Friday, February 10, 2006
TERRIFIED COLLABORATORS
Charles Krauthammer on the menace of moderation:
The German, French and Italian newspapers that republished these cartoons did so not to inform but to defy—to declare that they will not be intimidated by the mob.
What is at issue is fear. The unspoken reason many newspapers do not want to republish is not sensitivity but simple fear …
The worldwide riots and burnings are instruments of intimidation, reminders of van Gogh’s fate. The Islamic “moderates” are the mob’s agents and interpreters, warning us not to do this again. And the Western “moderates” are their terrified collaborators who say: Don’t worry, we won’t. It’s those Danes. We’re clean. Spare us. Please.
UPDATE. A bunch of recent op-ed pieces and other comments. First, Andrew Bolt:
Last Sunday, as Muslims enraged by cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed torched Danish diplomatic missions in Lebanon and Syria, Melbourne’s artists rallied to defend free speech.
Their timing was perfect.
After all, almost every paper in the country had just decided to censor themselves, refusing to publish 12 innocuous cartoons that had Muslim extremists from Jakarta to London threatening death and mayhem.
But luckily there were some Australians to whom even self-censorship was so wrong it had to be protested.
So entertainers such as Max Gillies, Rod Quantock, Sigrid Thornton, Gerry Connolly, Drew Forsythe, and Tim Minchin, not to mention ABC radio host Virginia Trioli, held a chic concert for free speech at Hamer Hall ...
They weren’t defending that right against the very real threat of violence by Muslims.
They were there to defend free speech instead from the completely imaginary threat of prosecution by the Howard Government, under sedition laws we’ve actually had for decades.
Resigning New York Press ed-in-chief Harry Siegel:
A lot of papers haven’t run these cartoons because they’ve felt threatened and they’ve been worried about the consequences. And if that happens, then this violence has been worthwhile and it’s accomplished its goal.
When I was an editor, I would not have dreamed of publishing cartoons that depicted the prophet Mohammed as a suicide bomber.
Would the violent response of Islamic zealots (and terrorists) to a Danish paper’s doing this have tempted me, in the name of free speech and in anger, to reproduce the Danish caricatures, now widely available on the internet and reprinted by some newspapers?
An equally resolute “no”. Free speech becomes babble when exercised indiscriminately, even, or maybe especially, in Danish. Graffiti (counting the 12 Danish cartoons in that genre) is best left to lone rangers drawing on walls, both brick and cyber.
How much of the American media’s unwillingness to show the cartoon images of Islam’s prophet has been out of respect for Islam, how much an inflated sense of political correctness, and how much out of sheer cowardice?
All of the evidence points to the latter.
Our mind-set is progressive and rational. Your mind-set is pre-Enlightenment and mythological. In your worldview, history doesn’t move forward through gradual understanding. In your worldview, history is resolved during the apocalyptic conflict between the supernaturally pure jihadist and the supernaturally evil Jew ...
In my world, people search for truth in their own diverse ways. In your world, the faithful and the infidel battle for survival, and words and ideas and cartoons are nothing more than weapons in that war.
If 12 silly cartoons are enough to spark the hysterical over-reaction by Muslims, then this is a confrontation we need to have. Not publishing the cartoons adds to the debate by suggesting we will walk on eggshells in appeasing Muslim sensibilities. The spontaneous reaction across the Middle East has morphed into planned intimidation of the West and its values. And it seems to be working. Those opposed to free speech are learning that the louder they shout, the faster we surrender.
The institutionalised weakness of the West is epitomised by its reaction to the riots over the cartoons: the apologies from governments, the sacking of an editor in France, the ready acceptance by newspapers of a limit to free speech, despite the fact the cartoons are so tame by the standards of Western satire ...
The global over-reaction to the publication in a privately owned newspaper in a Western secular society shows that there are increasing numbers of Muslims who expect to be able to control what non-Muslims do in their own countries.
Commenter hooligan:
The blogosphere has become to the 21st century westerner what the transmitter and wireless was to the resistance fighter of occupied Europe in WW2.
UPDATE II. Mike Carlton:
No jokes about Islam, please. It’s all right for them to crash airliners into New York, blow up Balinese bars and decapitate hostages on video. Or do a cartoon with the Star of David flying over Auschwitz, as I saw the other day. As long as we don’t do anything tasteless in reply.