"Let thine eye look like a friend on Denmark"

"Dr. Seuss’s political cartoons from the early 1940s are just as dead on target as when he first drew them, and especially pertinent today as the ideological heirs of the good Doctor’s 'Appeasement' characters run amok in the streets of Europe and San Francisco," wrote Charles Johnson -- blogged in our "Clueless, then and now" -- two years back. Some people never learn. Click here for larger version of "Remember . . . One More Lollypop, and Then You All Go Home." For one of today's satirists whose work is on a par with Dr. Seuss's, check out Scott Ott's ScrappleFace post today, "Fatwa Adds Riot Duty as Sixth Pillar of Islam."

"Has Jyllands-Posten insulted and disrespected Islam? It certainly didn't intend to," writes Flemming Rose, culture editor of the Danish newspaper that published the cartoons that launched a thousand calls for self-censorship, in a Washington Post op ed that catches the conscience of the thing:

But what does respect mean? When I visit a mosque, I show my respect by taking off my shoes. I follow the customs, just as I do in a church, synagogue or other holy place. But if a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy.

This is exactly why Karl Popper, in his seminal work "The Open Society and Its Enemies," insisted that one should not be tolerant with the intolerant. Nowhere do so many religions coexist peacefully as in a democracy where freedom of expression is a fundamental right. In Saudi Arabia, you can get arrested for wearing a cross or having a Bible in your suitcase, while Muslims in secular Denmark can have their own mosques, cemeteries, schools, TV and radio stations . . .

The lesson from the Cold War is: If you give in to totalitarian impulses once, new demands follow. [See Dr. Seuss cartoon, above] The West prevailed in the Cold War because we stood by our fundamental values and did not appease totalitarian tyrants.

Meanwhile, over in the mailbag at The Harvard Crimson, Sean Barrett ’07 has penned a thoughtful letter to the editors re the conservative student publication The Salient's decision to publish the YKW [PBUH]* cartoons that asks the right question:

As The Salient well knows, we are at war, and thus, The Salient should have asked itself, “Does publishing these cartoons help our allies or our enemies?”

But comes up with the wrong answer:

The ensuing riots that some of our allies have struggled to subdue, and the inevitable use of these cartoons as recruiting tools and propaganda by the Jihadists answer this question loudly and clearly . . . The Salient has put its desire to grandstand and challenge the liberal orthodoxy of Harvard ahead of our country’s goal of winning a war it has so eagerly supported.

On the contrary, publication of the cartoons helps our allies -- not our enemies -- by serving as a wake-up call. The Jyllands-Posten's Flemming Rose explains:

Since the Sept. 30 publication of the cartoons, we have had a constructive debate in Denmark and Europe about freedom of expression, freedom of religion and respect for immigrants and people's beliefs. Never before have so many Danish Muslims participated in a public dialogue -- in town hall meetings, letters to editors, opinion columns and debates on radio and TV. We have had no anti-Muslim riots, no Muslims fleeing the country and no Muslims committing violence. The radical imams who misinformed their counterparts in the Middle East about the situation for Muslims in Denmark have been marginalized . . .

Still, I think the cartoons now have a place in two separate narratives, one in Europe and one in the Middle East. In the words of the Somali-born Dutch politician Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the integration of Muslims into European societies has been sped up by 300 years due to the cartoons; perhaps we do not need to fight the battle for the Enlightenment all over again in Europe. The narrative in the Middle East is more complex, but that has very little to do with the cartoons.

With apologies to Shakespeare, Good Freedom Lovers, "cast thy nighted colour off, And let thine eye look like a friend on Denmark." (Hamlet 1.2.68)

Update: "Hey, I believe that this is the first time we've had Instalanche together. ;)," comments our blog buddy, TigerHawk. Be sure to go over and read his thoughtful "Realigning tolerance: Our options in the collision between free speech and Islam."

*YKW [PBUH] = You know who [Peace be unto him]

Comments

[TigerHawk]

Hey, I believe that this is the first time we've had Instalanche together. ;)

[charles austin]

I had earlier wondered why Shakespeare's "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark," had not been used in any blog post I have seen on this topic. If the enemies of freedom win this battle, then perhaps "Good night, sweet prints," would be apropos.

[ic]

C'mon guys, don't you think it is more historic that Cheney had shot his buddy with a BB-gun?

[John Blake]

Alas, in later years Seuss/Geisel diluted his legacy with a genuinely stupid work, "The Butter Battle Book". Here he equates the Communist totalitarianism of Stalin and Mao, never mind Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, Kim Il-sung et.al., with the civil libertarian, free-market, representative democracy wherein he swam so well.

Geisel says, What does it matter, on which side bread is buttered? Isn't it the same butter, the same slice?

The asininity of such analogies boggles the mind. Electing governments, federalizing and limiting Constitutional powers within a fundamental Bill of Rights, is no different than suffering a "liquidation of the kulaks" via mass starvation in Ukraine, encompassing purposeful deaths of fifty million helpless peasants during Mao T'se-tung's clinically deluded Great Leap Forward? Really, Theodore Geisel, "Dr. Seuss"?

It would require a Balzac, a Zola, mayhap Mencken on the side, to do this justice. For all his virtues, the Sweet Doctor's "Butter Battle" represents a lapse to Leftist cant of the absolute worst sort. Certain attitudes transcend the mere political, and moral-equivalence of ideological slavery with freedom is one of them. Look no further than America-hating, nihilistic, collectivist Statist domestic ideologues today.

Like Wahabist death-cultists, today's putrescent Saddamists respect no facts, rational argument, well-meaning assertions of fundamental principle-- nothing but a Ramsey Clark's self-indulgent, narcissistic self. Maybe the once-fearsome Danes will shuffle off their self-imposed blinders and stand up for Freedom and Liberty, absent "socialist" BS, just in the nick of time. We'd like to hope so; we'll support 'em every way we can (primarily by liberating our own country from Dr. Seuss' cant); but alas... in all probability, the disease has already progressed too far.

Now in survival's cause, grave injustices alone will avert worse. And there it stands. The question is, Now that issues have defaulted to extremes, will the Danes or any other "post-modern" polity muster the guts to redefine their legacy? Don't count on it.

[Sissy Willis]

Thank you, gentlemen, for your stimulating comments.

TigerHawk: Was it good for you, too?

Charles: You are a prints.

ic: You'll shoot your eye out.

John: Totally fascinating. I had no idea. These lefties can go off the deep end at any time.

Also, for our readers who are accustomed to Goomp's wise and witty -- and sometimes downright scary -- comments, he's been without internet access since the recent storm. We're all looking forward to his return to verbal combat in the near future.

[Kuni Leml]

So we should not tolerate the Religious Right, close cousins to the Taliban, here then?

I don’t see much of a difference between the protestors of the comics and those who protested Terri Schiavo. Nor do I see much difference between the violent protestors and those who have violently attacked abortion clinics or doctors.

Extremism on all sides is bad; unfortunately the extremists here, and there, have the ear of those in power.

[goomp]

Sorry to have missed the spirited debate but Sisu and her readers have demonstrated that there is no moral equivelancy between freedom of speech and PC-controlled speech.

[KSM]

Kuni,

If anyone qualifies as a member of the Religious Right, it is I.

As insulting as your comparison of my faith to that of the Taliban may be, I do not advocate beheading you, or burning down your house, or even limiting your right to free speech so that you would not be allowed to offend my sensitivities. Heck, such talk doesn’t even cause me to want to boycott your company. You’ve got to do much worse than this to merit that response.

I know of no conservative Christians who advocate the killing of abortion doctors. Instead, such actions are universally denounced by maninstream conservative Christians.

Comparing Christians like me to the Taliban shows gross mis-understanding, naivety and a lack of judgment. Not to mention that it is very insulting. But go ahead. No Christians are going to threaten to kill you over it.

By the way - how many conservative Christians do you actually know personally?

[K T Cat]

It's not that free speech shouldn't be defended. It's that this is the wrong place to fight the Islamofascists. By defending the cartoons, we've allowed ourselves to fight on their terms. Defending the Iraqi voters is fighting for free speech, too. I would argue that the Iraqi voters are being constructive and the Danish cartoonists are not.

I have a longer post about this at my blog if it interests you.

[Teresa]

"I don’t see much of a difference between the protestors of the comics and those who protested Terri Schiavo. Nor do I see much difference between the violent protestors and those who have violently attacked abortion clinics or doctors."

Let's see if I can help you Kuni...

The Taliban - ALL women are completely oppressed - they can be killed any time a man feels like it - this happens often including fathers killing daughters and sons killing sisters they think have brought shame on the family (no evidence needed). They can and are killed for being raped - or for protecting themselves from a rapist... can be stoned for showing any portion of her body outside of a burkha... Gays must be killed... Infidels must be killed - most especially by beheading, they can be strung up and their bodies burned beyond recognition. Thieves have their hands cut off - even if they are stealing food to feed their family. Let's stop there or this will get too long.

Christian right - holds demonstrations consisting of standing outside Teri Schiavo's nursing home with signs protesting her being taken off of fluids... the one abortion protestor I know about who has committed murder (of a single abortion doctor... not even the family and friends) has been arrested and taken to court and jailed for his actions. Abortion protesters who blocked clinics (not hurting the women entering or trying to hurt the women leaving - just physically stopping them from entering) - were lawfully stopped and now must be a certain distance from a clinic and can not impeded women entering the clinic...

Yeah... like you say - no difference at all... How could I have missed the similarities...

