Fitna Farce
Acres of print articles and blog entries have already been expended on the subject. Following the release of the notorious clip, a lot of I-may-not-like-what-you-say-but-I’ll-defend-to-the-death-your-right-to-say-it speeches have been flying around. Coming from his defenders as well as from Muslims who felt slighted yet ascribed it to one of those things that come with freedom of expression. Call me an anarchist but I won’t defend to the death the right for anyone to disseminate schism. Rather I believe freedom comes with checks and balances. In the first place one would be naive to believe freedom to be absolutely free.
I though Fitna was utter rubbish, lacking in substance and wholly inflammatory. Divorced from context the movie itself was a sardonic farce. It featured selected verses from the Qur’an interposed against horrific scenes of terror and violence. Whatever one would like to think, Mr. Wilders intentions leave little to be desired. He wasn’t merely expressing his freedom of expression. This was a decisive attempt to skew people’s perceptions towards the Qur’an; the Muslims Holy Book. Specifically to reify what the majority or peace-loving, well-meaning intellectuals have struggled to mend; the notion that Islam is synonymous with violence.
Notions abound about Islamists sweeping across the world who want nothing but to obliterate freedom and democracy to impose their strict interpretation of Islamic Sharia. For this reason it is generally thought that pandering to Muslim sensitivities is akin to sanctioning the evil elements ‘inherent’ in the religion. Afterall, why should you care if you hurt the feelings of those barbarians who have no qualms about killing innocent women and children, slaughtering homosexuals and beheading apostates?
This kind of thinking does not help at all. The fact is while there are some who take the religion to an extreme they neither represent nor speak for the majority. I particularly cringe when these writers cite their pseudo first person account of the ongoings in Northern Nigerian. You would think they’ve lived there all their lives. What they don’t know and fail to mention is the implementation of Shari’a in Northern Nigeria is being carried out by the ruling elite against the will of the populace. It is not the will of the majority of Muslims but a select few fulfilling their fantasies through religious oppression and subjugation. Though most have accepted their lot, if you asked whether they were better off before the implementation their collective response is a resounding no.
As is the case with the ‘West’ also, people often mention the West as if every single person in the West supports the policies of their government. Failing to distinguish the ideological West -which mirrors a number of Islamic values - and the political wing of it. Not all Americans support the war in Iraq. Most, more than we give credit for, are aware of the underhanded tactics the Bush administration used to invade the country. Remember also the millions that marched in protest against Tony Blair and Co’s decision to deploy troops to Iraq.
I like to think different and diverse as we are, we all want one thing as human beings; to live a life of dignity with freedom of self-determination and laws to prevent others from impinging on our rights. I think it’s important for Muslims to make a distinction between the west and the policies of the administrators in those countries, just as we should give the average individual the benefit of their independent faculty of judgment addressing them first and foremost on that basis alone. It is important because in doing so we acknowledge that a select group of people are acting to further their own selfish goals at the detriment of the rest of us. We are left fighting each other while they bleed the earth dry.
*
I just stumbled upon an article by Ali Eteraz with the same title. Wanted to point out I had never come across his prior to writing mine… Just a coincidence. Better written piece that one. Totally different perspectives both.
