RickKerner750
The present representation of conflict over the freedom to publish cartoons featuring the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) in western media while the confli...
In its original historical meaning, a (from the Italian cartone, meaning "big paper") is a full-size drawing a for a further artwork as made in writing, such as a painting or tapestry. In modern print media, a cartoon is an illustration, frequently humorous in intention. Present representation of conflict over the freedom to create cartoons featuring the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) in western media as the conflict between freedom of speech and expression and Muslim sensitivities - obscures what is actually going on at the deepest degree of our collective international psyche.
I strongly believe that the distribution of the infamous characters in Danish Jyllands-Posten was almost no about the debate on freedom of expression that we cherish so highly", as argued by the authors. While I think that freedom of press, speech and expression is one of many greatest human achievements, these liberties must be protected where and when possible and sensible but not no matter what.
That larger principles just take precedence over human life is one of the main tenants of society develop on hierarchical and patriarchal values. The central tenant of a culture build on values of centrality of human (and human - nature) relatedness would be to just take seriously issues and interests of worldwide human community, along with the community, future generations of individuals and other living beings.
What's considered interesting is obviously premised on the underlying worldview. For example, for a racist joke to be observed as funny, bias needs to be an underlying worldview, we've to have an inner racist within us. The joke about the difference between a blonde and a trolley (a shopping trolley has a mind of its) is funny when we still have some aspects of sexism within us (since many of us, raised and living in patriarchal societies nearly certainly do).
If on the other hand, the fundamental worldview could be the desire to negotiate - to work things out - with the other you become sensitive about what you can say, when and where about such group. You're also careful about what type of behaviours you choose to engage in, choosing those who dont reaffirm various types of direct, structural, ethnic, epistemological and environmental violence.
Non-violent connection and humour
If jokes that deal in bigotry, sexism, bias, ageism and the rest of the politically incorrect isms are the quintessential expression of bigoted, sexist, racist, orientalist, ageist and politically incorrect/hierarchically structured and (using Riane Eislers period) dominator society, what type of jokes could a different society with a different underlying worldview produce? For example, what would humour be like in a culture by which cultures of non-violent communication, compassion and peace are firmly set?
Perhaps:
1. People own up of these own material. There is an understanding of people own agenda, thoughts, assumptions, actual worldview, fears, beliefs about self and the others exists. There's also an knowledge and awareness by what type of actions might have specific (abuse selling) outcomes.
2. There is a general understanding that your speech can be part of the issue or part of the perfect solution is. That is, that your speech may be expression of verbal violence or an expression of want to discuss and work things out.
3. Humour becomes a way of reducing inflated individual and collective Ego, thus you engage in laughing at self and your personal group more regularly then in laughing at her/him/them. You also do the later, if you should, in a safe house verbally, with your own personal, taken off the eyes and ears of her/him/them.
4. Cutting your own Ego entails that you dont identify so much with certain dogmatic axioms and rules that help determine your own individual and collective identity. That's, you consider offence against yourself and your own class as carefully as possible. And, most importantly of all, you dont respond to one type of (ie. epistemological, national) abuse with much more extreme one (ie. Real, direct violence).
5. Comedy becomes a means of destabilising centers of oppressive ethnic, political, epistemological, economic and military power and ideally a means that will help create a world without institutionalised violence and social injustice. Seemingly, the Muslim world is full of Mullah jokes, and as far as I understand, representing Mullahs is not regarded as out of bounds by most of Muslims. This kind of simple editorial intervention might have spared many issues and intense escalation of violence and still allow expression of the freedom to talk, expressing true feelings.
6. There's a consultation with local groups, and various minorities (racial, religious, sex) in terms of the limits of free speech.
7. You find a way to differentiate between different humour types, e.g. between Life Mocker Kolberg and (Loomans, 1993 and a Master, Joke Maker, Fun Meister. p. 15). As the Joy Master has mostly positive qualities, is comprehensive, impressive, warm hearted, humanising, innocent and healing (ibid.) Life Mocker has mostly negative qualities, and is cynical, cynical, special, cold hearted, worldly and dehumanising (ibid.). The positive sides of a Maker (e.g. wordplay, teaching experiences, parody, instructional, insightful) and Fun Meister (slapstick, clowning, naive, imitative, interesting) should be balanced with their negative attributes (JM: insulting, stinging, satiric, stereotyping, destructive; FM: ridiculing, black humour, loss and suffering, hurtful, degrading) (ibid.).
Regardless of the social rules, the primary issue is what is the spirit behind humor? Could it be to put down others and reunite at them, in a single way or still another, or to generate new depths of mutual understanding and concern?
Creatively, compassionately and genuinely coping with the present conflict over values, liberties and humour at the world wide level is among the most requisite of our times. It's only by these ensures that we're able to possibly aspire to prevent another escalation of violence and also to safeguard all our liberties a kasse
