Screenshots: Modernity in the protests of Muslims

JEFF OOI says: From caricatural cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad to Western observers shocked by the extent of Muslim anger worldwide, evident in the demonstrations that have erupted from Europe to Southeast Asia -- get real. These demonstrations are global in scope and highly orchestrated in their execution, says academic researcher Farish A. Noor.

Watch it! We need bridge-builders if civilisations were not to clash.

Guest Blogger
Farish A Noor, Germany

Thus far much has been said and written about the global Muslim response to the controversy surrounding the caricatural cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad that appeared in a Danish newspaper last year. Western observers in particular seem to be shocked by the extent of Muslim anger worldwide, and the level of organisation that has gone into the demonstrations that have erupted from Europe to Southeast Asia. Those who read this as an instance of the 'revenge of God' or a sudden display of emotional piety are missing the point: The demonstrations, global in scope and highly orchestrated in their execution, shows precisely how modern, developed and globalised the Muslim world has become. This was, in fact, a demonstration of a parallel form of globalisation at work: albeit one that is not capital-driven but rather based on a set of firmly shared values.

For decades, if not centuries, Occidental scholars have been asking the same questions: Are Muslims modern? Can Islam be reconciled with modernity? etc. It appeared as if these innane questions were being asked in some ahistorical vacumm, oblivious of the fact that Muslims have been among the first to embrace the tools of modernity from the beginning: the printing press, modern transport, modern notions of identity, citizenship, the nation-state; modern commerce and now internet and virtual communication technology and modes of representation. The images of the cartoons were transmitted world-wide via a network of interlinked Islamist websites and portals, they were discussed and criticised in Islamist chatrooms in cyberspace, and the protests against them were likewised organised and co-ordinated in cyberspace. How modern can Muslims get?

What we have seen therefore is clear evidence of a globalised Muslim world on the march. Islamist NGOs, parties, movements, civil society groups, media outlets and politicians have mobilised Muslims and got them on the streets to demonstrate the will of the Muslim masses, and more importantly the power of the Muslim dollar. The boycott of Danish goods has shown that the Muslim dollar has clout - Muslims are rich, by the way - and that the Muslim dollar can make or break Western economies when it wants to.

But beyond the spectacular aspect of these demonstrations and their equally spectacular results (leading to Western leaders cringing and begging for forgiveness on Arab-Muslim TV channels) we have lost sight of the issue itself and the real underlying problems that perhaps could have done with a little more academic interrogation.

The cartoons themselves could be read not as caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad (for indeed we do not know what the Prophet actually looked like) but were really caricatures of the everyday 'Muhammad' of the contemporary Arab-Muslim world. The cartoons were racist, offensive, abusive in more ways than one, but they really revealed the darker side of the Western liberal conscience and how some segments of Western society - including those who proudly claim to be Western liberals - really see Arabs and Muslims today. The stereotype image of the Arab as gun-carrying murderous fanatic was and is more an invention of the paranoid Western liberal mind, blind to its own racism, than anything else. This is perhaps one of the reasons that the cartoons caused so much pain to so many Arabs, who already have to labour with the painful realities of a Palestine under occupation and an Iraq brought to its knees by the American war machine.

The other aspect of the demonstrations that ought to be studied seriously is how well developed the global Islamist mediatic machine has grown. Over the decades, Islamist groups have learned the power of the media. Orchestrated media-directed protests such as we have seen show just how well integrated this parallel Muslim universe has grown, and the response time between the spark that ignites the crisis and the reaction to the crisis has grown ever shorter. Within 72 hours of the cartoon controversy re-emerging, a Muslim response was seen and heard from London to Indonesia. This demonstrates the extent to which this has become such a well developed, smooth-running global machine.

But the phenomenon of media-orchestrated protests, mediated and reproduced via the media, also faces the real threat of becoming ritualistic, predictable and thus easy to manipulate. Indeed, one cannot help but feel that this entire crisis is being manipulated by conservative elements on both sides, who wish to see the Muslim and Western worlds grow further apart.

