What is human life worth?
Ok, I wasn't going to write about this because I just didn't want to get involved, but everywhere I look I see this issue about the cartoons depicting Muhammed popping up. It's driving me friggin nuts!!!! Ok, let me preface this with the usual blather, because even though all this is true I'm sure some of you will see it as just some pitiful attempt at comaraderie on my part. I realize that not all Muslims are terrorists. In fact, the majority are not terrorists. I have several Muslim friends. I've been in relationships with Muslim men in the past. I respect everyone's religion and everyone's right to religion. I really admire Persian culture. I love Islamic art and Middle Eastern food. I think Israel is occupying Palestinian land and it's unfair. I think the Iraq war was a bad idea (hopefully I'll be proven wrong). But the Western world just doesn't get this controversy! And, I'll tell you why:
First of all, the cartoons were satirical, meaning not to be taken too seriously.
Second, the cartoons were published in free societies with freedom of press and expression.
Third, because of the latter, people who hate the cartoons can express their outrage and either boycott or sue the paper(s) that printed them or even take the higher ground and count them off as idiots or whatever.
Fourth, Westerners don't understand the importance of not depicting Muhammed. We have pictures of Jesus everywhere. We just don't understand it. It's a cultural problem and even though we can acknowledge that people find the depiction appalling, we still don't entirely get it. It's kinda like Bush or some other super rich and privileged person trying to understand the life of a homeless person. Maybe that's our fault, but it's not done out of maliciousness it's done because we don't get it.
Fifth, Muhammed was depicted with a missile on his head and denying suicide bombers into heaven because of a lack of virgins because terrorists have hijacked your religion and used it so well to their murderous agenda that the rest of the world will always connect Islam to terrorism and death no matter how hard we try not to. Even though we know it's the horrible actions of a few, it's impossible to get rid of that image. But that's not really our fault. It's the fault of those few terrorists and, maybe, the fault of those good Muslims who aren't working hard enough to take back their religion.
Sixth, while there are some of us who believe that religion supercedes everything, most of us still don't understand the swelling of outrage over some cartoons drawn by some obscure guy at an obscure newspaper when there are hundreds of people dying each day on your side and our side. Regardless of sides, I think we should be most outraged at all the killing. How are you burning flags and calling for death to an entire country because of this??? Where's the outrage at the deaths? People are being beheaded, gunned down, and blown up. If you have to be mad, be mad at this! We just don't understand!
posted by Melissa @ 11:58 AM
8 comments
8 Comments:
yeah... i mean, we may not understand coz we're not muslims but i wonder what kind of jokes they say about other religions in their closed doors...
'a priest and a rabi walks into a muslim bar...'
anyhoo... this is just as bad as making a big deal of a blowjob and saying that spying on americans is an ok thing to do.
blows my mind.
i agree soo much, i ranted about this in my journal a week ago, probably the same day you did.. lol.. but man.. people have to get a life
Hello there Melissa,
I stumbled on your blog and I hope you don't mind if I comment on this topic.
I disagree with your statement that satire is not meant to be taken too seriously. Throughout time, satire has been used to discuss every single type of injustice known to man. So, while the cartoons may have been satire, that is not reason to see it as less serious.
Your second point was that the cartoons were published in "free societies". Well, that view is a bit subjective. In a place that has cracked down on immigrants (even those seeking asylum) and the large majority of the population belongs to one ethnicity and one religion, hegemony limits the level of freedom one truly has quite a bit.
I agree with your third point. However, the fact that someone else can choose the response that the original provocateur would prefer, doesn't mean that they will do so. To me, that means those who would yell "fire" in a crowded building, as did the Jyllands-Posten, bear a lot of responsibility for what will likely result from their actions.
I think you're making an overly-broad generalization in your fourth point. Plenty of westerners understand how muslims view depictions of their prophets. All you have to do is simply do is google the subject and you can get an understanding of it. Plenty of non-muslim westerners (many of them are American Christians like me) have come down on the side of the muslims in this case. If they didn't understand what this issue means to muslims, it would be hard to explain why they'd willingly march and boycott along with them in protest.
