Loads Of Angry Muslims

The debate about the Innocence of Muslims film has been fairly predictable so far. There’s Deborah Orr in the Guardian complaining about Western ‘arrogance’ and quoting the Quran, Seamus Milne trying to marshall the Arab street into his discredited anti-imperialist matrix, and a letter in the Guardian which declares ‘Surely those who made and then distributed this disgusting – not laughable – film, bear as much responsibility for the violence as those who are reacting against it.’

The idea is that all that Enlightenment stuff about free speech is all very well, but you can’t challenge worldwide religious ideas and you can’t hurt anyone’s feelings. Because when my feelings are hurt I cheer myself up by setting fire to a building.

But there are a couple of things that are new.

The first is the fairly obvious political gamesmanship behind the whole thing. It’s more and more apparent that dictators and clerics in the theocratic world generate this kind of hysteria because it distracts Arab street’s attention from the horrendous poverty, discrimination and misery in their own countries, most of which is the fault of the dictators and clerics. Avaaz has a good, pointed article on the Salafi activists who distributed the film and organised the embassy burnings. Rebels in Syria are infuriated that the controversy over a stupid thirteen-minute YouTube clip has eclipsed Assad’s war against his people – death toll 26,000, 250,000 refugees, and counting. Syrian activist Ammar Abdulhamid told the Daily Beast that: ‘To Assad, the rallies spurred by the Islam-bashing film were heaven-sent: they have given credence to his claims that the Arab Spring is at heart an Islamist spring and that al Qaeda and its affiliates will be empowered as a result.’

Chomsky was wrong. What’s behind this is not the manufacture of consent, it’s about the manufacture of outrage, and it’s striking that so many on the Western Marxist left seem to miss the blatant ruling class politics going on here. There is hope though. Avaaz estimates that the numbers on the streets are tiny in comparison to the street demonstrations during the Arab Spring. The Arab street wants what the rest of us wants. There have even been demonstrations in Libyan cities where people have come out with placards apologising for the violence and condemning terrorism.

I’d also highlight this article by Richard Dawkins. He’s a more measured and nuanced thinker than the militant atheist of Guardian caricature, and he concedes that the critics of free speech have a point: ‘While anybody has a perfect right to say what they like about any dead prophet, in this case you kind of wish they wouldn’t.’ But he goes on to talk about the classic Monty Python film Life of Brian, which showed that ridicule and derision can, paradoxically, have a civilising effect.

Life of Brian reminds us of the contrast between Christian and Muslim reactions to offence. Christians were furious about that sublimely brilliant film, and they blathered and pontificated pathetically (in notorious cases never having seen it), but they stopped short of murder and arson. It would be completely impossible for the Monty Python team to get funding to make a comparable film about Mohammed. An additional consequence of Muslim intransigence and violence, then, is that high quality, sharply satirical movies about Mohammed cannot be made.

That is it. Because of the huge social taboo against critiques of Islam, thoughtful and reasonable criticisms don’t happen. People who respect civility just don’t go there. (I follow an ex-Muslim on Twitter who ended a series of quality points on Mohammed idol worship with the line ‘And I am only saying this because Twitter has allowed me to do so anonymously.’) Only the provocateurs, the attention seekers and outright racists feel that they are up to the challenge.

I don’t believe in offence for its own sake. Civility and etiquette are worth having. Intellect shades so seamlessly into emotion and some ideas are so much a part of people’s identities that to challenge them will cause emotional pain. But it’s the restrictions and taboos around what you can and cannot say about Islam, that in their perverse way facilitate the causing of offence.

The Arab Street, yesterday. Image: Gawker

5 Responses to “Loads Of Angry Muslims”

  1. Fat Roland Says:

    The ‘manufacture of outrage’ is an interesting point, and a depressing one. As a nice contrast, yesterday there was a sizeable march down Oxford Road with people protesting about the misunderstanding of Islam and holding placards calling for peace and love in the name of Allah. (They were followed by a police riot van!) I suspect a majority of these protests have been as equally reasonable and peaceful, but I still think you’re right about the hysteria being a distraction.

    Not for the first time, I think Dawkins is wrong. I’m not convinced by his “comparable film about Mohammed” comment. Firstly, he misunderstands the Life of Brian. Brian was about the lunacy of Jesus’ followers much more than it was about Jesus himself. Secondly, and with that in mind, a “high quality, sharply satirical” comparable film *has* been made: Chris Morris’ Four Lions. Funding wasn’t easy but it did get support from FilmFour and Warp. (I am, I realise, assuming Dawkins made his comments after Four Lions was produced and not before.)

    • maxdunbar Says:

      I had no idea! Great to see secular Manchester Asians out in force.

      I think, however, the taboos around Islam are a lot more powerful than the ones surrounding Christianity, because Christianity has been neutered by UK secularism

  2. Ben Says:

    I think Christopher Hitchens’ anecdote about Samuel Johnson holds true here. Best to find it on Youtube but I’ll tell it anyway:

    After the publication of his dictionary Dr. Johnson was met by a group of respectable ladies, the leader to whom congratulated him on not allowing any indecent words into his dictionary. He replied, ‘I congratulate you on your ability to look them up’.

    I’ve seen many older and nastier things regarding Islam/Muslims on the internet elsewhere and they didn’t cause any riots.

  3. comradeNosaj Says:

    Max, your comment about manufacturing outrage brings to mind Thomas Frank’s idea of the “plenty-plaint” from his book on Kansas, that Republicans have a never-ending litany of gripes/grievances with the world (rap music, violence in video games, homosexuality, abortion etc) which they build into an ideology (and a vote-winning programme) to focus the electorates attention away from them selling off that same electorates jobs and securities via tax breaks to the rich/corporations. The opportunistic, religious far-right/Salafists in Libya & Egypt have been totally blind-sided by the Arab Spring. For 40 years these guys thought they had the monopoly on opposition to secular, authoritarian dictators like Mubarak and Gaddafi and now several hundred million people are on the streets for days, weeks on end chanting and fighting for freedom, democracy. With the exception of places like Sudan or Iran where it’s the far-right in power and as such directed and co-ordinated by the state and their security apparatuses, for Libya et al these protests instigated by the Salafists are a chance for them to “moralise” society, misdirect the public’s attention from the slaughter of their co-religionists and comrades in Syria and to gain a foot-hold post-revolution, to harness the anger, boredom and frustration that large sections of the population feel.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: