« Eleven theses on the … | Home |

The necessity of free speech on islam

11 10 15 - 18:20 Freedom of speech has got a very important function to us (the western society). Because of the freedom of speech, tensions can be negotiated, social problems are revealed, we can confront problems and change is possible.

Especially when it comes to discussing religion, freedom of speech needs extra protection. Religions like Christianity and Islam tend to protect themselves from criticism by prohibiting it, and if possible to criminalize any opposition. But the taboo on criticism of religion is the very cause of the danger of many religions. It is at the expense of dissenters, and leads to a paranoid society full of tensions and violent conflicts, exactly what we hope to prevent with freedom of speech.

The escalations caused by the Danish cartoons make this very clear. Therefore the time is now to point out how important it is to criticize Islam.

Religion and the Freedom of speech.

Everyone should be able to handle criticism. We can only keep our pluralistic society viable if we are not too quickly offended and not immediately call for vengeance and justice.
For religion, we do not need separate standards. Satire has to extend over every human expression, individual rulings, social structures, ideologies or religions alike. There is no reason to exclude religion from critical or satirical approach.

Religion is eminently a human expression which makes it necessary to protect freedom of speech! For while a secular society is trying to give space to a plurality of views and individual freedom, religions oppose convulsively against the destruction of their exalted position, which is the inevitable consequence of the freedom of the individual.

Religion is a human expression like all other ideas and laws are. Secular theorists admit honestly that their philosophies are people work, and they keep them open to criticism and discussion. It is unacceptable that someone claims that his expressions are reflections from a god, and thus above criticism, on punishment of death. That would be an unequal battle, where the sacred religions always would emerge the most perfect.

Need criticism of religions.

Freedom of speech makes change possible: changes in vision, from fundamental believes, from laws of society e.g. Changes are not always 'improvements'. Yet they make it possible to adjust our attitudes to new use, so they do not become a burden to us. This will prevent escalation of frustration.
Unfortunately that also means that the 'safe and known' values which we are attached to, in the long run no longer exist or need to be re-evaluated. But doing so we meet the need of the moment.

The Islam blasphemy laws make this impossible. Because of the lack of freedom in Islam it remained intact for centuries, but at what price? The culture remains in the grip of the dictatorial, sectarian, discriminatory environment from which it emerged. Whatever moderate Muslims try to do in order to reassess these values, there are always orthodox' that will hark it back into it's intolerant roots, making all attempts invain trying to interpret the sacred texts more symbolic and freer.

Necessary precursors for Modernization.

Islam can not be modernized from within. It would only be possible under two major conditions, which evidently Islamic leaders do not want to comply with.

The essential conditions for modernization are:

1) Criticism on Islam must be unconditionally permitted.
2) Make it is permissible to openly leave the Islam if one would not feel at home under it.

That would of course lead to a dramatic change of the essence of Islam, and probably even to a large desertion as in the Christian church, but that is something that must be accepted.
If Islamic leaders do not want to comply with this request, then the moderates and Non - Muslims will always continue to suffer the iron boot of the fundamentalists who stick to the text from 1400 years ago. A text formulated to, with violence to unite a sectarian unity, and segregate it from non - Islamic ideas.

The importance of criticism

It is important to be able to freely discuss social issues, as social problems continue to fester, and affect the wellbeing of the entire society. That is exactly what is going on in the Islamic culture.
For example the inferior position of women, their sexual repression and their only permissible role as mother, leading to unmanageable numbers of children, are major causes of the knowledge gap and poverty in the Islamic world and perhaps even an aggressive retribution that is indicative of the inability to deal with criticism. Learning how to deal with criticism is something that must be taught in an non-frustrated environment.
Muslim women regularly try to put these matters on the agenda, but time after time the masses are turned into anger, and the women are silenced or killed for blasphemy. That makes a change from the inside very difficult.

It is a misconception that only satire leads to collective anger. Salmon Rushdie called a fatwa upon himself when he used the Satanic Verses in his novel. The Bangladeshi Taslima Nasrin was sentenced for her profession as a gynecologist when she brought the horrors which women suffer in Bangladesh into the open, and because she called upon all to stand up for the abused and oppressed women. Moreover, the mullahs in Bangladesh now want her dead. The Pakistani Younous Shaik was sentenced to death because he was accused to have said that the marriage of Muhammad and his first wife was not Islamic, because there had been no revelations in that period. The Egyptian Abu Zaid was convicted to a 'renegade' because he felt that it's not necessarily to regard the Quran as the literal word of God; He now lives in the Netherlands, in order to escape the Egyptian revenge. When this article was written (2006) In Egypt, people were regularly killed because of their criticism. Remember Malala Yousafzai, who's only crime it was to ask for the freedom of girls to go to school and become educated.

