Crying ‘Muhammad’ in crowded theater
Sunday, February 5, 2006 at 5:53PM ARTICLE: “Temperatures Rise Over Cartoons Mocking Muhammad: European publishers seem stuck in a valley of culture difference,” by Craig S. Smith and Ian Fisher, New York Times 3 February 2006, p. A3.
The Danes did something stupid when they published cartoons depicting Muhammad, because they knew full well that any such depictions are inherently offensive to Muslims. Claiming equal treatment with other religions is nonsense. It’s a different line in Islam than it is in Christianity. The line for Christians would be more like depicting Jesus Christ as Mary Magdalene’s lover (a favorite over the years): artistic freedom to some, but patently offensive to others.
Reprinting the cartoons as some sort of solidarity statement was equally goofy, because it just pours gasoline on a fire.
Coming after the French riots and the European governments’ growing awareness of the rising alienation among ghettoized Muslim populations across the continent, this is just rubbing salt in wounds. “Fuck ‘em if they can’t take a joke” is an excellent bar room rejoinder, but it’s no way to encourage assimilation and the toleration of diversity in a civilization that’s frankly dying within because it does both so poorly.
I mean, you see the Europeans shooting themselves in the feet on this one and you just have to laugh out loud at this slew of books over the past year predicting how Europe is going to lead the world as the next great superpower. Good God! Could reality and rhetoric be more separated?
All the Europeans do by this sort of insensitivity is simply raise the price they will ultimately pay in making their countries open and welcoming to Muslims.
And if you’re going to tell me that Europe won’t need those Muslims, don’t bother. Europe either makes this happen or recedes into the backseat of history, where, quite frankly, that sort of boneheadedness belongs.
Reader Comments (24)
And we are supposed to ignore Muslim violence toward Christian minorities in their own countries, their destruction of the Bayamim Buddhas, their broadcasts of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, their constant anti-Semitic tirades and threats to nuke Israel, not to mention the "honor" killings, murderous rioting, beheadings, suicide bombings, and their failure to take responsibility for their own actions and condemn their own bad actors.
The heck with them, and your little dog too.
I will start worrying about their tender sensitivities when they start acting like civilized human beings.
Until then billions for defense, not one cent for tribute.
This started rather innocently. Juan Cole has a fact file
http://www.juancole.com/2006/02/fact-file-on-reaction-to-danish.html
So when is the last time a gang of enraged Christians descended upon a nation's embassy and set it on fire for publishing blasphemous material?
If you need any further thought as to why fanatical Islam is a mortal threat to civilization, compare and contrast how Christian nations have treated Dan Brown for "The Da Vinci Code" to how Salmon Rushdie was treated for "The Satanic Verses."
I've been reading this blog for quite some time. I'm no political expert, but I find myself frustrated so much by this story. I'm frustrated by people who show no respect for the feelings of others and I'm frustrated by people who keep marrying the image of violence with their religion. This one is a miss on both sides. Ridiculous, really. Do you know they've taken LEGOs off the shelf in Kuwait? Brilliant! Way to focus on the larger picture. I'd say that's as ludicrous as pouring french wine into the gutters to protest their non-support of the war, right?
Re: Mr. Schwartz' comments - please dispense with the refernces to "them" and "they". For the record, I am married to one of "them". (Much to the chagrin of both our families. Yep, we've bucked traditions of both America and the Arabian Gulph) And if the two of us can exist in an environment of mutual respect without burning down the house, then I don't think the actions of a very visible and angry minority represent the feelings of an entire population, and entire religion. Some of "them" are sickened by the violence and hope for a better world.
We can be connected and different at the same time. This blog talks alot about it starting with technology, business and a high level of political/economic integraion. But, it also starts at a micro level...with individuals. It starts with me, my husband and the education we give to our family. And, hopefully, it moves forward from there...
The heck with your little dog, Mr. Schwartz...and your sterotypes and over-generalizations, too.
The line for Christians is constantly crossed, but you don't see them (us) burning down embassies or calling for artists heads (literally.)
