Salman Rushdie on Islam: 'We have learned the wrong lessons'
28 replies, posted
[quote]Salman Rushdie believes that if The Satanic Verses had been published today, the members of the literary elite who rounded on Charlie Hebdo in the wake of the French satirical magazine winning a PEN prize for courage would not have defended him.
In an interview with the French magazine L’Express, the novelist said that “it seems we have learned the wrong lessons” from the experience of The Satanic Verses, which saw a fatwa issued against him by Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeini in 1989, sending him into hiding. “Instead of realising that we need to oppose these attacks on freedom of expression, we thought that we need to placate them with compromise and renunciation,” he said.
.....
Rushdie told L’Express that he disagreed, saying that the 12 people murdered at Charlie Hebdo’s offices were killed because their words were seen as blasphemous. “It’s exactly the same thing,” he said. “I’ve since had the feeling that, if the attacks against The Satanic Verses had taken place today, these people would not have defended me, and would have used the same arguments against me, accusing me of insulting an ethnic and cultural minority.”
The novelist told the French magazine that he believes “we are living in the darkest time I have ever known”, with the rise of Islamic State of “colossal importance for the future of the world”. He argued that the taboo surrounding “supposed ‘Islamophobia’” must be brought to an end.
“Why can’t we debate Islam?” he said. “It is possible to respect individuals, to protect them from intolerance, while being sceptical about their ideas, even criticising them ferociously.”[/quote]
[url]http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jul/23/salman-rushdie-on-islam-we-have-learned-the-wrong-lessons[/url]
I agree. No religion or ideology (religions are "special" ideologies anyway) is excempt from criticism, parody or ridicule. If people from a religion or ideology respond in despicable and inhuman ways, well, first they are insecure in their beliefs, and second it's idiots revealing themselves as idiots so that we can treat them as such.
We have to have debates about ideas. It's the way that good ideas are promoted and dumb ones die out.
The Western world used to be a place where if you criticised (with good reason) the main religion, you'd be killed, but luckily we had the enlightenment.
radical islam isn't a singular institution. i fail to understand how the west has "failed to oppose it" through "compromise." in what ways have we compromised with radical islam? should we run an ad campaign against it?
what he's actually doing in this interview is leveling a personal complaint against the literary and artistic community for shunning shitty agitprop art and cartoons that have no intrinsic value except to inflict a humiliating political statement on muslims, radical or not. he's totally confused his own importance with that of actualy policy.
Where does this guy get off suggesting that we're not allowed to criticize Islam? He has literally made a living doing exactly that.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48292234]Where does this guy get off suggesting that we're not allowed to criticize Islam? He has literally made a living doing exactly that.[/QUOTE]
Yes, and he has had to live in hiding because of it. In the past, the retaliation to his criticism was heavily criticized by western media, but things seem to be moving in the opposite direction now. Criticism of Islam/Muslims is generally met with cries of racism (even though Islam is a religion, not a race) and intolerance.
If you read the article, there was a protest by a fairly large group of authors earlier this year claiming that awarding Charlie Hebdo with a "freedom of expression courage award" was "valorising material that intensifies the anti-Islamic, anti-Maghreb, anti-Arab sentiments already prevalent in the western world”.
In response to the attacks on Charlie Hebdo and the somewhat mixed reception by the media since, they recently pledged to no longer publish any cartoons featuring Mohammed.
meanwhile...
[url]http://www.theonion.com/article/no-one-murdered-because-of-this-image-29553[/url]
He isn't doing a very good job of living in hiding if he's in the media every couple of months complaining about how he isn't allowed to criticize Islam while simultaneously getting paid to criticize Islam.
As for the author's protest against Charlie Hebdo, there have always been large groups of (non Muslim) people who disliked their material for being nothing more than offensive for the sake of being offensive. Nothing about it was particularly courageous so it's not unreasonable to believe that while they should have the right to publish it, they shouldn't necessarily receive an award for it.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48292234]Where does this guy get off suggesting that we're not allowed to criticize Islam? He has literally made a living doing exactly that.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48292352]He isn't doing a very good job of living in hiding if he's in the media every couple of months complaining about how he isn't allowed to criticize Islam while simultaneously getting paid to criticize Islam.