Progress in the Islamic world stopped for centuries because of this collective madness. Even today, many journalists and scientists are condemned or killed. With the murder of Theo van Gogh this madness also made its way to the Netherlands. Van Gogh is not the first Dutchman who was killed because of the preservation of Islam. It should be publically known that the increasing numbers of 'honor' killings against women are committed to this same cause. Many women and girls are killed because they are 'westernized', and try to evade the harsh authority of their fathers and brothers. It is precisely this, the 'Westernizing' which is the crucial reason for these honor killings. The murdered women are, as opposed to the murdered journalists and scientists, mostly nameless but it is typical of the way how Islam is maintained for centuries, by eliminating critics and apostates.

The danger of "respect" for religion

Currently there is a lively discussion on ' how far ' one should or could go with the freedom of expression and whether we should have more respect for religions because the religious soul is hurt easily. But in reality, Islam does not allow any negative criticism. In recent history there are examples of people who have been threatened, killed or murdered because they have been critical about certain Islamic principles; among the victims were even Muslims who had a warm heart for their religion.

Some believe they can temper the Islamic anger by asking to put the freedom of speech to discussion. But it is of utmost importance that the oppressive nature of Islam shall be openly discussed, in order to mitigate the type of primeval reactions that we now see in so many different ways.

Verbal criticism is a way to prevent escalating situations. But in Islam it seems to be the same as violence and aggression. Whoever dares to criticize religion in an Islamic country is put to death or murdered. Since the authority of Islam does not extend across the West, they ignite to our free opinions in a senseless rage. We look in amazement at the collective outbursts of hysteria , burning of flags and embassies, calls for attacks and murders of random people and the cutting of the throats of cartoonists.

Respect is not submission.

Respecting religion means that you give in to the urge of it's doctrine to want to dominate everything. To try in advance to avoid any debate in order to avoid being threatened with jihad, means nothing more than to give in before the holy war was conducted. But with respectful silence the danger of the holy war is not passed yet. Because Islam is forcing his opponent each time a little further back , until dominance is complete. The respect that Islam claims is in fact in no way reciprocative. As a small example, Muslims asked Dutch women not to sit near a mosque in their own garden in a bikini, because that does not show respect for religion. But where is the respect for us who like to sit in the sun in a bikini?

Shoot the messenger.

Islam has survived since Mohamed by murdering opponents and critics, and to allow only hymns and praise. That shows how worried Islam is of freedom of speech. It's so easy to prove that Islam encourages violence, it is so easy to refute that the Qur'an does not come from a god, the belief that Prophet Mohamed received the Koran from God himself is so easy to debunk, therefor there is only one remedy for Islam: eliminate anyone who opposes it, and as much as possible spread fear to discourage criticism.

The cartoons and the critical analysis of Islam bring a hidden fear in the Muslim soul to the surface: The fear that their religion is not so perfect, maybe that Mohamed was not a messenger of God. The aggression is a consequence of the reflex to suppress this fear.
Of course, anyone who has ever conquered his fears can tell you how liberating it is to confront your psychological tormentors instead of suppressing them.
When it comes to religion, people reject the psychological mechanisms that impede us to recognize them, and they meet them in the same way as any anxiety disorder.
Religion was able to turn into a collective accepted delusion precisely because God was placed as omnipotent and omniscient above man, and was raised above criticism.
This is the reason why Muslims will vent their oppressed religious fears against the messenger.

Muslims are being kept hostage by their religion. To this aspect not only muslims, but all of mankind that feel strongly attached to the dictations of their religion and are not able to discuss these dictations open and honest.
The only way to liberate mankind from these by their own psyche created oppressor and tormentor is to face them with an open mind. Religion needs to be traced back to the field where it comes from, the not so perfect human mind.

Distraction Maneuvers.

We can observe that Muslims in recent years clearly made their point. However the free word and satire are the most important means to negotiate conflicts and diminish tensions. It is not about defamation or primitive insults. To accuse the west of disrespect and a lack of integrity by pointing at satire is nothing more than a diversion. Islam suppresses and kills massively People who try to put Islamic abuse on the agenda, even if they do this in an appropriate manner.