The danger then, is this: Without the help of circuit-breaking mechanisms in the form of level-headed commentators and dialogue agents who can prevent such crises from spinning totally out of control, we now face the real prospect of future incidents - both real and imagined - being spun by media-savvy demagogues who want to create
controversies for the sake of publicity. Absent in this whole incident were the voices of reason who were capable of calming the nerves of everybody. Educated Muslim intellectuals ought to have stepped into the arena and cautioned the angry young men of the Muslim street before doing stupid things. One such case was the idiotic reaction of the British Muslim youth Umar Khayyam, who dressed as a suicide bomber during the demonstrations in London last week. The demonstration was also marred by the presence of placards bearing provocative slogans like 'Kill those who insult Islam' - a slogan designed not to defend the image of Islam and the Prophet, but which rather had the effect of helping to demonise Muslims further.

Now we are left with the final tricky question: If this culture of global mediated protest continues without any introspection, what may happen in the future? Will Muslims react to every such incident in such an unreflective way? What might happen, for instance, if some poor innocent driver were to accidentally back his car into a mosque in London? Would this be seen as an 'attack on Islam' and would there be another round of protests, demonstrations and boycotts against British goods?

Muslims have every right to protest against the injustices meted out against them. But let these injustices be real ones, not imagined. And as Muslims make their case and take their stand, they can and must be polite, rational and firm - never blindly reactionary. For that would merely confirm every negative stereotype of Muslims that they have been fighting against for all these years.
_________________________

Dr. Farish A. Noor is Academic Researcher at the Centre for Modern Orient Studies (ZMO), Berlin, Germany

Comments

"...And as Muslims make their case and take their stand, they can and must be polite, rational and firm - never blindly reactionary...."

I couldn't agree more with that phrase, makes me wonder have these protestors saw those pic? and if they have seen it, then it must be one of their muslim friends that "reprint" it and pass it off to his/her circle of friends, which means that they themself have commit a crime by showing a portrait of Muhammad.

and the other question is that if these protestors are truly faithful followers of islam, then chances are they won't reprint the cartoons and which means that majority of them have yet seen the cartoon, which means that they protest blindly without knowing if the cartoon is indeed offensive.

Afterall, art, design, cartoon and architecture are an abstract form of expression, there is no right or wrong. Some people sees it as art while others sees it as an insult.

Posted by: calvin_fernandez | February 11, 2006 08:27 PM

Google-Owned Blog Is Censoring Posts About Cartoon Depictions of the Prophet

One of my favorite cartoonists, Darrin Bell, (http://www.candorville.com") is having the same censorship problems with the Google-owned Blogspot, as General Braxton (see my previous post on this at http://crockplot.blogspot.com/).

When he tries to have the cartoons visible on his blog, he finds that the Google/Blogspot system reduces them to a postage-stamp-sized image that makes them too small to see.

Bell had to post the cartoons on a separate server (his own) in order to have them appear the correct size.

Go here to see what I mean: http://www.rudypark.com/candorville/blog/2006/02/about-those-mohammed-cartoons.asp

This is a disgraceful situation and shows just how fragile the so-called freedom of expression is in the blogosphere.

More about the censorship here: here: http://www.braxton2008.org.

Posted by: LewisPerdue | February 12, 2006 01:13 AM

Being able to use a computer and cyberspace doesn't make one modern! Farish, when people say that Muslims aren't modern, it doesn't mean that they can't turn on Windows and use a chatroom. It means that they are not willing to embrace some principles that are generally seen as modern. Gosh, can you miss the point any further?

//they really revealed the darker side of the Western liberal conscience and how some segments of Western society - including those who proudly claim to be Western liberals - really see Arabs and Muslims today. The stereotype image of the Arab as gun-carrying murderous fanatic was and is more an invention of the paranoid Western liberal mind, blind to its own racism, than anything else//

Well yeah, that's the PERCEPTION, that's the stereotype, that's the image, but are the Muslims doing anything to dispel that perception? I mean, truly SHOW that you are a peace-loving race. Whereas now, as Farish points out, they take to the streets with slogans like that (KL not excepted), burn embassies, shoot priests and do all the things that just serve to reinforce this PERCEPTION that the West has. My point is that this perception, while not painting a picture of TRUE Islam (which we know professes peace), is nevertheless a very accurate depiction of the Islam practised and portrayed today.

