I thought that this would be a good topic to start in my series of posts, as it is the most misunderstood issue that has risen out this year, and is still an issue to many, albeit most Muslims could care less right now as this, like many issues that stir up such controversy here in the MidEast, are easily forgotten as time passes by. I'll just begin with a little summary of how this mess started.
Early in September of 2005, the ultra-conservative Danish Christian magazine, Jyllands-Posten, published several cartoons depicting the Islamic Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Upon viewing this, several Danish Muslims were offended, and sent letters showing their disgust to the resident ambassadors of their respective Muslim nations. The ambassadors then took this case to court in a legal manner, but failed. Muslims on the street then sent letters to the Danish embassies and signed petitions urging the Danish government to apologize for dropping the case and for allowing such an offensive set of depictions to be published. Seeing their success in the court order as an opportunity, Jyllands-Posten and Norway's Magazinet published them again in late December/early January. This, of course, offended the Danish Muslims, who also felt threatened and terrified of such xenophobic, bigoted imagery. Many Muslims took to the streets, protesting to this offensive depiction of the Prophet. Others simply boycotted Danish products.
News of this reached the Middle East, and within a few days, entire supermarket networks cleared their shelves of Danish produce. Sheiks and imams preached that such an outrage should be stopped, and that the Danish cartoonists should be forced to apologize. Sadly, thousands of Muslims worldwide took to the streets in a less than honorable protest, rioting, burning buildings and embassies, and even going to the extent of killing people (in Nigeria). Jyllands-Posten and other newspapers and magazines that published these cartoons most likely expected this reaction, and a few days later, proclaimed that the Muslims were protesting against "freedom of speech". This riled up many Islamophobic Westerners and other right-wing hawks, who saw this as an opportunity to "prove" that "radical Muslims hate the West for their freedoms", and then urged their comrades to reprint these cartoons "for the sake of free speech". Of course, this was not the case, as they were clearly protesting the cartoons themselves and what they intended to do. If they were to protest free speech, they would have boycotted all media outlets, which was definitely not the case.
What's worse is that regardless of the huge majority of Muslims that did not take to the streets in such a way, but instead boycotted Danish products, wrote letters/petitions, or simply ignored the whole matter to begin with, it was taken that the general reaction of the Muslims to the cartoons was the violent reaction on part of the few thousands of Muslims worldwide. As in many controversies such as this, it's always the moderate and fundamentally able majority that gets the short end of the stick, thanks to the Westerners who just love to stereotype and lump Muslims into one group, painting them with the same brush. However, such a violent reaction was expected somewhat: this was the first time that the majority of Muslims worldwide were exposed to satire on Islam.
It's a false perception to think that all Muslims are one homogenized group that react the same way to a certain issue. Why? Well, if you take a look at the worldwide demographic statistics for Muslims, you will find that only 18-25% are Arabs, and most of the Muslim population outside the Middle East is scattered in the Far East, in North America, Africa and other parts of the world, in scattered percentages of their respective populations. Furthermore, Islam, unlike Catholicism, does not have a head or figure such as a Pope, and Islam, like Christianity, is split into many different sects.
That aside, let's return to the issue at hand. I claimed that only a few thousand Muslims took to the streets and protested vehemently to the cartoons. Many Islamophobes out there exaggerate the figures to at least 100,000, which is certainly not the case, as 100,000 Muslims would definitely make more noise. If you take a look at the first link I presented, you will find that the numbers of those who protested violently were not greater than those who protested peacefully or simply ignored the matter to begin with.
On the other hand, I, as well as many Muslims out there, believe that the violent reaction to the cartoons was indeed needless and counterproductive... not to mention unIslamic. To quote this favorite website of mine:
Despite the apology from Jyllands-Posten, the anger at the double-standards of the West was still not resolved. It was known that many anti-Semitic projects, cartoons, series, movies, etc. were called off the air before they can even go on. What brought them down? Well, be surprised: letters and peaceful demands. It's funny, though, that lobbyists pressure media companies not to make such "anti-Semitic" media productions, whether on film or on paper. Another is the famous anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism clumping of issues, but that will be discussed much later as I am dealing with the cartoon controversy. Another example was "Piss Christ", but "Piss Christ" was brought down by peaceful protests to this foul, unaesthetic exhibition. However, no one had a problem with depicting the Prophet Muhammad: of course, such people do not care of the consequences, not that I support them.
With that, one can say that freedom of speech does not mean freedom from responsibility, so in that sense, if you were to go in the middle of a Manchester United fan club and yell out at the top of your lungs, "MANCHESTER SUCKS!!", expect an angry mob of rabid Manchester supporters with clubs and batons to turn you black and blue. You have to face it: you can't expect to do something and not accept what would happen as a result.
So, what should be done? Should all freedoms be dropped or restricted? Of course not. However, we can overcome this problem in many ways. One would be education: educating people about tolerance, acceptance and respect for others and their beliefs would be an excellent start. Another would be allowing people to get used to such satire and offensive imagery: let's face the fact that the West is a secular society that hails with tons of offensive imagery and documentation from time to time. It was as the disciple Matthew once said: "If thine eye offends thee, pluck it out." That is to say that if something offends you, just turn away, and don't bother to give a damn about the issue, unless it is really offensive and you are compelled to exercise free speech in protesting the issue peacefully. Also, take note that not everyone is an Islamophobe or an anti-Semite: if it happens that someone becomes Islamophobic or anti-Semitic, it's just destiny, but people can revert. It's just that many people are comfortable with ignorance that sickens me.
Finally, we should take note that Muslims, like everyone else on Earth, are human: we can all learn from our mistakes, and in the future, such satire would not produce such an outrage. We should all be able to practice and preach for social equity and tolerance, as these make a society diverse, strong and accepting at the same time.
Salaam, from
Saracen
Early in September of 2005, the ultra-conservative Danish Christian magazine, Jyllands-Posten, published several cartoons depicting the Islamic Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Upon viewing this, several Danish Muslims were offended, and sent letters showing their disgust to the resident ambassadors of their respective Muslim nations. The ambassadors then took this case to court in a legal manner, but failed. Muslims on the street then sent letters to the Danish embassies and signed petitions urging the Danish government to apologize for dropping the case and for allowing such an offensive set of depictions to be published. Seeing their success in the court order as an opportunity, Jyllands-Posten and Norway's Magazinet published them again in late December/early January. This, of course, offended the Danish Muslims, who also felt threatened and terrified of such xenophobic, bigoted imagery. Many Muslims took to the streets, protesting to this offensive depiction of the Prophet. Others simply boycotted Danish products.
News of this reached the Middle East, and within a few days, entire supermarket networks cleared their shelves of Danish produce. Sheiks and imams preached that such an outrage should be stopped, and that the Danish cartoonists should be forced to apologize. Sadly, thousands of Muslims worldwide took to the streets in a less than honorable protest, rioting, burning buildings and embassies, and even going to the extent of killing people (in Nigeria). Jyllands-Posten and other newspapers and magazines that published these cartoons most likely expected this reaction, and a few days later, proclaimed that the Muslims were protesting against "freedom of speech". This riled up many Islamophobic Westerners and other right-wing hawks, who saw this as an opportunity to "prove" that "radical Muslims hate the West for their freedoms", and then urged their comrades to reprint these cartoons "for the sake of free speech". Of course, this was not the case, as they were clearly protesting the cartoons themselves and what they intended to do. If they were to protest free speech, they would have boycotted all media outlets, which was definitely not the case.
What's worse is that regardless of the huge majority of Muslims that did not take to the streets in such a way, but instead boycotted Danish products, wrote letters/petitions, or simply ignored the whole matter to begin with, it was taken that the general reaction of the Muslims to the cartoons was the violent reaction on part of the few thousands of Muslims worldwide. As in many controversies such as this, it's always the moderate and fundamentally able majority that gets the short end of the stick, thanks to the Westerners who just love to stereotype and lump Muslims into one group, painting them with the same brush. However, such a violent reaction was expected somewhat: this was the first time that the majority of Muslims worldwide were exposed to satire on Islam.
