The Twitter account @GlobalCivility has a lot of tweets about that terrible “global civility” protest in Downing Street yesterday. I followed Raquel’s example and asked if they’d be protesting things like the flogging of Raif and Boko Haram massacres and mobs killing alleged “blasphemers” in Pakistan. It took them maybe 10 seconds to block me.
Global Civility @GlobalCivility · Feb 8
Demonstrating our love
All men in the first; all women in the second. Civility.
There they are. Not petitioning Saudi Arabia to stop torturing a liberal blogger, but petitioning all of us to shut up about their prophet. If they represent their prophet, then he’s a horror.
“Civility” can bite me.
Looks like a demonstration born of a sense of entitlement, not love. Well, self-love, perhaps, or maybe love of self-interest. Nothing more than that.
The women look SO happy to be there. You’d think they’d been ordered by their
ownershusbands, or something.It’s very close to ‘Global Servility’, perhaps once the infidels know their place, the hashtag will be changed.
If, as the placard says, the prophet is the savior of humanity, I want to switch species – NOW.
I did see one woman at the Free Raif demo in Ottawa 2 weeks ago who appeared to be wearing a hijab (though at this time of year, people of all genders are covering most of their faces when outside).
I’m pragmatically in favour of civility, except that when I use the term I mean that people and governments should learn to accept criticism and dissent with good grace.
Civility: how to live together in a city. (Some would say in the city, but we usually apply it outside of Rome these days.[*])
You can try to avoid offending everyone. Turns out that doesn’t actually work, however – for example, events like the above offend me.
Or you can try to live with being offended occasionally. Experience seems to indicate that works quite well.
[*] That last remnant of the Flavians tends to often publicly feel rather entitled, too.
I’ve said it before (or at least tried to…) and I’ll say it again: this is free speech and freedom of assembly. This is a good thing. This is what we want British Muslims doing. Would people rather they were blowing up Tube trains? No thanks.
Yes of course it’s free speech and freedom of assembly. Nobody said it wasn’t. But that doesn’t mean it’s a good thing. It’s not a good thing; it’s a very bad thing; that’s all I’m saying. I’m not arresting them, nor am I saying they should be arrested. I’m simply saying they’re doing a bad thing.
And if you think these gangsters=”British Muslims” then you’re insulting most British Muslims. These gangsters are transparently Islamists. It’s a mistake to conflate Islamists with Muslims.
Also, there are more than two choices. British Muslims don’t have to choose between blowing up Tube trains and protesting against cartoons. They have many many other things they can do.
This is not at all what “we” (which we do you mean?) want British Muslims doing. What an absurd and terrible thing to say.
Lots of older bearded men in that crowd — they’re probably feeling most threatened by all this freedom of speech, for rather obvious reasons.
@khms: I don’t think it’s about not being offended, it’s about the appropriate response to offense. I support the right of people to be offensive. I like to quote Philip Pullman’s response to criticism about a “blasphemous” book he wrote about Jesus:
Those protesters have considerably twisted the concept of “civility”. Sure, they are being physically civil in their peaceful protest holding up signs and proudly wearing their religious clothing and artifacts (and not killing or flogging anyone). But insofar as they appear supporting prosecution, persecution, murder and torture of people who disagree with them, they are no longer entitled to claim that they are being “civil”.
Fallacy of the excluded middle, aka false dichotomy.
I think the point that these are at least semi-civilized muslims compared to the really bad extremists is sorta what sonofrojblake is trying to get at.
I’d call it damning by faint praise. Sadly, they clearly don’t get the point of free speech, whilst taking advantage of it.
Fuck them.
Its great that a liberal western democracy has the right to free speech and assembly , but these people are using that right to protest against other peoples freedom of speech.
you’ve gotta laugh, and not with them.
#13 Crimson Clupeidae says:
That makes me uncomfortable. As an American, I can easily replace your statement with “semi-civilized blacks compared to the really bad Malcolm X or Black Panther extremists” and that makes me pause with the underlying connotations of your statement.
Absolutely correct, and my mistake. I apologise, and I’ll try to not make that one again. Sorry.
But the rest of my point stands: what we (civilised people who have to live in the same country with them) want these extremists doing if they’re upset is doing what we do when we’re upset – exercising the rights our society gives and marching, legally, to protest. It’s too much to hope they’ll stop being extremists, and it’s too much to hope they won’t be upset. But a decade and a bit after two million of us took to the streets to protest the Iraq war, it seems churlish to begrudge a thousand or so Islamists the same right when they believe they have a point, whether we like their point or not.
What do you mean “begrudge”? That seems like a loaded word for the purpose.
Partly you’re just stating the obvious – better they protest if the alternative is killing some people. Yes, true; who would deny it?
But partly you’re saying therefore one shouldn’t criticize their cause-of-protest. That’s not obvious and as far as I’m concerned it’s not true either. Just for one thing, it’s well worth pointing out that their cause-of-protest is not a core universal normal Muslim view. But it’s also worth pointing out why it’s not and what’s bad about it.
Not at all. The reason for their protest is self-evidently ridiculous, and I’d be the first to criticise it. But it’s very important to be clear that you’re disagreeing with what they say, while upholding their right to think, and protest about, whatever they like, no matter how dumb or disagreeable.
Also, the “better protests than bombs” is not a false dichotomy, or at least, not as false as you pretend. Obviously, it would be even better if they didn’t protest at all and kept their odious superstitions entirely to themselves. It would be even better if they didn’t hold those views at all, and behaved and thought like civilised people. But both those things are unrealistic expectations of these people. Marching and protesting is the very very least they want to do, and the very very most we should tolerate from them, so when that is in fact all they do, it should be, if not rewarded, then at least not so roundly condemned in principle.
In summary – disagree with what they say, but remind them that you support their right to say it. It’s more than they’d do in return.