//But let these injustices be real ones, not imagined//
This is the best thing said in the whole article.

Posted by: hann | February 12, 2006 02:39 AM

I would like to highlight on one area where no one has actually touched.

The caricature can be considered as blasphemy or just merely the newspaper's ignorant to Muslim taboo of showing Prophet Muhammad. Either way it is wrong. But the biggest wrong is Danish Imam's making of the 3 additional cartoons of their own Prophet to gain support.

1. Those Imams are supposed to be respected head of Islam. Any action to smear their own Allah or Prophet in order to gain support is the ultimate blasphemy regardless of their intention.

2. As a representative of Islam, they smear the name of Islam by using such a heinous tactic, thus bringing shame to Islam.

3. This is a clear vendetta between the Danish Imams and Danish government. If they are really insulted by the caricature, they should target on the newspaper alone and not the whole country.

The Western world is not blameless. Muslims has every right to protest in a civilised manner. What intrigues me is that no Muslim has ever condemn the Danish Imams who are the ultimate blasphemers!!!

This leads to a lot of thinking. Are the head of Islam immuned to any wrong doing including blasphemy? Do all protestation are purely religion based? Are the protesters protesting on what they believe strongly or pressured by their peers not to be outcasted? Why non-extreme Muslims are not taking strong effort to curb and condemn these manipulated protestations? Are we looking at the begining of extremist taking control over the voices of all Muslim? Think about it. I hope I can sleep tonight!

Posted by: amalaysian | February 12, 2006 03:24 AM

" For that would merely confirm every negative stereotype of Muslims that they have been fighting against for all these years. "

EXACTLY! Protesting is fine. But to burn down the embassies or destroying the properties - it's a crime, too.

While everybody should know the tolerance level of the freedom of speech, we should also know the limit of the protest too. :)

Posted by: Vertebrato | February 12, 2006 03:36 AM

Bill Braxton, referenced to in another post said it best "Islam is a relatively new religion and as such is showing the same religious insecurity that Christianity demonstrated when it burned witches, and tortured heretics during the inquisition. It's a childish display by the so-called faithful, showing a basic lack of faith in the strength and endurance of Islam itself."

Modernity is not achieved if today's conduct is not more than a regurgitation of what happened over 400-600 years ago in the Christian world. Indeed today's scholarship should have thaught them not to repeat that. Instead what we see is something that probably goes to a time even preceding that!

Posted by: Observer | February 12, 2006 10:57 AM

Somewhere in the back of my mind I am convinced that the majority of Muslims are peaceful and just like me - worried their family, earning a living, etc, all the usual things humans have in common.

But I fail to reconcile that with what I see.

Here is my question.

Which does a Muslim think is more offensive the the Prophet Mohammad:

a. A cartoon
b. Murder in his name (eg the Indonesian schoolgirls that were beheaded, the Beslan schoolchildren that were slaughtered, I can go on and you now I can).

Islamic extremists, convinced they are on their way to a date with 72 virgins most certainly are doing this for Islam which means by default they are doing this in the name of Mohammad.

SO I ask you, which is worse?

If the cartoons are worse then there is no hope for reconciliation between the west and Islam.

If the latter, where were the protests?

I can only base things on what I see. I see the extremists do the most abhorrent things. I see the moderates doing NOTHING about this.

If Islam is so modern, explain the honor killings in the Middle East. Explain the under 16 year old girls who are hung in Iran. You are one nation under Islam, or so I hear, why do the moderates do nothing about this?

Posted by: flagrant | February 13, 2006 02:07 AM

If you had inquisition and crusades then remove it, that’s modernization.

Using computers, Internet, cars, planes, shows ability to use modern tools. Modernization in terms of ideas and of the mind it is not.

Posted by: eMalaysian | February 13, 2006 09:09 AM

INTERNET does not operate in a legal vacuum.
Read this before you post a comment in this blog!

Screenshots

Thinking Allowed. Thinking Aloud.

Modernity in the protests of Muslims

TrackBack

Comments

Post a comment