Who dares to put the perfection of Islam under discussion, is not sure of his life anymore. Many critics of Islam are forced to write under pseudonym or to disappear from public life. This is the core of the problem, not the anger over a satirical drawing of a prophet short fuse.

It is absurd to not be allowed to have a negative view on religion, just because "it is sacred or a taboo” for some people.

And that is also at the core of religious freedom: the right to freely judge a religion without a third party telling you how a religion should be viewed.
A religion is not free, however each individual is free to make of religion whatever he wants, as he is free to see culture and society as he wants.

The dangers of the ban on criticism.

There is no reason to approach religions with misplaced respect. However, it is dangerous to keep a god taboo, to guard him against criticism. Psychoanalysis gives enough examples to make clear that suppression does not lead to the disappearance of the problem: it is ostrich politics, and the inevitably consequences return in another form.

Criticism and debate are important to address abuse, and it is important to get rid of emotions in order not to be surprised by an emotional discharge of frustrations that continue to fester in our subconscious. Every human utterance, each behavior and each idea must be able to be approached critical. The same is valid for the gods, the prophets, and even religions.

Who has been conditioned to think that his foundations are perfect, is not open to critical assessment. If criticism remains banned, then one is doomed forever to build on the same weak foundation, on which the effects in terms of frustrations and conflicts continue to accumulate.

What we can notice at this moment in Islamic countries is an overwhelming discharge of pain, anger, aggression, and frustration. This is not only because of a satirical drawing. It is because it is not authorized by verbal means to express the doubts and frustrations which man has. Who can not laugh at the human condition, whose emotions can not be discussed in public, who is not allowed to change anything in his destiny, ventilates his emotions where it it is allowed. In Freud's psychoanalysis it is simply called "shift". If you fail in your own life and you can change anything about it, then you hold someone else accountable, and you discharge your frustration by setting a Danish embassy on fire. Boss barks against man, man beats dog.

Misplaced respect for the religious foundation and the inability to vent frustrations are the causes of this collective hysterical rage. Everyone understands that the reactions over a drawing are out of proportion. Frustration and low self-esteem lead to anger, arson, despair, vandalism and violence, revenge and murder.
Because inward criticism is not permitted anger will direct itself outward.

The balance between respect and free speech.

Obviously Muslims make use of the privilege to criticize our culture. Criticism on the Islamic culture is however prohibited. Genocides are concealed, excesses which are the result of rigid laws can not be discussed, murders and wars of the Prophet denied or excused, the Islamic doctrine of jihad is portrayed as a spiritual endeavor, without explaining how spiritual endeavor can lead to divide the spoils of war.

Muslims ask for "respect" for their religion. But everyone has the right to say what he thinks of a particular religion. 'Respect' should not be used as blackmail to counter criticism of Islam. (My own note: Respect is something that someone earns and does not have by default, the atrocities in name of Allah or in the name of the prophet committed by IS, the Taliban, Al Quaida, Boko Haram and every other faction causing harm to humanity make it necessary for Islam to regain respect in a much different way that portrayed at the moment.)

Muslims would be offended by the cartoons, all cartoons are seen as one, they suggest that all Muslims are terrorists. But that's not what the cartoons express.
Muslims experienced it in this way because they fully identify with their religion.
But these cartoons express precisely that criticism of Islam is taboo, and they express that the Islamic violence which we are constantly observing, and which is directed against anyone who refuses to conform to Islam, is inherent in Islam.
The cartoons express the fear to criticize Islam because of muslim agression against criticism. Ironically these cartoons are all about the mass hysteria that it gives rise to.

People need to be evaluated by their behavior, not by their religion. One should be kind to people, be empathic with their feelings, and try not to be abusive or insulting.
Religion is simply a set of rules, a philosophy or society ideology according to which people are trying to live. We should not have a special respect for religion. We need to challenge those rules and ideas, just as happens with all rules and ideas. From the smallest child to the royal family, in private and in public, from newspaper articles to elaborate philosophical works and law books, ideological principles, from communism to neo-liberalism and capitalism, from atheists to zealots: everyone and everything should be subject to criticism. It is never defendable that criticism, whether in the form of satire, or by the spoken or written word is avenged or met with aggression and murder.

I do not want to hurt people, but I want the freedom to discuss ideas and regulations.

Apologies.

