Offensive Cartoons?

Warning: you may find the contents of this post a tad inflammatory. I offer no apologies.

This is possibly a story that goes a long way to show what exactly is wrong with Islam today; at least most of it. The most common complaint that Muslims have is that the rest of the world doesn’t really understand the Islamic world and the way it works. But we are getting a decent idea nowadays. As you all might have read [everywhere], a Danish newspaper recently published several cartoons depicting Prophet Mohammad (negatively?) causing Islamic ambassadors in Denmark to ask for newspaper censorship. Before anyone who understands freedom of expression could stop laughing, the story spread to other European countries that are normally thought of as understanding the Islamic world better, such as France and Belgium, and got published in their newspapers. This infuriated the Islamists even more and they threatened to boycott products made in Denmark, France, and Belgium.

What is the issue here, I ask myself? Publishing cartoons of a god-like person or trying to stifle free speech, or even worse intolerance to criticism, even if it is made in jest? Probably if I were a Muslim, I would be infuriated with the newspaper as well but at the same time would respect their right to air their opinions. By equating an entire country with the newspaper’s opinion, Islamists are making the same mistake that they accuse others i.e. over-generalization. Other religions get lampooned just as bad and usually any talk of the ‘fundamentalists’ voicing their dissent is drowned amongst the more rational minds that choose to laugh along or protest in more peaceful ways. I find it paradoxical that Albert Brooks was compelled to shoot his movie, Looking for Comedy in the Muslim World in India which is hardly a ‘Muslim world’.

Immediately after 9/11, many courses such as ‘Understanding Islam’ were offered in universities around America so as to help us better understand the Islamic thought rather than blindly hate them. Well, I believe that these courses’ objectives would be better served if they are offered in the Muslim world instead. Today the world has changed and is becoming increasingly more globalized, where thoughts such as freedom of expression and greater tolerance are common. Of course, certain conservative cultures are opposing these changes [think of Shiv Sena in India or the far-right wing in the U.S.] but an important difference is that the other more moderate side is equally emphatic regards acceptance and need for tolerance. In a way, the mixing of cultures is also allowing us to understand other cultures better and yet differentiating our culture with few unique traits that do not infringe on other cultures.

For a tolerant society to exist, an overall [common] code of values must be arrived at. You may say that not all Muslims are radical but then if that is true, it is the violent and loud minority that seems to drown out the overwhelming silent majority who hardly raises a voice. Any group is labeled thus by the resulting consensus emerging from the different opinions expressed within its factions. If the ranting of a loud minority drowns the opinions of a silent majority, then I am afraid that will be perceived as the resulting consensus. You have to speak out to be heard. Such efforts although still nascent in the Muslim world are encouraging. I just hope the political entities are brave enough to take such a stance.

All I want to say to those aggrieved by seeing those ‘offensive’ cartoons is – please express your opposition in more rational and less offensive ways. It is not worth picking a fight with people who care about you i.e. the liberal left in Europe. The Danish newspaper in
question has a reputation for crossing the politically-correct line and protests over their actions to feature supposedly blasphemous images would have been more effective if the newspaper was targeted instead of the whole country. Wasn’t the Shiv Sena and Bajrang Dal roundly chastised by the moderates for their choice of protest against M.F. Hussain’s ‘offensive’ paintings? Would you call India intolerant of Muslims based on the exhortations of the VHP and Shiv Sena? Would you call the United States intolerant of Muslims based on Pat Robertson’s rantings? So why blame Denmark for refusing to censor free speech?

Update#1:

[Source: Cox & Forkum]

Update#2: Shocking! I wonder how much would that percentage be in actual Islamic countries. Now don’t tell me they don’t want it. They sure do. Trying to install democracy in Iraq might actually be futile, considering this fact.

“Offensive Cartoons?” [Short URL: http://www.ipatrix.com/?p=1070] was published Wednesday, February 8th, 2006 at 12:46 pm by Patrix, filed under Current Affairs, Religion, Society Culture, and tagged as , , , . Both comments and linkbacks are closed.

«
»

Related Posts

  1. Top Editorial Cartoons of 2006
  2. Offensive Sunglasses
  3. Breast Feeding Offensive?
  • http://jebroni.blogspot.com Shahid

    Hey Patrix
    I have just written my opinion on my blog. See if that makes sense….However I agree with your last paragarph. Good point.

