|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Was it worth it? |
| Certainly |
|
50% |
[ 11 ] |
| Probably |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Not sure |
|
13% |
[ 3 ] |
| Probably not |
|
18% |
[ 4 ] |
| Certainly not |
|
13% |
[ 3 ] |
| I couldn't give a rat's **** |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 22 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:01 pm Post subject: Danish Cartoon: Was it Worth It? |
 |
|
Prejudiced Danes provoke fanaticism
I was just reading this article and wondering how Flemming Rose (the guy who commissioned the cartoons) might feel about it now.
At the time, I agreed in principle that free speech should over ride any objections to published materials on religious grounds, but wondered what particular benefits that exercise might bring. Still none that I can see. It just seemed pretty dumb.
I agree in principle that a person should be able to walk around outdoors in their very expensive gold and diamond jewellery. But in practice it seems to be dumb thing to do, as you'd just be inviting robbers to take it from you. Of course you should be allowed to do it, but we don't live in a perfect world, and most people would think you foolish for doing so, even if they despised the robber.
Reading these paragraphs made me wonder how the editor must feel now:
| Quote: |
Watching the nightly news in February 2006 was a shocking affair for most Danes. They watched their flag burning in the streets of Damascus, Beirut and Tehran. They cringed as demonstrators screamed violent slogans and rioters attacked their embassies. Police fired on the crowds, resulting in more than 100 deaths.
Now the Danes won't back down and the few but fatally insane radical extremists will continue the fight. The first major reaction came in January 2008 when Danish police arrested a cell of extremists that were accused of planning Westergaard's assassination. There are 87 men in Denmark with the name Kurt Westergaard and all of them now have police protection. Four months later, suicide bombers attacked the Danish embassy in Islamabad, injuring 30 and killing six. Al-Qaida took credit for the attack, claiming it was retaliation for the cartoons and the 700 Danish troops in Afghanistan. In October 2008, two men were convicted in Danish courts of preparing a terrorist attack. |
That's more than a hundred and six dead, and probably scores more injured on top. And 87 men living under police protection. And likely more death and injury in the future. For what? To prove a point? For a cartoon that wasn't even that clever or funny? It would be good if something good came out of this in the long run. It would be good if it were a strategic battle in sort of struggle that we will eventually win. But I can't see it. It still just seems like a silly thing to have done.
I don't have any concrete opinion on this - just thinking aloud really. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Danish cartoons are a bad example of what you are talking about. The controversy and ensuing violence was completely manufactured by extreme Islamist groups. The furor erupted months after the initial printing of the cartoons and only erupted because of concerted efforts of the aforementioned to incite violence and hatred. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You are asking a question that may be answered differently in decades to come. I am not for provoking sectarian strife by offending people via a chocolate Jesus (I don't mean as in black person), insulting the prophet Mohammed, or trashing Moses. I mean one can argue that it should be permitted based on freedom of speech. I understand that argument. It would be nice in a way if human beings didn't respond with violence vis-a-vis people they disagreed with.
How will history deal with the fight between Islamists and moderate Muslims and the West? How will the affect things in the future and being exposed to cartoons like that? Will such things push Muslims to fight for a more moderate version of Islam while encouraging Europeans to show more sensitivity to Muslims?
I would like to think that that moderation amongst people will win out in the end. Flemming Rose, obviously, dislikes Islam. I understand that.
He is also connected to Daniel Pipes. Daniel Pipes is sectarian in his thinking.
No matter how insulted people are regarding the depiction of someone holy to them responding with violence won't impress people.
Last edited by Adventurer on Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:47 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 0% of the blame is held by the cartoonist, and 100% of the blame is held by the Muslim groups that acted upon their outrage. And I'd say the same thing if any other religion were involved. The cartoonist isn't the one attacking people, or the one suicide bombing. The worst thing we can do in the West is to hold ourselves responsible in any way for the actions of extremists, or accommodate them in any way. No one who is unable to control their passions has a place in civilized society. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Islamic fundies use a non-violent but provocative cartoon, a cartoon, as justification for violence, and the OP's response is, 'maybe the cartoon isn't worth it?'
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| 0% of the blame is held by the cartoonist, and 100% of the blame is held by the Muslim groups that acted upon their outrage. And I'd say the same thing if any other religion were involved. The cartoonist isn't the one attacking people, or the one suicide bombing. The worst thing we can do in the West is to hold ourselves responsible in any way for the actions of extremists, or accommodate them in any way. No one who is unable to control their passions has a place in civilized society. |
My question wasn't who is responsible for the violence. My question was "was it worth it?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| 0% of the blame is held by the cartoonist, and 100% of the blame is held by the Muslim groups that acted upon their outrage. And I'd say the same thing if any other religion were involved. The cartoonist isn't the one attacking people, or the one suicide bombing. The worst thing we can do in the West is to hold ourselves responsible in any way for the actions of extremists, or accommodate them in any way. No one who is unable to control their passions has a place in civilized society. |
My question wasn't who is responsible for the violence. My question was "was it worth it?" |
Yes, it was worth it. Sooner or later either moderate Muslims are going to have to step up en masse and start fighting back against the extremists who have co-opted their religion, or they're going to be implicitly throw their lot in with them. Each incident like this gives them another chance to make the right choice. That, plus the fact that freedom of speech in the face of this kind of adversity is just, makes it worth it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| 0% of the blame is held by the cartoonist, and 100% of the blame is held by the Muslim groups that acted upon their outrage. And I'd say the same thing if any other religion were involved. The cartoonist isn't the one attacking people, or the one suicide bombing. The worst thing we can do in the West is to hold ourselves responsible in any way for the actions of extremists, or accommodate them in any way. No one who is unable to control their passions has a place in civilized society. |
My question wasn't who is responsible for the violence. My question was "was it worth it?" |
Yes, it was worth it. |
And you're going to get the same response from many Americans, most of whom think the European anti-Holocaust-denial laws infringe on freedom of speech.
