Samizdata

The way that the blogosphere in particular and West in general is slowly but surely focussing in on the all-too-human life of the very founder of Islam himself reminds me strongly of the way that we anti-Soviet elements in the 1980s finally stopped pratting around with nonsense about how Communism had been “betrayed” by Stalin, and said, no, it had just been done, by Lenin himself, and by Stalin, and by all Communists since then.

This from Scrappleface last Friday is a send-up correction note by the Nigerian newspaper that had sparked off the rioting by venturing a few mildly humorous observations about the Lenin of Islam:

“We regret our statement earlier this week that Mohammed would have chosen a bride from among the Miss World contestants. Upon further study of the life of the religious leader, we determined that he would have preferred to marry someone much younger than these women–since his favorite wife was Ayesha, who was six years old when he wed her.

“In addition, it is unlikely that Mohammed would have chosen just one bride from among the contestants, since he was married at least 11 times after his first wife died. The editors regret having printed such a poorly researched assertion.”

And how about this, from the “in fact” section of the December 2002 issue of Prospect (no link, you have to subscribe to view), picked up from the November issue of Commentary?:

The prophet Muhammad engaged in 78 battles, only one of which was defensive.

→ Continue reading: Muhammed and Lenin – the similarities and the differences

According to Ros Coward of the Wanker, we should be grateful to the Islamic rioters in Nigeria for reminding us of our shortcomings and just how far we have strayed from acceptable civilised standards:

“What an irony that fundamentalist Muslims managed to do what feminism ultimately failed to do: make Miss World a global political issue. As contestants flee to London, and Nigeria counts its dead, it is almost impossible to retain the idea that an annual parade of female flesh is just an innocent quest for universal beauty acceptable to all reasonable people.”

Of course! (Slap to the forehead) I should have realised that ‘Miss World’ is a deeply symbolic manifestation of class and gender struggle; the very antithesis of the dialectic rationale for the liberation of..er..something or other.

“In the west, the contest became as naff as bingo. It was feminism that represented modernity.”

That’s funny, I thought things like the silicon chip and the space shuttle represented modernity.

“Last year’s winner, Miss Nigeria herself pointed out that she is “the first black African woman to win”, because, for all its multiculturalism, the winners from black countries remained resolutely pale.”

That’s right, they weren’t ‘black’ enough. They were the wrong sort of ‘black’. In fact, they were all Uncle Toms still grovelling to ‘de White Massa.’

“How was this circus of womanhood going to respond to an issue of global political concern for women: the sentencing of Amina Lawal to death by stoning for adultery? Even a bunch of brainless bimbos would have found this a problem, but our post-feminist intellectual beauty queens couldn’t avoid it.”

‘Brainless bimbos’? Excuse me, but isn’t that a rather pejorative, sexist remark? Hate speech, in fact?

“The riots in Nigeria were ultimately triggered, not by the contest itself but by a piece in a local paper claiming the prophet himself might have chosen a wife from these beauties.”

If only all newspapers could be as sensitive as the ‘Wanker’ then surely there would be world peace!

“This is the same cultural naivety exposed by the bombing of the Sari club in Bali. The consolation some clubbers exchanged after the outrage betrays this same sense that the world is a playground where the true human (western) values can be paraded. Because no harm is meant, no offence should be taken. One clubber mourned the passing of the club on a website, saying “it was the United Nations of decadence” without any sense that this is what made it a target.”

Translation: the victims of the Bali bomb got what deserved and deserved what they got. They should have shrouded themselves in self-effacement and sensitivity. Instead they recklessly taunted and tortured those poor Islamic terrorists until they could tolerate it no more. They are the real victims.

“Now the reluctance to attack representatives of western values has disappeared even among those with no involvement in extremist organisations.”

And, let’s face it, in that extremist organisation known as the ‘Wanker’, that reluctance never existed in the first place.

“In such a world we should think carefully about what values we want to parade. Democracy, equality and tolerance certainly. But a beauty contest?”

We must abandon our sinful ways and foreswear all this drinking, dancing, laughing, carousing, loving and generally celebrating our lives. It’s unseemly; it’s uncivilised; it’s dangerous, dammit. We must aspire to the true hallmarks of civilised behaviour, like wearing sensible shoes, cross-referencing files in the Department of Social Security, exchanging Outreach Initiatives and discussing gender politics over an organic vegetable curry in a ‘Fair Trade’ workers co-operative canteen. That is the zenith of Western civilisation and it behoves us well to aspire to nothing more than that.

In order to survive we must be boring, po-faced, monochromatic, insecure, shot through with crippling guilt and terminally earnest. Just like…well, just like Ros Coward I should imagine.

Would somebody please send a message to Al-Qaeda to the effect that the editorial staff at the ‘Wanker’ are planning to sponsor a Naked Lesbian Dance Collective in Mecca. With a bit of luck, they’ll be next on the hit-list.