Disclaimer: I have two degrees in religious studies and history, am a social liberal and a fiscal conservative (and a self-proclaimed ‘toothless-moderate’), and am two (or three) scotches into the evening.
With all that said…
I watched the last two Southparks. I think the show, in general, in hilarious–if for no other reason than it makes fun of everybody and if you can’t laugh at yourself, then you’re living life wrong–and these past two episodes were just riotous (as in hilarious, not violence-inciting).
I, personally, would not wear such a shirt. That’s due to a number of things. First, I’m the kind of person that hates bumper stickers. I hate McCain/Palin bumper stickers and I hate Obama/Biden bumper stickers–in fact, I hate anything on my car, even those plate-holders from the dealer! I have feelings on the subject–not as strong as some–but I don’t really think anyone driving behind you cares what you think. Whether it’s a “Go Vegan, Save the Planet” or a LaRue “Extremely Right Wing” sticker (which I’m strongly contemplating pasting on the “Go Vegan, Save the Planet” car parked out in my lot), I just don’t think anyone gives a flying fk.
But second, it’s unnecessary. One of the sad realities in life is that perception is often more important than reality. I honestly hope the producers of Southpark stick to their guns and keep pushing buttons. But that’s because they have the chance to have a positive effect. They are in a position where they can make social commentary and significantly contribute to the social dialogue on the subject. And as much as wearing a t-shirt around might be ‘doing the same thing’… it’s not. On an individual scale, it has very little chance of affecting society’s discourse on the subject but has a very real potential to seriously piss some folks off. (Read on if you’re saying “So what?” right now.)
Think of bumper stickers. Either the person behind you voted for the other guy and thinks, “God, what an asshole” or “Haha, loser.” Or the person behind you voted for the same guy and thinks, “That’s my kinda guy.” What does it matter? You’re preaching to the choir in one instance, and just pissing someone else off in another. (Or the person behind you just doesn’t give a crap.)
So, as individualistic as the American spirit is, the potential to have any significant effect is, to be honest, slim. So what are the downsides? Physical violence (although not likely), for one. But you could really insult someone. You might say, “So what?” But right now the battle is being fought over the moderate Muslims. They might be on the fence and being another “arrogant American” isn’t going to help your case. In fact, it’s likely to hurt it. Giving a huge middle finger to the extremists, while satisfying, will only set you back. Aiming for incremental progress through the moderates, while time consuming and frustrating, is the only way to achieve anything. So your goal is either to bring about change and sensibility, or just piss off people who disagree with you.
Let me digress a moment and offer up what might be called an anecdote. I took a class on Hinduism a few years ago with a really bright professor. He was a Hindu himself but I swear to God, he had 50% of the academic literature on the subject (worldwide) memorized and personally knew at least 75% of the authoritative scholars in the field. Really one of the smartest people I’ve ever known–I was seriously intimidated by his intellect; I have immense respect for the guy. We spent a semester (which, given, isn’t that long) learning about all the basic in’s and out’s of Hinduism and how there’s really no single religion, it’s more of a huge, and often contradictory, conglomeration of similar tribal religions, grouped together by the Muslims and the British over the course of history. And on the last day of class he asks, “So, imagine you’re flying home for Christmas in a few days and you sit next to someone who asks you what you do. You say you’re a college student and you’re studying religion. They ask you what kind of courses you take. You tell them Hinduism. They ask you ‘What did you learn about Hinduism?’ What do you say?” Everyone offered up their answers and he finished by saying, “The ‘right’ answer is: it depends. If they’re Hindu, they’re going to have strong beliefs on the subject and you should just avoid it. They believe what they believe and there’s no sense in you arguing otherwise, you’ll just make the rest of the flight uncomfortable for both of you. If they know nothing about it, use your judgement. Some people might be ready to hear ‘There’s no one thing called Hinduism’ while other people might only be ready to hear a simplistic version of the truth. I study this stuff for a living. I teach it. I write books on it. And my answer to you is still, ‘it depends.’ Some people are open to whatever you have to say, some people are ready for only a simple version, and some people only want to hear exactly what they believe.”
My studies were focused on early Christianity. I find it fascinating how dramatically the religion changed and morphed in the first 3 or 4 centuries it was alive. I’ve studied heretics before they were heretics, splinter sects before there was an orthodox sect, and various councils which changed the face of the religion based on what seemed to be politics. I’ve studied secular interpretations of the history, religious interpretations of the history, and interpretations of the history based entirely on ignorance and willful misinterpretation. And yet still, when someone asks about it or someone says something which is factually untrue, my response depends on who the person is. If they’re a friend, I might get into a 3-hour discussion on the matter. If it’s a co-worker, I might equivocate a little bit and say, “Well, an alternative view/interpretation is…,” and if it’s a stranger, I’m likely to just pass over the subject altogether.
That’s not because I’m a coward or that I think ignorance is fine. It’s because some people aren’t ready to hear dissenting opinions and anything they hear and don’t like won’t simply fall on deaf ears, it’ll be counter-productive.
I think such a shirt stands to achieve little. I think the creators of Southpark have a very large and influential soap box which they can use to spread enlightened ideals of tolerance and get people to understand that a CARTOON Jesus watching internet porn or Buddha snorting crack (from the episode) is far worse than showing a CARTOON depiction of Mohammed just standing around. But I think the soapbox of the individual cannot have even the same proportional effect and yet stands to incur problems just as severe.
Further, flying in the face of Muslim ideals and laws will accomplish nothing. The way to overcome extremism in any form (whether it’s Muslim, religious, political, etc.) is not extremism of the opposing poles, but moderation. And right now I think anything which enables extremists to group the moderate Muslims in with ‘arrogant infidels’ is harmful to both camps.
I’m totally with you in my frustration. I agree, it’s completely asinine. But I think it’s a bad idea for the same reason that I hate Michael Moore. I’m left-leaning on social issues, but Michael Moore is a total asshole and all he does (besides making boatloads of money off of his films) is make it easier for the right to group moderates or left-of-centers in with the cooks on the far left who really only care about pissing off ‘the other guy.’ That’s why I dislike Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly as much as I dislike Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann. They’ve all got an agenda which gets in the way (to greater and lesser extents) with presenting and participating in a productive and positive social dialogue.
If you’ve ever seen Jon Stewart’s famous appearance on Crossfire (and even if you haven’t), you’ll understand that the greatest danger to both the right and the left, is the huge polarization that the extreme right and left try to accomplish. I think such a shirt, as correct as I think it would be, does nothing but polarize the issue.
We’re all gun people here. We know that you can have a temper and you can have a gun, but not both. We all know that with those 2.5 pounds of steel and lead on our hips we have a responsibility to be able to judge a situation as “not worth it.” I think that if the same level-headedness was brought to bear on this issue, we could probably agree that such shirts are just “not worth it” (that guy’s a real jerk and I’d love to give him a piece of my mind, but he’s just not worth it).
I’ll fight to the death for your right to make, sell, buy, and wear those shirts. And even though I agree with the idea, and think it’s kind of funny, I’ll still counsel you the entire time that you shouldn’t do it.
I hope that made sense and didn’t piss off too many people.
