I find it difficult to remain silent and keep a level head when faced with a storm of rage, of verbal and physical abuse. Hundreds and thousands of demonstrators across continents, hundreds of people killed, injured and arrested, schools and embassies closed, statements, excuses and reassuring ads from leaders in the United States and France to calm Muslims. And why? For a pseudo-film, “Innocence of Muslims” that we would never even have heard of, or claimed ownership of, especially since no one even knows the director’s name! And, at the height of delirium, Pakistan’s railway minister announced he would have “donated $100,000 to the person who would kill the blasphemer who insulted the Holy Prophet.” The expression “derailed” in this instance is really the most appropriate!
Everything has been said and written, or almost everything, about the incomprehension that this tragicomedy of poor taste has once again revealed and that is borne of the tension between freedom of expression, that I don’t deny in any manner, and the responsibility that comes from a guilty conscience or, worse, of disdain of the sensitivities of others. As the famous French comedian, Pierre Desproges, said, “You can laugh about everything, but not with everyone” to which I would add “and not at all times.”
Effectively there are sensitive issues for all of us, whatever our nationality, ethnicity, culture or religion. Additionally, we have known for some time that religions are not very tolerant of criticism and even less of caricature or derision. Islam not only makes no exception, but in these times of a powerful show of the religious element on the political and cultural scene of Muslim societies, Muslims appear even more sensitive. Everything can become the spark that sets off an explosion.
Is this right or wrong? Are we faced with an intentional provocation or with promises subject to hidden political motivations? In my opinion this is not the question, in any case, we will never know. I believe that it is legitimate to pose some questions. Why play with fire? Why attack where you know “blood will flow?” You cannot, with reason, be surprised. Attacking people’s faith provokes aggression and violence and unleashes the infernal cycle of stupidity, fear and hate. Deep down, human folly is omnipresent, everywhere and in all ages, and for this reason it brings us together, even if we are distancing ourselves from each other.
Of freedom of expression
Here is the eternal debate on the legitimacy of placing limits on freedom of expression at least to avoid insult or incitement to hatred.
Whatever our opinion, there is no doubt that this “cheap stick of dynamite” has been perceived as provocative and blasphemous. And, as Bernard Pivot wrote, “the freedom to provoke is answered by the freedom to object” an objection that has spread like wildfire and in such dramatic proportions such that the first who should be asking themselves questions are the Muslims themselves.
People who have become fanatical, and are manipulated by politicians who exploit religion, took to the streets and vented their rage, their daily frustrations, their perceptions of an unjust situation, of stigmatization and exclusion by the self-styled international community. In some countries, these angry citizens were more easily mobilized inasmuch they ran no risk of being punished by their government, given that, officially, they were protesting against an assault on the sanctity of religion.
Here I accuse the opinion makers and specifically some media outlets. The legitimization of this “film” and Charlie-Hebdo characterizations of being “anti-Islam” or of “insulting Islam” and even “attacking Islam” that represents a amalgam that has contributed to inflame Muslim fanaticism.
These are amalgamations that kill…
Every reasonable person who has seen the video making the rounds on the internet, would deduce if there was an insult, it was to cinema, art, artists and more in general, the intelligence of the viewer. But how many of them have seen it? An infinitesimal number! It is obvious that the opprobrium of the video made by provocateurs, who are above all incompetent, did not merit this sudden glory.
Additionally, even if there are those who feel obliged to take the role of defenders of Islam, a thing I personally don’t understand, theoretically nor practically, there are may other reasons, more noble reasons, and, above all, far more serious reasons for rising up. Every day brings its quota of injustice, repression, serious aggression against the dignity of Muslims by their equally Muslim rulers in many countries. Women are stoned to death; thieves have limbs amputated following trials that are parodies of justice; a disabled girl is condemned to death after being accused of offending the Holy Koran. The list of misery is long and unconscionable. However, according to Wahabism, Salafism and other archaic practices, everything that is done is justified in the name of Islam. One deduces that if there is a necessity to fight against Islam’s poor image, to provide visibility to the values of justice and tolerance that we Muslims continue to affirm in the fundamental discourses of our religion, then one should do this first of all by rebelling and putting an end to these practices. One should then encourage literary and artistic counter-productions of quality portraying an enlighten Islam in harmony with the needs of Muslims and with the universal values of human rights. This is certainly not only the duty and responsibility of governments, but also of universities and research centers and, more in general, cultural and artistic elites in countries with a Muslim majority.
The time has come, and it has been so for a very long time, to rethink educational systems in Muslim countries. Charles Dantzig said that “provocation is born of resentment and is infantilism. What need do we have to provoke those whom we look down upon? Does it mean that perhaps we do not look down upon them that much? Deep down, provocation is approval.” And so in order to avoid mass exaltation, such as we have seen in the course of recent years, it is essential to promote an education of tolerance for citizens, certainly, but above all one of freedom of thought, conscience and expression. In this way citizens will grow in peace with their faith, proud of their identity and make choices with a strong sense of responsibility. It will be difficult to provoke them… with anything and under any circumstance.
Questions addressing the ethics of criticism
Certainly freedom of opinion and expression are the basis of human rights recognized by everyone. If it were not for the adage “everyone’s freedom stops where it begins for others” does not apply to freedom of opinion, which includes the freedom to criticize other opinions. I recognize and defend the right and freedom to criticize, including religions, but at the same time I defend the ethics of criticism. Criticize does not mean insulting or denigrating and the freedom to criticize does not exonerate one from the right to respect in a way one consults or refers to others. As far as faith and religious beliefs are concerned, the sensitivities of believers can be very easily be provoked and unleash disproportionate reactions. Remember that the illustrious Pakistani railway minister had so completely derailed as to put a reward on the head of the director of the famous pseudo-film and even called “the Taliban and brothers of Al-Qaeda to take part in this noble action.” And he added that if he had the chance, he would kill the director of this film produced in the United States with his own hands “and then they can hang me.”
Delirious certainly, but above all very serious, worse of all, criminal!
—
*Nouzha Guessous, a researcher, bioethics and human rights consultant, has been a medical biology professor at the Faculty of Medicine at Casablanca. She is a former president of UNESCO’s International Bioethics Committee and has been a member of the royal consultative committee entrusted with reform of the Moudawana (Morocco’s new family code, editor’s note)
Translated by Francesca Simmons