I share this because this is a kind of thinly masked bigoted quote of the kind you find in self-proclaimed, self-rejoicing liberal circles. His definition of what matters as far as dietary customs is offensive to a great portion of the world, but, of course, anyone who supports this statement without a sensitivity to this, probably revels in Rushdies knowing cultural imperialism and the trigger words he uses to evoke bigotry. I dont actually disagree with much of what he says in this statement, but the bacon quote is a dig at those who do not eat pork, and I dont think he is targeting observant Hindus, certain Buddhists, Jews, vegetarians, or vegans (though I myself am vegan and find that inclusion offensive on that level). Those who dont eat pork are not the only fundamentalists who the world needs to worry about, neither are the religious fundamentalists the only ones the world needs to worry about. But, of course, we should define what matters with others who dont agree with us--namely, the Muslims. How about a quote from a real thinker on this question who is not so caught up in pushing his own dubious intellectual and artistic legacy, say, Eric Hoffer from True Believer? He dealt with fundamentalism in a much more objective and credible way, and I believe that book should be read by all. Really, this is a kind of hate speech masked as liberalism, and if you dont see that, you really should check how you dehumanize others. I think what is important is that we should allow for traditions to flourish in their authenticity, and that other ways of life, dietary habits, customs, ways of perceiving the sacred or choice to not believe--all of this is what we should agree upon is living unafraid of bigots and fundamentalists, and this is what we should support, whether if it is for Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, or anarcho-syndicalist agnostics.
Posted on: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 04:22:40 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015