As for the author's protest against Charlie Hebdo, there have always been large groups of (non Muslim) people who disliked their material for being nothing more than offensive for the sake of being offensive. Nothing about it was particularly courageous so it's not unreasonable to believe that while they should have the right to publish it, they shouldn't necessarily receive an award for it.[/QUOTE]
You are retarded.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Craptasket))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48292352]He isn't doing a very good job of living in hiding if he's in the media every couple of months complaining about how he isn't allowed to criticize Islam while simultaneously getting paid to criticize Islam.
As for the author's protest against Charlie Hebdo, there have always been large groups of (non Muslim) people who disliked their material for being nothing more than offensive for the sake of being offensive. Nothing about it was particularly courageous so it's not unreasonable to believe that while they should have the right to publish it, they shouldn't necessarily receive an award for it.[/QUOTE]
Going into hiding in international lingo is just a fancy way of saying 'He's got asylum here and we're watching over him to make sure no one goes after him.'
[QUOTE=MoonlessNight;48292517]You are retarded.[/QUOTE]
wow u sure showed him!!!
[QUOTE=MoonlessNight;48292517]You are retarded.[/QUOTE]
Thanks, but the fact remains if you make a living saying "I'm not allowed to criticize [the thing I criticize]", you're just a con man. He absolutely has the right to criticize Islam all he wants, no belief is immune from criticism, but the rhetoric isn't necessary. There are plenty of effective ways to criticize religious fundamentalism without it.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48292610]wow u sure showed him!!![/QUOTE]
We can no longer Box and move on. Sometimes you just have to tell it to their face.
Useless? Yeah. But it's gonna happen from time to time now.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48292639]Thanks, but the fact remains if you make a living saying "I'm not allowed to criticize [the thing I criticize]", you're just a con man. He absolutely has the right to criticize Islam all he wants, no belief is immune from criticism, but the rhetoric isn't necessary. There are plenty of effective ways to criticize religious fundamentalism without it.[/QUOTE]
Nice job responding to the idiot, and totally ignoring the real criticisms of your comments.
[QUOTE=DuCT;48292838]We can no longer Box and move on. Sometimes you just have to tell it to their face.
[B]Useless? Yeah. But it's gonna happen from time to time now[/B].[/QUOTE]
I don't know, I actually like the new system, it keeps these conversations from devolving into "who has the most agrees, who has the most boxes?"
[QUOTE=DuCT;48292838]We can no longer Box and move on. Sometimes you just have to tell it to their face.
Useless? Yeah. But it's gonna happen from time to time now.[/QUOTE]
I was pointing out how dumb and useless his post was.
[QUOTE=sgman91;48292901]Nice job responding to the idiot, and totally ignoring the real criticisms of your comments.[/QUOTE]
The only criticism I didn't respond to was a semantic argument about what "going into hiding" means.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48292639]Thanks, but the fact remains if you make a living saying "I'm not allowed to criticize [the thing I criticize]", you're just a con man. He absolutely has the right to criticize Islam all he wants, no belief is immune from criticism, but the rhetoric isn't necessary. There are plenty of effective ways to criticize religious fundamentalism without it.[/QUOTE]
you could, you know, read the article. or even the op. it's very clear that he's talking about the backlash from the ultra "liberal" left whenever islam get's criticized. you literally can't say anything remotely negative about islam without being called racist. you're clinging on to the phrase he used and completely ignoring the content of the article.
I say just criticize the people who are radicals, not the religion as a whole. Kinda like how not all cops are murdering, racist, xenophobic scumbags, and not all Mormons are polygamists
[QUOTE=mralexs;48293536]I say just criticize the people who are radicals, not the religion as a whole. Kinda like how not all cops are murdering, racist, xenophobic scumbags, and not all Mormons are polygamists[/QUOTE]
Why not criticize the religion as a whole? If you believe that religion is stupid, go ahead and criticize it. Criticize the radicals and the moderates.
People criticize communism and capitalism, liberalism and conservatism, so they can also criticize Islam and Christianity. Don't forget you can criticize individual cops and you can criticize the judiciary system as whole.
If you believe in something I think is stupid, then I will definitely criticize you and point out where I think you are wrong. It's kinda self-evident here.
[QUOTE=Bruhmis;48293330]you could, you know, read the article. or even the op. it's very clear that he's talking about the backlash from the ultra "liberal" left whenever islam get's criticized. you literally can't say anything remotely negative about islam without being called racist. you're clinging on to the phrase he used and completely ignoring the content of the article.[/QUOTE]
I can guarantee that Rushdie is not afraid of backlash from liberals. This is a guy who was the target of an assassination attempt by hardline Islamists; people who disagree with him by writing letters are not a threat. If he truly believes the things he says he should welcome this kind of non-violent dissent.