The problem, as I see it, is attempts by the west to exert hegemony over the muslim world. No matter how much some people might wish it were different, we will never be able to get all the inhabitants of this planet to think the same way or value the same things. So, if we're going to survive, we have to establish a few ground rules. The west has nuclear weapons so we get to have a major influence on who can trade with whom. The east has a millions upon millions of folks who are willing to sacrifice themselves for "the cause" so they get to have a major influence on how much of our humor and mocking they need to accept. Without that compromise, no nation will thrive.
Fifth, I believe that everyone is responsible for what they think. Therefore, it is patronizing to state that we simply can't help but connect Islam to terrorism and death. If muslims can and should be expected to see the difference between Christianity/Judaism/Hinduism and those who simply use these religions as an excuse to commit crimes, then there is no reason why we shouldn't be expected to see the difference between Islam and those who use it as an excuse.
Is Bush in office because you didn't work hard enough? I don't think so. I think that such a statement oversimplifies what's happening. When the western world participates in and supports disrespect for the religious sensibilities of muslims, we make it harder for the average muslim to prove that we are the sensible, caring, and just folks that we'd like to believe we are. How much impact can the peaceful muslims have when they have to fight the violent elements within their religious community and those in the west who don't want to have to care about what muslims want?
Lastly, I don't think that the uproar we've witnessed is because of one obscure journalist at one obscure paper. Rather, it's the straw that broke the camel's back, in a sense. You asked "Where's the outrage at the deaths?" Well, it's in the same place where these current protests are taking place. The only difference is that the world is, for a short time, paying attention. Sadly, the world does not pay much attention to Arabs fighting as Mahatma Gandhi and Reverend King did. Such actions don't fit the stereotypes most often held by the world when it comes to what "real muslims" think and do.
So, really the biggest effect can be made by people like you and me. Instead of just paying attention when muslims start burning flags (Ironically, it's a time-honored "peaceful" tradition when Americans do it) and throwing eggs, we could do our part to call attention to all of the peace-seeking muslims who just want this planet to see peace amongst people of all religions.
Feel free to come to my blog and comment on this subject.
http://bintalshamsa.blogspot.com
Hi Bint. You're more than welcome to comment on my blog.
It is impossible for me to debate and list both sides of every possible argument between the West and the East, nor do I want to. Of course I realize the West has done and still does greedy, evil, and unthinkable things to people of other countries and even to its own people (case in point: Hurricane Katrina/New Orleans). Can't deny colonization, globalization, slavery, the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc. But two wrongs don't make a right, so I don't think this gives the East or Islamists or whatever carte blanche to act or do whatever they want. And, perhaps you're right that those societies are not REALLY free, perhaps I should have said a free press.
We can acknowledge all these things as much as we want...we can note the evil on either side, but there really just comes a point where I just can't take it anymore. I'm sick of it all. A lot of good people who are not quick to judge and try to look at both sides are sick of being the "good guy". Sick of always accomodating. Are we supposed to look at what happened on 9/11 and be the "better person" and realize that the U.S. did a lot of bad stuff in the past so we can't really be mad or upset? I think that's quite the stretch.
And while one can say that a greedy U.S. company setting up in a third world country and soaking it dry and indirectly causing the death of people there because of its practices can be related to the death of a hostage by a terrorist, it still looks different to me.
And, so we're supposed to understand Muslims declaring death to editors, cartoonists, and whole countries for those cartoons. What if the West got as pissed off about the burning of their flags? Muslims are constantly burning U.S. flags as a sign of protest. What if Westerners were to declare death to Pakistan because of some burnt flags? Are we not allowed to protest Islamic fundamentalism with some cartoons? Or is it only ok to burn flags?
I know there are good Muslims out there. I know many of them. I know that there is a lot of injustice doled out to Muslims. But I still don't think that is an excuse.
