February 27, 2006

The Freedom to Speak About Restricting the Freedom to Speak

The catch phrase now in the Cartoon War is "clash of civilizations". But in dealing with a "civilization", large numbers of whose members can be driven into frenzies of violence by taboo-violating cartoons, the real situation more closely resembles the Roman Empire under siege by barbarians.

Even Islam's intellectuals are infected with the false logic that springs from trying to reconcile seventh century mysticism with modern democratic freedoms. Dr Abdelwahab El-Affendi is a senior research fellow at University of Westminster in London. Writing for al Jazeera, Dr. El-Affendi calls for Muslims in European societies to use democracy:

Muslims, especially minorities living in Europe, are likely to be the first victims of new restrictions on freedom. They should, instead, make use of democracy to build coalitions which would isolate the hate mongers and extremists and cause them to be condemned by all.

In calling for more, not less, freedom of expression, they should also try to reach a consensus on using that freedom in a more responsible and constructive manner.

In other words, Dr. El-Affendi would have Muslims use freedom of expression to create a Muslim fundamentalist cousin to Political Correctness, call it Taboo Correctness.

Dr. El-Affendi's column tries to maintain a veneer of balanced, rational thought, but it's betrayed by this passage, which proves that he just doesn't get it:

The very idea of giving Rushdie a literary prize after his book Satanic Verses was like offering Hitler the Nobel Peace Prize after Auschwitz. And the very inability of Western intellectuals and leaders to understand this simple fact lies at the heart of the threatened "clash of civilisations".
In Dr. El-Affendi's mind, writing a book is equivalent to starting a World War and murdering millions of people. That's primitive thinking coming from a man who has had every opportunity to be capable of moving beyond taboos.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.

Posted by: Bluto at 12:04 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 333 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Now we're startin' to make some inroads. Can ya see the Golden Calf uh, check that, PIG from here? No not Sheehan-the other one-no not MooreGore- the other one- no not DUHEEEEEEEN- the other one.....the one that's behind the one that's behind..... Can you feel the love? Oh ye wild eyed wanderers!

Posted by: forest hunter at February 27, 2006 02:57 AM (Fq6zR)

2 I agree with you Bluto and I doubt this guy really believes such an absurd comparison. This is my take. He knows the West has created victimization with special rights and its becoming a perfect fit for the Muslim mentality. He easily assumes a matter-of-fact injustice against Muslims, especially "minorities" as the victims of any new restrictions on speech. He's trying to create the perception that biased unjust actions will be from the majority and wealthier non-Muslim community. But the fact is, any laws against insensitive antireligious speech, if applied fairly, would go against those who preach and act out hatred toward Jews and Christians more than anyone else (what could the imams talk about?) I think he's on to something here with reason to be concerned... but he's playing on western political correctness and Muslim fears to create the opposite reality. I don't agree with any new speech sensitivity laws but if they were enacted across Europe, Muslims may well be hurt more than helped. They could not so easily impose their views on the rest.

Posted by: Javapuke at February 27, 2006 04:08 AM (I5OxF)

3 What are they trying to do now?

Posted by: sandpiper at February 27, 2006 09:32 AM (AlCYT)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
18kb generated in CPU 0.0834, elapsed 0.1519 seconds.
118 queries taking 0.1423 seconds, 241 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.