|
By Robin Phillips|Published Date: January 09, 2012
“Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression...” Isaiah 10:1
One of the key differences between the classical liberalism of the 19th century vs. the progressive liberalism of today is in the area of free speech and intellectual freedom.
Classical liberalism, for all its limitations, was at least committed to defending individual freedom against the encroachments of state power. That is, after all, why it was called liberalism, which comes from the word liberty. However, as I explained in my articles “Thought Control” and “Is that Liberalism?”, a key aspect of today’s liberalism (what is sometimes called “progressivism”) is the expansion of the State at the expense of personal freedom.
This was also the theme of Jonah Goldberg’s eye-opening book Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Change. Goldberg shows that contemporary liberals often have no qualms when it comes to limiting the free exchange of ideas – something that would have been anathema to earlier liberals like John Locke, John Stuart Mill and Adam Smith.
I was reminded of Goldberg’s book last month when the Obama administration joined forces with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to support a UN resolution that, critics fear, may result in criminalizing the criticism of Islam. Coming together to form what I have elsewhere described as “the strange alliance between fundamentalist Islam and Western left-wing politics”, the two groups have been seeking ways to fight against “the negative projection of the followers of religions” and “derogatory stereotyping…of persons based on their religion or belief”.
I’ll admit that on the surface, UN Resolution 16/18 sounds benign. However, the crucial question is how will it be implemented? Jonathan Turley, professor of public interest law at George Washington University, isn’t so sure. In an op-ed piece for the Los Angeles Times, Turley pointed out that
“The members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, or OIC, have been pushing for years to gain international legitimacy of their domestic criminal prosecutions of anti-religious speech.
This year, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton invited nations to come to implement the resolution and ‘to build those muscles’ needed ‘to avoid a return to the old patterns of division.’ Those ‘old patterns’ include instances in which writers and cartoonists became the targets of protests by religious groups. The most famous such incident occurred in 2005 when a Danish newspaper published cartoons mocking the prophet Muhammad. The result were worldwide protests in which Muslims reportedly killed more than 100 people — a curious way to demonstrate religious tolerance. While Western governments reaffirmed the right of people to free speech after the riots, they quietly moved toward greater prosecution of anti-religious speech under laws prohibiting hate speech and discrimination.”
Turley is not alone in raising concerns about the implications Resolution 16/18 might have for free speech. In a CBN News report, a number of thinkers were interviewed who believe that it could result in a clampdown on free speech and the mainstreaming of Sharia blasphemy laws in the West.
OK, maybe people are being just a little paranoid. But after reading Robert Spencer’s book Stealth Jihad, I think I have good reason to be concerned. Spencer shows that by skilfully employing the political process, Muslims are succeeding in turning themselves into a class immune to criticism. This is happening at precisely that moment when the West is most in need of a robust debate about the tenets of Islamic theology.
In taking their stand against free speech, radical Muslims seem to have found allies in the political Left. Although the former are motivated by Sharia law while the latter are motivated by relativism, pluralism, and multiculturalism, both groups have found that when it comes to free speech, their goals coincide with remarkable precision.
Are any of your Christian friends aware of this issue? Forward a copy of this article to several Christian friends, then agree to meet and discuss it. See if you can agree on some actions you can take together to alert other members of your church about the threat to free speech this situation represents.
For further insight into this topic, read Robin Phillips’ article, ‘Criminalizing the Criticism of Islam’, ‘Thought Control’ and ‘A Strange Alliance.’ Also buy The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) from our online store.
|
PRINT
RSS