Okay, here’s the thing
There is a middle ground, as I’ve referred to, between completely selling out free speech and poking a hornet’s nest with a stick. Malkin is doing the latter - but Europe appears to be doing the former. I’m not sure which is worse.
The middle ground lies in exploring the issues behind these riots. This is something that neither side of the blogosphere seems very interested in right now. Quite unsurprisingly, Juan Cole is an exception.
Muslim touchiness about Western insults to the prophet Mohammed must be understood in historical context. Most Muslim societies have spent the past two centuries either under European rule or heavy European influence, and most colonial masters and their helpmeets among the missionaries were not shy about letting local people know exactly how barbaric they thought the Muslim faith was. The colonized still smart from the notorious signs outside European clubs in the colonial era, such as the one in Calcutta that said, “Dogs and Indians not allowed.”
Free speech has *everything* to do with, “poking the hornet’s nest.” This is, after all, why the American founders sought to protect this basic human right. The somewhat modern counter balance to free speech has been “politically correct” speech, which is a modern form of speech/thought control introduced in order to protect “feelings”. Indeed, this modern reaction seeks to protect “feelings” above all.
So, the argument comes down to this; which human trait is most valuable to the future of our civilization, feelings or freedom? It’s a crude argument, I know. But I think it has merit.
Comment by JW — February 10, 2006 @ 9:57 am
These cartoons were published in October, in Egypt, without any fuss.
http://malkinwatch.blogsome.com/
Comment by sgtSpanky — February 10, 2006 @ 10:08 am
http://pajamasmedia.com/2006/02/mohammed_cartoons_published_in.php
Comment by sgtSpanky — February 10, 2006 @ 10:09 am
Who’s being politically correct? Suggesting that the rioters’ “feelings are hurt” continues to minimize and ignore the real problems.
People are, as always, free to poke the hornet’s nest. They’re free to be bigots, or assholes, or whatever they want.
Just like I’m free to call them histrionic, whiny, racist demagogues more interested in their own television stunts than actual, world-improving dialogue. And I’m free to call their defenders brainwashed, simple-minded misanthropes who kneejerk to xenophobic petty fascism under the guise of Americanism.
I’m free to say all of that, but I generally don’t. The middle ground is optional. It’s also constructive. Those who go to either extreme for the sake of it are not always destructive, but sometimes they are.
Each extreme end of this debate are being objectively destructive. But those who are being destructive via speech have every, every right to do so. I will never say otherwise.
Comment by Auguste — February 10, 2006 @ 10:09 am
Spanky, are you presenting that to me as though it isn’t my thesis? Read other posts on this blog for more information.
It’s not just about the cartoons. That’s my point.
Comment by Auguste — February 10, 2006 @ 10:11 am
No doubt you;ll be expressing yout outrage at the NYT for publishing images offensive to Christians and or Jews.
Futher, publishing Juan Cole’s assinine remarks do not exactly reflect well on you- unless you plan a post excoriating him for completely neglecting the Muslim world’s portrayal of other religion and the hypocrisy surrounding the calls by Muslims to sensitive to religious sensibilities.
Yeah, right.
Comment by sigmund, carl and alfred — February 10, 2006 @ 1:20 pm
As soon as you show me where I’ve expressed actual outrage at the Danish newspapers, your parallel will make sense.
Comment by Auguste — February 10, 2006 @ 4:30 pm
The somewhat modern counter balance to free speech has been “politically correct” speech, which is a modern form of speech/thought control introduced in order to protect “feelings”. Indeed, this modern reaction seeks to protect “feelings” above all.
That’s not what “poitical correctness” is about, it’s just what right wing retards made it out to be because they can’t stand what it really is about, which is that culture should be studied objectively viewpoint, not a subjective judgment which was the traditional western style of education. Today nobody but troglodytes use the term ‘politically correct’ because it is taken for granted among those who aren’t.
No doubt you;ll be expressing yout outrage at the NYT for publishing images offensive to Christians and or Jews.
Because they do this so often? I’d love to see that.
Comment by elemental — February 10, 2006 @ 10:45 pm
It’s easy and convenient to dismiss your opponents as racist. It removes you from having to think critically about the actual issues at had. This is a rather large problem with the left. They are great at name calling and not much else…
Comment by Lisa Lisa — February 10, 2006 @ 11:49 pm
It’s easy and convenient to dismiss your opponents as racist. It removes you from having to think critically about the actual issues at had.
Thinking critically like posting this oft-repeated, ersatz assertion that every freeper has committed to memory so they can pretend they’re not actually obstinate reactionaries?
Sorry, “We good, Muslims bad” is not critical thinking. If you can make a point without being hypocrtical, stereotypical or fanatical please do, I’d love to hear some critical thinking about ‘the actual issues at hand’ from the right that isn’t dogmatically prejudiced and antipathetic.
Comment by elemental — February 11, 2006 @ 12:38 am
It’s easy and convenient to dismiss your opponents as racist. It removes you from having to think critically about the actual issues at had. This is a rather large problem with the left. They are great at name calling and not much else…
I think I have a longer-than-one-year track record of thinking critically.
My sniping comment arose from a specific charge of political correctness; do you not defend my right to say what I said? That’s fine, as long as you’re willing to read the rest of my blog history. If not, then kindly go away.
Comment by Auguste — February 11, 2006 @ 3:31 am
“Sargeant Spanky”?
hehe
Comment by LA — February 11, 2006 @ 3:44 am
Right on, its not just about cartoons. Regarding their publication in Egypt in oct 2005, which condemned them didnt cause riots because it was wasnt about just cartoons but increasing Islamophobia in Europe.
The piece of shit who put out this misleading bit of information is a an Egyptian neocon who deliberetly didnt translate the arabic headline under which the picture was printed.
Comment by MalkinBlowsAss — May 7, 2006 @ 2:16 am