September 16, 2012
Who tolerates anti-American preaching from Muslims?
From Discover:
Obviously the news over the past week has been filled with the events in the Middle East, and the broader Muslim world, in reaction to an anti-Muslim film. I think the most eloquent commentary is from The Onion (NSFW!!!), No One Murdered Because Of This Image. That being said, there are some serious broader issues here. A friend of mine who lives in India (he is Indian American, though raised for several years in India, so not totally unfamiliar with the culture) has expressed to me his frustration with having to defend American liberalism in a society where American liberalism is an abstraction, rather than concrete. The frustration has to do with the fundamental divergence in basic values. For example, his interlocutors have argued to him (he is a practicing Christian of libertarian political orientation) that if someone committed an act of blasphemy against his faith of course he would react in anger and violence. And yet of course the clause “and” is false, though he is greeted with skepticism when he asserts he wouldn’t react violently. As a matter of fact I can attest to the reality that he wouldn’t react angrily necessarily, because in interactions where I’ve made casually blasphemous comments he’s only rolled his eyes. Just as Americans have a vague, even misleading, understanding of the broader historical forces which engender resentment of American hegemony in the broader world, so many non-Americans lack a proper awareness of the broader historical forces, and cultural reality, of the particular American radicalism and extremism in the domain of free expression.
...Would Americans tolerate anti-American preaching from Muslim clerics in this country? We can explore this with the General Social Survey with the SPKMSLM variable. It asks:
Now consider a Muslim clergyman who preaches hatred of the United States.
If such a person wanted to make a speech in your community preaching hatred of the United States, should he be allowed to speak, or not?
The question was asked in 2008 and 2010. Since the sample sizes are large I’ll limit to non-Hispanic whites first.
More here.
Posted by Azra Raza at 06:29 AM | Permalink
Comments
This article made no sense to me. The bar graphs are totally incomprehensible.
Posted by: Arun Mukherjee | Sep 16, 2012 3:41:43 PM
The point of this article, I think, appears to be that American free speech is a misnomer. And that American values of liberty don't cross over to India - at least based on the writer's conversation with a friend.
Both points appear to be red herrings to provide cover (or explanation) for the violent Muslim protests from Paris to Sydney ( http://richarddawkins.net/news_articles/2012/9/15/behead-them ).
Posted by: Sam | Sep 16, 2012 5:34:28 PM
i thought readers of this weblog shared a common language with me. i guess not :-)
Posted by: razib | Sep 16, 2012 5:53:29 PM
Females in general, apparently, run with "stupid", while males trend with "smart".
Posted by: Sam | Sep 16, 2012 11:50:41 PM
The answer is that, in fact, America *does* tolerate anti-American speech by Muslim clerics.
Posted by: Anderson | Sep 17, 2012 10:48:18 AM
I used to think there was nothing good about any religion, but driving to work in New York today on Rosh Hashana with half the normal traffic was so pleasant that I am now in favor of any religion that bans driving on certain days of the year. The ideal would be a religion that bans driving completely. On the other hand, finding a dentist or doctor in New York today - forgetaboutit.
Posted by: Reader | Sep 17, 2012 11:02:06 AM
Post a comment