Apologizing also appears to make little sense. The apology seems to be explained as an admission that the West has behaved in an unauthorized way toward Islam. This in the eyes of many Muslims can not be compensated by a lame excuse, retribution is needed. And above all it must be clear that the same mistake should never be made again.

That of course is not the intent of an apology: people just do not mean to hurt one's feelings, yet nobody wants to suspend the freedom of expression.
Therefore, it is typical that for many Muslims apology is not enough; some even propose to kill the cartoonists like Theo Van Gogh, like so many others have been killed. It is all about honor, revenge and satisfaction for a humiliated Islam.

Opposing worlds.

The murder on Theo Van Gogh is condoned and justified by Islam. A simple doodle is seen as an attack on Islam and as a justification for collective anger, it calls for more killings and jihad. Islam demands an apology and atonement for a cartoon, but murder and arson receive collective support. This is an irreconcilable contradiction between two different worlds.

It is simply: We do not acknowledge blasphemy. Murder and arson are crimes, but satire and free expression are among the achievements of our free culture. Religions are allowed to be historically and psychoanalytical decomposed and unmasked, even if this leads to the disintegration of the faith.

Special respect for religion does not exist in the Dutch society. God is approached in the same way as any other philosophy, movement, ideology or personal opinion, the Queen or the Prime Minister or any other person, etc. In no way are there for gods exemption positions.

Frustration is mitigated by a cartoon, a satirical text, by discussion, analysis, opinion articles or whatever in this order. We are hold to demonstrate peacefully, not smashing windows or burning flags, not incite hatred or violence. If you do you get arrested. For us it is incomprehensible that freedom of expression in Islam can be a capital offense.

Murder and intimidation in the Netherlands.

In the Netherlands and other European countries many murders have been committed by Muslims on their critics. Honor killings of women who tend toward Western culture, the killing of Theo Van Gogh, a woman who expressed her annoyance against aggressive Moroccans in a supermarket, many people who interfered with aggression in the streets. Yet this has not led to arson and murdering by our population towards Muslims.

People are terrorized into fleeing their neighborhood, (for example a homosexual couple, living peacefully in a suburb with a high percentage of muslims) death lists and fatwas circulate, they call for jihad and attacks. Muslims demonstrate against the dutch with organizations such as “enough is enough” and “stop the smear campaign”, they complain bitterly about their disadvantage in our society, they continually blame our alleged racism.
But there are no demonstrations against Muslims. If people tried to set fire to a mosque because of the murder of Van Gogh, it is done anonymously, because it is a criminal offense. It is inconceivable that a furious mass plunges on Muslims and mosques. But the ventilation of our frustrations is present, in the form of a drawing of a prophet who is at the root of Islamic aggression.

Measuring with two sizes.

People demonstrate massively against US imperialism and feel safe to do so, but why does nobody demonstrates against imperialism of Islam? Muslims participate massively in the free criticism against America, against the West, against the Dutch culture, but they demand respect for their religion: who opens his mouth, is accused of Islamophobia, racism, xenophobia.

Muslims attack our culture in innumerable levels. It happens with criticism, by slander and intimidation, violence and jihad. Our society is disrupted by a massive influx of Muslims from import marriages, and soon by an inevitable birth-explosion.
Our culture is undermined by forcing us to accept values that are in no way, our values.

By relying on our own human rights such as freedom of religion and the prohibition of discrimination, Muslims attempt to force us to accept their discrimination and apartheid. "Integration has to work both ways," they say, and demand that we suspend our rights for their discriminatory values. The only thing we can say in our defense, is our right to free criticism. But who uses it, is accused of racism or Islamophobia. For us it is a stalemate, and for Muslims a win-win situation.

Time for criticism.

Following the outbreaks because of a drawing I decided to take up the challenge. I'm going to write some critical articles on Islam. I stand for equal rights of men and women, for sexual freedom, freedom of expression, equality. I am against discrimination, against swearing, against violence. I always resist discrimination against minorities. I also do not accept these things from Islam. That's why I'm going to treat Islam as everyone else is treated who restricts the rights of others. It is beyond my comprehension that many Muslims complain that they are discriminated by the dutch - which is categorically untrue - but at the same time claiming the right to be discriminated against by their own religion.

The writer of this article is planning articles on Islamic marriage, the origin of the Qur'an and the tyrannical behavior of the prophet Mohamed.

Els Geuzebroek, 9-2-2006 38 views