Christians may get upset, write a few stern letters, and even boycott the offending outlet. But that is a far stretch from what the Muslims are doing.
But then again, there is every indication that this campaign of violence, is being stage-managed for maximum media impact. So, how much rightuous indignation is there really?
I would have to say, based on what I've read, that there really isn't as much as the press is making out.
http://baldilocks.typepad.com/baldilocks/2006/02/last_night_when.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-2025704,00.html
It seems slightly odd to me to ask that the Muslim world be "connected" into the global economy and marketplace of ideas, without asking also that they be able to deal with the consequences of that connectivity-- specifically, exposure to ideas that they don't like-- in a reasonable fashion.
This is a bit of a chicken and egg question, Tom, but, in your grand strategy, what is the order of events, and why?
Does connectivity come first and tolerance later, with the implicit assumption that West tolerates intolerance? Or does tolerance come first and connectivity later? What's the projected timeline, here?
Tom, I have to disagree on this one.
"The Danes did something stupid" But the Danes didn't do anything. Someone in Denmark exercised free speech. Boneheaded free speech is still free speech. We don't allow a "heckler's veto" in the USA and I don't think free societies anywhere should do so.
There is no way anyone in Europe or America should say the Government can compel people not do criticize Islam. It just won't work. Free speech is a fundamental principle of a free society. Everything is up for discussion and criticism and even vilification. It is a demanding freedom, free speech is. We all have things we don't want to see criticized or attacked verbally.
I'm a Roman Catholic. I do not like it when someone unfairly attacks my religion. But I am also an American citizen and do not dream of using government power to silence them. Nor do I think that death threats and violence are an appropriate response, either.
Does Europe need a Muslim labor force in the future? Yeah, looks like it. Does Europe need emigrants who understand that there are different cultural rules in their new country, and that violence and threats are not an acceptable response to free speech? Yeah, baby.
Free speech requires thick skin. That is what everyone has to assimilate to. My Irish ancestors had to in the USA. The Muslims in Europe are no different.
Thomas --
That's one of the most boneheaded comments I've seen on this issue.
The line for LA gang members is the corner of their block. The line for child rapists is prohibition of rape. The line for Nazis is having Jews alive in their midst. If you respect everyone's self-professed "line", regardless of how ridiculous or harmful, you may as well just die right now.
It's not just our "cultural preference" that free speech be tolerated. It's not just "my perspective" that your rights end where my nose begins. These are the foundations of the civilized society that we believe is our RIGHT. If someone prevents my free speech, or extends THEIR beliefs into my space, I will fight back.
So I'm fine with Muslims not liking images of Mohammed. They can protest and boycott all they want. But when they get violent, or insist that their norms govern my free speech, and that governments enforce this standard -- then they have earned my wrath and retribution. Not because I'm mean or warlike, but to defend what makes society civil; what I am entitled to.
The Declaration of Independence is my code.
Unfortunately, in our ultra-PC, weak, consumerist "I want my American Idol" culture, led by chief nincompoop George Bush, we don't make strong assertions of our values, backed both by strength and moral clarity. We apologize and appease.
We've made this mistake before. Those who forget are condemned to suffer again.
In Core/Gap dynamics, the struggle is always going to be over how much of the ruleset of the Gap state that is integrating be integrated into the global Core ruleset. Generally, each individual state except the first few are going to have less and less of their own idiosyncratic rules adopted because while an individual alternate ruleset might be just as good as that which it is proposing to replace, the rising cost and inconvenience of shifting all those established Core states means that laggard countries rulesets must be superior (and by a significant amount) for them to be adopted.
Muslims are looking for a way to tilt the table so that more of their rulesets get adopted than would otherwise be the case. A chunk of them have decided to see if a little bit of rioting and arson are a viable way to do it. The problem is that there are so many ways to offend muslim pride. You can wear a skirt that is too short. You can treat women as equals in court. You can eat pork. You can charge interest on loans. The list is easily lengthened.
So what is the natural defensive line? At what point do muslim rioters get basically told to cut it out or else? There does not seem to be a natural line of defense other than "violence doesn't get you anywhere".