    :)
    I also want your permision to link to your blog – if it is ok with ya.
    Shahid

  • http://ipatrix.com Patrix

    Shahid, Yup. Feel free to link back.

  • Logical Paradoxes in right wing rants

    This

    This is possibly a story that goes a long way to show what exactly is wrong with Islam today

    followed by this

    Would you call India intolerant of Muslims based on the exhortations of the VHP and Shiv Sena?

    should explain to you why most Muslims wouldn’t care about your right wing rants. Yes, I know you do not claim to be from the right wing, but all your rants about religious stuff on this blog are right-wing and it would help if you recognized yourself.

  • http://ipatrix.com Patrix

    Logical…whatever, I don’t know who you are so I care less about what you think I am.

  • http://www.parablog.com/ Parag

    I completely agree with you, Patrix. I made a post about this on my blog a few days ago. If one is offended by something, they should stop looking. Also, there are no labels on any of those images in the cartoons. They could depict any mullah, not necessarily the Prophet.

  • Logical Paradoxes in right wing rants

    So I will spell out the paradox for you because you seem to be quite inept.

    1. You think a few Muslims objecting to the cartoons is enough to put all of Islam in the wrong.
    2. You think the exhortations of popular parties like VHP & Shiv Sena simply does not put all of India in the wrong.

    Of course you are extremely biased. I just wanted to point out the nakedly obvious. Too bad I had to do it twice.

  • http://ani.rediffblogs.com Animesh

    I actually witnessed the protest here right outside my office! Well, I can understand the anger, but burning embassies and flags and violence is not the answer!!!

    But check this one out… rotfl
    http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2006/02/cartoonist_or_p.html

  • http://www.lifeandsomething.blogspot.com Gaurav

    Logical

    There is a difference between petty vandalism and burning embassies.

    By your statement “just a few muslims protesting…”
    I assume you have recently arrived to earth.

    Instead of trying to find imagined paradoxes in alleged right wing rants, a better option will be to find out why muslims are in state they are.

    Regards

  • http://www.lifeandsomething.blogspot.com Gaurav

    Patrix,

    I may like to add that Liberal left is a bunch of wussies or as Arnie said girly men.

    MSM will defend piss christ and dung mary, but any problem where Islamic extremism is involved they suddenly discover respect for religion.

    Regards

  • http://ipatrix.com Patrix

    Parag, I was simply incensed by the attempts to impose their faith beliefs on the rest of us too.

    Logical..(?), oh dear! Starting off with an ad hominem argument >because you seem to be quite inept mut surely endear you to lot of people.

    Anyways, as Gaurav pointed out, your comparisons are faulty. VHP and Shiv Sena were roundly criticised by the moderates…heck, I still do (wonder what that makes me). I don’t see the same happening in the Muslim world. Governments of multiple Muslim countries made official protests. I don’t see any point trying to argue with you because you have already made up your mind [about me] anyways.

    Gaurav, I am all for respecting well-established religion and their beliefs. But don’t force us to. There are nutjobs on both sides…well, more on one than the other at least as this controversy shows.

  • http://ipatrix.com Patrix

    Thanks to the link by Animesh, I read some really insightful comments there especially by people like Farhad and Alan.

  • http://ajju.us/blog Ajju

    Let me first say that I live by Voltaire’s “I may not agree with what you say, but I’ll defend to death your right to say it”. Having said that, I would not call people who insult God’s of other religions liberal – I would call them idiots with a fetish for insulting Gods of other religions. And I think M.F.Hussein falls under this category. While MF Hussein has a right to paint whatever the f* he wants, if an Indian or any other newspaper published this – http://www.sanatan.org/en/05/Protests/MFHusain/paintings4.php
    I would be very angry and I am not even a devout Hindu. Why? Because while M.F. Hussein can paint whatever the f he likes in his private studio, when he/someone else publishes something like this, the only intention I can see in it is to hurt the sentiments of Hindus.

    Considering that the Shiv Sena controlled Maharashtra for a long time and that Modi was re-elected in Gujarat, I would definitely say those two major states have significant support for right wing views. But I agree, this doesn’t make the whole country “in the wrong”.

    And, I wouldn’t burn an embassy – I think that’s wrong. Protests should be peaceful. But branding an entire religion intolerant because of the violent protests of a few is the same as branding entire India as far right based on the behavior of Gujarat and Maharashtra.

