The Muslim blogger Ihsan has approvingly posted a piece from a Muslim cartoonist based in Berkeley, Khalil Bendib, that comments on the Danish Cartoon Scandal (Danoongate). It is a perfect example of moral equivalence.
Much like our British commentator, whose response to this issue is to argue we shouldn’t ban holocaust denial in order to maintain standards of free speech, Bendib and Altaf at Ihsan make an equivalence argument to point out the hypocrisy of the West. As a result, holocaust denial is equated with cartoons critiquing Islam.
The notion that there is an equivalence here, that saying something offensive to Jews and something offensive to Muslims are the same thing seems to lie at the heart of the comment.
Let’s just consider what these commentators want us to entertain as an argument: images that deny the Holocaust, a systematic attempt to exterminate an entire people that managed to murder about 6 million of them, all civilians, is the equivalent of 12 cartoons, many not even critical, that depict the prophet Muhammad. Granted some Muslims feel strongly that Muhammad should not be depicted, but that is a religious commitment that we infidels neither share nor, in a world of freedom, should be asked to share. If Muslims feel that way about Muhammad, or Christians feel that Jesus is the only begotten son of God, that is their beliefs. To say that non-believers cannot deal with these world-historical figures as historical figures, cripples the very mainsprings of modern honest discourse… which may be precisely what’s at work here.
To describe these cartoons as Islamophobic is equally interesting. One of them clearly is afraid of Muslims.
But the hysterical and hypocritical Muslim reaction suggests that “Islamophobia” may be a sane response, not a pathological fear (like Muslim Judeophobia).
Now let’s briefly address the issue of hypocrisy. First there’s the case of the deeply offensive cartoons that permeate Muslim media. One searches in vain for a condemnation of these among either the Ihsan blog or Bendib’s cartoons. Actually Altaf has a post on how the anti-Muslim cartoons are like the Nazi one’s of Der Stuermer, as Europe resurrects its fascist past! Apparently, the injury he feels at the “Islamophobic” cartoons has so blinded him, that when he looks for parallels to Der Stuermer in today’s world, it’s the cartoons insulting Islam, not Islamic cartoons insulting everyone else that catch his eye.
The hypocrisy of supposedly progressive Muslim bloggers and cartoonists (from Berkeley no less!) who invoke moral equivalence to condemn something that their fellow Muslims do on a terrifying scale, needs to be considered when we then deal with the two issues they wish to equate: cartoons criticizing the Muslims and Holocaust denial. European countries have outlawed Holocaust denial because they want to hold on to the sobering sanity that hit them all when, in 1945, they took cognizance of the results of Nazi madness. Whether this legal prohibition is a good idea from the perspective of civil society or not, is up for debate. But when Muslim MSM accept Holocaust denial and all the conspiracy thinking that goes with that as dogma, when their Imams preach genocide from the pulpit, in other words when they are eagerly plunging into the same madness their insistence that we live up to extraordinarily high standards of tolerance while they engage in the most debased expressions of hatred and intolerance strike me as a classic definition of demopathy.
Now remind me: is Hitler popular here because he killed 6 million Jews, or because he did nothing of the sort?
The woman in the photo with the “God Bless Hitler” sign looks like she’s enjoying some kind of joke. Is she really serious, I can’t tell. Also, both women are trying to hide what they look like so they can’t be identified. They look Caucasian to me. Maybe they’re not Muslims at all. The sign is so insane and provocative that I’ll bet even the Muslims in the protest were embarrassed. It’s possible that these two women are from the opposite camp, trying to show the protesting Muslims in a bad light. Who knows? I’ve seen too many deceptive photos on the internet and MSM to believe anything this outrageous anymore.
Comment by Laura — February 21, 2006 @ 12:36 pm
the picture comes from a German TV station:
http://www.n-tv.de/634520.html
with the rather charming remark: “What exactly them mean by the sign is not clear.” Can anyone think of what it might mean other than, “we love you because you killed so many Jews!”?
you are very kind to the demonstrators. if this were two protestors from the “other camp” as you say — you mean the Zionists? or the anti-Islamists — one has to admire their courage to be out in public in Pakistan, and one would presume that if the crowd were as politically sane as you suggest, they would have been told to put their sign away.
your comment: :the sign is so insane and provocative that I’ll bet even the Muslims in the protest were embarrassed…” suggests your own cognitive egocentrism. it’s provocative and insane by your (our) standards, not theirs.
I don’t think you see enough to judge their skin color or facial features, although the fact that the sign is in English (as is the sign behind them “FREE MEDIA C… FRE…” suggests that they are aiming their message at the world, not each other (makes sinces in a rallyt protesting European deeds).
as for their smiles, it may just be that they are happy to be out front about what they really think. (my guess is that subversive agents for the other side would not have such insouciant smiles in the midst of a hate rally.)
and as for their “trying to hide what they look like so they can’t be identified”, i think this is standard public dress code for Pakistani women, especially at Islamic rallies, rather than any unusual attempt to hide.
nice try. you’re a kind person.
Comment by RL — February 21, 2006 @ 3:29 pm
[…] if 12 Mohammed cartoons are morally acceptable so is Holocaust denial (see here for an analysis); and Israeli or Iraqi […]
Pingback by daniel360.com » Blog Archive » Join the Moral Equivalence debate and who wiped Sudan off the agenda? — March 17, 2006 @ 1:36 am
[…] moment.” But to then turn it into an exercise in moral equivalence that serves as a phoney apologetics for the Muslims, compoun […]
Pingback by Augean Stables » Where’s the Double Standard? Moral Apologetics vs Moral Courage: — April 2, 2006 @ 7:10 am
[…] f Peace” for being mindlessly violent is somehow on a par with Holocaust denial is a moral capitulation of monumental proportions […]
Pingback by Augean Stables » The Right to Ridicule: Muddled Thinking from the Top — April 30, 2006 @ 11:08 pm