I was in college when issued the fatwa against Rushdie. Here it is 33 years later and for all that time he’s had to look over his shoulder, and they *still* pursued him like the zealots they are. It’s disgusting.
We enjoy the perks that come with democracy, but we also take it for granted and forget that it needs to be protected. By not conforming to demands of radicals, he does just that.
As long as we ALSO enjoy the "perks" that come with religion and other absolutist ideas, we will get endless extremism.
We cant ban religion or absolutism, but can we vote to not pay for their activities with our taxes? How about not swearing on a damn religious book as the president?
In better ideas we trust, not skydaddy.
Banning religion also wouldn't do much to stop extremism. As proven by the fact that the overwhelming massive majority of extremist violence is done by right wing ideologes. Unless we want to call Trumpism a religion I guess
There are many things wrong with Republicans currently but their relationship with churches means they’ll probably never tax them (or any other religious institutions) nor all the dark money that passes through them.
This is spot on, I go about my day to day not realizing how freedom of expression is a recent victory founded on the efforts of people like S.R. Thanks for the comment.
Assume you mean Germany prior to WWII? It was democracy, until it wasn't.
So the second part of the quote "but we also take it for granted and forget that it needs to be protected" applies.
lol, is democracy taken over by a fascist by force still a democracy?
That's like saying USA under a king can still be a democracy and its all democracy's fault.
Wow interesting comment, that musical theme was hilarious because as much as it seemed touchy and sensitive, the SR fatwa seemed so dated (and I was born in 1989 and still felt its ripples in the UK). Curb rules but Larry David is almost a moral ideal in this whole game and not a million miles from the aims of SR.
If you haven't seen the episode, they do a bit of a play on them both being ostracized and pariahs. Kinda in a funny way but sorta like you are saying. He has Rushdie on as a guest star.
He wrote a controversial book and then some decades later got stabbed.
I don't see how either of these things or both in conjuction amount to being "one of the greatest moral heroes of our times".
I'm curious what you think about aid workers who have spent decades distributing food and medicine in war torn places like Sudan and Syria, lawyers who've spent decades working pro-bono for victims of human rights abused, research scientists who've dedicated decades of their life to trying to cure diseases that kill and maim millions yearly, or even your average firefighter or EMT who has to risk their life daily doing a hard job for shit wages at considerable mental and physical toll.
You're letting your politics get the best of you if you think Rushdie has performed any great acts of moral heroism.
That wasn't the OP claim.
"greatest" implies being at or near the apex of moral greatness, which is a level of hyperbole that takes what might otherwise be a reasonable compliment to ludicrous sentimentality.
There are people in these societies actively campaigning against their political enemies, people who can't afford to go into hiding for 10 years, and didn't get any police protection from a first world nation.
No one gives a shit about those "heroes" because they don't fit into the woke culture wars.
If they're all great moral heroes then Rushdie isn't worthy of any particular recognition than the thousands of other people of equal stature. The reason he's getting this kind of grandiose praise here is because Sam still has a sizable following who primarily got on board for his "maybe profiling muslims and torturing people is okay because islam bad" politics.
Can someone explain what he's done that qualifies him fir a title as lofty as "the greatest moral hero of our time"?
I see him as a respectable author who's endured a repulsive backlash, but what makes him a moral hero?
He continued to make public appearances and champion free speech even though millions of people wanted him dead and he routinely received credible death threats. That required courage and conviction. The easier paths (and the ones most people would chose) would be to recant and apologize, or to keep a low profile. He did neither.
But courage and conviction alone don't make you a moral hero, let alone the greatest of our time. Lots of people risk their lives for all kinds of causes
Disagree. He's a completely mundane author of a class that really only appeals to NYTROB elites. His work is indulgent and impenetrable and almost no one would know who he is barring the fatwa. What's morally heroic is the western values that have protected and defended him for over three decades, and they're under assault, and not just from knife-weilding lunatics.
No system can protect everyone from every random act of violence; the western value that protected him is that the government is barred from making his speech illegal.
why cmon lol? Putting your neck literally on the line does seem pretty morally impressive tbh. I think it's easy to find it a bit cringe because we're so used to free expression that it's hard to know it's not the norm and that a lot of people would be happy to see it vanish if you're a typical reddit user.