I know exactly what the article is saying and I'm taking issue with his extremely disingenuous claim that he "can't debate Islam". He debates Islam just fine.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48293711]I can guarantee that Rushdie is not afraid of backlash from liberals. This is a guy who was the target of an assassination attempt by hardline Islamists; people who disagree with him by writing letters are not a threat. If he truly believes the things he says he should welcome this kind of non-violent dissent.
I know exactly what the article is saying and I'm taking issue with his extremely disingenuous claim that he "can't debate Islam". He debates Islam just fine.[/QUOTE]
so he's under direct and immediate threat of assassination, but his right to speak the opinions that lead to him being marked for death isn't in any way under threat?
uhh
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48292352]He isn't doing a very good job of living in hiding if he's in the media every couple of months complaining about how he isn't allowed to criticize Islam while simultaneously getting paid to criticize Islam.[/QUOTE]
He hasn't been in hiding for 17 years and doesn't "get paid to criticise Islam"
And yeah he is literally free to say what he wants about Islam, but his point is there are many supposed "liberals" who would rather silence the likes of him rather than risk hurting the poor sensibilities of Muslims, almost to the point of siding with Islamists
The issue is many people (on either side of the debate) conflate criticising Islam with insulting Muslims. There are certainly some Islamic religious concepts which are very common yet I still think are somewhat backwards, but at the same time I'm going to treat Islam with the same respect I treat any other religion; do what you want, as long as it doesn't involve invading the rights of other people.
[QUOTE=Jamsponge;48293862]The issue is many people (on either side of the debate) conflate criticising Islam with insulting Muslims. There are certainly some Islamic religious concepts which are very common yet I still think are somewhat backwards, but at the same time I'm going to treat Islam with the same respect I treat any other religion; do what you want, as long as it doesn't involve invading the rights of other people.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, he even says this at the end:
“Why can’t we debate Islam?” he said. “It is possible to respect individuals, to protect them from intolerance, while being sceptical about their ideas, even criticising them ferociously.”
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48292639]Thanks, but the fact remains if you make a living saying "I'm not allowed to criticize [the thing I criticize]", you're just a con man. He absolutely has the right to criticize Islam all he wants, no belief is immune from criticism, but the rhetoric isn't necessary. There are plenty of effective ways to criticize religious fundamentalism without it.[/QUOTE]
He's not saying that he legally can't criticize something, he's saying that according to the progressive viewpoint, you shouldn't criticize it.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48292234]Where does this guy get off suggesting that we're not allowed to criticize Islam? He has literally made a living doing exactly that.[/QUOTE]
Did you not read the article? He is arguing the opposite of what you said.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48293711]I can guarantee that Rushdie is not afraid of backlash from liberals. This is a guy who was the target of an assassination attempt by hardline Islamists; people who disagree with him by writing letters are not a threat. If he truly believes the things he says he should welcome this kind of non-violent dissent.
I know exactly what the article is saying and I'm taking issue with his extremely disingenuous claim that he "can't debate Islam". He debates Islam just fine.[/QUOTE]
you're taking issue with something he didn't say. the entire article is about the radical left dismissing any criticism of islam. you're acting like he's playing the victim when all he said was that if the death threats against him happened now the liberal left wouldn't care and would blame him. I'd wager you're not "afraid" of conservatives disagreeing with your opinions on equal rights but that doesn't mean that it's not a problem.
I'm pretty sure (I think) Zeke was one of the few here that actually criticized Charlie when the attack happened.
So I'm not surprised he's totally missing Rushdie's point
[QUOTE=Zeke129;48293711]I can guarantee that Rushdie is not afraid of backlash from liberals. This is a guy who was the target of an assassination attempt by hardline Islamists; people who disagree with him by writing letters are not a threat. If he truly believes the things he says he should welcome this kind of non-violent dissent.
[B]I know exactly what the article is saying and I'm taking issue with his extremely disingenuous claim that he "can't debate Islam". He debates Islam just fine[/B].[/QUOTE]
I don't know man, every time someone brings up Islam in a critical light on Sensationalist it's always the same aggressive "stop talking about it" vibes from the same people.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
