Cartoon Outrage
The Danish Cartoon Controversy seems to get bigger and larger each day. As Muslims around the world display their anger (mostly reactionary and spontaneous) through riots, protests and even lethal threats, the European looked on, justifying the drawings as innocent depiction of their freedom of speech. One comment I read in Blogcritics.org said that the cartoons are satirical and satires are the essence of free speech. Freedom of Speech is the epitome of democracy, another commented. Is it reasonable for the muslims to create such a bloody (literally) furore or outrage over the incident? Must Europe compromise this? How long can we tolerate Islam extremists who would jump on any artists, writers or persons who are expressing their opinion? So on and so forth...the list of comments made me dizzy a bit as I have to digest hatred, dissatisfaction, frustration and lots of assumptions at one go. That is no easy feat considering that I am also a Muslim who are just as sensitive over this issue as any other Muslims in the world. Just imagine, how a cartoon stir such reaction. Not to mention, economic boycotts and political implications- Turkey for instance, is now questioned over its stand which calls for the removal of the cartoons which to some (or many) is inconsistent with the underlying principles and beliefs of EU countries. In another words- one more complain about the cartoons, Turkey, don't even think of joining us in the EU. If EU is putting such pressure on Turkey, then I must asked, " Err...what about Turkey `s freedom of opinion?"
As a full fledged supporter of democracy and human rights, my understanding and exercise of my rights and worldview on this matter would of course very much be influenced by my faith and identity as a Muslim. Are my faith and love for my religion are complicating my democratic beliefs, sometimes I pondered. The answer is NO;but the complexities of society, values and ideologies are. Because as we interact with each other, our biasness, preferences and worldview escape and reshape the outcome of our communications, ideas and opinions. So, am I saying there is no common value that could ensure we all are not going to rip off each other `s throats in the event we disagree with each other? Of course we have. Respect. and Hypocrisy, too (re: how superpowers interact, i mean)
So back to the issue. I seriously don't understand the reason why the cartoons must be drawn in the first place. That` s why I am using the word "innocent depiction". If looking from a satirical point of view, I would have intepreted the cartoon where Muhammad is wearing the turban shaped like a bomb as meaning Muslims including me, who follow the teachings of Muhammad are potential bombers i.e terrorists. Different intepretation would ensue if the figure is replaced with Osama Laden, Yusuf Islam etc (no offends-just examples). My point is what is the point of attacking the ideals of extremism which unfortunately is accepted as "Islamic" globally by potraying Muhammad - known for his gentle and compassionate ways? And the fact that he is a Prophet, doubled the protest.
Thus, rather than those cartoons could potentially open doors for great discourse on Islam in the Europe, it offends first and that kinda destroy the essence of reason for freedom of speech-acknowledging differences. And you know what, rather than looking at this incident as a human rights/moral/freedom of journalism, one must view this incident from the political perspectives too. Would the Muslims `s unprecedent (or precedented) blast of anger merely be angry over 12 pictures ( I heard there is another 3 which is damn more offensive) of Muhammad or could the Muslim `s global response be a reflection of their years of frustration/anger over supression, domination and invasion by superpowers and developed countries? Would they be THAT angry if Jylland-Posten writes about the death toil of civilians in Iraq where thousands of Denmark soldiers are also stationed? Or maybe a critique on how Israel protest the tag "a Palestinian Movie" be used on "Paradise Now", a strong contender for Oscar in Best Foreign Film? I read the idea for these cartoons come up because there `s A writer that is seeking for some illustrations for his latest book and put up a public challenge for anyone who could come up with such drawings. What about that? Why must there be such challenge in the first place?
Perhaps the cartoonists/Jylland-Posten have some brilliant message that they want to share with the society, but that never comes across at all. The only thing that Muslims around the world can think of right now are "You are offending our religion". And I guess its just as fair for Muslims to feel bad or even a bit "disturbed" when other religion is being bad-mouthed or openly shamed. I guess respect applies to all in our plural society. and oh, we have to earn it too.
You must say then, that I agree with all the lethal threats, bloodbath or riots? Well, not exactly. I mean I respect certain sectors of the society that went straight to the newspapers and demand for the removal of the cartoon. but why must we counter these "fishy" provocations and sensationalizations with emotional outrage? I emphatize with the anger, upsetness or frustration at being offended in such way, but I guess such reactions are not going to help us in the long run. It would perhaps reaffirm public `s perception that Muslims are a bunch of extremists. Is it worth it? Or would it be the newest entry point for Muslims to be further misunderstood.
