Index.php

The current representation of conflict over the freedom to publish cartoons featuring the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) in western media since the confli...

In its original historical meaning, a (from the Italian cartone, meaning "big paper") is a full-size drawing made in some recoverable format as a for a further graphics, such as a painting or tapestry. In contemporary print media, an animation is an example, frequently humorous in intent. current representation of conflict over the freedom to write cartoons featuring the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) in western media since the conflict between freedom of speech and expression and Muslim sensitivities - obscures what is really going on at the deepest level of our collective international mind.

I strongly believe that the distribution of the infamous shows in Danish Jyllands-Posten was hardly any about the "ongoing discussion on freedom of expression that we cherish so highly", as argued by the authors. While I do believe that freedom of speech, expression and press is among the greatest human achievements, these freedoms should be guarded where and when possible and practical however, not at all costs.

That larger rules just take precedence over human life is one of the key 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 global human community, as well as the non-human community, future generations of individuals and other living creatures.

What is considered interesting is definitely premised on the underlying worldview. For example, for a racist joke to be observed as interesting, racism has to be an underlying worldview, we have to have an internal racist within us. The joke about the difference between a crazy and a trolley (a shopping trolley has a head of its) is just interesting when we still have some aspects of sexism within us (because so many of us, raised and living in patriarchal societies nearly inevitably do).

If on the other hand, the underlying worldview is the desire to negotiate - to work things out - with the other you become delicate about what you can say, when and where about such group. You're also careful in what form of habits you decide to engage in, preferring those who dont reaffirm various types of primary, structural, cultural, epistemological and ecological abuse.

Non-violent communication and comedy

If jokes that offer in bigotry, sexism, racism, ageism and the rest of the politically incorrect isms will be the perfect expression of bigoted, sexist, improper, orientalist, ageist and politically incorrect/hierarchically organized and (using Riane Eislers term) dominator society, what sort of jokes would a different society with a different underlying worldview produce? As an example, what could humour end up like in a society by which cultures of compassion, peace and non-violent communication are firmly set?

Perhaps:

1. People own up of their own stuff. There is an awareness of people own agenda, fundamental worldview, assumptions, thoughts, concerns, beliefs about self and others occurs. There is also an knowledge and awareness by what sort of activities could have certain (violence selling) effects.

2. There is a general knowing that your conversation can be part of the issue or part of the perfect solution is. That is, that your speech may be expression of verbal aggression or an expression of desire to discuss and work things out.

3. Comedy becomes an easy method of lowering inflated individual and collective Ego, hence you participate in laughing at your personal group and self more often then in laughing at her/him/them. You also do the later, if you should, in a safe space verbally, with your own personal, removed from the eyes and ears of her/him/them.

4. Reducing your own Ego also means that you dont identify so much with certain dogmatic maxims and policies that help define your own personal and collective identity. That's, you consider offence against yourself and your personal group as carefully as possible. And, most importantly of all, you dont respond to one form of (ie. epistemological, social) abuse with even more extreme one (ie. physical, direct violence).

5. Comedy becomes a means of destabilising centers of oppressive national, political, epistemological, financial and military power and ideally a means that can help produce a world without institutionalised violence and social injustice. Apparently, the Muslim world is full of Mullah cracks, and so far as I am aware, portraying Mullahs isn't regarded as out of bounds by the majority of Muslims. Such a simple editorial treatment might have spared many issues and extreme escalation of violence and still allow expression of the freedom to speak, expressing true feelings.

6. There is an appointment with local groups, and various minorities (racial, religious, gender) when it comes to the limitations of free speech.

7. You manage to distinguish between different humour styles, e.g. between Life Mocker (Loomans and Kolberg, 1993 and a Master, Joke Maker, Fun Meister. p. 15). While the Joy Master has mostly good qualities, is comfortable hearted, inclusive, inspiring, simple, humanising and recovery (ibid.) Life Mocker has mostly negative qualities, and is cynical, ironic, unique, cold hearted, worldly and dehumanising (ibid.). The positive sides of a Maker (e.g. wordplay, training stories, parody, helpful, useful) and Fun Meister (slapstick, clowning, naive, imitative, enjoyable) can be balanced using their negative attributes (JM: insulting, stinging, satiric, stereotyping, destructive; FM: ridiculing, dark humor, disaster and putting up with, painful, degrading) (ibid.).

Long lasting societal principles, the key problem is what's the spirit behind humour? Can it be to place down others and get back at them, in a single way or yet another, or to generate new depths of concern and mutual understanding?

Wonderfully, compassionately and genuinely coping with the existing struggle over values, freedoms and humour at the worldwide level is just about the necessity of our times. It's only by these means that we could possibly aspire to prevent an additional escalation of violence and also to guard all our liberties find out more