Here we stand against decency

From the BBC: Muhammad cartoon row intensifies: Newspapers across Europe have reprinted caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad to show support for a Danish paper whose cartoons have sparked Muslim outrage. I have posted comments over at Ed Brayton's weblog on this topic, they are verbose, but they encapsulate many slivers of my thinking. I will assume you know the general outline of this story, so, from the BBC piece:

First, hallelujah that European newspapers are standing up for freedom of speech on principle. Second, on the owner of the French newspaper, it was his right to do what he did, I won't attack him for it, newspapers are about money as well as principle, though I'm not totally sure that the monetary utilitarian calculus here works out (a) how many Muslims read this paper? b) is the negative publicity bad publicity? c) do enough non-Muslim French stand ready to show solidarity with their Muslim co-citizens?). But, the point about "convictions of every individual" is important, the reason that freedom of speech is important is because it is in part about the individual being able to say what they want in contradiction of public mores and sensibilities. This individualotry is a special thing, and across all time and space I do not think it is that normal or conventional. Social pressures and stigmas are very strong in many nations, and in the West they were rather strong until recently. The last execution for heresy in the British Isles took place around 1700. That's not that long ago. But less then 2 centuries later the British people were also electing an atheist, Charles Bradlaugh, to public office. Cultures change, and the British and their daughter cultures were among the first to make this transition, the salons of London were packed with intellectual refugees from France in the mid-18th century. Thomas Jefferson's quote that "But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg," shows a sensibility that injury must be bodily injury, and the offended sensibilities have no legal status in the liberal order (barring cases like defamation of character of living humans).

Which gets me to the point about "provocation." Yes, it was certainly in part provocation, it tested the bounds of liberality of thought, of mind. Denis Diderot once said "Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." Now, that is provocative. The emergence of the liberal order was about toleration of provocation in the interests of plurality and exploration of the full sample space of ideas. Provocation is a necessary byproduct of innovation. That is one reason much of art is so transgressive. To the liberal mind, to provoke is not necessarily an insult! In England the Sikh attack on an offensive theater illustrates the contrasting cognitive mode. Here are some quotes:

Sewa Singh Mandha, the chairman of the Council of Sikh Gurdwaras, said of the theatre: "They keep saying the playwright has the right to her imagination but these imaginations could harm a community. This play will not help race relations in the city."

But the play itself came under fire from Birmingham's Roman Catholic Archbishop, who described it as offensive to all faiths.

In a statement, the Most Rev Vincent Nichols said: "In recent weeks the Sikh community has acted in a reasonable and measured way in representing their deep concerns to the Birmingham Repertory Theatre.

"I regret that the Repertory Theatre, in the interests of the common good, has not been more responsive. Such a deliberate, even if fictional, violation of the sacred place of the Sikh religion demeans the sacred places of every religion."

Note that one individual claimed that imagination could cause harm! What contrast with the sentiment of Jefferson. The second part shows that some religious non-Sikhs sympathized with their outrage. My point is that the behavior we see in the Muslim world lay latent in all cultures, and expresses itself in most, and has government sanction in many. Here in the US I have seen Bill Donohue of The Catholic League moot the idea of blasphemy laws which violate public norms on talk show panels (to the thankful silence of the other talking heads).

Which brings me to my last point, this isn't about Muslims. The big picture isn't that the cartoon reprint was to spite Muslims, who seem to believe that the West is obsessed with them. As I told a self-absorbed friend once, it isn't always about you! But if you don't value freedom of expression, perhaps it is difficult to conceive that that is the real motive behind the relative intransigence on the part of Western governments.

Finally, more power to Muslims if they want to boycott Danish products. I disagree with their opinions and actions but will fight to the death to protect their right do so. To paraphrase Aragorn:

A day may come when the courage of Men fails, when we forsake our principles and break all bonds of solidarity, but it is not this day. An hour of "sensible" silence when the Age of Men fades into mediocrity, but it is not this day! This day we shout! By all that you hold dear on this good earth, I bid you stand, Men of the West!

