You can go vote me an extremist in the dKos diary linked to below, which I concluded with your words. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
I refer you to my last comment on Sirocco's thread which basically sums up my position that the whole thing is at best a monumental miscalculation on the part of Jyllands-posten, and at worst a hijacking of freedom of speech for the benefit of the Danish right's anti-immigrant agenda.
if Jyllands-posten ended up issuing their apology (not a retractation, though) within the last week, they might have issued the same apology back in October. The fact is that it took an international boycott to get Danish agribusiness to put political pressure on JP and the PM, and then they apologized. Fredom of speech? I don't think so. It's all about power.
Sorry to have tried to sent you into the orange hell. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Just being my usual undiplomatic self. Good thing I don't draw cartoons, edit newspapers or meet with ambassadors. guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
In that case, we might as well rail against other insignificant slights that abound. As I said earlier, I liken this to the ACLU's defense of the KU Klux Klan, a group I clearly find reprehensible. But I don't bother protesting them, even as I think their right to have political marches should be guaranteed.
Let's face it, this tempest exploded when a heretofore unknown tiny newspaper caused a wave of protest. It's perhaps not ironic that the protest itself caused the images of Mohammed to proliferate around the world. In other words, the protest itself spurred the supposed "mass desecration of the prophet" to its exponential maximum.
In the case at hand, too many people are claiming that this is purely an issue of freedom of speech, which I think it's not. Jyllands-posten, in my opinion, decided to use its freedom of speech and its position as one of Denmark's papers of record, to provoke the muslim community of Denmark.
As I am not a muslim but I am a secular European, it is Jyllands-posten behaviour, not that of the muslim extremists issuing death threats, that reflects on me by association, and therefore that is the side that I concentrate on criticizing. Especially when I see freedom of speech used to protect bigoted attitudes, only to turn around and issue a half-hearted apology when a boycott starts hurting Denmark's economic interests. At its core, this is an issue of power. guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
By bringing up the KKK, I'm trying to make the same point that jyllands-posten's action should be immaterial to the discussion of free speech. Frankly, I've never read the newspaper, nor do I care to. nor do I condemn them because they are so far beyond my scope, I wouldn't bother. For all I know, they are a right-wing Nazi newspaper.
Freedom of speech is sued to put forth bigoted attitudes all the time, especially from obscure corners (as I have heard the mass media Danes portray this particular newspaper). I simply don't see why this particular instance of bigoted free speech merits so much exposure.