    And if you think a vast majority of the US is ‘tolerant’ perhaps you would like to explain why Bill O’Reilly and Pat Robertson are so popular or why Bush won the elections. Because a significant percentage of the population likes them – again this doesn’t make the whole country wrong.

    I am not saying all Islamic countries are as liberal as the US. Clearly they are not. But just like you can’t convince Bush to take up non violence, publishing cartoons of their God as terrorists is not the way to nudge them towards being liberal. And while I don’t think the Danish government should be held responsible for anything, I do think the world would be a more peaceful place if people like M.F.Hussein and the Danish newspaper painted their cartoons and paintings in private and kept them that way. Publishing Laxmi copulate with a Bull or Mohammed as a terrorist does not make you a liberal, it puts you in the same category as intolerant idiots who revel in insulting other religions.

  • Ankita

    Although most people agree that the Danish newspaper acted in bad taste, going out of their way to depict the Prophet as a terrorist, one must appreciate that whatever they published was fully within thier right to freedom of speech and expression. Patrix pinpointed the heart of the matter – Moderate Muslims who believe that the world has a skewed view of their religion should speak up to condemn Jihadis as heartless terrorists who kill in the name of Allah and do nothing but defile the name of Islam. If they are truly moderate, their outrage over the cartoons would be better balanced by a condemnation of terrorist acts worldwide and the violent riots which led to the burning of embassies etc. Governments like those of Bahrain and Kuwait who have banned the sale of Danish products fail to see the difference between outrage against a free standing institution (the newspaper), and lashing out at the entire government and businesses of a country. In the weeks succeeding the publishing of the cartoons, it was regrettable that radical muslims failed to engage in peaceful protests but instead behaved in an unjustifiably violent manner. But it sadder still that moderate muslims, who frequently complain that the world does not understand Islam, failed to recognise a valuable opportunity to rise above the occassion and prove to others how tolerant and peaceful their religion really is.

  • http://ajju.us/blog Ajju

    This is plainly ridiculous. What do the cartoons of Mohammed have to do with Jehadis? Let me just lay out what you are saying should happen

    Danish Newspaper – Mohammed is a terrorist there is a bomb in his turban. ha ha, ha ha.

    Moderate Muslim – Jehadis are bad!

    Seriously do you see a connection there?
    And STILL, have you ever though that the reason you don’t see these stories of moderate muslims protesting violence is because the western media is in LOVE with images of muslims as terrorists. You think this is bare speculation don’t you? How about this?

    http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2006/02/02/1423416-cp.html

    http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/12/stories/2006021205281400.htm

    http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=9e14a2a4-2734-49c2-b359-db8e4f11bb65&k=8875

  • Ankita

    If you look closely you will see that I did not suggest that the response of moderate muslims to the danish cartoons should be that ‘jehadis are bad’. I said that their outrage over the offence to Islam those cartoons caused would be lent greater credibility if they also acknowledged and condemned the far greater insult to their religion caused by terrorists who take innocent lives in the name of their God and smear the name of Islam in the eyes of the world. Defenders of faith who believe that every religion should be respected should also think about how much they protested when the Taliban was busy tearing down ancient Buddhist statues in Afghanistan. All I’m saying is that if they condemned extremists who use Islam as an excuse for terrorism half as much as they are condemning a silly cartoon, perhaps their outrage would be more justified. I really dont want to say this because in all honesty I do not believe that Muslims in general are a violent and intolerant creed, but the irony of the sitation is undeniable: by burning down embassy buildings and threatening to kill those who insult them, the extremists are illustrating the almost-reality behind the caricature of Mohammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban, better than any cartoonist ever could.

  • Ankita

    As for the bit about western media being in love with painting muslims as terrorists, I wanted to point out that I live in Bahrain, smack between Saudi Arabia, UAE, Quatar and the rest of the Middle East. Although embassies have been stoned/burned, personnel injured and Danish goods banned off shelves, I have yet to see, hear of or read about even a small demonstration protesting this unjustified behaviour.

  • http://ipatrix.com Patrix

    Ajju, I guess Ankita’s responses must have conveyed my thoughts exactly so I won’t bother repeating them.

    She did bring my attention back to the Bamiyan Buddhas. Talk about a pot calling the kettle black. Not a peep from the Islamic countries (even the usual moderate ones) when that cultural crime was committed.