Tags
Categories

More like this

Here's an "I have some good news and some bad news" scenario for you regarding the now-infamous caricatures of Mohammed that have Muslims around the world throwing a temper tantrum. A French newspaper reprinted the caricatures and took a stand for freedom of the press: France-Soir reprinted 12…
How's this for appeasement: Franco Frattini, the European Union commissioner for justice, freedom and security, revealed the idea for a code of conduct in an interview with The Daily Telegraph. Mr Frattini, a former Italian foreign minister, said the EU faced the "very real problem" of trying to…
UK Sikhs accuse BBC of racism: "We should not be paying a licence fee for promoting the ignorance-based ramblings of those bent on self-promotion who sneer at Asian religion and culture," said Hardeep Singh, a spokesman of the Sikh Media Monitoring Group, which accused BBC's Asian Network of being…
The New York Times has an article titled Across Europe, Worries on Islam Spread to Center. It is a string of anecdotes and examples which show that criticism of Islam is now becoming acceptable in non-extremist circles. I am frankly pleased by this. Consider: Whatever the motivations, "the…

Two small notes about "France Soir": the owner, Raymond Lakah, is Egyptian (he's described in several places as Franco-Egyptian); and, the "France Soir" filed for bankruptcy back in October.

http://tinyurl.com/7mhts

And if it was only a case of boycotts...

(Which aren't necessarily legal, btw. If they are supported by a state, which is the case with at least Egypt, they are against the WTO rules and Denmark can demand compensation.)

EU offices in Palestine have been attacked over this, arabs working for the Danish company Arla in the Middle East have been beaten, the Danish Red Cross has had to move some of their people out because they were threatened, the artists who drew those infamous drawings received death threats, the offices of the newspaper who brought them received two credible bomb threats, and apparently we have become a valid target for terrorism.

I am afraid one of the caricatures depicting a Muhammed with a bomb in his turban was only too apt :(

By Peter Lund (not verified) on 01 Feb 2006 #permalink

I grew up in Northampton, the seat Charles Bradlaugh stood for. There is a stature of him in Abington Square. Bradlaugh used to begin one of his meetings by taking out his pocket watch and saying: "God! You have sixty seconds in which to strike me dead!"

Your knowledge of Western intellectual history is admirable. Unfortunately, you don't address very real tensions: Danish experience with Muslim immigrants; popular importance of religion for the average Muslim is more importance that certain liberal rights that are part of Western political philosophy. For the Muslim individual living in the Middle East, they don't see political or intellectual history through your lenses.

Danish experience with Muslim immigrants; popular importance of religion for the average Muslim is more importance that certain liberal rights that are part of Western political philosophy. For the Muslim individual living in the Middle East, they don't see political or intellectual history through your lenses.

1) elaborate on the danish experience with muslim immigrants. (i know some of this, but i want to see exactly what you mean by the somewhat elliptical allusion).

2) i agree that religion is more important than individual liberal rights for the average muslim, but, at least in the USofA i think most christians would have to say the same, they would pick their savior over their liberties. but, most christians do not see a fundamental contradiction, and would even argue that liberty is a necessary implication of their faith. myself, i don't think it is a necessary implication, i think people tell themselves what they want to think to enable what they want to do. if islam is to thrive in a western matrix, it has to adapt, simple as that. either that, or non-muslim society adapts to islam, and i like western liberalism as it is, to a first approximation, thank you very much.

3) i am well aware that middle easterners have their own experience. i was addressing western spatial contexts. muslims can burn, kill or riot in the name of god in their own nations. christians have done this in the past. the point is that this sort of behavior can not be allowed to be normative in the west. as i have noted before, the last man was executed for atheism in scotland in 1700. the past is a shadow with us still.

4) what do you recommend that i read to familiarize myself with middle eastern culture? i have read the koran in translation and have some hadiths in the hanafi school, but that's about it as regards culturally insider based texts.