When commenting, please take political correctness into consideration


October 1, 2012

When commenting, please take political correctness into consideration

by Oon Yeoh (09-26-12) @http://www.thesundaily.my

WESTERN media will normally publish critical commentary on anything under the sun. Nothing is sacrosanct. However, for certain topics, especially those that touch on race and religion, even western media takes into consideration political correctness.

It does this by featuring a commentator from the community that the topic touches on. For example, if they wish to have a commentary about how Chinese entrepreneurs need to stop being copycats and start innovating, there’s a good chance they would get a Chinese entrepreneur to write it.

And so it is with the violent response in some Muslim countries to the anti-Islam YouTube clip called Innocence of Muslims. Here are excerpts of commentaries:

“If Americans – and, more importantly, American politicians – can let (Egyptian president) Morsi’s apparent venom towards us and our way of life slide, then why can’t Egyptians remain calm when some random kook mocks the Prophet Muhammad?” – Tarek Masoud, Slate.com (September 14)

“Modernity requires the willingness to be offended. And as anti-American violence across the Middle East and beyond shows, that willingness is something the Arab world, the heartland of Islam, still lacks.” – Fouad Ajami, Washington Post (September 15)

“Rather than letting the crisis blow over, he (US President Barack Obama) ought to use the moment to explain the Constitution’s First Amendment and freedom of speech, a principle unfamiliar to societies of the Middle East and Southern Asia but (is) at the heart of democracy.” – Nivien Saleh, Salon.com (September 19)

So, there you have it: three critical commentaries extracted from American news publications. Notice how all three writers have Muslim-sounding names? This is no coincidence.

When you want to feature a commentary that’s critical of Muslim reaction to the video, it makes sense to get a Muslim commentator to do it. In similar fashion, if there’s to be a commentary about Buddhists, who would be the best person to write that? A Buddhist writer, no less.

You can see examples of this all around. Recently, former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad wrote in Mingguan Malaysia a scathing commentary about how Malays had become so weak that they now had to “beg for support” from other races.

“Who brought on this disaster? No other than the Malays themselves – greedy Malays, Malays lacking in intelligence, Malays easily influenced by lust, easily dominated by hatred when agitated,” he wrote.

Imagine the backlash if the same words had been written by former MCA President Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik or former MIC President Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu? Going back to the three commentaries I referred to earlier, imagine if they had been written by Christians or Jews.

Actually, it doesn’t even take a whole column. Perak DAP Chairman Datuk Ngeh Koo Ham learned that all too well when he posted a tweet questioning UMNO Youth Chief Khairy Jamaluddin’s intention to stage a protest and asked whether Muslims were spending too much time and energy on the matter. That single tweet earned Ngeh 237 Police reports (and counting).

Do I have any views about Muslim reaction to the Innocence of Muslims clip? I do, but being that I’m not a Muslim, I’m going to cite a group of Malaysian Muslims instead:

“… rather than to recoil in defensiveness against everything western or offensive, there must be instead, an attitude of critical reflection and openness to ideas. Progress requires freedom, for no genuine learning can proceed when power is imposed from without on what can be said and heard… Hate must be combated. Oppression must end. But Muslims will only fail themselves if they proceed in a stupor of insecurity and anger.”

That statement was jointly authored by Ahmad Farouk Musa, Ahmad Fuad Rahmad, Fadiah Nadwa Fikri, Rizqi Mukhriz and Ehsan Shahwahid of the Islamic Renaissance Front. I share their views.

About these ads

15 thoughts on “When commenting, please take political correctness into consideration

  1. “Notice how all three writers have Muslim-sounding names?”

    The writer obviously hasn’t been to the Middle East. What does a Muslim-sounding name sound like?

    Sensitivity to others requires strict adherence to the Golden Rule, which all religions teach. The hypersensitive and untoward reactions of almost all of humanity to perceived slights, insults and affronts is due to disobedience of this rule. The action and reaction reveals that the tribal nature and sheer ignorance of Man is beyond redemption. Physicists call this the Pauli Exclusion Principle of quantum physics. I call it moronism.

    I think the way to go about it is to teach conflict resolution and general knowledge when young. Bring back geography as a required subject in high school and basic anthropology in pre-U.

  2. Mr CLF, I agree with you. The New Education Blueprint does not deal with these subjects. Our young should be taught how to think, and not what to think. This will not happen for as long as our politicians remain an insecure and insular lot, who think that freedom of expression and speech is dangerous to their well being.

  3. For goodness sake, grow up la. not happy don’t read. Lagi not happy, kill yourself la. you think the whole world owe you. You pathetic monkey

  4. yup, that is political correctness. care should be taken when criticising another religion and sometimes its better to let someone else do that who knows the religion from inside.
    it is nice to have freedom of expression but it is difficult to prevent its abuse – which arises mainly from ignorance and lack of a good educational background.

