Re: article posted by Andy Lowy Im all for free speech but I dont think this is a helpful response. As much as they posture/demand otherwise, these extremist groups have to be aware that theyre never actually going to significantly stymie free-speech or religious satire, not even close. Instead, these attacks function more as occasional, shocking reminders that they exist. Theyre aware that there will be this kind of defiant backlash afterward, a probable increase, even, in the printing of these cartoons. (Of course Im not necessarily talking about everyone involved, or those who actually perpetrated the attacks, but about the higher levels of the organizations). The intention behind this reprinting is noble, but it amounts to nothing more than a display of machismo, a kind of misguided we wont be intimidated pose that just feeds into the whole oppositional narrative that theyre trying to create. This reaction only fuels their sense of purpose, perpetuates their perceived struggle-and this is the underlying, tacit goal behind all the rhetoric. Not to mention that this collective reaction automatically promotes these simple, vulgar cartoons into a position as the de facto, most prominent voice against religious extremism, at the expense other voices/institutions that far more articulate, and therefore more threatening to extremists. (There are some obvious overlaps here with the situation with the movie the interview). However counterintuitive or uncomfortable, it seems like the most lethal reaction to this kind of event (in addition to appropriate grieving by those personally affected), would be a kind of coordinated indifference and disdain toward the attackers on the part of governments, media outlets, individuals. (As just one example: it could be a culturally accepted taboo or faux pas for a politician, religious leader, or media pundit to reference the event more than necessary to establish facts, to milk it for political traction, in other words to establish it as a kind of cultural phenomenon, landmark.) This would be far more damaging to extremist organizations than this unified front of outrage and condemnation-with every elected official coming out of the woodwork to comment, taking advantage of the rare opportunity to say something everyone approves of, with whole headlines often consisting of nothing more substantive than X group/person speaks out against attack/extremism-or this massive reprinting of the cartoons, or the sensationalized TV re-creations of the attack in detail, or the minute-to-minute updates on the killers whereabouts and identities. This suggestion seems wildly unrealistic. But this is the world we live in now, a world that sees a dribbling of these events each year, will continue to see them by all indications-and weve been living in this world for a quite a while. It seems like we still need to adapt, to collectively adopt a more effective framework of response. As a side note: most people, in fact, are largely indifferent to these kind of events. Understandably so. Its ridiculous to think that the everyday person can and should invest themselves emotionally in all the crises and horrors transpiring, currently and constantly, around the world. And it would be dishonest not to admit the element of arbitrariness involved in singling out just a select few of these crises to receive your compassion and genuine empathy-which, of course, you necessarily do in any case. There seems to be a kind of tacit, cultural imperative that we should feel guilty about this inevitable, base-level condition indifference and distance toward events around the world, that we should actually genuine feel for the people affected in every case. The manner in which these types of events are reported, with the emotionally charged, hyperbolic emphasis on shock, disbelief, or outrage, on the real-time perspectives of the people on the ground, seems to function as a kind of compensation for the guilt of not being able to do this. The pre-packaged outrage in which the events are presented to us tricks us, at an automatic unconscious level, into thinking that have already had the appropriate emotional response, already fulfilled this tacit imperative, however senseless or unrealistic it may be.
Posted on: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 01:35:00 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015