It's untenable to claim that the line for christians and muslims is different. This is because such a distinction ignores the fact that Jesus is regarded as a muslim prophet (usually spelled Issa). Most of what goes on in the West along the lines of mocking Jesus would be banned in any muslim state as an affront to Islam.
I think that it's actually much better to fight such fights over trivialities than over the more important issues of usury, equal rights for women, and religious freedom.
It's worth noting that many of the more violent protests have occurred within the Gap (Gaza, Syria, Lebanon, etc), and not Europe.
While its true that the latter's protests contained threats of violence and other vile statements, we see plenty of that within the US also -- just attend any radical anti- globalization/war/abortion rally. As a soldier I've seen many of these first-hand (whether on deployments or stateside), and its mainly about people blowing off some steam. Childish and stupid? Yes. But if you're thinking many of Europe's Muslims are going to go around hacking off unbelievers' heads, you're also probably waiting for the "people's revolution" to "drive-out" the "Bush Regime" by force [after four years, you'd figure their tanks would have descended upon the capitol by now], or the destruction of the US capitalist economic model by Che-fetishists [thankfully, they're doing a lousy job].
Of course, that's how protests go in the Core, but as Tom mentions so frequently, this kind of rhetoric gets taken up a few notches to a whole other level in the Gap, as we've seen with the embassy burnings and the like. Unfortunately, many citizens of Europe are probably going to take out of this that "these people" just aren't compatible with their society, and as a result the process of assimilation, which Europe generally does a poor job of, becomes more difficult.
The Christian Science Monitor has a good article on the internal dynamics of the debate among Muslims themselves [http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20060206/ts_csm/ooutcry_1], and several of the leading Islamic bodies have denounced the violent outbursts that occurred. As an above comment mentioned, it shouldn't be surprising to see some Gap countries are trying to fan these flames even further.
Freedom of the press and freedom of speech are NOT table stakes to be bartered away. I love you, Tom, but you are off on this.
But perhaps not way off. I totally think that a bit of reverence for all religions would do the secular press some good, and might avoid these issues altogether.
However, if our societies no longer allow authority to be lampooned (sometimes inappropriately, sometimes accurately) I'm not sure why we even bother descriminating between the Gap and the Core. The Gap is simply where the chaos is today...the Core is where the rulesets will be abandoned in the name of tolerance.
I know you don't advocate that.
Turkey's response (excepting the lone murderer case) to this controversy is perfect: boycotts, free expressions of disagreement, vocalized outrage. That's the model going forward: not French abdication of Western values...not orchestrated "uprisings" against embassies.
In your quest to make the core more hospitable to the gap, never lose sight of the fundamental principles that make the core so desirable in the first place.
I would just like to pass on a great question that I heard this morning on my local NPR affiliate.
Where were these protests when larger acts of violence that are generated from within the Muslim community occur? The attacks of 9/11 were denounced by many Muslims as offensive (but obviously not as offensive as a few whips of a pencil). So, why were the Muslim masses not up in arms when (as many Muslims claimed) their religion was "hijacked", not simply offended? Apparently a suggested complete misrepresentation of a religion ranks lower on the scale than a cartoon.
So the equations are:
Offensive drawings = Fires and protests.
Hijacking of culture = Nicely worded political statement.
I feel it comes down to a larger point. Many of the violent occurrences stemming from the region are perpetrated against humanity, not Islam. In the west, most view religion as part of your life. Many Muslims (and to be fair many of the more devout in other faiths) view religion and life as one in the same. Given that viewpoint, an attack on Islam doubles in power.
"Some of "them" are sickened by the violence and hope for a better world."
Where are they?
Schindler saved 1,000 jews from the Holocaust. If Germany had a mere 6,000 more righteous men, there would have been no Holocaust. And, the German nation is judged harshly for that lack.
In the western movies there is often a scene where the townsfolks meet to try to figure out how get rid of the bad guys. We don't hear about Muslim meetings.
Reread my indictment: "their failure to take responsibility for their own actions and condemn their own bad actors."