Bint:On your fifth point, you said "If muslims can and should be expected to see the difference between Christianity/Judaism/Hinduism and those who simply use these religions as an excuse to commit crimes, then there is no reason why we shouldn't be expected to see the difference between Islam and those who use it as an excuse." The fundamentalist Muslims DO NOT see the difference between Christianity/Judaism/Hinduism and those who usurp their religions. If they did, then they'd be a lot more discriminate about who they were kidnapping, beheading, and blowing up. If they understood or accepted this concept, then they wouldn't have flown those planes into those towers, because they'd realize that most of the people that would be killed would not be the people whom they had a problem with. If they understood, then they would not be kidnapping and beheading aid workers, who are only there to help the Muslim people.
And as for your point, "The problem, as I see it, is attempts by the west to exert hegemony over the muslim world." I do agree that this is a problem. Unfortunately the jackasses in charge of the U.S. have continually screwed us by following their own greedy agenda year after year leaving us with this stupid problem. We never should have gone into Iraq in the first place. We never should have set up Saddam Hussein in the first place. Unfortunately, I have to live with their friggin mistakes.
However, you said the hegemony is the problem. You should have said PART OF THE PROBLEM, because you're taking responsibility and culpability entirely away from Muslims. You said there should be compromise and ground rules in order for us to live together. I do agree, but don't put the blame for everything on one side.
Bint: You brought up nuclear weapons. I was curious on your thoughts about Iran and North Korea's pursuit of nuclear power and/or weapons. On one hand, I don't think it's fair for the countries that have nuclear weapons to tell the ones that don't whether or not they can have them. I mean, how can you "e.g. the U.S." have all these nuclear weapons and then tell me "insert country", a sovereign country, that I cannot have them? Fair is fair right? But then I'm still mortified at the idea of Iran or North Korea having nuclear weapons. Their regimes are unstable and their leaders are of questionable sanity. So, what do you think should be done?
I do agree that the massacres carried out by the West do not give those in the East carte blanche to carry out massacres here but understanding what happened before a particular event sure goes a long way towards explaining why new acts of violence are carried out.
In regards to the free press issue, I think it can be argued that many countries in the East have as much of a free press as we possess. When most of our news comes from three or four organizations, most opinions on issues are never heard.
I know that many people do get sick of being the "good guy" but what is the result when we act on that feeling? Just as many people in the West justify supporting the actions of those responding to 9/11, there are those who use that exact same mentality to justify supporting the actions of those who used 9/11 to respond to the violence perpetrated on their people. If getting revenge is justifiable because you've been wronged, then we will never see a cessation in the amount of terrorism carried out in the world.
However, not seeking revenge is quite different from not being upset or angry. There's nothing wrong with being upset but I see something quite immoral about killing innocent people just because your upset--and that applies across the board, to those in the East and in the West.
You mentioned that, in your eyes, the predatory actions of U.S. corporations looks different from the actions of those who take hostages and kill them. I agree. However, that's comparing apples to oranges needlessly. The truth is that we take hostages and kill them just as those who are often labeled as terrorists by us.
Do you think that situations like what happened at the hands of American soldiers at the Abu Ghraib prison just started happening? If a U.S. soldier that got convicted of killing an Iraqi who had never even been charged with a crime (according to the standards we supposedly believe in, the murdered victim was an innocent man, by the way) was only sentenced to pay a fine and got a mark on his record, what do you think happens in those cases where there was no widespread media reporting of the incident? With over thirty thousand Iraqis dead and for most ne'er a conviction showing that they did anything to justify being killed, what do you think would happen if everyone who has been repeatedly wrong took the attitude that being tired of being the "good guys" justifies retaliation?
To answer your question: no, we are not supposed to understand when muslims declare death to editors, cartoonists, and entire countries. However, it would certainly be helpful to us if we did try to understand why this is done, especially since people in the West do the exact same thing. Do you remember the "with us or against us" comments made by a certain President? Or how about the comments of a particularly popular political figure/lawyer/author who advocated the forced religious conversion of muslims? Oh how about the three Reuters journalists that we kept imprisoned for eight months? And then there's the bombing of news stations in other countries and the planted stories created to show that the Iraqi people approved of U.S. actions. All of this was done by us, the West, the U.S.A. specifically. It all shows that there is nothing we can complain about others doing to us that we have not also done to them. Bombing civilian buildings to make political points? Well, there was that pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum (and several civilian-populated areas in Pakistan and Afghanistan) back in 1998.
