ThePrint’s Op-Ed on France is DUMB!!
So, recently I came across this opinion piece published by @ThePrintIndia that puts forth several arguments related to France issue. I read the whole article and found it pretty DUMB.
The article is filled with false comparisons and fails to a single coherent sensible argument. Lets talk about it piece-by-piece:
So, the author starts by saying how a 1,400 year old religion with world’s second largest following is too sensitive to take a cartoon.
Also, somehow, she compares it to substance abuse 😂
Such illogical comparisons are a running theme here.
Now, the author tries to talk about how president endorsed a cartoon and how those cartoons were so problematic. There was just one problem. A few key developments were conveniently missed, for instance:
- the cartoons were made back in 2015 and in the same year, magazine faced a terror attack which claimed lives of its employees
- Teacher who showed it in class, did it to make a point about Freedom of Expression. Before doing so, he asked students to sit out that class if they found it offensive. Even after that, the said teacher was BEHEADED
Now, the author tries to dis-associate role of religious preaching from religious fanaticism. The fact is, since 2015, the same cartoons have not only caused KILLINGS of people but the same have also been ENDORSED on name of religion.
Macron supported the cartoon, not because they may have been offensive, he did it because he was making a point against this fanaticism and stand up for the Freedom of Expression.
In the continuation of earlier argument, author tries to paint the war against terrorism as some sort of conspiracy against one religion. Author perhaps forgets that an individual being ashamed of terror activities doesn’t mean that terrorism is not happening on the name of religion.
Terrorists repeatedly cite the religious fanaticism as the reason of their attacks. It is RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM. It cannot be fought if we don’t accept its existence.
also, what is this bar reference? Can’t a person go to a bar and be a follower of Islam?
Now, the author makes an attempt to name a few terror outfits. Looking at the names of these organizations one may realize how author is literally looking for the bread crumbs here.
now, I won’t go there and name any terror outfit but I want you to just think about the FULL NAMES of PRESENT DAY terror groups.
You will find innumerable number of such outfits that literally say that they are doing it for religion. The even specify it in their names.
Now, author refuses to accept that terrorists are doing it on the name of religion.
Look, no one is blaming every single religious person for terror activities. People just expect you to condemn it like others, instead of writing whole article criticizing those who crackdown on it.
If we do not accept that such fanaticism exists, how will we be able to fight against it?
As I mentioned earlier, the false equivalences are a running theme here. Continuing that in this part of the article, author makes a comparison between “terrorist attacks” and “murder in the name of love”
There is a very simple answer to the query — have you ever heard a terror outfit named “lover state of Iraq and Syria”?
Because we surely have seen a lot of such on the name of religion.
Now, the author criticizes Macron for his remark on religious extremism, in the same breath author also writes how “cartoons unleased terror attacks”
Author fails to understand that cartoons didn’t unleash any terrorist attack. It was the terrorist organizations made in the name of religion unleashed those attacks.
Charlie Hebdo has made such cartoons on many religions, including Christians. Why did they never face a terror attack before? 🤔
This simple question explains why Macron had to make that remark about religious extremism.
Now, author makes an argument that Frech govt is BULLYING others by by putting their weight behind the cartoons that led to beheading done by extremists.
It’s not BULLYING.
I see it more like retaliation of a violent attack on FoE by a few bigots who think beheading is justified for cartoons they don’t like.
Also, it’s funny that a author hiding context of French govt’s reaction is talking about context here 🤦♂️
In this paragraph author talks in length about having nuanced while discussing religious scriptures, but as soon as scriptures from other religions come, this nuance goes right out of the window.
case in point: this verse from Gita.
The ridiculous false comparisons that started in the beginning, continue here as well.
She translates “dharma” as “religion” which is WRONG.
Dharma — righteousness/duty
It’s different from religions.
Author makes similar comparisons from other religious texts.
It’s funny how the title of whole article manifests in last few paragraphs.
What’s more funny is — Gita was force-fitted among these verses in a failed attempt to paint it with same brush
Conclusion of the article is even more interesting.
Author preaches to be unapologetic and oppose the cartoon. Author says terror attacks don’t make cartoons less offensive.
But totally fails to comprehend that terror attacks are the reason why those cartoons got support.
Loved the article?
Leave a like, comment below your thoughts and consider helping An Open Letter through Patreon/Instamojo.
Instamojo: https://imjo.in/sVq9Dq
Patreon: https://patreon.com/AnOpenLetter
Note: Instamojo allows UPI, Paytm, Debit Card etc. Patreon allows credit card/PayPal only.
