It’s basically bullshit through and through. But if you can get people to believe that bullshit, then, it’ll be easy to scare them. Such values did not originate in Europe, and the Europeans have exactly the same struggles with them that we do, although sometimes just a little different. Am I the only one old enough to *remember* the Meese Commission? Yeesh.

Say what you will about the guy, he’s not a coward. He is living under a death sentence.

Turns out, some people want him dead. (Who? Why? Another mystery…)

What these Danish "cowards" have done is prove that "The West" has not yet been cowed to the point where it will remove one, specific religious group from the long list of groups it is willing to insult.

It has NOTHING to do with art. It is a pushback against pure, unadulterated intimidation.

The idea that raging mobs of lunatics can prevent Europeans from doing something they have long prided themselves on – goring sacred cows – (artfully or otherwise) is truly chilling.

….I also strongly believe that this case illustrates that the true ideal of freedom of speech is hardly implemented in the West.

"True ideals" exist only in the mind.  The West may not perfectly realize ANY ideal, but it does at least make the effort, as any number of people who make comfortable livings criticizing it from its own soil will be only to happy to deny.

…On the whole I think anyone who attempts to argue that the West is intrinsically defined by its freedom.

It used to be. I’m starting to wonder, though. Threatening it seems to at least trigger a pretty strong anti-freedom impulse – an impulse to which the words "tolerance," and "diversity" get attached like post-it notes on dung.

…is ignorant of the fact that speech is never and nowhere truly free.

Nothing – no thing – is ever "truly" (by which I mean, "perfectly) ANYTHING. Reality is one imperfect thing after another.

As far as this case goes, I think however that this description of one of his works seemed intriguing enough to warrant a look:

One recent cartoon on his web site caricatured a Christian fundamentalist and Muslim fundamentalist as zombies who met at an anti-gay rally and now wished to marry.

Now, that’s all kinds of awesome. On the basis of that alone I dont think that we can lump this guy into the pure jafi category. At any rate I think we do need to err on the side of free expression and be against such laws as the one under which he was arrested. Who knows what gems we may find among the muck.

I also strongly believe that this case illustrates that the true ideal of freedom of speech is hardly implemented in the West. Perhaps there is more freedom of speech, on the law books, in the West – but there are restrictions on speech that operate beyond the written law as well. On the whole I think anyone who attempts to argue that the West is intrinsically defined by its freedom, is ignorant of the fact that speech is never and nowhere truly free.

Aziz Poonawalla’s last blog post..Pipes’ dream

Elisha Feger’s last blog post..Blatant Disregard for the Rules

Goal!!!!!
Absolutely. Whether it’s Larry Flynt being attacked by the Right Wing or a racist being pilloried by the Left Wing, defending these guys isn’t fun. Unfortunately it has to be done, but it’s a sucky job.

I feel the same way about the mouth-breathers in the Muslim world who generate antisemitic art. People who push propaganda and call it art are cut from the same cloth no matter what their ideological background.

Ironically we’re not actually arguing. I agree with you that any attempt to limit hate speech is a slippery slope. But I really wish there was a clean-cut way to differentiate, because defending crap on principle is getting tiresome.