Shame

The production of a 14-minute trailer humiliating Prophet Mohammed instigated a pandemonium worldwide. Due to our inability to understand one another, the world is raging.

As far as freedom and free speech are concerned, the West believes it knows best, and the world should go by its rules and ways. The Muslims around the world, on the other hand, are steadfast in holding their pride and dignity above anything else and in the process demeaning themselves to spiteful rage.

So shaming is in order. The first to shame are those who made the despicable movie ridiculing prophet Mohammed without thinking of the consequences. Shame, too, on those who posted it on September 11 to incite Muslims into flaring up on that day in particular.  They succeeded in what they were out to accomplish: to purposefully enflame a mob-like response validating Muslim barbarity and simultaneously provoking the disgust of the West.

Let’s look at matters from the Muslim perspective. Prophet Mohammed is a sacred, not-to-be-depicted icon. To most Muslims, Prophet Mohammed’s figure should never be reproduced in any shape or form, let alone made fun of. Even at my age, I have yet to see a single portrait of Prophet Mohammed. It may be hard for the western world to envisage such respect, but that is the case—to everyone his own. So the West has to understand this mentality or bear the resulting rage and consequential hatred.

And before we go into free speech and to what extent we are truly free, do we not refute hateful expressions such as “Jews should be wiped off the face of the earth, ” “the holocaust did not happen,” or words belittling the 9/11 tragedy? Do we not find these thoughts despicable and repulsive?

If so, then the West must understand that demoting Prophet Mohammed is of equal caliber to Muslims, and we should not consider it freedom of any shape or form if it disgraces what others consider sacred. Indeed, it is hate speech—fair and square.

But at the same time, while we are in shaming mode, we must shame the Muslims, too: the Benghazians who killed an innocent man, an avid supporter of the Libyan cause, and the Egyptians who couldn’t curtail their anger and attacked the American Embassy when an embassy is sacred soil.

Then shame on those Muslims who resorted to burning homes and attacking stores of Christians around the world. And shame on the silly Egyptian Muslim who took his anger on the Bible and burned it—like as if that did any good.

These fervent but blinded Muslims are no better than the Americans who killed Muslims or vandalized mosques after September 11. And the silly Egyptian is no better than Terry Jones, who burned the Koran.

But the most shame in this vicious cycle goes to the French cartoonist and his magazine, Charles Hebdo, who decided to fan the flames of anger even more. To him, it was neither here nor there that people were dying. He ignored the rage around the world and decided to publish more demeaning depictions of the Prophet. 

With a publicity stunt like this one, he may have gained some fame, but he did this regardless of lives lost and pain felt. He did it because “he can” lampoon anyone in France. 

While a free France where anyone can be ridiculed may be a good thing, to millions he had done a truly incomprehensible act, and in the process he may have endangered French abroad, too. In anticipation of reactionary attacks, the French have decided to close off their embassies, schools, and centres in 20 countries around the world.

So, Mr. Cartoonist, accept the consequences of your behaviour. These simple Muslims may be enraged but it is the only way “they can.” These Muslims on the streets of Cairo, Kabul, or Teheran have neither the skills, nor the eloquence, or calm nature that allows them to treat this animosity in any other way.  

What have we come to? The world seems to be reaching a deadly impasse. All seem to be at fault, and no one is listening to anyone else.

Now that I shamed half the world, we still need to take heed. Vindictive acts create hatred and result in severe repercussions, so we need to respect one another, avoid blind thoughtlessness, maintain our cool, ignore stupidity, and be aware of the consequences of our actions. Allah, God, Jesus, and every other God known to mankind, be with us in these trying times.

Comments

[Susan]

This is a wonderful opinion piece and one that led me to think and to review my own principles and stance. For that I thanks the author.

Some years ago, in a different context entirely, I battled to understand the stance another person was taking on an issue. I sought advice from an older person and what they led me to was acceptance of paradigm shifts/leaps.

So, I can well understand why Muslims do not wish to see any form of depiction of their Prophet. Or, to be more accurate, I accept it completely and I can perhaps make learned presumptions as to the 'why'.

I do agree that, for a long time - and indeed it does still exist in many quarters - that the West believed itself to hold the moral right. I recall as a young academic being outraged that a group of American people were working to create some sort of library that held all the information in the world - and they claimed some moral right and ownership of all that said information no matter what country it was sourced from. I sometimes wonder if the group still exists, and perhaps in some dark, dingy space, they do.

As a westerner, I also agree that the French cartoonist and the magazine did the wrong thing completely and did indeed act inflammatory. Same as people did here in Australia who gave Muslim children signs to carry around that called for beheading. We do not need acts that either mock a faith or reinforce isms about the people who hold that faith.

I embrace the even-handedness of this article and the responsibility that is placed on each of us to generate that listening culture that is described here. And each time we write or speak, to give these even-handed examples and to continue an awakening that the solution relies on the energy and desires of all major parties.

I want to know for example, why some Islamics do not support the telling of historic tales so as to inform contemporary understandings. I think these are places that thinking westerners are longing to go; to have opportunities to engage with and exchange cultural understandings with others around us.

The people who act in a deliberately inflammatory manner in the name of freedom of speech, or art, simply hold these discussions back as we return to working to settle our respective communities.

In my view by the way, there is no such thing as freedom of speech. We do not allow paedophiles to stand in public squares describing their desires. Each society draws lines. Stop using a non-existent concept as an excuse for lack of moral choice.

[azza radwan sedky]

Thank you so much for your reply. I appreciate your understanding and your view on matters. Wish there were more like you around the world.
We will continue to harm one another because of our inability to figure out how to live together. It is only after we realize that the world is small and that our behaviour crosses oceans in seconds and reaches those we are attacking ever so swiftly that things may improve.
Until we accept that "my" way is not the only way, we will keep having these incidents. Hopefully they will continue to be incidents and not more.

[Mark P]

It's hard to take you seriously when you literally say that a cartoonist is more worthy of rebuke than murderers. the point about understanding the issue from "the other's" perspective is well-taken, and I believe that most Westerners have at least a superficial understanding of why these movies and cartoons are so inflammatory to many Muslims.

But to suggest that the violent response should also be evaluated in the framework cultural relativism is INSANE. Mob violence, death threats and murder are universally unjustifiable. No Western intellectuals stood up after 9/11 and said "well you know, you have to understand how the people burning down mosques feel..." We condemned that crap unequivocally.

[azza radwan sedky]

I said the cartoonist is the worst because he utilized the previous events to his benefit; he used the hatred on both sides to create more rage. His was the last straw--not the worst for sure though.
What I was trying to do here is see both perspectives. See how both cultures are seeing one another. That's all. At the same time I shamed everyone who has taken part in this ridiculous fiasco, and they are many.