It goes without saying that I am appalled at the violent demostrations throughout the Middle East over a set of anti-Islamic cartoons published in Denmark. Talk about conforming to stereotype. But before we get all superior, we should be aware of other stereotypes we are bringing into play.
I am with Ian on this. The depth of the reaction in some quarters defies reasoning. Nobody forces you to read Satanic Verses or The Last Temptation of Christ; if you do and are offended, it’s on your head. If you want to express your offence and criticize the offender, that’s your right, but if you seek to silence the offender, you’ve violated one of the basic freedoms. Words alone cannot be considered “unacceptable provocation” and are no excuse for violence.
But some of us are getting a little high and mighty about the reaction from the Islamic world. They are mischaracterizing it, and they are misusing it to paint Islam in general as badly as possible. Consider the tut-tutting over certain signs waved at angry Islamic demonstrations in the United Kingdom.
This photograph (courtesy Dr. Dawg’s Blog) of a group of Islamic demonstrators in the United Kingdom saying things like “screw freedom of expression” and “slay those who insult Islam,” has made the rounds on a number of blogs. The signs are loathesome, to be sure, but they’re not the whole story. For one thing, has anybody noticed that the handwriting on these signs is remarkably similar? Somebody has.
So what you are seeing is a group of Muslims within a wider demonstration, of which possibly one person has written up a bunch of signs. It’s something of a leap, isn’t it, to suggest that these particular people speak for the entire protest?
And now consider this image, by Scott Barbour of Getty Images, picturing a group of peaceful protesters at the same demonstration. Their signs read “We do not fear criticism or debate - but no one likes abuse.” That sounds a lot more reasonable, and it probably describes the mindset of most of the people who attended these demonstrations. They don’t threaten and they don’t denounce freedom of speech.
Furthermore, it’s worth noting that peaceful demonstrations are an expression of political opinion which is as protected and valued in our democracies as any other form of speech. Sadly, it only takes a few hooligans to turn an otherwise peaceful demonstration violent, marring things for everybody.
We’re doing it again: in framing our dispute with groups of Islamic fanatics, we are tarring all of Islam with the same brush, and the religion is no more likely than Christianity and Judaism to deliver violent fanatics. I acknowledge that, today, the groups which represent the greatest threat to our collective security happen to claim to be Islamic, but ascribing a design flaw to an entire faith ignores the influence of Christianity on the Oklahoma City bombers of 1995, and of the various Catholic and Protestant terrorists in Northern Ireland. It ignores the violence of a fanatical faction of Jewish settlers in Gaza and the West Bank who are not above using political assassination to achieve their aims.
All acts of violence should be condemned, and yes, religious violence almost seems like the worst violence of all, but that’s no excuse for bigotry.
Looking through my archives, I came upon this article and was surprised at how little has changed in the months that have passed. I don’t really need to say more, but ask that you go read what I had to say in September 2004.
Yes, we have a right to offend, but we also have a right to say that we are offended, and most Muslims are simply exercising that right. We would be offended if we were tarred with the same brush used to tar a small group that committed atrocities in our name, and average Muslims deserve the same courtesy.