Abraham could not find ten righteous men in Sodom, and it was destroyed. Are there enough righteous Muslims to avoid the storm?
Why does Europe need Mid-East Arabs when there are other sources of immigration available which carry less baggage?
From a business perspective, this turn of events illustrates how vulnerable the supply chains are that bridge the Functioning Core and what I will call "islands of connectivity" in the Gap. For all the capital invested into its Middle East supply chains, the Danish dairy producer Arla is discovering that creating a "resilient" supply chain into the Gap requires several levels of market sensitivity--evidenced from boycotts and demonstrations towards their business. I would say these levels can be segmented as follows:
Level 1: Region-targeted exports only
Level 2: Acquisition of local distributor
Level 3: Establishment of brand store/distribution
Level 4: Localization of brand/supply, integrating local tastes
Level 5: Corporate engagement of community/philanthropy
Level 6: Promotion of regional management/local face now most prominent
Level 7: Local management promoted globally
It would be interesting to look at, as a case study, just how far Arla had progressed. And not just at its "islands of connectivity" in the Gap but along its entire supply chain. I would say significant progress at Level 5 or higher would do well to fend off damaging boycotts and protests, thus resulting in a more resilient supply chain.
The following website shows an image pointing out Arla's market locations in the Middle East. Unfortunately, its in the Danish language (which would be what?--forgive my lack of European knowledge, Asia is my focus):
Arla in the Middle East
I eventually plan to address the role of logistics and supply chain resiliency in "shrinking the Gap" at my site at a later date.
It would be truly refreshing if media/culture/art would once and for all lay off ALL religions. Then again, it would be equally refreshing if fundies of all stripes would grow thicker skin.
I'm not entirely sure what the cartoonists thought they were accomplishing with all of this, but I'll bet they never thought for a minute about how it would go over in the Islamic world. Scandanavia is notorious for having lots of church affiliates who never go, so why on earth would Muslims get so riled up? Right?
Please. Anyone with a thimble-full of sense could predict this outcome. Muslims are generally a touchy bunch when it comes to religious beliefs, and they take it a lot more seriously than most Christians take their religion. So these cartoons accomplished what exactly? Point out the shortcoming of a religion? That's super duper useful when it comes from an infidel.
Pure freedom, as in freedom of speech, should always be weighed against judgement, if not general graciousness. And that's where the cartoons (as does "Piss Christ", et. al.) fail to pass muster.
Having said all that, Muslims HAVE to get their heads around the notion that nearly all of the rest of the world plays by a completely different set of rules. Want to boycott Danish goods, or march around with signs decrying everything Western? That's great. Just don't go around burning/blowing up things, or even threatening to do so.
I also suspect a fair amount of "Rent-A-Mob" activity in all of this, and that falls directly on the heads of Muslim leadership. Rather than diffusing the situation, they either did nothing or openly advocated violence. That points to the likelihood that, in at least some places, the violent mob is simply a tool for political gain, and that nonsense has to come to a screeching halt. And ground level Muslims are the ones who have to do it.
What amazes me is how much of a public relations nightmare this is for both sides of the equation. For that reason, I can't see how each side can continue to keep the pot bubbling.
To Mr. Schwartz: No you don't hear about Muslim meetings.
That's an issue the community has in general. The local mosque isn't quite adept at generating its own positive PR. It's not its normal function.
But, have a go at google....just a random search under 'muslims against violence' will do. There are groups out there. I'm certainly not arguing in favor of the violence...and I'm not out to get sucked into a whirling vortex of religious debate. Just want to say that an entire culture and religion shouldn't be lumped into the same bucket. Like everthing else...there is a broad spectrum of values and beliefs that fall under the umberella of islam. Are there enough righteous Muslims? I've met a fair share. Whether or not they can translate ideals into influence and additudes into action is another question.
You can add Grand Ayatollah Sistani to those who have denounced the violent protests: [http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/03/D8FHNUPG8.html]
In Iraq, the country's top Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al- Sistani, decried the drawings but did not call for protests.
