Terrorism v/s Freedom of Speech

In Flirting with Disaster, Marc Gerstein wrote about the (short term) behavioral change due to terrorism and its consequence:
“After 9/11, many people were terrified to fly, and they took to the roads instead…the shift of people from commercial airlines (which are extremely safe) to cars (which are less safe when measured on a comparable basis) meant that one thousand more people died in the three months after 9/11 than would have if people had travelled as they usually do.”
It’s exactly this kind of behavioral change that Simon Phipps warned about more recently:
“Terrorism isn’t just performing a terrifying act. It’s provoking society’s immune system into attacking itself, making its defence systems attack the values and people they are supposed to be defending.”

During the recent Sony hack, and the related threats against airing the movie The Interview, David Carr wondered (he wrote this when Sony had yielded to the threats):
“Now that cultural discourse has become the subject of online blackmail, it is hard to imagine where it will end.”
At around the same time, Scott Adams wondered whether it was worth (or right) putting lives on the line on a matter of principle:
“Do any of you believe that Sony employees should risk their lives, and the lives of movie-goers, so you can see more movies about dictators?”
Touché.

And this brings us to the terrorist attacks against the Charlie Hebdo publication in Paris because of, what else, cartoons making fun of, who else, the prophet. One of the victims was Stephane Charbonnier, the publishing director of Charlie Hebdo, who once said:
“I am not afraid of retaliation. I have no kids, no wife, no car, no credit. It perhaps sounds a bit pompous, but I prefer to die standing than living on my knees.”
Prophet-ic words. Pun unintended.

Turns out a couple of years back, Charbonnier said this after the magazine's offices were fire-bombed:
“Mohammed isn't sacred to me. I don't blame Muslims for not laughing at our drawings. I live under French law. I don't live under Koranic law.”
And yet, the pseudo-secularists everywhere, both in Europe and India, now worry about an over-reaction against Muslims and ask whether it was at all necessary to provoke them. What are they thinking? Give in to these animals and we will have won peace for our time? Hmmm…who was the last man who said that? Oh yeah, it was Chamberlin. About Hitler. And we know how that ended.

Comments

  1. AnonymousJanuary 9, 2015 at 9:51 AM

    The word pseudo-secularists is a very convenient way of verbal attack in some general direction, hoping to hit someone whom the person using it wants to hit. The person using the expression should be invited to define the expression's meaning. [In this, we have to leave out all politicians because they can never be interested in principles but only interested in politicking.]

    If the person using the word is reasonable, he or she would have to agree that there are pseudo-secularists and there are secularists. The secularists need not necessarily be the pseudo type. We must, in this context, look into how and why this catchy expression 'pseudo-secularist' came into being. This word was the weapon used by Hindu extremists and fanatics who wanted to attack (verbally, to start with) anyone who is unwilling to tow their line. The word is their solution to silence those who condemn their religious extremism and fanaticism.

    That I would get branded and labeled as a pseudo-secularist cannot and should not limit me. I would like to hold on to my value system. Secularism is a better way and religious extremism is evil. I am not budging from that! Just because I am secular, despite being a God-believer without the narrowness of any religion, should that mean that I am siding with the Muslim commitment to and their immersion in terrorism? Their terrorism is the cancer that will bring about the end of the decadent Muslim society. I say decadent because, in the Muslim society, the voice against their own wrong doings is so so absurdly minimal. But in contrast the zeal with which they whip themselves up against any non-Muslim without evaluating the situation objectively is phenomenal. Both their extreme form of fanaticism and their ever-readiness to lean on terrorism are going to be the cause of their own doom. In fighting terrorism, we are only helping in what the Muslims have chosen for themselves. So, this fight can be done with cool-headedness.

    As a person likely to be labeled as a pseudo-secularist I would still harp on this note only. "World! Take on terrorism and show no weakness in doing so. Stand up with all the strength and ways that would support this right cause. There can be no wavering on "Terrorism has to be defeated and terrorists have to be punished". This has to be a true resolve not a politician's harangue. In doing the battles against today's evil-most component of the society, do not follow the same unreasonableness, extremism, purposeless killing and the brutality towards the innocents - all of which is what the terrorists and religious extremists follow or support."

    Before closing, I wish to return to one more point about pseudo-secularism. The European society went in for 'secular' governance. Through that they actually succeeded in getting rid of all messy but powerful influence wielded by the Church, which had been going on for centuries. My question is: "Is the secular approach shown by the Hellenic society and later taken up many other societies with a fair degree of success the pseudo-secular type?" At once, this question emerges too: "The Muslims believe their governance (whatever it may be) has to be perfect, because they consider they are neither pseudo nor secular! Are we to agree then that religious governance is better than secular governance, unless we wish to condemn one religion only?"

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Student of the Year

Image
As a toddler, my daughter loved Alia Bhatt’s songs, esp. the ones from Student of the Year . (That movie did have many good songs and well-choreographed dances). Fast forward to present day, when she is 12 yo. She rarely watches Hindi movies now, but one of the few ones she likes of late, Raja aur Rani ki Prem Kahani has, yes, Alia Bhatt.   If I had any hopes that there was anything to be read in the name of her toddler-time favorite ( Student of the Year ), they have been dashed. Our conversations come exam time are perfectly captured by this photo and its caption: In fact, the pic below captures how she and I look at her answer sheets – me intently, she with an expression of “It’s over, so why are you even looking at it?”   Of late, we pull her leg and tell her that she isn’t showing any signs of academic prowess, she’d better find a rich guy to marry. Some time later, she showed us this meme on the Internet: “Me No Study, Me No Care Me Go Marry Millionaire If He Die
Read more

Animal Senses #7: Touch and Remote Touch

Instinctively, we think touch is based on contact. Not entirely true, explains Ed Yong in Immense World – there’s a more important aspect than contact: “These incredible feats are possible through movement. If you rest a fingertip upon a surface, you can get only a limited idea of its features. But as soon you’re allowed to move, everything changes. Hardness becomes apparent with a press. Textures resolve at a stroke.” As you run your fingers over a surface, they hit the tiny peaks and troughs and set off vibrations in the mechanoreceptors at their tips.   At the tip of its snout, the star-nosed mole has many pairs of hairless appendages. It uses them to touch things around itself. Alive or dead? Food or ignore? It does these movements at an insane speed. In the time it takes to blink our eyes, the star-nosed mole can probe, identify and swallow its food. “Light may be the fastest thing in the universe, but light sensors have their limits, and the star-nosed mole’s sense of
Read more

The Retort of the "Luxury Person"

Image
Coming up with biting and witty retorts. It’s something we dream of, but rarely manage to pull off. Worse, the more we stew over the offending remark, the more likely we are to come up with that dream retort, as Calvin ruefully points out: During our last holiday at the Taj Resort, seeing my wife carrying towels to our poolside chairs, one of the kids there mistook her for a member of the staff and asked for a towel. When my wife narrated this to us, I did not imagine that my 8 yo daughter would come up with her own retort. But a day later, my daughter recapped the incident, an incident that didn’t even involve her in the first place , and said, “You know what I’d have told that kid who asked for the towel?”. And without waiting for an answer, she told us anyway: “I don’t work here. I too am a luxury person who is living at this resort. Go get your own towel.” We were highly amused by the phrase she had coined: “luxury person”. It certainly captures the kind of holid
Read more