Good points, SC. And thank you for reading what I wrote and showing that you'd done so and thought about it.

I didn't mean to say that anarchists haven't polarized debate before. In fact the term "anarchist" to me suggests someone who blows up buildings, which is very polarizing. I didn't even think of them as anarchists. Perhaps they are. I assumed they would call themselves liberals. But whatever label you put on the person who causes it, my point is that polarization doesn't help anything except consolidation of government power. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

And I'm sure there must be millions of other people who agree with them about the church, but unfortunately what they did in the cathedral doesn't suggest that to someone who sees the video, and it doesn't do credit to the views of most such people. If they had done their "shit" liturgy for a large crowd standing outside the cathedral it would have had a very different effect. And if they had performed in a way that wasn't intended to offend the faithful they might have increased opposition to the Putin/church relationship instead of strengthening support for it.

You said the actions weren't intended as publicity stunts to launch a career. That may be; I don't see how anyone can say for sure. But do you think it won't have that effect? With that name, and with all the publicity and the link with Madonna, and with them looking like martyrs to the anti-church crowd? The intent may not be with the individual, who takes advantage of opportunity, moving in the direction that the system pushes. The intent may be with the system that rewards the divisive attention-getter and ignores anyone who advocates unity and understanding.