freedom of expression and the creation of a "clash of civilizations"

Towards the end of the Vietnam War I used to be a regular visitor to Dharamsala , the seat of the Dalai Lama, in  India. I was one among many who saw Dharamsala as a destination that could help them spiritually.  

Among the American many there were some Vietnam vets,  and quite a few draft dodgers - those who had refused to fight  in,  what was then, America's longest war. 

The winter of 1973 was a  cold one, for me. I had grown up in the Southern hills  and was just not used to  to the  cold winds from the Himalayas. A tea shop in Lower Dharamsala used to be my 'hot spot' escape from the cold.  It was there that I used to meet many a 'Hippie'  -the generic term for white long haired escapees from their own cultures.   And it was there that I first  heard  a serious discussion  on America's eternal need for  Enemies.  

The Vietnam vets and the draft dodgers from America  were united in their belief that  the end of the Vietnam war did not mean the end of wars for Americans.  A new enemy would be found they thought.  And  new wars would fought . The  Middle East, they agreed,  would be the future battle ground. And Islam would be the  new eternal enemy.  For the Oil . 

They were so right ! 

I read Samuel's Huntington's " Clash of Civilizations" years later.  and was  reminded of that long  converstion in a tea house in Dharamsala.  l  just could not agree with  what theory Huntington was pushing.  I knew from personal experience  that  Muslims were not a monolithic mass of people  . They had their  divisions and their differently located beliefs . Muslims  fought each other  just as much as all mankind did. What made them a unified target was the resources that lay in their lands. 

 The Muslim  Other had to be recreated  and sold as  a singular mass that was easy to demonise.   and necessary to destroy . 

Huntington and his henchmen did just that.  they created the Muslim masses.  Horrifying Hordes to  war  with.  Eternally. 



In every incident many American public officials and pundits argue that the “irrational” reaction by thousands of Muslims around the globe “exposes” their religion’s intolerance to freedom of speech and expression. Their central argument has always been that Islam is incompatible with democratic values, with freedom of belief, speech, and expression being at the center of such values. Their objective, of course, is to give credence to the “clash of civilizations” thesis and to keep Islam and Muslims on a continuous collision course with the West.

Yet what about the practice of freedom of speech in the West?

Western governments and civil society institutions assert that freedom of speech, expression, and association is the bedrock of maintaining their democratic character. Whenever someone deliberately sets out to inflame the sensitivities of Muslims toward their prophet or holy book, freedom of speech is invoked in order to defend the cause of the uproar and dismiss its effects as an irrational response. Granted though that under no circumstance should violence be an acceptable answer to any attack no mater how wicked or appalling.

But on a more basic level, does the West really believe in free speech or does it apply a double standard when it comes to Muslim sensibilities? Let’s check the record.

In the private sector, when Google was asked to remove the highly inflammatory YouTube video, it immediately and correctly cited its long established policy of supporting freedom of speech, including all despised speech (though it reluctantly agreed to suspend it in Egypt and Libya.) But as the Jewish Press reported on August 1, Google had no problem removing 1,710 videos and closing their affiliated accounts because “A substantial number of those videos concerned Holocaust denial and defense of Holocaust deniers.” According to the newspaper report, Google “closed the user’s account within 24 hours” of receiving the complaint by a group that monitors anti-Semitism in Australia.

The criteria to judge whether a society values and respects free speech is when the most vulnerable members of society, those who might be the targets of the majority, can feel safe and free to say what they think when they want on any subject without fear, intimidation or negative repercussions. In other words, to know whether America today honors free speech one must ask one hundred random American Muslim activists that question to get the real answer.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/09/14/america-and-the-muslims/