. ideology” has taken the place of migrants as public enemy number one for many nationalist leaders, love is not love.
It is a threat.
Soon after the Coke ads appeared, a pro-government internet news site ran a banner headline: “The Homosexual Lobby Has Now Besieged Budapest — They Won’t Give You A Chance to Avoid It.”
Istvan Boldog, a lawmaker representing Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s far-right Fidesz party, used Facebook to call on the public to boycott Coca-Cola products until the company “removed its provocative posters from Hungary.”
The battle over the billboards is just a small skirmish in what is emerging as a broader campaign across the region against gay rights. Right-wing politicians complain that their traditional cultures are undermined by a decadent and dangerous import from the irreligious West.
In 2013, Russia made it illegal to expose minors to discussion of “nontraditional” sexual relationships.
More recently, Poland’s leaders have focused attention on what they call “L.G.B.T. ideology,” painting it as an insidious threat to the nation. Other parties in the region are watching closely to see how effective it proves.
In the run-up to national elections in October, Poland’s governing Law and Justice Party, along with Catholic Church leaders, have stepped up their attacks. More than two dozen provincial governments have declared their localities “L.G.B.T.-free,” and the party leader, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, has said Poland will not live under “the rainbow flag.”
The vitriol in Hungary, Poland and other countries bears striking similarities to the region’s vehement reaction against the wave of migration into Europe that peaked in 2015, as people fled war and deprivation in the Middle East and Africa.

CreditAttila Kisbenedek/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Mr. Orban was at the vanguard of painting a frightening image of a continent under siege by terrorists and parasites. His relentless campaign — often using billboards targeting political enemies — proved politically effective, and others across the continent would take a page from his playbook.
Then the flow of migrants slowed dramatically, and few settled in Eastern Europe. The issue lost much of its potency, but the campaign against gay rights offered a new group of people to paint as a threat.
“Kaczynski’s and Orban’s populism provides a dangerous cocktail of anti-pluralist, strongly xenophobic features which are then followed by legal, systemic changes in both countries,” said Edit Zgut, a visiting lecturer at the Center for Europe at University of Warsaw. “Fear mongering against inner enemies usually pays off politically as it channels voters’ frustration toward the most targetable social groups.”
After marchers at a gay pride parade in the conservative town of Bialystok, Poland were attacked in July, critics of the government said that the propaganda was fueling violence.
That mirrors a debate taking place in the United States, where President Trump’s opponents say that his fevered warnings about an invasion of immigrants were emboldening extremists and fueling violence like the recent massacre in El Paso.
On Monday, YouTube blocked an account belonging to a far-right Polish anti-abortion group, The Life and Family Foundation, for promoting “content glorifying or inciting violence against another person or group of people.”
In the immediate wake of the attacks in Bialystok, Polish politicians sought to distance themselves from the more hateful rhetoric. But the campaign against “L.G.B.T. ideology” has not slowed.
Every criticism of the campaign, in fact, is used as evidence that those promoting gay rights are part of some sinister cabal looking to undermine traditional values and national sovereignty.
The Archbishop of Krakow, Marek Jedraszewski, compared the L.G.B.T. movement to Communism during a sermon last week.
“The red plague is no longer on our land,” he said. “But it does not mean that there is not a new one that wants to rule our souls, hearts and minds. It is not Marxist or Bolshevik, but it has been born of the same neo-Marxist spirit. It’s not red, but rainbow.”

CreditGeoffroy Van Der Hasselt/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
The conservative radio station Radio Maryja posted the homily on YouTube, prompting a formal warning from YouTube for “spreading hate.”
While there have been stepped-up campaigns against L.G.B.T. rights in other countries, it remains to be seen if they prove politically potent.
Same-sex marriages are legal in Scandinavia and most of western Europe, and civil unions are allowed in many other countries on the continent. But Romania, like Poland and Russia, is among a handful that do not allow either.
In October 2018 Romanian politicians organized a referendum on whether to narrow the constitutional definition of a family to a man and a woman, rather than the gender-neutral term “spouses,” which conservative groups feared could lead to legal recognition for same-sex relationships in the future.
Despite strong support from the country’s governing Social Democratic Party and the Orthodox Church, the primary response was apathy, and the referendum failed. More voters approved than disapproved, but turnout was just 20.4 percent, far below the 30 percent required for it to take effect.
In Slovakia, another nation that does not recognize gay couples, a popular magazine widely known for spreading disinformation, Zem a Vek, offered stark warning. On its cover this week, it featured a photo of guillotine, painted in rainbow colors, with the headline: “L.G.B.T. Terror.”
Prominent far-right and ultranationalist politicians regularly attack L.G.B.T. people in their speeches, including Andrej Danko, the speaker of Slovak Parliament and the leader of the Slovak National Party.
But the new Slovak President, Zuzana Caputova, won a resounding victory in March after campaigning on a platform of tolerance and support for gay rights. And the pride march in the capital, Bratislava, in July drew the largest crowd in its history, with 10,000 people filling the streets.
Private companies, many with global reputations and brands to protect, have also pushed back against overt bigotry.
Coca-Cola refused to take down its billboards in Hungary, defending its campaign as being in line with its corporate values. “We believe both hetero- and homosexuals have the right to love the person they want, the way they want,” the company said.

CreditAnna Liminowicz for The New York Times
On Wednesday, it announced that the posters would be replaced with images of Coca-Cola bottles with rainbow-colored labels, which company officials said was always the plan.
The American Chamber of Commerce branch in Hungary said it stood behind the right of companies like Coca-Cola to express their views.
“We believe inclusion, tolerance and openness are essential to a modern, progressive society, and promoting equality is pivotal to economic growth and competitiveness,” the group said.
In Poland, Empik, the largest book and media retail store, withdrew an issue of a right-wing newspaper, Gazeta Polska, that included “L.G.B.T.-free zone” stickers.