Nilufer Gole idols and insults
This discussion was part of the PEN world voices series that i was able to attend yesterday.
Idols and Insults: Writing , Religion and Freedom of Expression
Juan Luis Cebrian editor El Pais, Upmanyu Chatterjee novelist English August, Hans Magnus Enzensberger poet and essayist, Nilufer Gole Turkish sociologist teaching in France, Ayaan Hirsi Ali Dutch M.P., Tariq Ramadan (by video) Professor at Oxford; moderated by Ian Buruma Dutch author.
Cebrian editor of El Pais defines the concept of liberty, for city of people, which is different than city of God, freedom of thinking and disagreeing with others.
1. Universal values are not universal freedoms. Liberty does not belong to one person. Since Sept 11, 2001, and the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq criticism and provocation is the duty of writers and journalists. The Danish cartoon controversy is less about the cartoons per se but a reflection of the tension of inequality, persistence of poverty and the use of violence to resolves conflicts. This causes the growth of fanatics. We cannot became fanatics.
2. Respect for international law, treaties and agreements.
3. Conflict between individual and community identity. Democracy is not identity. Pluralism is many democratic identities. The defense of identities has became an obsession currently.
Upmanyu chatterjee was very disappointing, he was articulate, but seemed so set in his ways, so dated. He gave the impression of being boorish and self satisfied. He said criticism should not be hurting others,differentiating between public and private. Criticizing Gods of others religions should not be done. Only when one understands another religion fully can it be criticized. He gave the example of Hussein painting nude Hindu goddess and B.J.P.(India’s Hindu fundamentalist party) asked him why as a Muslim does he insult Hindu gods, and Hussein responded Hinduism is as much mine as it is yours.
Chatterjee then mocked minority rights by stating in typical Hindu fundamentalist fashion, in India, the government bends over backwards to accommodate minorities, that was the end of me listening to this unbearable man. I wonder then, why Indian governments allow riots killing minorites year after year ?
Hans Magnus Enzensberger said it took a long time to achieve freedom of speech. He felt their was a lack of reciprocity, citing that Muslims insulted Jews and Christians all the time, and when the Danish cartoons criticized them they got sensitive bordering on squeamishness. He also said the controversy was exploited politically. But he did feel that writers should be held responsible and accountable for producing hate.
Nilufer Gole, was extremely impressive, she started off by explaining why freedom of expression matters. It describes the world in a critical way. For instance in Turkey freedom of expression is taboo breaking, since it challenges the ideology imposed by state power. It challenges the notion of social norms and public opinions. Bourdieu says sociology is against common sense and state power. Political correctness has introduced new taboos, restricting free expression. For instance in Turkey the genocide of the Armenians is often whitewashed and people who do talk about it are censored (Orhan Pamuk is an example).
She felt right now the conversation was between minorities and majorities in Europe, leading to a new phase of anxiety. For instance progressive intellectuals and post-colonial discourse was popular about ten years ago, but these discourses have all but disappeared, unsettling habits of thinking. This was in keeping with the long process of secularism and democracy. Secularism does not develop in a liner process, so right now there is a revival of religious fundamentalism. Religion is divisive, its restrictive towards womens rights, and issues dealing with abortion and freedom.
The role of secular Europe versus pious America has been challenged by Muslim migrants in Europe. Faith and identity are challenges right now. Islam has turned faith into a collective identity. For instance the word neo-martyrs is from a Shia tradition, veiled students are not traditional but are churning religion into a faith and identity problematic. The encounter of Europe and Islam is one of identity. No one questions a European’s Christian background, but they do question a Europeans’s Islamic background.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali was attempting to keep people satisfied and content with their views, she even got a standing ovation from two women in the front. But I felt her arguments were weak and lacked historical clarity and were very politically motivated. She started off by saying Islam should be satire, mocked and provoked. She said if their was censorship a right would be removed. She then challenged the questioning of power and said that it was a progressive intellectual thing speaking to power. But that the very powerless don’t speak at all.
Cebrian made a significant point when he said who decides what is common sense? Is it common sense to invade Iraq and implant democracy? Democracy is a contract between people. He said where power lies is a complex issue.
Nilufer Gole spoke about the idea of publicness. She said that democracy is performative not discursive any longer. The idea of icons and idols are important in communication. For instance the cartoons circulated much quicker than Salman Rushdie’s book would have. But the problem with that is that it gets simplified into caricatures or stereotypes. Habermas said that publicness increases proximity and therefore causes greater accidents.
Internal debates within Europe get challenged by people who have multiple identities. Europe can proceed in these directions.
1. The idea of common cultural values
2. Defend western values
3. Create a new space that defends values, and translates and interprets values people in between, beyond stereotypical images
4.Aesthetics- faulty fundamentalism promotes bad art.
Nilufer and Cebrian challenged Ayaan’s idea of a common space and equal exchange in secular Europe, by giving the example of Italy that has a secular state but the catholic church has a lot of power.
Tariq Ramadan gave a repetitive talk on video, since he had been denied a visa by the US government. It seemed to be quite politically motivated to be conciliatory but was not saying anything too significantly new.
