Editor,
I would like to enlighten Joachim Oberst on the principles of free speech as well as the idea of a privately owned and operated media outlet. It seems like he favors state-sanctioned media that reports the party line, or only speech that has been sterilized to nothing.
First of all, the Danish paper is private property. The editors there do have the right to determine what they will or will not publish. While rejecting cartoons that may have been offensive to Christians while publishing the Muhammad cartoons was hypocritical, it still is the paper's right to select the content that will be published for consumption.
Second, the Supreme Court of the United States determined under case 485 U.S. 46, Hustler Magazine Inc. et al. v. Falwell, on Feb. 24, 1988, that speech could not be restrained based upon hurt feelings when there was no other objective gauge to measure the grievance by, such as outright libel or slander.
Public figures cannot claim the same degree of protection as private persons, and the same can be said for historical personages. After all, many within the loony lefty crowd who now preach restraint had no problem with depictions of the Virgin Mary in a bikini or smeared with dung. It is also no big secret that many state-owned or state-approved publications in the Islamic world publish cartoons portraying Jews as vampires, bloodsuckers and as other negative stereotypes.
So Oberst is just as guilty as the Danish papers of being selective in his interpretations of sensitivities. He also omits the fact that many of the riots were state-inspired and sanctioned, most likely a means of diverting tensions from the realities of high inequities of wealth distribution, lack of economic and educational opportunities, poor roads, water and infrastructure. In order to retain a hold on power, many regimes inspire external or internal tensions by channeling popular focus toward some adversary or affront.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
The classic case for this is Argentina's Falklands invasion in 1982 - as that nation's Dirty War raged on and the populace became increasingly restless, Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands to stir up nationalistic support at home.
The cartoon riots are simply paragraphs lifted from the Argentine textbook - governments who do not allow for much dissent domestically inspire rage toward some outside force.
Sorry, but Oberst's letter has been measured, weighed and found quite wanting.
Brandon Curtis
UNM alumnus
