Two Faces of Extremism
The “cartoon wars” that are capturing headlines at the moment clearly reveal the two faces of extremism: one that rejects tolerance in the name of free speech and another that rejects free speech in the name of intolerance.
When the Danish newspaper, Jyllands Posten (a paper, incidentally, that also supported the regimes of Hitler and Mussolini in the 1930s) recently published satiric cartoons depicting the sacred figure of Islam, Mohammed, as an accessory to terrorism, holding him up to ridicule for the world to see, many Muslims around the world reacted violently, attacking Danish embassies, consulates and interests around the world. Other European and American media then picked up the story and published the images. The result: a minor clash of civilizations at ground zero.
Both acts represent the intellectual slag of the Enlightenment.
The period known as the Enlightenment triumphed in Europe after centuries of despotism, mysticism and religious intolerance. Starting with the reintroduction of Aristotelian ideas in 12th century Europe and the gradual triumph of the scientific method and the secular philosophy of humanism, Europe established a modus vivendi view of history that offered its inhabitants a viable alternative to constant wars and persecution of minorities. The Europe that emerged in the 18th century – spurred on by the democratic revolution in America – was the first step in the long march to today’s liberal societies, extolling the values of critical thinking, tolerance, respect for evidence and acceptance of natural sciences as the basis for improving social cohesion, physical health and economic well-being.
After 9/11, the actions of a fringe political activist group received global attention and, with the invasion of Iraq where their activities multiplied as a breeding ground for terrorists, achieved world notoriety. When George W. Bush won re-election in 2004, historian George Wills wrote a column in the New York Times entitled The Day the Enlightenment Went Out.
Wills published his comments November 4, 2004. A little more than a year later, we are now seeing the spread of fundamentalist intolerance to the European community. Hiding behind the guise of free speech, some European newspapers have decided that an attack on one of the world’s leading religions is somehow an obligation, as well as a legal right. In doing so, it seems to me, they are assuming the intellectual weapons of those in the Muslim world who want to stamp out the Enlightenment, outlaw tolerance of opposing views, do away with secular science and destroy liberal democracy.
The issue of the right to be insulting is not the same one as the moral propriety of insulting someone’s deepest beliefs – particularly when the beliefs on the receiving end are shared by the terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, whose avowed purpose is to destroy their secular enemies. Besides being totally offensive and gratuitous, such use of free speech will only serve to incite non-terrorist groups and individuals in the Muslim world, strengthening the hand of those whose professed aim is to tear down the wall that separates secular societies from theocracies.
Tags: Jyllands_Posten, Enlightenment, Extremism, Al Qaeda, Terrorism
When the Danish newspaper, Jyllands Posten (a paper, incidentally, that also supported the regimes of Hitler and Mussolini in the 1930s) recently published satiric cartoons depicting the sacred figure of Islam, Mohammed, as an accessory to terrorism, holding him up to ridicule for the world to see, many Muslims around the world reacted violently, attacking Danish embassies, consulates and interests around the world. Other European and American media then picked up the story and published the images. The result: a minor clash of civilizations at ground zero.
Both acts represent the intellectual slag of the Enlightenment.
The period known as the Enlightenment triumphed in Europe after centuries of despotism, mysticism and religious intolerance. Starting with the reintroduction of Aristotelian ideas in 12th century Europe and the gradual triumph of the scientific method and the secular philosophy of humanism, Europe established a modus vivendi view of history that offered its inhabitants a viable alternative to constant wars and persecution of minorities. The Europe that emerged in the 18th century – spurred on by the democratic revolution in America – was the first step in the long march to today’s liberal societies, extolling the values of critical thinking, tolerance, respect for evidence and acceptance of natural sciences as the basis for improving social cohesion, physical health and economic well-being.
After 9/11, the actions of a fringe political activist group received global attention and, with the invasion of Iraq where their activities multiplied as a breeding ground for terrorists, achieved world notoriety. When George W. Bush won re-election in 2004, historian George Wills wrote a column in the New York Times entitled The Day the Enlightenment Went Out.
“The secular states of modern Europe do not understand the fundamentalism of the American electorate. It is not what they had experienced from this country in the past. In fact, we now resemble those nations less than we do our putative enemies.
“Where else do we find fundamentalist zeal, a rage at secularity, religious intolerance, fear of and hatred for modernity? Not in France or Britain or Germany or Italy or Spain. We find it in the Muslim world, in Al Qaeda, in Saddam Hussein's Sunni loyalists. Americans wonder that the rest of the world thinks us so dangerous, so single-minded, so impervious to international appeals. They fear jihad, no matter whose zeal is being expressed. “
Wills published his comments November 4, 2004. A little more than a year later, we are now seeing the spread of fundamentalist intolerance to the European community. Hiding behind the guise of free speech, some European newspapers have decided that an attack on one of the world’s leading religions is somehow an obligation, as well as a legal right. In doing so, it seems to me, they are assuming the intellectual weapons of those in the Muslim world who want to stamp out the Enlightenment, outlaw tolerance of opposing views, do away with secular science and destroy liberal democracy.
The issue of the right to be insulting is not the same one as the moral propriety of insulting someone’s deepest beliefs – particularly when the beliefs on the receiving end are shared by the terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, whose avowed purpose is to destroy their secular enemies. Besides being totally offensive and gratuitous, such use of free speech will only serve to incite non-terrorist groups and individuals in the Muslim world, strengthening the hand of those whose professed aim is to tear down the wall that separates secular societies from theocracies.
Tags: Jyllands_Posten, Enlightenment, Extremism, Al Qaeda, Terrorism
posted by J. DeVincent at 5:28 AM
3 Comments:
Free speech is your right to comment on this argument without presenting any arguments to back up your views. Are name calling and negativity all we can ever expect from Sir Rascal?
Does the fact that the State Department seems to agree with my overall assessment put them in your non-intellectual dog house, as well?
Or are you, like the Frog Prince, simply revealing a deep anti-Enlightenment bias?
Don't tell me, let me guess. LOL!
Laughable blog. Grade=F. You don't have a real argument or position and you beat around the bush. Easy to call issues the "slag of the Enlightenment". What we are dealing with today is a 1400 year-old murderous warrior cult, aka islam, masquerading as a religion that has re-emerged after a few centuries of dormancy. Imagine a type of nazi theocratic totalitarianism that survives 1400 years with times of quiescence and times of activity. Now is a time of activity for this vile islamic warrior cult.
Thanks for the comment, Anonymous. I'm glad you're amused. I would be even more pleased if you had at least hinted that you had some understanding of what the Enlightenment was all about. But perhaps that is too much to ask.
I like your group-think, though. Placing all Muslims in the 1400-year-old box is a neat way to avoid serious argument. I won't call it racist, but I should.
Post a Comment
<< Home