I apologize if the subject sounds patronizing; I don’t mean it to be. But with all the protests we’re seeing about that anti-Muslim film, it seems to be the case that there’s a large number of people in the Muslim world who genuinely don’t understand how free speech works in the United States. The fact that someone produced an offensive film doesn’t mean that it’s endorsed by the government or that more than a tiny fraction of the populace agrees with him. In fact, the government probably doesn’t even have the legal authority to do anything about it.
It’s pretty terrible that we’re in this position where any one person who wants to post a video on youtube of them insulting Mohammed or burning a Koran can potentially cause widespread protest resulting in loss of life. So my question is, do you think the U.S. government should be doing more to try to teach people in the Muslim world how free speech works in our country? Or do you think that’s not even the problem? Maybe these protesters would only be happy if the U.S. actually did away with protections for this sort of speech (which is something I sincerely doubt will ever happen, nor should it). If that’s the case, what’s to be done?
Yes, they need to be educated. A commentator on the radio noted that many of the people making all the noise live in societies where such a film could not possibly be made w/o the approval/participation of the government. That’s all they know. Therefore, they conclude that its the same everywhere so the U.S. government must be behind the “movie”. Freedom of speech and thought are incomprehensible to them.
BTW, if I was an anti-U.S extremist I would make such a movie under an American alias just to rile up the masses. Its like bombing your own people and blaming the enemy in order to gather support.
It’s an extraordinarily important principle, so in that sense, yes, education is worthwhile and all countries should be encouraged to protect these rights for their citizens (and citizens should be encourage to demand them when they don’t have them). I note that WH spokesman Carney addressed that point the order day. But there’s a related question here: do you think a lot of these people would care about the distinction? A lot of them are more interested in the result - promoting Islam and protecting it from criticism - than in the principle underlying the right to free speech.
Anecdotally, and I can link to specific instances if anyone really wants me to, I can say that one of the ‘counter-arguments’ used against our freedom to denigrate (e.g., depict) Muhammad is the idea that if we did something that offensive to the Jews or to Jesus our government would force us to take it down. “Piss Christ” doesn’t exist in their world and, really, would you expect it to?
So google “No One Murdered Because Of This Image” on The Onion. That is what we need more of over there. (I’d link to it but I can’t see a way to follow the two-clicks rule here.)
I think quite a few would, actually. They appear to be under the impression that this offensive movie is some kind of officially sanctioned piece of American propaganda.
Yeah, I think we should definitely try. Like Der Trihs, I’m uncertain if it will actually help, but it probably couldn’t hurt. My take is that eventually the folks going through all these gyrations will organically figure it out on their own…just like the Europeans did (consider what effect someone criticizing Christianity would have in Europe even a century ago, let alone several). In the mean time, we simply need to stick to our own guns and endure periodic episodes of mass stupidity from Muslims that just haven’t figured it out yet and who are still going through what is basically a fundamentalist revival coupled with no history of real democracy or freedom of speech. We survived the Christians doing a lot worse, we’ll muddle through this period of Islamic idiocy as well I’m thinking…
I read one article that said the Egyptian media did report that the U.S. government financed the movie. Maybe I’m being a bit more cynical than is warranted and some people would be less offended if they realized this was the work of a couple of dickheads, but I think plenty of people wouldn’t care. I don’t think anybody thought those South Park episodes were backed by the government.
I can’t think of anything better, and it seems something needs to be done.
We certainly cannot abridge the freedom of people to make whatever films they want and put them on the internet. (not that anyone here has suggested that, at least not yet)
In times of dictatorships this would have been true in their countries - if not government sponsored, then government tolerated. In a place like Saudi Arabia there is no hope to try to teach free speech, since it is the last thing the government wants. Maybe in the other countries where people are now freer to speak there is a chance.
Well, there is probably only limited hope to TEACH them, but IMHO they will come to it on their own in the course of time, and the more radical element will become more marginalized…or the entire debate will get shifted, and the radical folks will at least minimally conform to the expectations of the broader society, if for no other reason than they will grasp how monumentally idiotic they look when they act so badly over such a stupid thing as a YouTube video that was pretty obviously trolling for Muslims. Consider how the wider population in Europe or the US would react if radical Christians (of which we have quite a few) went nuts and whacked an ambassador from another country over some video about Jesus.
Should we try to educate them to the ways of civilized people? Sure. Can’t hurt. But these throwbacks have GOT to get with the friggin program. It’s 2012, not 712.
Another thing we have to do is stop excusing or explaining away their atavistic ideas and the means they use to defend them. As far as their particular strain of violent intolerance goes, we should be hyper-vigilant and even more intolerant. Educate, yes. For those unwilling to live more like humans and less like animals, kill them or lock them up. Sheezus, it’s like we’re letting a bunch of Charles Mansons walk around simply because he calls the ideas in his fucked up head "religion.
That’s not exceptionalism, it’s just speaking as if the U.S. gets to decide what everyone else does. If you’re talking about terrorists you’re not going to get a lot of argument, but if you’re talking about people who are just Muslims and “not civilized,” then no, the U.S. doesn’t get to kill them or arrest them.
I can’t imagine their authoritarian governments will start adding classes on free speech to the curriculums. Their religious leaders? Over their dead corpses, maybe.
These people are poor, uneducated and infected with the disease that is ignorance and superstition. It would take a concerted effort between governments, including their own (which essentially means a removal of the current status quo), to make a dent into that culture. And I’m talking a concerted effort lasting decades.
Good luck. I’m all for it, but the reality is that these people are going to have to crawl out of the middle ages, pretty much on their own. And it’s going to take them a very, very long time, and it’s going to cost a lot of lives world-wide.
It seems to me that improved access to communications and digital media would give them an opportunity to teach themselves. Free speech is something that’s best understood by seeing it in action.
Not always a pleasant process.: (This is from a special sub-group of pages created specifically to discuss the presence of depictions of Muhammad in the Muhammad Wikipedia article.)
No discussion. Indeed. Keep in mind, this is just one page of over two dozen in that collection alone, representing about five months or so of time.
In the interest of not pointing and laughing too much, I didn’t choose the most frothing of the demands. Those are on the polite end of typical.
To be fair, the demands have dropped off precipitously since then, as have the off-Wikipedia petitions and other activities.
My point is this: When people are confronted with things they once imagined impossible, you have to expect them to lose their shit. A sudden inspiration along the lines of “Oh! This is what Free Speech means!” isn’t something you can count on. It’s more like “Crap! Those bastards! Those idiotic anti-me bastards! I’ll fix them right the fuck now!” and then, after they realize that, no, they can’t ‘fix’ it, a growing realization that the world is not ending, leading to an acceptance of the world as it is now.
Or, you know, dying in an embassy somewhere.
So we can’t give in. We have to prepare ourselves for gales of angry and potentially disruptive comments and activities at the best of times. That’s what our world will involve now.
