I found the nyt article on the basic difference between American (note I do not say 'Christian') and Muslim perceptions of the common phrase "I hate and reject what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." very well explained. It is a crucial difference.

Unfortunately, I know the only people who will read it are those who don't need to . . .

Best wishes
Jon

I can at least understand why the media favor the first set of pics--fear generates sales. But what I don't get is why the right-wing religionists in this country have so much invested in the "crazie" image. Why is it so important to them to believe Muslims are "crazie" and to convince everyone else the Muslims are "crazie"?

Kate

The anti violence demonstrations number in the thousands.

America is similar in that a minority of the population is fundamentalist vs the remainder which is either non-observant or atheist.

Suggest you read your own linked postings - and the postings they link to - a bit more carefully before mounting your expected arguments against me :) I seem to have read your referenced article more thoroughly than you have . . .

Best wishes
Jon

A muslim, a communist, and an illegal alien walk into a bar.

The bartender asks, "What'll you have Mr. Obama?"

-Ron-

Apparently for you it boiled down to the opposition of "American" vs "Muslim" perception. Just as there is no one Muslim viewpoint or attitude obviously there is not an American one either. I don't imagine there is one British way of thinking about the Muslim world either.

We [Americans] have decided that the potential unhappy consequences of a strong free speech regime must be tolerated because the principle is more important than preventing any harm it might permit. We should not be surprised, however, if others in the world - most others, in fact - disagree, not because they are blind and ignorant but because they worship God and truth rather than the First Amendment, which not only keeps God and truth at arm's length but regards them with a deep suspicion.

The author's words, not mine, but yes, I do think it is a very germane view that has seldom been taken into account in the current troubles, and I've never seen it expressed before in the press. Surely you have noticed that the protests in the Muslim world have been against America, not against Christianity?

I do not see why you think we have an argument. I applauded your original post.

Best wishes
Jon

I agree with Fish that Westerners (Locke was no American, aye?) and Easterners (not just Muslims) have very different psychologies. I have some direct experience in this vein as a result of meeting and studying with Sikhs from India (IOW, not "westernized") over many years. Things that seem utterly normal to them seem extreme to us. Separation of the sexes during meetings, as an example. Some westerners coming to check it out walk away when they encounter such things that to us can seem like a journey backward to the seventeenth century.

Therein lies the problem: the judging of cultures as if they lie along a continuum of human progress from bestiality to enlightenment. That in itself is a rather western concept. It is as incorrect as the notion of progress in evolution. Equally as wrong-headed as the Chinese (Han) and Japanese racial-superiority mindsets that are still quite ubiquitous.