Thought police hijacking free speech

AIRING honest views builds tolerance.

NATIONAL Public Radio former analyst Juan Williams has learned an important lesson: beware the M-word.

Williams, fired from his radio job for an offhand remark he made about Muslims on the Fox News network, has become the latest victim of the thought police.

What did he say? That he gets a little nervous when he sees people on aeroplanes in “Muslim garb”. Bzzzzzt. Off with his lips! And so Williams is no longer affiliated with NPR.

Williams’s ouster followed closely on the heels of Bill O’Reilly’s own public drumming on The View, the girl show where women of different decades discuss current events in various octaves that cannot be perceived by heterosexual males. There. How many people did I manage to offend with that facetious but true-ish description?

O’Reilly had the effrontery to say that Muslims attacked us on 9/11. Bzzzzzt. Amid much screeching (female bluster), Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar stalked off stage in protest. O’Reilly managed to keep his job, despite having said something true. But not completely true.

What we have is a failure to qualify. In O’Reilly’s case, clearly he should have said “extremist Muslims” or “Muslim terrorists”, not simply Muslims, as he subsequently clarified. We’ve managed to evolve far enough in this country to understand that not all Muslims are guilty of attacking us, and that the other 1.6 billion neighbourly Muslims shouldn’t be smeared along with the 19 evildoers who hijacked aeroplanes.

Neither Williams nor O’Reilly deserved the outrage. The 9/11 attacks obviously were carried out by men who claimed to be committing mass murder/suicide for Allah.

And, guess what? Lots of Americans suffer an involuntary free-associative moment when boarding an aeroplane alongside someone whose attire says, “Oh, by the way, I’m a serious-enough Muslim to dress in the way Allah commands”, but no worries.

Perhaps we shouldn’t entertain those thoughts, but we do. Is it better that we air our fears and address them, or should we repress them and keep our prayers to ourselves? Wait. Let me rephrase that. Let’s do keep our prayers to ourselves, but let’s also speak openly about our fears.

What might have followed Williams’s statement, far more useful than a sanctimonious public flogging, was the conversation we’re now having. Or at least that I’m having. That conversation might include asking the following questions: Why are we afraid of people in Muslim attire? Is that rational? What can we do about it? How do we move beyond subconscious profiling? It is tough for mere humans to move beyond their natural – and sometimes logic-based – fears and prejudices. Sometimes fear keeps us alive; sometimes it creates unfair assumptions. Let’s talk about that.

Let’s figure out how not to fear and smear people who are not like us, but with whom we must share the planet – and the plane.

Moral of the stories: we’ll get nowhere fast in our commendable search for equilibrium and tolerance by suppressing the expression of honest thoughts.

If we suppress speech, we risk missing the great ideas that might emerge from the chaos of our less careful thoughts.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply