It's the Culture, Stupid

The Nation makes a convincing argument that the recent furor over the controversial cartoons is actually more indicative of western racism than muslim intolerance. I'm always tempted to take articles from the Nation with a large dose of sodium chloride, especially ones that use the tired "blame us first" theology, but this one makes some good points. The same Danish newspaper that printed the cartoons had declined to publish provocative cartoons satirizing Easter. Double standard? Gary Younge, the author of the piece, writes: "If our commitment to free speech is important, our belief in antiracism should be no less so. Neither the cartoons nor the violence has emerged from a vacuum. They are steeped in and have contributed to an increasingly recriminatory atmosphere shaped by, among other things, war, intolerance and historic injustices. "

As with any issue, your point of view depends upon the backdrop that you wish to view it against. For Younge, the cartoons are best examined after remembering the endless list of western transgressions against the Middle East. Younge does not address the more immediate background of these events or the obvious differences with publishing satirical christian cartoons.

Should not the more appropriate background include the murder of Theo Van Gogh or the threat that Salman Rushdie still lives under? In fact, there are a host of examples of recent muslim extremism. No one would fear reprisal on the same level if the cartoons satirizing christians were printed. What the Danish newspaper did was shine the light on the 800 lb gorilla, a monster that Europeans have lived with in their midst for decades. The point is more subtle than Younge imagines. If the threat of violence can intimidate you into not printing silly cartoons, then violence becomes the language of the moment. The recent furor is, in my view, a result of Europeans engaging in a dance macabre with muslim culture over many decades: Lockerbie, Munich '72, the Achille Lauro, etc. Each time some act of violence occurs, politicians with views like Younge excuse it with multi-culturalist rhetoric.

Violence is also something the West will cover on TV and as a result, the Muslim street views this as an opportunity to be recognized in a world where they are continually marginalized by the advaces of other cultures. Essentially, in this sick codependency, it doesn't matter what the issue is about as long as there is some basis to feel insulted, to threaten violence and then to be published in newspapers and viewed on CNN. It legitimizes, even for an instance, a group of people who feel insignificant. The West keeps wondering why the riots keep going on when it's obvious that it's because they keep publicizing it. Had it gotten a short mention on the 11 o'clock news, this thing would have been history.

TV is their global language, their means of legitimacy. How else could a talentless, nameless son of rich Saudi prince be recognized on a global level except by blowing something up?

If the Europeans are considering buckling under the pressure and embracing a faustian bargain with the extremists by issuing a ban on depictions of Muhammed, they should ask that all media not cover terrorist events or to show or reprint diatribes of extremists such as Bin Laden. I would bet that if you robbed the extremists of their ability to speak on a global level, they would lose all appeal.