What is the limit of western freedom of expresion?

Remove all ads!

That, and it sucks like hell when they treat Muslims oh so delicate because Muslims aren't delicate themselves. So stroke them gently like a furry little animal or they will bite. But this said, I'm against blanket security measures like searching all Muslims at airports by default etc. They should cut discrimination, both positive and negative.

 

I think Tal may have hit upon the underlying problem. By and large, Muslims do not integrate well into the country they immigrate to. Now, I will admit that integration of immigrants is difficult to accomplish - it rarely happens fully. But for most people, upon moving to a different country, the second or third generation DOES integrate. Moreover, this integration seems to happen on its own. There doesn't seem to be any need to force this to happen - it just does.

I know many people from Asian backgrounds, Arabic backgrounds, and Indian backgrounds, many of whom are only second or third generation Americans (heck I'm only a second generation American so it's not like I'm any better). The difference between the people my age and those people's parents and grandparents is astounding. That's because they were born into a different culture and immigrated here as adults for the most part. But the people that are born in the U.S. tend to adopt an Americanized culture and way of thinking. For one reason or another, it doesn't appear that this has happened in Europe, and I don't know why. It certainly isn't a time issue - I imagine a significant portion of the Muslim population in Europe were born IN EUROPE.

 

Now it's an inmigration issue? Bear in mind that western countries have been sucking oil from the mid east for years. That means you are in their country as well, taking what's important away with you, leaving them to their own silly religious issues. It's a trade off (like in chess!) of sorts, I think.
AMaster, this what I'll say is totally off topic, but still debatable. Look, them Muslims are tired of being portrayed as terrorists. It's a heavy burden, like being gay in the 1900 or jew in the 1200 or native american during the 1500. How do you measure this harm? I'm not sure if this is completelly right, but I'm like 99% sure it was because of this noxious stereotype in american people's minds that Bush could invade Irak. There're subtleties, of course. Stereotypes are dangerous. You may end up comparing Muslims to cancer...
Perhaps it's asking too much of an old man, but the pope could've said something. I don't know if he did. But he could've called the media and said "chill out, my childs" or something. A *bridge* is needed between this two sides. Not a shut mouth and a bunch of prejudices.

 

Its not just Muslims.

Visit France and Spain and you will see English and Americans colonies with no intentions of integrating with the locals (or learning their language). Many American actor's are trying to purchase land in 'gaeltacht' (Irish speaking regions), but refuse to adopt to Irish lifestyles. They are trying to recreate their own country in Ireland, which makes me wonder why the hell they wanted to move here in the first place.

The Costa del Sol is a very beautiful place, however you would be hard pushed to find any Spanish cuisine.

 

The problem with many immigrants is that they first beg for entry, then start demanding things like it's their right once you let them in. Don't get me wrong, they shouldn't have less rights than a native citizen. But they aren't indigenous populace and shouldn't behave as if they had been living there for eons or as if their culture and customs were the best thing you could get in your own country. I'm still not a fan of offending people's religious feelings, though.

 

No, integration, not immigration. I'm certainly not against immigration. Heck 99%+ of all people living in America are either immigrants or descended from immigrants. But there is a (justifiable IMO) expectation by the country that you're immigrating to that you'll integrate in their society. Kind of like the saying, "When in Rome do as the Romans do". And it seems like that isn't happening. I should point out that the problem isn't unique to Europe, although it does appear to be more widespread there. The problem with the U.S. is not so much with Muslims (most of whom integrate quite well) but with Hispanics. There are actually schools in the U.S. that teach in all Spanish, which I find strange, because that doesn't help children integrate into society.

 

Western countries haven't been 'sucking' oil; they've been purchasing it. Have you seen the GDP of the oil producing mid eastern nations? The fact that they have so much wealth and it's in so few hands isn't exactly the west's fault.

Let's just agree to disagree on the impact of stereotyping

 

If integration is the problem, than Islam has nothing to do with it. Mexican immigrants often don't integrate with American culture.....frequently they don't even learn English. We have problems with gang violence from the children of Mexican and South American immigrants. We have severe problems with gang violence from Vietnamese and Korean immigrants in certain cities on the west coast. In the Pacific Northwest we are plagued by crime from the children of Russian immigrants as well as having difficulty with the Russian mafia. None of the groups I mentioned are Muslim, last I checked, so the "problem" is something other than Islam. The problem is cultural.

While we are on the subject, I think everyone needs to be careful with their usage of the word "integrate". It's one thing to ask immigrants to respect our culture's ideology about free speech and equal rights. It's another thing entirely to force immigrants (as France did) to abandon their most deeply held religious beliefs and call it "secularisation". Telling a Muslima that she cannot wear a head scarf (done in the name of modesty.....the western equivalent would be to force all women to wear a sports bra and no shirt) because it is an open display of religion while still allowing Christians to wear crucifixes sends a bad message to everyone. It tells the Muslims that they are not welcome and it tells the Christians that it is OK to discriminate against Islam.