  • http://thesilentmuslim.blogspot.com The Silent Muslim

    Hey Patrix,

    Most of what you say makes sense. It’s time for the silent and peaceful Muslim majority to take Islam back from the criminals who are defaming Islam with their violent acts more than any cartoon can.

    But the media is not going to show a billion plus peaceful Muslims going about their daily life, when it can show a handful doing things that people have been led to believe most Muslims do.

    But why not examine the facts and figures?

    Take any country which has had a violent protest. Take the total number of violent protestors in that country (10? 50? 100? 1000?). Take the total number of Muslims in that country (10,000? 50,000? 100,000? 1000,000?). Has the majority chosen to be violent? Or to STAY AWAY from violence? Does the media show or focus on the mainstream majority NOT PROTESTING? Or the deviant minority protesting violently?

    Why isn’t media talking to or faeturing the majority of the people who have chosen to stay from protests and asking them why they aren’t being violent? Perhaps they are the ones who understand the teachings of their religion better.

    Also it’s interesting that the self-appointed ‘experts’ on Islam that do the rounds on many talk shows are not only non-Muslim, they are anti-Muslim. Wouldn’t it help if practicing Muslim scholars from reputed Islamic institutions worldwide, or in the West, were called to represent Islam on TV?

    Yes, the silent Muslims have to make their voice heard, but it won’t make it to the sensational headlines.

    The Silent Muslim

  • http://ipatrix.com Patrix

    Silent Muslim, Glad to hear your opinions. I completely agree that the media too looks for sensationalism. The only way to get attention for moderate muslims and get Islam back from radicals is to make your voice heard and dispel the negative image of Islam.

  • Non-Muslim

    Dear Moderate Muslim,
    It is always a pleasure to hear a muslim declare that he understands what most of the world have been talking about. Your agreement that moderates need to take a stance and make their voice heard is much appreciated. Undoubtedly the media looks for sensationalism and the chance of peaceful muslims NOT rioting is unlikely to make it to the 9 o’ clock news, but should they let that discourage them from condemning radicals loudly and sternly anyway? Certainly not ! :)

  • Logical Paradoxes in right wing rants

    Sweet!!

    Oh I get it. Why aren’t all these moderate Muslims condemning all this embassy burning. Poor Patrix looked and looked all over the Internet and couldn’t find one moderate Muslim criticizing this. Poor Patrix. And what is that grand representative of all Indian Muslims Ms. Shabana Azmi doing? Why hasn’t she criticized the embassy burnings?

    Would you call India intolerant of Muslims based on the exhortations of the VHP and Shiv Sena?

    Of course I will; give me one reason why I shouldn’t. The VHP and Shiv Sena represent one face of what is wrong with Hinduism today. The other face is of course the deeply entrenched casteism but we can leave that for later.

    You know that This is possibly a story that goes a long way to show what exactly is wrong with Islam today. Yeah, I completely agree. With around 1.5 billion Muslims all over the planet, three embassies being torched demonstrate exactly what is wrong with Islam today. Just as 2000 dead in 92-93 riots, 1000 dead in Gujarat, 3300 Muslims killed in Nellie in 83, 3000 Sikhs in 84 massacre show exactly what is wrong with Hinduism today. Let us not even talk about caste-based violence.

    Oh, I hope you don’t want to say that you know Mr. Moderate Hindu has criticized so and so massacre. You can just as easily find Mr. Moderate Muslim and Mr. Moderate Christian all of them potentially annoyingly leftie. You know if you say that you end up being a pseudo-secularist. You know the conviction rate for these massacres. For Bombay and Gujarat it is a sweet and cute zero. And this VHP and SS which apparently does not represent mainstream Hinduism in any way has been in power at the centre (Oh BJP != VHP huh) and the state. How can you call India intolerant on the basis of these utterly marginal entities like VHP and SS.

    I am looking forward to your next post on what is deeply wrong with Hinduism today. Surely there is no dearth of topics or dead body counts. I can send you helpful pointers in case you are still struggling.

    BTW, Patrix, your reference to ad hominem was kinda cute. But then I dont know what your 1st response to my comment was. Logical fallacy? mad hominem? Don Esquieter? Please help.

  • http://ipatrix.com Patrix

    Logical…, I don’t respond to sarcastic comments.


Copyright © 2012 Nerve Endings Firing Away. Designed by ckunte. Powered by WordPress.
Ads: cash advance loans.