Many Americans are strongly in support of a very expansive concept of free speech. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
Islamic fundies use a non-violent but provocative cartoon, a cartoon, as justification for violence, and the OP's response is, 'maybe the cartoon isn't worth it?'
|
So Kuros, was it worth it? Has anything been achieved? Will anything be achieved? Or were there more cons than pros?
Adventurer: is he Russian? I know he speaks Russian and corresponded from Russia, but I was under the impression he was Danish. But you may be correct. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The cartoons betrayed poor judgment as well as undue anti-Muslim antagonism.
Why throw pointless rocks at rattlesnakes...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| 0% of the blame is held by the cartoonist, and 100% of the blame is held by the Muslim groups that acted upon their outrage. And I'd say the same thing if any other religion were involved. The cartoonist isn't the one attacking people, or the one suicide bombing. The worst thing we can do in the West is to hold ourselves responsible in any way for the actions of extremists, or accommodate them in any way. No one who is unable to control their passions has a place in civilized society. |
Tell me this. When Protestant Unionists marched into Catholic areas and the Catholics responded with violence were the Protestants without blame since marching is a non-violent act? When Israeli right wingers insisted in marching in an Arab-Israeli town called Um Al Fahem was it simply the fault of the Arab Israelis for any violence that ensued? If the cartoonists felt his actions may provoke violence by what may be perceived as an insult on a religious level is he blameless? I am not so sure. Doesn't he owe his adopted country, of Denmark, to be more responsible?
Well, people who feel provoked respond with anger in the United States, as well. I think they shouldn't, but they do so. Caravallo got death threats in New York for his chocolate Jesus. I don't think Caravallo really met any harm in this case, but I think Flemming did. I think Caravallo was simply being an artist, he wasn't trying to be political. The intentions are different. You still should be careful when stirring up religious passions. In an ideal world, of course, there would be no Belfat, Beirut, Sarajevo. We need to go to such a world, but we aren't there yet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| 0% of the blame is held by the cartoonist, and 100% of the blame is held by the Muslim groups that acted upon their outrage. And I'd say the same thing if any other religion were involved. The cartoonist isn't the one attacking people, or the one suicide bombing. The worst thing we can do in the West is to hold ourselves responsible in any way for the actions of extremists, or accommodate them in any way. No one who is unable to control their passions has a place in civilized society. |
My question wasn't who is responsible for the violence. My question was "was it worth it?" |
Yes, it was worth it. |
And you're going to get the same response from many Americans, most of whom think the European anti-Holocaust-denial laws infringe on freedom of speech.
Many Americans are strongly in support of a very expansive concept of free speech. |
I used to believe in uncensored freedom of speech. Now I'm not sure. Britain became a hotbed for extremism, eventually exporting radical Islam out to parts of the world that had previously been untroubled by the phenomenon. That's because the radicals who had been chucked out of their own countries for their militant extremist Islamism (such as Egypt's Abu Hamza al-Masri ) took full advantage of the UK's free speech to spread their poison and groups that were outlawed elsewhere, such as Hizb ut-Tahrir were able to flourish to the detriment of the UK's muslim community, the UK, and the world.
Before I used to laugh at my German friends who tut-tutted about Klu Klux Klan members being interviewed on US TV - but now I'm not so sure they are wrong any more.
That's not to say I don't have very serious concerns about the potential abuses of a 'modified' free speech. I don't know what the answer is, frankly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
The cartoons betrayed poor judgment as well as undue anti-Muslim antagonism.
Why throw pointless rocks at rattlesnakes...? |
I guess that pretty much sums up where I'm coming from too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| Tell me this. When Protestant Unionists marched into Catholic areas and the Catholics responded with violence were the Protestants without blame since marching is a non-violent act? |
That's an interesting question, Adventurer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| Tell me this. When Protestant Unionists marched into Catholic areas and the Catholics responded with violence were the Protestants without blame since marching is a non-violent act? |
Yes.
| Adventurer wrote: |
| When Israeli right wingers insisted in marching in an Arab-Israeli town called Um Al Fahem was it simply the fault of the Arab Israelis for any violence that ensued? |
I'm not sure given I don't know the specifics of the situation, but assuming the Arab Israelis initated the violence, yes.
| Adventurer wrote: |
| If the cartoonists felt his actions may provoke violence by what may be perceived as an insult on a religious level is he blameless? I am not so sure. Doesn't he owe his adopted country, of Denmark, to be more responsible? |
I would say he did his adopted country of Denmark a service by not allowing himself to be intimidated by the threat of extremist violence.
| Adventurer wrote: |
| Well, people who feel provoked respond with anger in the United States, as well. |
And they're equally wrong when they do. That's why we have a criminal justice system. We can't allow law abiding citizens to be bullied into not utilizing their freedoms for fear of the response from extreme individuals who can't control their passions (or worse, individuals who intentionally inflame the passions of other members of their group using said utilizations of freedom to further an agenda, as was the case here). The average, civilized Muslim is not going to hurt anyone over a comic. It's the rhetoric of certain agenda-driven leaders in the extremist Muslim community that gets people going, and those men are who bear 100% of the blame.
| Adventurer wrote: |
| We need to go to such a world, but we aren't there yet. |
We won't get closer to such a world by giving in to intimidation. The cartoonist did not give into intimidation, and this was his small contribution towards moving closer to such a world rather than further from it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