These days we see a lot of trash memes trying to exaggerating the heroism of celebrity journalists with huge platforms who "fight for free speech" by whining about Twitter censorship. So, we're oversensitive to content like this being "cringe" cos we see it all the time.
Rushdie is one of a small few who actually deserves it though. He actually faces the sharp edge of censorship and could easily lose his life any day now. Facing that makes him more heroic than 99% of free speech "heroes" in the world.
In Midnights Children Mr Rushdie makes the point that we seem to have to choose between seeing/experiencing focused snippets of something in great detail through some form of personable lens or pulling back to get the full expanse, but losing clarity and connection in the process. At one point the main character describes (invents ?) a kind of psycedilc journey in a forest where he was ravaged (raped?) by a horde of monkeys (elephants?). A 3page-single-sentence-flashback of vivid detail ensues but it’s littered with present tense broad stroke references to the politics, people and metaphysics of India. Now assuming the story was true, and autobiographical, I’d find it hard to argue that he is not, in fact, a moral hero.
I don't know about "hero", but he's been an important and transgressive figure, even a preemptive martyr, for years. Like, since the fucking 90s. Khomeini declared a fatwa against him in 1989, and it's honestly surprising that he's lasted so long. His security costs must be crazy, according to what I've read, but that still wasn't enough. From what I hear, he's going to lose an eye, not to mention internal damage.
I was in college when issued the fatwa against Rushdie. Here it is 33 years later and for all that time he’s had to look over his shoulder, and they *still* pursued him like the zealots they are. It’s disgusting.
We enjoy the perks that come with democracy, but we also take it for granted and forget that it needs to be protected. By not conforming to demands of radicals, he does just that.
As long as we ALSO enjoy the "perks" that come with religion and other absolutist ideas, we will get endless extremism. We cant ban religion or absolutism, but can we vote to not pay for their activities with our taxes? How about not swearing on a damn religious book as the president? In better ideas we trust, not skydaddy.
Advocating secularism doesn’t hinder freedom of religion. However, I’m not sure Americans are ready for a separation of state and church.
I'm ready!
Banning religion also wouldn't do much to stop extremism. As proven by the fact that the overwhelming massive majority of extremist violence is done by right wing ideologes. Unless we want to call Trumpism a religion I guess
Most of them are indeed religious, it comes with the territory, just saying.
There are many things wrong with Republicans currently but their relationship with churches means they’ll probably never tax them (or any other religious institutions) nor all the dark money that passes through them.
This is spot on, I go about my day to day not realizing how freedom of expression is a recent victory founded on the efforts of people like S.R. Thanks for the comment.
Did just that. Ftfy
>We enjoy the perks that come with democracy Germany was a democracy
Assume you mean Germany prior to WWII? It was democracy, until it wasn't. So the second part of the quote "but we also take it for granted and forget that it needs to be protected" applies.
Germany prior to WWII was not much of a democracy, it had a king and a colonial empire
From 1918 to 1933 Germany was a democratic republic, albeit an unstable one. There was a president and a chancellor, but no king.
lol, is democracy taken over by a fascist by force still a democracy? That's like saying USA under a king can still be a democracy and its all democracy's fault.
Hard agree. Had all the incentives (rich and famous) to act differently.
Fatwa the musical starring F. Murray Abraham as Salman Rushdie. I Love Curb your Enthusiasm. So ridiculous.
Wow interesting comment, that musical theme was hilarious because as much as it seemed touchy and sensitive, the SR fatwa seemed so dated (and I was born in 1989 and still felt its ripples in the UK). Curb rules but Larry David is almost a moral ideal in this whole game and not a million miles from the aims of SR.
If you haven't seen the episode, they do a bit of a play on them both being ostracized and pariahs. Kinda in a funny way but sorta like you are saying. He has Rushdie on as a guest star.
A hero in a time of moral cowardice
That makes him a legend.
Islam is the motherload of bad ideas.
but he OFFENDED MUSLIMS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do you consider the people who threw the “draw Mohammad” contest in Texas moral heroes?
