Sender: -2.6 (spamval) -- NONE
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.60.0602050943030.11909 &AElig assos>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0602051215290.7275 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0602041630410.7275 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>   <Pine.LNX.4.64.0602041710120.7275 &AElig boston.eecs.umich.edu>  <Pine.GSO.4.60.0602050943030.11909 &AElig assos>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 12:52:52 -0500 (EST)
To: Uluc Saranli <saranli &AElig cs.bilkent.edu.tr>
cc: improvetheworld &AElig umich.edu
From: Daniel Reeves <dreeves &AElig umich.edu>
Subject: Re: view the infamous cartoons, support free speech, buy legos
Status: O

I disagree, Uluc:  there were several world-improving conclusions from the 
feminist debate, listed under "things we can do" on the itw whiteboard.

In that spirit, let's make such a list for the problem of Islamism (nb: 
not the problem of Islam -- and, btw, no one's allowed an opinion on any 
of this till you read James's email which lays out the real context of 
this debate).

I'd love to hear more thoughts from you especially Uluc, since you live 
in a theoretically open, secular, muslim society.

Here's the list so far:
   http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves/improvetheworld

Also, I added a rationale (ie, James's email) to the directory of images 
and am resetting the vote in light of that.


--- \/   FROM Uluc Saranli AT 06.02.05 10:27 (Today)   \/ ---

> Well, realistically, I don't think doing it this way will go very far in 
> improving the world.
>
> My reaction to this will not be from a religious standpoint, but a 
> psychological one. As some of you know, I am by no means a religious person 
> (despite the *very* useful indication of "Islam" as my religion on my Turkish 
> ID :)) so I don't personally care any depictions of any prohet in any way.
>
> Back to my take on this. The worst way to convince somebody on a topic is to 
> spit on their face, tell them their mother is a bad woman and start loudly 
> calling them names. Except a few people who are exceptionally mature and 
> calm, this will almost surely get you some sort of physically or verbally 
> violent reaction in response. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to justify 
> any of the bombings or the obviously stupid reaction of the muslims, but as 
> the "defenders of all things good", I would think the west could have been a 
> bit more knowledgeable about basic human nature.
>
> To me, this whole episode about cartoons seriously feels like a 
> primary-school kid fight than an intelligent exchange about free-speech or 
> religious rights or any meaningful topic. And this partially includes your 
> excited posting of the cartoons on your web page, Dan. This is not to say 
> that censoring is ok and we 5A5Ashould be intimidated by terrorist actions. 
> So, in that sense, it's great you can, and did post them up. However, from a 
> practical perspective, this will achieve very little to further our cause of 
> improving the world since it is an action which conveniently ignores the 
> personalities of the very people you are hoping to change.
>
> You can either get all worked up about the Muslim reaction to this and take 
> silly actions in the name of free-speech to infuriate them further, or you 
> can sit down and think of constructive ways of inducing change. Constructive 
> criticism and creative solutions to dealing with immature idiots are very 
> hard to construct. It saddens me that we, as people who claim to know how to 
> improve this world, cannot go beyond participating in the cat-fight.
>
> Your discussions on radical/constructive feminism was not conclusive on this 
> either, so I don't expect there to be consensus this time around. So, bring 
> on the flame! (you can call me names, it's ok :))
>
> - Uluc.
>
> On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Daniel Reeves wrote:
>
>> And by the way, I'm completely serious about this. I think this is a way 
>> that improvetheworld can literally improve the world.
>> 
>> Also, please don't be shy about chiming in on this.  Once the first message 
>> is sent it's really no more burden for people to delete the whole thread 
>> (as long as you leave the subject line intact).
>> 
>> 
>> (PS, I can see from the web logs that lots of you have viewed the pictures 
>> already so don't pretend you're not listening! :)
>> 
>> 
>> --- \/   FROM Daniel Reeves AT 06.02.04 17:03 (Today)   \/ ---
>> 
>>> A Danish newspaper recently published cartoons depicting Mohammed and 
>>> muslims as terrorists.  Muslims are up in arms about it.  In fact, they've 
>>> burnt down the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Syria, as a start.
>>> 
>>> It's all over the news but no US newspaper has the backbone to print the 
>>> cartoons.  I guess terrorism works. So this is an opportunity to fight for 
>>> free speech by helping make sure the agenda of the radical religious right 
>>> backfires.  And so, improvetheworld brings you:
>>>
>>>  http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves/itw/mohammed
>>>    (or google improvetheworld)
>>> 
>>> Oh, and since muslims are calling for boycotts of Danish products in 
>>> response to those cartoons, you should also buy more Danish stuff.  Like 
>>> Legos.
>>> 
>>> <ducking>,
>>> Danny
>> 
>> -- 
>> http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves  - -  search://"Daniel Reeves"
>> 
>

-- 
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves  - -  search://"Daniel Reeves"

"I have enough money to last me the rest of my life, unless I
buy something." -- Jackie Mason