So, sure. I say we can burn as many flags and create as many cartoons as we want. However, everytime we do things that inflame some people in the East, they will do things that inflame some people in the West and this will continue to go on ad infinitum as long as people focus on exerting what they think they should have the right to do instead of focusing on what they can do to heal all of the wounds that centuries of fighting have produced on both sides.
I don't think that excuses matter much, at least they don't in my world. What matters to me is what will work to solve the problems and excuses don't do that. So, excusing their behavior or ours is pretty pointless in my book.
You wrote, "The fundamentalist Muslims DO NOT see the difference between Christianity/Judaism/Hinduism and those who usurp their religions." If you go back and look at what you responded to, you'll see that I wasn't referring to fundamentalists. If we are going to talk about what fundamentalists do, then we'd be remiss not to notice that the fundamentalists in Christianity/Judaism/Hinduism also do not see any difference between the religions of others and the actions of those who usurp their religions. Fundamentalists are in a category all on their own. I submit that fundamentalist muslims have more in common with fundamentalist Jews/Hindus/Christians than they do with moderate muslims. So, if the average Easterner should be expected to see a difference between those who kill their brethren and the religion those people belong to, then there's no reason why the average Westerner should not also be expected to do the same.
Just as you pointed out what fundamentalist muslims would do if they separated the actions of others from the religions they belong to, can't the same be said about religious fundamentalists in other countries, like our's for instance? And, despite 9/11,we come out on the lucky side of it all because while we have to live with how the U.S. supported Hussein, many Iraqis don't have that luxury. They died because of that support.
I think you misunderstood me when I said that hegemony was the problem because I should not have said that it's part of the problem. Our problem is our actions. We cannot control what other nations and people do so all we can change is the role that our society plays and hope that like-minded people in other countries will do the same.
Individuals are only responsible and culpable for their own actions. The truth is, there can only be compromise when each group takes responsibility for its own actions and no amount of complaining about what the other side does will ever do anything to fix the problems we face.
Hey Melissa,
Wow! I think I monologued so long that I forgot about answering the nuclear question. Sorry. Okay, so here we go.
I don't even see nuclear weapons as an issue of fairness. I don't think that anyone should have them. As far as I'm concerned, there are no nations that are stable enough for it to be a good idea that they have them.
I actually don't see the Irani or N. Korean leaders as insane or at least no more insane than a lot of other rulers. I think they play to their core audience as do all leaders. I believe that most politicians are such power-whores that they will say whatever they think will keep them in office.
I don't know what would be the solution to the world nuclear issue. A lot of people like you and I recognize that as long as certain countries have "nukes", then nations like Iran and N. Korea can easily counter our arguments by pointing out that "what's good for the goose" is also supposedly "good for the gander". Yet, getting rid of our nuclear weapons isn't likely to make other nations get rid of theirs. And even if every nation could be convinced to destroy their nuclear weapons, the technology to rebuild them really quick would still be there.
I think it's kind of like that saying "you can't un-ring a bell". Now that nuclear technology is here, I don't know that it will ever stop being a problem for those who don't want to be turned into toast.
Thank you so much for not going ballistic about me posting all my views on your post. I find your blog very refreshing. It's really nice to meet other women who have strong views about politics. Hey, maybe that's the solution to the nuclear problems. Make all of the world's rulers women and I'm sure we'd find a better way to deal with things.
Please feel free to come and "rant" over at my blog. I've been writing about how society views people with disabilities lately but I also have a post about this Danish cartoon issue. I'd like it if you'd come and speak about any flaws you see in my position on it.
P.S. You and your hubby are quite a gorgeous pair.
Hi Bint! You brought up many good points in your argument. Thanks for your input, it was enlightening. I always appreciate a good debate because it shows other people are thinking AND it often helps me get a better perspective on things by getting other viewpoints.
I would really like to see women come to power. I'm curious to see if women would have a more positive affect on things. I think men have already had their chance.
Thanks for the compliment about me and my sweetie.
Post a Comment
<< Home