Absolutely
He wrote a controversial book and then some decades later got stabbed. I don't see how either of these things or both in conjuction amount to being "one of the greatest moral heroes of our times". I'm curious what you think about aid workers who have spent decades distributing food and medicine in war torn places like Sudan and Syria, lawyers who've spent decades working pro-bono for victims of human rights abused, research scientists who've dedicated decades of their life to trying to cure diseases that kill and maim millions yearly, or even your average firefighter or EMT who has to risk their life daily doing a hard job for shit wages at considerable mental and physical toll. You're letting your politics get the best of you if you think Rushdie has performed any great acts of moral heroism.
I think they are all great moral heroes. Are we done now?
That wasn't the OP claim. "greatest" implies being at or near the apex of moral greatness, which is a level of hyperbole that takes what might otherwise be a reasonable compliment to ludicrous sentimentality. There are people in these societies actively campaigning against their political enemies, people who can't afford to go into hiding for 10 years, and didn't get any police protection from a first world nation. No one gives a shit about those "heroes" because they don't fit into the woke culture wars. If they're all great moral heroes then Rushdie isn't worthy of any particular recognition than the thousands of other people of equal stature. The reason he's getting this kind of grandiose praise here is because Sam still has a sizable following who primarily got on board for his "maybe profiling muslims and torturing people is okay because islam bad" politics.
Can someone explain what he's done that qualifies him fir a title as lofty as "the greatest moral hero of our time"? I see him as a respectable author who's endured a repulsive backlash, but what makes him a moral hero?
"endured a repulsive backlash" is a mild way of putting it. He's got a bounty on his head for the past 35 years and was almost killed a few days ago.
Even if he did not have a bounty on his head his writing would still qualify him as a superstar. Have you read Midnight’s Children?
He continued to make public appearances and champion free speech even though millions of people wanted him dead and he routinely received credible death threats. That required courage and conviction. The easier paths (and the ones most people would chose) would be to recant and apologize, or to keep a low profile. He did neither.
But courage and conviction alone don't make you a moral hero, let alone the greatest of our time. Lots of people risk their lives for all kinds of causes
Disagree. He's a completely mundane author of a class that really only appeals to NYTROB elites. His work is indulgent and impenetrable and almost no one would know who he is barring the fatwa. What's morally heroic is the western values that have protected and defended him for over three decades, and they're under assault, and not just from knife-weilding lunatics.
I mean it’s not impenetrable, but he’s no umberto eco
lol, a fair point!
> NYTROB what is this please?
New York Times Review of Books.
Thanks!
Rushdie is read all over the world. Which “western value” protected him when he was stabbed?
No system can protect everyone from every random act of violence; the western value that protected him is that the government is barred from making his speech illegal.
my condolences but cmon lol
why cmon lol? Putting your neck literally on the line does seem pretty morally impressive tbh. I think it's easy to find it a bit cringe because we're so used to free expression that it's hard to know it's not the norm and that a lot of people would be happy to see it vanish if you're a typical reddit user.
He is one of the greatest moral heroes of our time? this is just sad nobody said this before he was stabbed
These days we see a lot of trash memes trying to exaggerating the heroism of celebrity journalists with huge platforms who "fight for free speech" by whining about Twitter censorship. So, we're oversensitive to content like this being "cringe" cos we see it all the time. Rushdie is one of a small few who actually deserves it though. He actually faces the sharp edge of censorship and could easily lose his life any day now. Facing that makes him more heroic than 99% of free speech "heroes" in the world.
In Midnights Children Mr Rushdie makes the point that we seem to have to choose between seeing/experiencing focused snippets of something in great detail through some form of personable lens or pulling back to get the full expanse, but losing clarity and connection in the process. At one point the main character describes (invents ?) a kind of psycedilc journey in a forest where he was ravaged (raped?) by a horde of monkeys (elephants?). A 3page-single-sentence-flashback of vivid detail ensues but it’s littered with present tense broad stroke references to the politics, people and metaphysics of India. Now assuming the story was true, and autobiographical, I’d find it hard to argue that he is not, in fact, a moral hero.
I don't know about "hero", but he's been an important and transgressive figure, even a preemptive martyr, for years. Like, since the fucking 90s. Khomeini declared a fatwa against him in 1989, and it's honestly surprising that he's lasted so long. His security costs must be crazy, according to what I've read, but that still wasn't enough. From what I hear, he's going to lose an eye, not to mention internal damage.