[Markus Kolic]

KSM: I know of a conservative Christian who advocates the killing of abortion doctors. His name's Tom Coburn, and he's a U.S. Senator.
(http://www.fox23.com/news/state/story.aspx?content_id=BF956298-934E-4B30-B9D3-DC274E134AF4)

However, I agree that the comparison between the Christian right and the Taliban is unacceptable. Even if the Christian right were to take power, I doubt it would go near the extremes that the Taliban did, and that speaks well for both Christians and America. (Also, the intellectual caliber of debate here on Sissy's blog speaks well for the conservative blogosophere, much moreso than most wingnut blogs I peruse.)

[nevine]

Hi', I'm an Arab Muslim Egyptian girl, live in Egypt, graduated from beaux arts faculty -French section. I'm just a simple girl who read newspapers and watch news in television and internet (sorry for my English language, it's not good enough).
I don't know how to begin, but the Denmark and its offensive cartoons publication motivate me to write to you and to all of westerns who doesn't know every thing about us, or about Islam.

Please do not accuse Islam of being terrorist, do not qualify our Islam as fascist. You should know the reason of this angry and this violent reactions committed by some Muslims.
Please listen to us and try to know about us. we all the Arab people (Muslim and Christian) raise religions and convictions which is much farther and deeper than all theories and hypothesis; religions among us, is the life itself and the whole existence, we live with and by religions, and that is totally different from your pragmatism which control your mentality and accordingly, religions are always above suspicion and under debate. While, religions based on a biggest humane experience in the history is strongly and faithfully fixed in our mind and our soul and become the basic part of our entity. So what do you (westerns) expect when you attack our prophet and our Islam? You're acting as somebody come and attacks our houses and our family, so what do you expect our behavior?
So I propose that if everyone of you survey the big different between Christians in this part of the world (ours)and all Christians in other side of the same world – and do not concentrate only your eyes on Muslims – you would realize how strongly they maintain their religion.
I want to ask you (westerns) why you insist on publishing these cartoons, whether Vatican denied this act. I know that your culture hallow the personnel freedom more than the religions beliefs. But let me suppose that the Danish journalist who published these cartoons didn't realize that his act would outrage Muslims and he did it candidly, whatever, he should know that he made a big mistake not by practicing his "freedom of expression" but by using it to insult other people's religion conviction. He should have rather had an idea about Muslims' basic principles and their culture which is totally different. I think visions and reactions would probably change.
And let me ask a question, does freedom mean people are free to insult prophets?
Does freedom mean immorality? – I'm talking now about cartoons and its contents-, does your democracy mean irresponsibility?
Do you know that our Islam deny us to insult others and incite us to keep a decent tongue in speaking. Otherwise, Muslims would have revengefully insulted other religion convictions. But they never did and well never, we never injure Christian and Jewish symbols, and if a Muslim did it, all Muslims would condemn him, because we consider all prophets in the same dignitary, and God instruct us to respect all prophets in the Koran, in The Cow Surat which says " [2.285] The apostle believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, and (so do) the believers; they all believe in Allah and His angels and His books and His apostles; We make no difference between any of His apostles; and they say: We hear and obey, our Lord! Thy forgiveness (do we crave), and to Thee is the eventual course."
I know and I'm sure that you (westerns) have deformed information about Islam, but I want to ask you, all of you who call for civilization and technology, what do you know about Islam? Does Islam mean Ben Laden? Does Islam mean Zawahry?
What do you know about prophet Muhammed? Did any one of you try to read about his biography, about his behavior, about his justice, his equality and his human rights maintain from about 1400 years ago? Muhammed and his principles and his sublime values were and still a great example and a source of inspiration for everyone asking for humane perfection. If you don't believe me read how Lamartine, Washington Irving, William Moyer and Dr. Michael Hurt described Muhammed in their books, I think that all of them are not Muslims, are they?
Let me ask you does Islamic immigration mean terrorism? And when other Muslims want to keep their goods and liberate their countries does it mean terrorism?
Let me ask, in the name of freedom of expression, why does this freedom stop when the issue concern Holocaust? Why did France haunt one of its biggest authors when he had his doubt about Holocaust? Why does Europe shut all writers' mousse up if one of them dare and attack a Jewish?

I want to tell you that all these violent acts and terrorism you see and heard about duo to politic issues and have no link with Islam. And if Muslims, in their life, practiced Islam in its right ways, they would be the best nation in the world, but unfortunately they don't.
Sorry again for my English language

This is a link to a Koran site if you need it www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/browse.html
And www.islamonline.com if you need to know something about Islam.

[Sissy Willis]

Nevine: Your English isn't bad, but your understanding of my viewpoint is. I cannot answer for Europeans, but as a person of conscience, I could never submit to a faith I did not believe in, and I could never respect a deity who insists on forcing his belief on "infidels." And to say that "our Islam deny us to insult others and incite us to keep a decent tongue in speaking," suggests you are living in a fantasy land of serious denial. "Death to America" comes to mind.