The Dutch Go Over The Edge

The Geek always enjoyed his lecture trips to Holland. The Dutch government is an excellent host. The Dutch people are charming. Amsterdam is a flat out hoot. Even though the Geek is given to breaking paradigms and possessing ideas far outside the scope of conventional wisdom, he always had a tolerant and polite audience for his controversial views.

It is this background which caused the Geek to be shocked speechless when the Amsterdam court ordered the public prosecutor to prosecute Gert Wilders for the crimes of deprecating the deity and inciting hatred on the basis of religion. The instrument of Wilder's offense was his short film Fitna. The Geek has watched the "criminal" video and found it to be inoffensive.

But then the Geek is not a Muslim. Neither is he easily offended. Nor is the Geek given to an eager search for offense and insult.

The Geek understands that the Dutch freedom of expression is not absolute even though it is enshrined in the constitution. The Dutch constitution allows limitations on expression in the interest of protecting or guaranteeing public order.

These limitations are unfortunate. The operative words are hazy, portmanteau terms open to wide differences of interpretation and application.

Equally unfortunate are the laws which Wilders is alleged to have violated. One of these is redolent of the long discarded blasphemy laws in the United States. The other is a sort of standard issue anti-hate speech law, thus serving to underscore the dangers resident in prohibitions of this nature.

The Geek understands that internal Dutch politics either is or may well be at play in the Wilders prosecution. In any event a slight majority (53% to 47%) of the Dutch population approves of the prosecution. This slight majority may be due to the unpleasant and controversial behavior of Mr Wilders and his political party.

Still the Geek has to wonder if the Dutch majority realises the peril in which their nation now finds itself. Not the hazard of Muslims rioting in the streets--acting out their rage and frustration, perhaps. No. The peril into which the court and the majority are steering their ship of state if far greater.

Freedom of expression, particularly unpopular expression, is the crowning glory of the West. Arguably, it is this freedom which served as the launching pad for the fast boost Western developments in politics, economics, science and technology. The fast boost which transformed Western Europe from an appendage on the Eurasian landmass to the dominant global presence which it became in a few short centuries.

Even with that record to buttress it, freedom of expression remains what it always has been--a fragile condition, an always threatened liberty. The whims of an autocrat, the demands of an ideology, the winds of social fad, the easily bruised sensitivities of a self-conscious minority, all of these threats confront freedom of expression every day.

Like Delft china, freedom of expression is easily broken. And impossible of repair. The court and the Dutch majority hold an infinitely fragile piece in their collective hands. If they throw it to the ground it will break. And, never be made right. Not in months. Not in years. Perhaps not ever.

And for what do the Dutch put this prize in peril? For what are they willing to shatter a tradition extending back to the days and writings of Spinoza?

The "sensitivities" of a small number of groups purporting to represent the outraged and "threatened" immigrant Muslims.

The "fear" and "outrage," the "insults" perceived by these immigrants seems curiously artificial. The video makes no charges against any individual Muslim. It calls for no action against Muslims whether living in the Netherlands or elsewhere.

Instead the video links particular verses of the Quaran with images of Muslim terror attacks against civilian targets. The verses are accurate. The attacks occurred. They were perpetrated by Muslims.

What's the problem?

It would have been far more fitting if the Muslim groups had stood up strong and proud. If they had said, "That's right. Islam is a warrior faith. Muslims of belief are sure enough of the rightness of their faith to kill and die in its name and for its global success."

It would have been far more fitting if the Muslims of Holland had grabbed the sword of their deity, which is, after all, emblazoned on the flag of Saudi Arabia and defied the infidels to wrest it from their hands.

Instead of being true to their warrior faith and its past glories of death and conquest, the Muslims of Holland sniveled to an infidel court, prayed for infidel justice (as if such a thing were possible) and begged an infidel government to protect them from Mr Wilder's deadly video.

The Geek is hard pressed to decide who is the greater coward: the Dutch who are willing to eviscerate freedom to buy a mess of "public order" or the Muslims who deny their own faith and past.

The Geek does know who will be the greater loser if (as seems likely given the nature of the Dutch criminal justice system) Wilders is convicted. And, it sure as hell won't be those in Holland who face Mecca on their knees five times a day.