A preemptive surrender

On November 2, 2004 a Dutch film maker named Theo van Gogh was shot eight times, had his throat slashed to near decapitation, stabbed in the torso several times and then had a note pinned to his chest with one of two knives embedded there.

---

The murder was committed by one Mohammed Bouyeri, a 26-year-old, Dutch-born Muslim who objected to the film Submission, which van Gogh produced in cooperation with Aayan Hirsi Ali, a female Somali immigrant and former Muslim who was also a member of the Dutch legislature. The film was critical of the way Islam treated women, specifically about the Koran’s assertion that a man may have sex with his wife whenever he wishes regardless of whether or not she acquiesces and the physical abuse that many Muslim wives are made to suffer. As a result, Hirsi Ali had to go into hiding and remains under 24-hour protection by armed guards. Van Gogh also produced a movie about the murder of Pym Fortuyn, an openly gay Dutch member of parliament, who advocated restricting immigration of Muslims into Holland. Fortuyn felt that the values of Islam were at odds with the values of the Dutch people whose generally permissive attitudes were seen by many Muslim clerics to be blasphemous. Like van Gogh, Fortuyn was also shot to death because of his views. Currently another Dutch Member of Parliament, Geert Wilders, is risking his life for his plans to release a short film on the Internet that is also critical of Islam. The film, called Fitna, links verses of the Koran to violence and the Dutch government is now looking at ways to legally stop Wilders from airing the film. Stating that the film will put Dutch citizens at risk worldwide, Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende is urging Wilder to reconsider. While the Dutch Prime Minister’s concern for the safety of Dutch citizens at home and abroad is admirable, a larger issue should be whether or not the Dutch people will be able to continue maintaining their liberal views in the face of violent threats by those who would want to curb them. It is without a doubt true that if any other religion threatened Dutch citizens with mayhem and death because of what they said or believed about those religions, the Dutch government would take a very hard line. I can’t imagine that the Dutch Reform Church or the Catholic church or even factions within any churches being able to cause the Dutch government to try to find ways to get the Dutch people to keep their views to themselves. This extraordinary concern about violence only seems to apply to issues that concern Muslims. And the Dutch government’s concern about violence isn’t exactly unfounded, as near violent protests have flourished in Iran, Pakistan and Indonesia, even before the film was released. Clearly there is cause for concern. However, a much larger issue is that of exactly what individuals or political parties are allowed to say or believe without having to be concerned about having their heads severed. In that regard Prime minister Balkenende totally misses the point by urging Dutch citizens to mind their Ps and Qs as what they say may not be to the liking of Islamic extremists. Once a government caves in to that kind of pressure, they are admitting that they are no longer effective in serving their citizens. If Balkenende can’t control what happens to Dutch people with unpopular views, then the Dutch are in serious need of a new government. While no government can control what happens to its citizens in other countries, the idea that the free exchange of ideas should be curbed because of a risk of violence is ludicrous in that it plays into the hands of those who are doing the intimidating. It is particularly ironic that it would be the Dutch government wishing to stifle free discourse because of unpleasant and unforeseen consequences. During the Second World War the Nazis occupied Holland and the free expression of ideas was severely curtailed, as was the practice of certain religions. At least then, the country was full of foreign troops who enforced their rule with an overt threat of violence. Now the Dutch government seems to want to capitulate just because there is a slight possibility that violence could break out. It’s a form of preemptive surrender that will have far greater and more serious consequences than the occupation by the Nazis had.