Of Teddy Bears and Cartoons
- From: jose <josefsoplar@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:57:18 -0800 (PST)
Of Teddy Bears and Cartoons
by Victor Davis Hanson
Tribune Media Services
Here we go again. Thousands of Sudanese Muslims took to the street
last week to threaten death to a British schoolteacher in Khartoum.
Her crime? She inadvertently committed the felony of allowing her
class to name a teddy bear "Muhammad."
The teacher, Gillian Gibbons, has been pardoned by Sudan's president
(after initially being sentenced to 15 days in prison) and sent home
to England. Yet that happy ending doesn't erase the reaction in the
streets of Khartoum. The tired story behind irrational anger in much
of the Muslim world remains the same.
Watch out if Westerners somewhere are judged blasphemous to Islam when
they draw a cartoon, write a novel, make a movie or discuss history.
In their furious reaction, thin-skinned Muslims may issue death
threats. And they expect apologies. Sometimes the offense -- like the
reporting of a Koran flushed down the toilet at Guantanamo Bay -- turns
out to be false but still causes riots and murdering thousands of
miles away.
Likewise, the reaction to this madness is now stereotyped. Often
apologies -- not condemnation -- follow from contrite Westerners. To
prevent a recurrence, Western writers, filmmakers, teachers and
religious figures quietly edit their work and restrict their speech --
but only when Islam is involved.
So-called moderate Muslims, often residing in Western countries, will
usually say they deplore such extremism on the part of radicals. Then
they claim such intolerance is simply not typical of Islam. Or that
the embarrassing story has been reported in exaggerated fashion by
those prejudiced against Muslims.
Few, though, ever explain why it is that Muslims -- not Hindus,
Christians, Buddhists or atheists -- are in the global news threatening
to kill someone over a toy or a cartoon or an opera.
Finally, the uproar dies down -- only to break out again in a new place
over a new grievance.
There are certain unspoken rules of the game behind all these
incidents. The first is the lack of reciprocity. Christ can be mocked
in the Middle East without any consequences.
Muslim leaders can venture to the Vatican at Rome, the ancient center
of Christianity, to consult with the pope about the necessity of more
interfaith understanding. But should a pope or clergyman want to
reciprocate by venturing to Mecca, he better convert to Islam first.
New mosques and conversions to Islam are common in the West. But to
send missionaries to, or build a new church in, Saudi Arabia, Sudan or
Pakistan is to court death.
Condescension is also required. The demonstrator who waves a sword
calling for a beheading is often excused. The poor guy must not be
educated, rather than just cruel and dangerous. "We're so sorry for
the little mix-up" is the public Western answer to the shout of "Death
to you!"
We also know why all this won't stop, whether in Pakistan or Sudan --
or whether over a cartoon or a teddy bear or who knows what next.
A globalized world means communications are instantaneous. What one
person in Denmark draws is broadcast immediately to millions in
Islamabad and Khartoum. And they are apparently glued to, but very
angry at, the modern world that pops up on their television screens.
The Muslim Middle East has much of the world's oil. So its excesses
are put up with by the rest of the world rather than loudly condemned.
But after 9/11 and the bombings in Madrid and London, Islamists
screaming for a beheading cannot quite be laughed off. Instead they
may be the vanguard of something far worse.
Decades of multiculturalism have brainwashed Europeans and Westerners
into believing that Islamic furor must be judged in a special cultural
context, or is only understood through some real past grievance,
usually dating back to the Crusades.
Sometimes apologists dredge up Timothy McVeigh or violence in Northern
Ireland as if to prove that supposed Christian-inspired terrorism is
just as much a world danger as jihadism. We know it isn't, but such
moral equivalence sounds liberal and might calm down the mob.
Other times we drag Iraq into the conversation and say the armed
removal of Saddam radicalized Muslims -- as if the fatwa against Salman
Rushdie or 9/11 followed the outbreak of that war.
What would stop this unhealthy teddy bear syndrome?
Weaning ourselves off imported oil and therefore the need to appease
those who have it.
Politely informing Muslims that Westerners believe the norms of free
speech and expression are to be uniformly applied. No one religion or
region gets a special pass.
Supporting human rights abroad and offering some constitutional
alternative in the Middle East to theocracy and dictatorship that both
encourage Islamic radicalism.
And remaining militarily strong.
Remember that the fanatic waving his age-old sword in the Khartoum
street over a teddy bear shows the same dangerous derangement as the
nut in Tehran who may one day want his hand on the Bomb.
(c)2007 Tribune Media Services
.
- Prev by Date: THE HIDDEN HAND
- Next by Date: Re: McConnel makes the case for the Dems to act again....
- Previous by thread: THE HIDDEN HAND
- Next by thread: Iran drops the dollar.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
