Abstract
The Danish cartoon affair presents a vehicle for rethinking some of our longstanding assumptions about liberal democracy and its capacity to accommodate cultural difference. The public and academic debates have tended to frame the affair as either a clash between liberal-democratic and illiberal religious values or as a question of whose position is most consistent with liberal-democratic values. We begin, instead, from the assumption that liberal-democratic values conflict, not only between liberalism and democracy, but also within liberalism and democracy. We argue that cases such as the Muhammad cartoons controversy present liberal democracies with choices about which liberal-democratic principles and conceptions of these principles they emphasize and when. Guiding these choices should also be the pragmatic question of how best to make multicultural democracies work. We suggest that the Muhammad cartoons encompass not one, but three distinct problem areas: the violation of a religious norm in the representation of Muhammad, attacks on Islam as a religion, and attacks on Muslims as a group. We examine how liberal democratic values and multicultural citizenship relate to each of these cases, and argue that attacks on Muslims as a group are a form of racism.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.