It is not as simple as what I wrote here. If it is as simple, the issue will not prolong and cause political and economic effects. What we need to do now is to direct our capacity and intellect (which I believe most of Muslims are) towards addressing these "innocent depictions" straight on rationally. Some Muslim scholars called for "intellectual distancing" in times like these. Rally if you must, but not with violence and lethal threats. Because demos are also a form of free speech. And the Europeans should know better. Tariq Ramadan, in his article (www.tariqramadan.com) stated that " yes, freedom of speech exist but what about civic responsibilities?", That is a question that THEY should answer.
For further details on Jyllands-Posten, visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten or www.jp.dk. Maybe some background info on J-P would help us to understand the issue better.
As a full fledged supporter of democracy and human rights, my understanding and exercise of my rights and worldview on this matter would of course very much be influenced by my faith and identity as a Muslim. Are my faith and love for my religion are complicating my democratic beliefs, sometimes I pondered. The answer is NO;but the complexities of society, values and ideologies are. Because as we interact with each other, our biasness, preferences and worldview escape and reshape the outcome of our communications, ideas and opinions. So, am I saying there is no common value that could ensure we all are not going to rip off each other `s throats in the event we disagree with each other? Of course we have. Respect. and Hypocrisy, too (re: how superpowers interact, i mean)
So back to the issue. I seriously don't understand the reason why the cartoons must be drawn in the first place. That` s why I am using the word "innocent depiction". If looking from a satirical point of view, I would have intepreted the cartoon where Muhammad is wearing the turban shaped like a bomb as meaning Muslims including me, who follow the teachings of Muhammad are potential bombers i.e terrorists. Different intepretation would ensue if the figure is replaced with Osama Laden, Yusuf Islam etc (no offends-just examples). My point is what is the point of attacking the ideals of extremism which unfortunately is accepted as "Islamic" globally by potraying Muhammad - known for his gentle and compassionate ways? And the fact that he is a Prophet, doubled the protest.
Thus, rather than those cartoons could potentially open doors for great discourse on Islam in the Europe, it offends first and that kinda destroy the essence of reason for freedom of speech-acknowledging differences. And you know what, rather than looking at this incident as a human rights/moral/freedom of journalism, one must view this incident from the political perspectives too. Would the Muslims `s unprecedent (or precedented) blast of anger merely be angry over 12 pictures ( I heard there is another 3 which is damn more offensive) of Muhammad or could the Muslim `s global response be a reflection of their years of frustration/anger over supression, domination and invasion by superpowers and developed countries? Would they be THAT angry if Jylland-Posten writes about the death toil of civilians in Iraq where thousands of Denmark soldiers are also stationed? Or maybe a critique on how Israel protest the tag "a Palestinian Movie" be used on "Paradise Now", a strong contender for Oscar in Best Foreign Film? I read the idea for these cartoons come up because there `s A writer that is seeking for some illustrations for his latest book and put up a public challenge for anyone who could come up with such drawings. What about that? Why must there be such challenge in the first place?
Perhaps the cartoonists/Jylland-Posten have some brilliant message that they want to share with the society, but that never comes across at all. The only thing that Muslims around the world can think of right now are "You are offending our religion". And I guess its just as fair for Muslims to feel bad or even a bit "disturbed" when other religion is being bad-mouthed or openly shamed. I guess respect applies to all in our plural society. and oh, we have to earn it too.
You must say then, that I agree with all the lethal threats, bloodbath or riots? Well, not exactly. I mean I respect certain sectors of the society that went straight to the newspapers and demand for the removal of the cartoon. but why must we counter these "fishy" provocations and sensationalizations with emotional outrage? I emphatize with the anger, upsetness or frustration at being offended in such way, but I guess such reactions are not going to help us in the long run. It would perhaps reaffirm public `s perception that Muslims are a bunch of extremists. Is it worth it? Or would it be the newest entry point for Muslims to be further misunderstood.
It is not as simple as what I wrote here. If it is as simple, the issue will not prolong and cause political and economic effects. What we need to do now is to direct our capacity and intellect (which I believe most of Muslims are) towards addressing these "innocent depictions" straight on rationally. Some Muslim scholars called for "intellectual distancing" in times like these. Rally if you must, but not with violence and lethal threats. Because demos are also a form of free speech. And the Europeans should know better. Tariq Ramadan, in his article (www.tariqramadan.com) stated that " yes, freedom of speech exist but what about civic responsibilities?", That is a question that THEY should answer.
For further details on Jyllands-Posten, visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten or www.jp.dk. Maybe some background info on J-P would help us to understand the issue better.
posted by GEE at 10:03 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home