Idols and Insults: Writing , Religion and Freedom of Expression
Juan Luis Cebrian editor El Pais, Upmanyu Chatterjee novelist English August, Hans Magnus Enzensberger poet and essayist, Nilufer Gole Turkish sociologist teaching in France, Ayaan Hirsi Ali Dutch M.P., Tariq Ramadan (by video) Professor at Oxford; moderated by Ian Buruma Dutch author.
Cebrian editor of El Pais defines the concept of liberty, for city of people, which is different than city of God, freedom of thinking and disagreeing with others.
1. Universal values are not universal freedoms. Liberty does not belong to one person. Since Sept 11, 2001, and the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq criticism and provocation is the duty of writers and journalists. The Danish cartoon controversy is less about the cartoons per se but a reflection of the tension of inequality, persistence of poverty and the use of violence to resolves conflicts. This causes the growth of fanatics. We cannot became fanatics.
2. Respect for international law, treaties and agreements.
3. Conflict between individual and community identity. Democracy is not identity. Pluralism is many democratic identities. The defense of identities has became an obsession currently.
Upmanyu chatterjee was very disappointing, he was articulate, but seemed so set in his ways, so dated. He gave the impression of being boorish and self satisfied. He said criticism should not be hurting others,differentiating between public and private. Criticizing Gods of others religions should not be done. Only when one understands another religion fully can it be criticized. He gave the example of Hussein painting nude Hindu goddess and B.J.P.(India’s Hindu fundamentalist party) asked him why as a Muslim does he insult Hindu gods, and Hussein responded Hinduism is as much mine as it is yours.
Chatterjee then mocked minority rights by stating in typical Hindu fundamentalist fashion, in India, the government bends over backwards to accommodate minorities, that was the end of me listening to this unbearable man. I wonder then, why Indian governments allow riots killing minorites year after year ?
Hans Magnus Enzensberger said it took a long time to achieve freedom of speech. He felt their was a lack of reciprocity, citing that Muslims insulted Jews and Christians all the time, and when the Danish cartoons criticized them they got sensitive bordering on squeamishness. He also said the controversy was exploited politically. But he did feel that writers should be held responsible and accountable for producing hate.
Nilufer Gole, was extremely impressive, she started off by explaining why freedom of expression matters. It describes the world in a critical way. For instance in Turkey freedom of expression is taboo breaking, since it challenges the ideology imposed by state power. It challenges the notion of social norms and public opinions. Bourdieu says sociology is against common sense and state power. Political correctness has introduced new taboos, restricting free expression. For instance in Turkey the genocide of the Armenians is often whitewashed and people who do talk about it are censored (Orhan Pamuk is an example).
She felt right now the conversation was between minorities and majorities in Europe, leading to a new phase of anxiety. For instance progressive intellectuals and post-colonial discourse was popular about ten years ago, but these discourses have all but disappeared, unsettling habits of thinking. This was in keeping with the long process of secularism and democracy. Secularism does not develop in a liner process, so right now there is a revival of religious fundamentalism. Religion is divisive, its restrictive towards womens rights, and issues dealing with abortion and freedom.
The role of secular Europe versus pious America has been challenged by Muslim migrants in Europe. Faith and identity are challenges right now. Islam has turned faith into a collective identity. For instance the word neo-martyrs is from a Shia tradition, veiled students are not traditional but are churning religion into a faith and identity problematic. The encounter of Europe and Islam is one of identity. No one questions a European’s Christian background, but they do question a Europeans’s Islamic background.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali was attempting to keep people satisfied and content with their views, she even got a standing ovation from two women in the front. But I felt her arguments were weak and lacked historical clarity and were very politically motivated. She started off by saying Islam should be satire, mocked and provoked. She said if their was censorship a right would be removed. She then challenged the questioning of power and said that it was a progressive intellectual thing speaking to power. But that the very powerless don’t speak at all.
Cebrian made a significant point when he said who decides what is common sense? Is it common sense to invade Iraq and implant democracy? Democracy is a contract between people. He said where power lies is a complex issue.
Nilufer Gole spoke about the idea of publicness. She said that democracy is performative not discursive any longer. The idea of icons and idols are important in communication. For instance the cartoons circulated much quicker than Salman Rushdie’s book would have. But the problem with that is that it gets simplified into caricatures or stereotypes. Habermas said that publicness increases proximity and therefore causes greater accidents.
Internal debates within Europe get challenged by people who have multiple identities. Europe can proceed in these directions.
1. The idea of common cultural values
2. Defend western values
3. Create a new space that defends values, and translates and interprets values people in between, beyond stereotypical images
4.Aesthetics- faulty fundamentalism promotes bad art.
Nilufer and Cebrian challenged Ayaan’s idea of a common space and equal exchange in secular Europe, by giving the example of Italy that has a secular state but the catholic church has a lot of power.
Tariq Ramadan gave a repetitive talk on video, since he had been denied a visa by the US government. It seemed to be quite politically motivated to be conciliatory but was not saying anything too significantly new.
Comments