    Our young should be taught how to think – AMReader
    basically religion tells not to think because it has all the answers that we need to lead a fruitful life and also a blissful after-life(??) Amen

    this is what freedom and St. Pauli Exclusion Principle can do to us, beware:

  5. “Rather than letting the crisis blow over, he (US President Barack Obama) ought to use the moment to explain the Constitution’s First Amendment and freedom of speech, a principle unfamiliar to societies of the Middle East and Southern Asia but (is) at the heart of democracy.” – Nivien Saleh, Salon.com (September 19)”

    Are you kiddin’? How do you tell middle easterns who regard burping after a meal as an expression of gratitude to their hosts, that in western society the same would be impolite to say the least.

  6. It does cause pain for this ignorance by people of all Faiths , who cannot tolerate mockings or Mockery. Why ?
    Have we forgotten that all the Chosen Elect not only to Muhammad but to Jesus Christ, to Moses, to Abraham & to Noah (p.b. unto all of them), they were ALL ridiculed, mocked and Scoffed till no end…
    Like when Moses retruned from Exile & and at the Assembly of the Korah people he delivered his Message. They scoffed & scorned at him, and the earth beneath their feet opened up and erupted, swallowing the entire Village of Korah….
    In more recent times, why, even great Scentists like Isaac Newton, Einstein, Graham Bell, Marconi or the Inventor of Apple, they were all Scoffed at…..but perhaps it may have been the ‘ plan ‘ , because the voice of heavens say : To those whom I favour, I shall lead them the way; but for those who seek not My favour, I shall lead them astray…..

    So let people scoff or scorn……none will be the more wiser….for, it is His Domain !

  7. Bean, i would rather think that Islam, as it is practiced now and in the past and by the huge majority, is incompatible with the concept of Western Liberty, Freedom and Democracy. But since i’m not Muslim, i cannot say anything good or bad about it. Have i got that right?

    Secondly, one must not read Scripture as a historical journal, nor as a scientific textbook. It is to be read as religious literature, just like when one reads Watership Down or Lord of the Rings. The need to personally digest, reflect, reason and understand seldom happens due to the sheer laziness, obduracy, literalness and herd instinct. The Laws of God are meant to be written within the Hearts of Men, and not on another man’s flesh and bones.

    Secular Laws otoh, are to be written on everyone’s forehead, to control Man’s disobedience to God’s Law. Anyone has a problem with that, all you prophets and saints?

  8. Just follow the simple rule. Your freedom ends where my nose begins. And yes, “I will confine myself no finer than I am”. I do not know who said that.

  9. “But since i’m not Muslim, i cannot say anything good or bad about it. Have i got that right?” — CLF

    You may want to direct this question to sister Kathy.

    Blasphemy is blasphemy. Never mind who says it. Today the name of God is mentioned in vain numerous times in the course of one day and nobody takes notice. But when you call a prophet pedophile that is meant to incite imminent violence depending on who your audience is. In the Land of the Free even that is unprotected speech.

    If you’re a student of U.S. constitutional law, you may want to remember the acronym FIDO. FIDO is unprotected speech — meaning the government can act to prevent you without falling foul of the First Amendment guaranteeing free speech. F= fighting words, I=incitement to imminent violence D=defamation and O=obscenity.

    Don’t try convincing Hussin and Hamid Gurkha. They are likely to think it is the name of a dog.

  10. So was the movie maker Imbecile only trying to promote his movie or was he inciting imminent violence? Google owns Youtube and Youtube owns the movie trailer. Google refuses to take it down. Google is acting within the law. It is their free speech right. But the Imbecile, the failed movie producer, was he only promoting his cheaply produced movie?

    But remember. The First Amendment is merely to protect you from the government. Not to protect you from the likes of this Imbecile.

  11. “Free speech does not mean careless talk” ? This plays into the UMNO mindset – and Pakatan’s too. How then do you define “careless” and who gets to define it??

    Over here, the courts do that. To be exact nine mostly old men (and one woman) in black robes sitting on the bench of the country’s highest court. They set up the standards which will have to be observed. It goes something like this. First look to the interests involved. Are they compelling interests, or merely important interests or merely legitimate interests? Are they necessary, substantially related or merely rationally related? Look to the nexus. There are different levels of scrutiny for each. They then decide.

  12. So youtube/Google is an accessory after the fact of imbecility?
    Thanks for the Acronym. Much appreciated.
    Over here retronyms rule using acronyms.

  13. Your point @6.14pm 2, Oct Mr Bean is a very strong point i must admit, there must always be limit to all values, nothing is absolute. CLF has a point too when he says its all in the heart about ‘ religion ‘.
    That’s where i feel muslims have over-reacted by going berserk, wild & unruly on their part.

    What’s really in the Book is actually a ‘strength’ & not a weakness for the muslims. It tells us to not only Embrace, but also love and show equal Reverence to all the prophets from Jesus, to Moses, Abraham and so on.. Whereas, if people of other Faiths denigrate, scorn & show irrreverence to the muslin’s prophet, muslims must understand that it is their weaknesses….
    So we have to maintain calm & soberiety, and portray dignity in the face of affronts, ridicule & mockery…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s