It's a false perception to think that all Muslims are one homogenized group that react the same way to a certain issue. Why? Well, if you take a look at the worldwide demographic statistics for Muslims, you will find that only 18-25% are Arabs, and most of the Muslim population outside the Middle East is scattered in the Far East, in North America, Africa and other parts of the world, in scattered percentages of their respective populations. Furthermore, Islam, unlike Catholicism, does not have a head or figure such as a Pope, and Islam, like Christianity, is split into many different sects.
That aside, let's return to the issue at hand. I claimed that only a few thousand Muslims took to the streets and protested vehemently to the cartoons. Many Islamophobes out there exaggerate the figures to at least 100,000, which is certainly not the case, as 100,000 Muslims would definitely make more noise. If you take a look at the first link I presented, you will find that the numbers of those who protested violently were not greater than those who protested peacefully or simply ignored the matter to begin with.
On the other hand, I, as well as many Muslims out there, believe that the violent reaction to the cartoons was indeed needless and counterproductive... not to mention unIslamic. To quote this favorite website of mine:
“You do not do evil to those who do evil to you, but you deal with them with forgiveness and kindness.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari)Yes, I know that this is highly effusive in emotion and an opinionated piece, but given the Hadith (saying of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)) and the content of the message, this is just my 2 cents on the entire issue. Yes, we love our Prophet as much as we love ourselves, but we can't allow our emotions to overcome us when it comes to such issues.
Muslims should follow the example of Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him), even in the worst of circumstances. Do not react violently as a reaction to devilish cartoons. Islam is a message for the salvation of humanity! Don't let the evil mongers distract us from our mission given to us by the Almighty God, the Most High and Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him). Be proactive, not reactive!
Despite the apology from Jyllands-Posten, the anger at the double-standards of the West was still not resolved. It was known that many anti-Semitic projects, cartoons, series, movies, etc. were called off the air before they can even go on. What brought them down? Well, be surprised: letters and peaceful demands. It's funny, though, that lobbyists pressure media companies not to make such "anti-Semitic" media productions, whether on film or on paper. Another is the famous anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism clumping of issues, but that will be discussed much later as I am dealing with the cartoon controversy. Another example was "Piss Christ", but "Piss Christ" was brought down by peaceful protests to this foul, unaesthetic exhibition. However, no one had a problem with depicting the Prophet Muhammad: of course, such people do not care of the consequences, not that I support them.
With that, one can say that freedom of speech does not mean freedom from responsibility, so in that sense, if you were to go in the middle of a Manchester United fan club and yell out at the top of your lungs, "MANCHESTER SUCKS!!", expect an angry mob of rabid Manchester supporters with clubs and batons to turn you black and blue. You have to face it: you can't expect to do something and not accept what would happen as a result.
So, what should be done? Should all freedoms be dropped or restricted? Of course not. However, we can overcome this problem in many ways. One would be education: educating people about tolerance, acceptance and respect for others and their beliefs would be an excellent start. Another would be allowing people to get used to such satire and offensive imagery: let's face the fact that the West is a secular society that hails with tons of offensive imagery and documentation from time to time. It was as the disciple Matthew once said: "If thine eye offends thee, pluck it out." That is to say that if something offends you, just turn away, and don't bother to give a damn about the issue, unless it is really offensive and you are compelled to exercise free speech in protesting the issue peacefully. Also, take note that not everyone is an Islamophobe or an anti-Semite: if it happens that someone becomes Islamophobic or anti-Semitic, it's just destiny, but people can revert. It's just that many people are comfortable with ignorance that sickens me.
Finally, we should take note that Muslims, like everyone else on Earth, are human: we can all learn from our mistakes, and in the future, such satire would not produce such an outrage. We should all be able to practice and preach for social equity and tolerance, as these make a society diverse, strong and accepting at the same time.
Salaam, from
Saracen
Comments
Post a Comment