Lastly, we have known for a long time that the main cause of discontent in our societies stems from socio-economic status and the opportunity (or lack thereof) to change it. Immigrants start in the bottom rung and have much less hope of gaining a better lot for themselves. No matter how well they speak their host country's language they will always have an accent. Many people won't hire them for that reason alone. Put bluntly, our problems with immigrants stem primarily from linguistic, cultural, and economic difficulties. Religion is only an issue when the western world decides to discriminate against one religion over another.

@Amaster: originally, the western world ran nearly all Middle Eastern oil production. As the Arab world has nationalised oil production, it has only been the wealthy that could afford to take over production and buy out Western interests. Technically speaking, the western world does share some culpability int the unequal distribution of wealth. Also important to point out is that we colonised this region of the world and it has only been within the last 100 years that they have had self-government. We put their current systems of power in place when we left. The power structure of the Middle East is a monster of our own creation.

[ February 17, 2006, 18:19: Message edited by: Drew ]

 

I think Tal has hit the nail on the head. As far as I know, all other races seem quite apt at intergrating themselves into another culture, some even spread some of their culture without forcing it or demanding anything.

Why must Muslims be so special? What past transgression warrents such hostility? Oil? We haven't been 'stealing' it! We've been buying it! What else are they going to make money with? Sand? Figs?

If every major decision made by anyone requires a "Will this offend the Muslims?" thought then we've got some serious problems. We don't think this about anybody else, at least not directly and with such conviction. What's more it was none of their damn business! It's in a country hundreds of miles away, in a newspaper very VERY few muslims will read and now there's a poostorm over it? If I have a picture of Mohammad screwing a goat in my basement and this never sees the light of day will they try to kill me too? It's absurd.

 

The first question here is "what does it take to offend a Muslim extremist?" The answer seems to be "not bloody much." The next question is "when someone is offended, how should they react?" and our answer is "peacefully and legally." I make no apologies for that answer and I don't think it's just a "western" one that is equally as valid as "burn down houses, kill people, and threaten the civil rights of others."

What concerns me is, what's next? A Muslim being offended by the fact that in the grocery freezer next to the beef is . . .PORK! This is an afront to Islam -- let's burn down the store to defend the rights of all Muslims! I know that sounds ridiculous and stupid, but IMHO it's just as ridiculous and stupid as vandalizing an embassy over an editorial cartoon.

In addition, if they really want to hit the Danes where it hurts, there are plenty of legal ways to do that -- protests, lawsuits, and (my personal favorite) boycotts are all legal, peaceful means of causing major headaches for your opponent without committing criminal acts.

 

No. Islam is not the cause of lack of integration. It is not a religious issue. If it were, the US would not be having so many (non-religous) problems with its immigrants not integrating and their children turning to gang violence. The issue is culture. The issue has always been culture.

Everyone sits here talking about Islam being the problem and it simply is not. Islam is a religion. The viewpoints of its believers are always colored by their culture. American muslims don't advocate terrorism or the limitation of womens rights because that isn't part of our culture. They are still Muslim. If Islam were the problem, than the droves of African Americans converting to Islam would be causing the same problems as the Muslims that are causing problems in the Western world today. Turkish Muslims do not advocate terrorism, either. They also advocate free speech and free press. Since religion is a common ground between these groups, the problem is logically caused by something other than Islam. The problems are caused by the cultural lense through which they see the world. This can only be solved through maintaining an open dialogue.

We can talk about the way things should be until we are blue in the face, but if we act in accordance with the way things should be instead of the way things are, I garauntee things will only get worse. We have a serious situation that requires some serious diplomacy and also requires us to stop stereotyping Muslims. Progressive societies are not supposed to use stereotypes.

[ February 17, 2006, 18:37: Message edited by: Drew ]

 

OK Drew, it seems Middle Easterners are having a difficult time integrating into European societies due to differences between Middle Eastern culture, and European culture. Is that better? However, I think it IS somewhat relevant to characterize this as at least somewhat about Muslims, because there are many Middle Eastern people who AREN'T MUSLIM, and they AREN'T the ones making a fuss. It may be incorrect to characterize this as ONLY Muslims, but it seems also incorrect to label it as coming from a specific geographic area. To me, it seems like all are factors: the geographic area, the ethnicity, and the religion. The more of those categories you fall into, the less likely it seems you are to integrate, and the ones that have all three seem not willing to integrate at all. So maybe it is better to say that it seems Middle Eastern Muslims are having a difficult time integrating into European socieities due to differences between interpretation of European cultural norms and Middle Eastern cultural norms, especially as it concerns the representation of Islam. Or, if not, how would you characterize what we're seeing?