"We strongly denounce and condemn this horrific action," he said in a statement posted on his Web site and dated Tuesday.
Al-Sistani, who wields enormous influence over Iraq's majority Shiites, made no call for protests and suggested that militant Muslims were partly to blame for distorting Islam's image.
He referred to "misguided and oppressive" segments of the Muslim community and said their actions "projected a distorted and dark image of the faith of justice, love and brotherhood."
"Enemies have exploited this ... to spread their poison and revive their old hatreds with new methods and mechanisms," he said.
-------------------------------
Later in the same article:
"About 4,500 people rallied in Basra and hundreds at a Baghdad mosque. Danish flags were burned at both demonstrations."
Several hundred people in a city of over 7 million. 4,500 in a city of over 2.5 million.
I fail to see how the reaction of some in the Muslim world is going to keep Europe from being a superpower, or even more ludicrous (sorry, but it's the only term I see thata fits), relegate them to the 'backseat of history.'
The people that are burning embassies, flags, and rioting are the same people that have hated America for many decades. Their collective ire has failed to make the US irrelevant, so I fail to see how it's going to make Europe irrelevant. This minority of Muslism has hated the US a lot more for a lot longer and we've somehow survived. I'm pretty sure Europe will too.
government should not curtail free speech. i don't see Tom suggesting that. but the market can 'curtail' free speech by imposing its penalties. so, if some Muslims want to boycott Lego, they darn well sure can. connectivity requires a modicum of cultural sensitivity. if some Europeans don't want to play ball that way, their connectivity will abate to some degree.
the EU can't become a superpower without population and good global connectivity. their below-replacement birth rate has got to give somewhere. like Peter Drucker said, the biggest challenge of developed nations in the 21st century will be having enough workers. and they tend to try to connect on their terms. i don't think the US does this as much, businesswise, but i could be wrong.
With the freedom of speech also comes the responsibility to accept the consequences for what you say. The Danish newspaper was insensitive and the other European newspapers who republished the cartoons were rude.
That said, if the Gap countries are ever going to succeed in integrating into the Core, they will have to learn that there are always a bunch of jerks out there who will say and do things people won't like. Anyone who doesn't believe that has not spent any time driving in rush-hour traffic. Those who burn and break (including those who incite for their own reasons) are far too immature to be accepted in the Functioning Core.
The good news is that there are a number of good Muslim examples out there. I think these insults will continue as connectivity progresses, and that is a good thing. The violent extremists will either grow a thicker skin or have a harder time getting their buddies (or lackies) to put forth the effort to make a fuss.
"Anyone with a thimble-full of sense could predict this outcome. Muslims are generally a touchy bunch when it comes to religious beliefs, and they take it a lot more seriously than most Christians take their religion. So these cartoons accomplished what exactly? Point out the shortcoming of a religion? That's super duper useful when it comes from an infidel."
Think of this as the lunatics veto. The craziest person in the room gets to control the conversation. Do you really think that is a good idea?
"Are there enough righteous Muslims? ... Whether or not they can translate ideals into influence and additudes into action is another question."
The ball is in their court. Can they stop the madness before a fire is lit that consumes them?
Let's get real here.
Muslims are threating holy war over a cartoon!
Does this pass the common sense test?
NO. It makes no sense whatsoever. Muslims better learn to live with others and get rid of their paranoid attitude otherwise they will never progress past the stone age.
"The line for Christians would be more like depicting Jesus Christ as Mary Magdalene’s lover (a favorite over the years): artistic freedom to some, but patently offensive to others"
The line was crossed today with a cartoon of Hitler lying in bed with Anne Frank. That is how the Arab European League proudly exercises its freedom of speech in response to Jyllands-Posten. And this is just the start... an Iranian newspaper announced a contest to lampoon the Holocaust.
Of course this is nothing new considering that Middle East newpapers routinely print virulently anti-semetic cartoons of this ilk.
But maybe now Europe and the US won't casually look the other way and, thanks to the power of free speech, they will get a clear view of the depravity of life in the Gap, as Tom describes it in PNM.