Reply #21: Some background stuff on this which (posted elsewhere before)

[Jemmons]

In the international discussion of this it is largely overlooked how the danish government really asked for this: For a number of years our political right wing have stayed in power on a "blame the immigrants"-agenda which is totally ignorant of the facts, but speaks to the gut of many people. This campaign has secured voters that are not benefiting from the "tax-break" policy of the government and not elevated by the danish "housing bubble". Hence, for a number of years there has been a sort of contest about who was most against immigrants and who could pass the most severe restrictions on anyone not born and raised in the country. Something which has brought a conflict with the EU human rights commissioner and sparked a number of grassroots movements.

When the the cartoons was made public in the right wing newspaper "Jyllands Posten" it raised a debate, but reactions mostly fitted the pattern of immigrant bashing and did not take into account that they were offensive not only to the immigrants but also to a billion muslims worldwide. Only when boycott campaigns were launched in the middle east did the government change its tune and slowly realized that it had to respond and perhaps even learn from these reactions.

Right to free speech is wonderful but it must be exercised within some rules of moderation. The whole point of free speech is that "might is not right" and you have to defend that point if free speech is not just an empty exercise.


The assumption of innocence is so easy to make but in this case it is clearly, evidently and totally wrong. There is nothing innocent about the cartoons and they don't have any belonging to the "beloved Danish tradition of satirical humor". Not only were they calculated to maximize anger but they are publicized in a context of right wing campaign to blame muslim immigrants for the loss of pension rights, unemployment and bad education for children.

The main reason that the paper is now apologizing is probably that big corporations like Mærsk that practically owns Denmark are twisting their arm: Its bad business to insult your business partners. And so Jyllandsposten returns to what common sense should have dictated, if they had not been so blinded by ideology and self-glorification.

The most glaring mistake people make about this is the assumption of "joker rules": It is assumed that Jyllandsposten is playing the role of the "Joker", who is allowed to make the painful points to the ones in power, that others will not make because of fear of consequences. The "beloved Danish tradition of satirical humor" is based on these spacial rules for the "Joker", who is protected and appreciated for his special role.

The reversal of this is when the King employs a "Joker" to tell his people the nasty things that he clearly thinks but he will not be on record for saying. This reversal makes the Joker a lackey and the real joke is that the lackey in this case only got the wrath of his king and no laughs.


To me this is all about immense stupidity!

The stupidity of the newspaper initiating this, Jyllandsposten, which should have know better.
The stupidity of the danish government for not handling the crisis when it was just a story.
The stupidity of the muslims blaming the danish government, when it should blame the newspaper.
The immense stupidity of the islamists threatening anything or anybody danish.
The stupidity of debaters who confuse being political correct with having no freedom of press.
The stupidity of the danish "blame the immigrants for whatever" -campaign.
The stupidity of the violent response on part of the muslims in the middle east.