 

I get what you're driving at, Drew. As I have said before, there are a large number of Muslims who do not advocate violence as a form of protest. The trouble is that there is no denying the fact that there are large numbers of people who commit violent acts and state very clearly that Islam is a factor in their behaviour. that's not a stereotype, that's a fact that the terrorists shove in our faces on a regular basis. Salman Rushdie said that moderate, cooperative, non-criminal Muslims HAVE to take their religion back from the extremists who have hijacked it. Until that happens, a large number of westerners are going to continue to see Islam as a potential threat, particularly if the message being told to the west is "you do not understand us -- understand or be bombed." That's what is basically being said when they say that publication of certain items endangers peacekeepers in hot-spots. That's garbage. What endangers the peacekeepers is the violent, criminal, terroristic tendencies of a select few well-financed and implicitly supported Muslims.

 

It doesn't strike me that the Muslim extremists are looking for understanding on the part of the West, they want 100% accomodation with no willingness to be flexible in return. Some of the claims I've heard in the past have just floored me - claims that the West is actively trying to overthrow Islam, or Arabic culture. Huh? These people are looking for offense and won't rest until they find it.

 

Religion is, and has always been, an extension of culture. Religion does not control the actions of a society. Culture is the driving force behind religion. I would prefer to see the problems we are having with some Muslims characterised as cultural. For the record, I have never known an Arab Christian who eats pork. They come to the United States, have no religious compunction against it, yet they do not eat it because the society they came from finds the very idea of eating pork disgusting. Similarly, Arabs share a common (mis)perception of the west. They are part of the same culture and every bit as offended by the blasphemy towards Mohammad as Arab Muslims. Those cartoons insult their cultural values, even though they have a different religion. In Arab society freedom of the press is not valued or understood. Being Christian, Jewish, Bahai, or Zoroastrian doesn't magically change your cultural ideology. Granted, it wasn't their image of Allah (contrary to popular belief, this is just Arabic for "God" and Christians also use the term Allah) that was insulted, but they were still deeply offended. Their, neighbor, cousin, or even their mother is likely to be Muslim, though they may not be.

 

News: Roberto Calderoli, Minister of Institutional Reforms (I think) of Italy wore a shirt yesterday with the M cartoons on it. There was a violent demonstration in Trípoli (Libia), with ten deaths and the burning of a italian diplomatic house. On this, Calderoli said he'd only quit if he notices a "gesture" from the Muslim world that his departure will help to end with terrorism, bombs and weapons.
We know politicians don't do anything without having backup. I wonder who the hell is backing up this dude... Ferrari? The old Mussolini followers? I don't have a clue. Anyway, here it's the arrogance Saramago spoke of in his article in a spanish newspaper. I must add "stupidity".
I wonder if there's a Marxist lurking around here... or something like that. Many social studies have pointed out that people seek shelter in religion when they've lost (almost) everything else. Religion gives them identity. I wish I knew more so I could share it with you. A bit of "science" here wouldn't affect the tsunami of biased opinions.

 

Am I the only one who sees this as a psychological issue?

If I believed in a god, say some all-powerful being who ruled the universe, I'd be secure enough in my beliefs to know that my god could stick up for herself. So if someone drew a comic saying my god was a wimp or my god had bad breath, I'd just chuckle to myself, secure in my beliefs that my god in fact doesn't have bad breath and that, if she did find such a comic offensive she'd zap the bastard cartoonist with a bolt of lightning. I'd leave it in my god's hands and go about my daily life content and happy.

Why do these insecure little men feel the need to come to their poor prophet's defense? He can't defend himself from On High? He can't command an army of angels to lay the smack down on this Dutchman?

To me, it shows a lack of faith in these so-called Muslims. It shows that deep down, they suspect their god doesn't really exist and that their prophet was really just a man like any other man. That if they simply do nothing and leave the matter to Allah that nothing will actually happen. If they simply pray about it, nothing bad will ever happen to the cartoonist. So that little voice of doubt -- of atheism -- that lingers in the backs of their minds says "damnit, you have to take matters into your own hands!"

These people treat their faith like an ugly, nerdy little bother that needs defending everytime the school bully picks on him. How about letting Allah fight his own fights and stand up for himself? You stay home and pray about it, okay?

 

In christianity, free choice is a big theme. We are told not to judge others and even the creation story indicates that man fell because of his free choice to eat the apple. In Islam, they believe it is the responsibility of all Muslims to make sure other Muslims do not stray. Islam does not emphasize free choice, so no, this behaviour is not indicative of a lack of faith. It indicates that Muslims view faith differently. You can't look a religion through the lens of a different religion. It doesn't work.

 

I can look at it through a completely different lense however, the cynical one for instance. Would that be a problem ?

 

That depends on whether the cynical lens through which you view the world is being used to stereotype it.