Thursday, January 8, 2015

Cowardly media poseurs v. Ezra Levant

The news is saturated today with stories and opinion pieces about the Islamist terrorist murders at the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris yesterday.  Many made mention of the publication of the Danish Muhammed cartoons by Jyllands-Posten and the Canadian media's refusal to publish them in solidarity.  A sampling: 

Christie Blatchford:
"Every newspaper in the free world should today be reprinting one or another of the brilliant cartoons that may have provoked the wrath of the terrorists who attacked Charlie Hebdo on Wednesday, or the original offending cartoons of the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in 2005 which set the Muslim world to rioting and puking in 2006 and which every paper in the free world ought to have reprinted way back then, but mostly didn’t. "
Andrew Coyne:
"one of the few magazines in the world to publish, back in 2006, the so-called “Danish cartoons ... Whole features were written about the controversy that never once showed readers what exactly the fuss was about. And if we are honest, we will admit the reason we did not publish them was because we were scared to.”

Terry Mosher:
"And yet the Economist, the Globe and Mail and most other news organizations around the world, including Canwest, the precursor to the Postmedia Network, refused to reproduce those cartoons despite their newsworthiness. ... One of the only exceptions: Charlie Hebdo... "
None acknowledged the one journalist who actually had the journalistic integrity and balls to re-publish those Danish cartoons at the time - EZRA LEVANT!

A general search of the Vancouver Sun, the National Post and Post Media in general produced no columnist who mentioned Ezra in connection with this story.  It's one thing for these poseurs to be totally lacking in courage.  It's another to willfully ignore the one fellow journalist who is not.

The one exception to this general rule for Canadian media was Maclean's Magazine who carried an interview with Ezra. The final question and answer:

.... Q. You criticized journalists and media organizations six years ago for not printing the cartoons. Has the culture changed at all, in your opinion?

A: Oh my God, it’s absolutely worse! Do you think the Globe and Mail is going to show a Danish cartoon of Muhammad tomorrow? Do you think the CBC will? The Daily Telegraph is already pixelating pictures from Charlie Hebdo. Do you really think we are less cowardly today than nine years ago? All these people putting “Je Suis Charlie“ on their Twitter avatar; you cowards! That’s not defying anybody. Put the picture of the cartoon in your avatar. That’s courage. Not a lot of courage, but baby steps. “Je Suis Charlie”? No you’re not, actually, because Charlie Hebdo published the cartoons, and Charlie Hebdo got killed.

Update: Here's Rex Murphy's excellent column of Jan 10th, "We Are Not Charlie Hebdo".  Though, he too fails to note the one example, Ezra Levant, who is qualified to make that claim.


Anonymous said...

I have no doubt that so called "Journalists" are "progressives" and cowards. Just like Moslem savages progressive journalists are the enemy of the west and the ever decreasing freedoms the west used to stand for. As far as I'm concerned the barbarians of Islam, progressives (Liberals) and their media are all on the same side and desire the same outcome for the west, it's total and complete destruction. They might openly disagree on the murderous strategies employed in western destruction but they do agree that the west must be destroyed and that lying to the "infidel" is part of that destruction. Islamization and Liberalism are the same thing, a death cult. Sean M.

Anonymous said...

I think it's important to point out that when Ezra did publish those cartoons he was quickly and viciously persecuted by the State through the nazi like "Human Rights Tribunal" thought police. The enemy of freedom is the modern Liberal/progressive and their ally's in the Islamofascism cult. Yes, western "journalists" are cowards just like the Jihadists they protect and enable, but western journalists collective silence is something far more sinister and nefarious then simple cowardice. Sean M.

JR said...

Yes. Too many Western "liberals" do push a culture of death. The culture they hate is that of their own Western civilization. That hatred they share with the Islamists, and like the Islamists want to tear it down. They also champion causes that look to killing as a solution - abortion and euthanasia.

And yes, we shouldn't overlook the fact that Ezra was persecuted for exercising his freedom and that the "liberal" media not only didn't defend him but took some glee in seeing him persecuted. After all the persecution was being undertaken, ironically, in the name of "human rights".

Anonymous said...

I should note in Quebec unlike English Canada, most papers did show the cartoons from Charlie Hebdo so its not all media or left wing media against it. If anything Quebec's media tends to be more left wing than English Canada and they see Islamic Fundamentalism as a threat to Quebec's values of secularism and equal rights.

I also don't think liberal moral relativism is bad intentioned, rather I think they are a little too idealistic in the world they favour. They want a world where everyone gets along and if we were just nice to everyone, everything would work it. I wish that were possible, but part of governing means looking at things the way they are, not the way one wants it to be. Yes past attacks on the Middle East and marginalization of Muslims in Europe hasn't helped, but First Nations in Canada, Blacks in the US, as well as Latin America in foreign policy suffered just as much if not more yet you don't see those groups committing terrorist attacks on a regular basis.

JR said...

Yes, as I understand it many Quebecers are followers and fans of Charlie Hebdo, not least because a)CH is in the French language, b) CH is a left wing paper and c) left wing secularists love mocking religion and almost any other 'authority' figure, esp those on the right d) ....

Moral relativism, like multiculturalism (cultural relativism) is part of cultural Marxism which, in a nutshell, involves a translation of Marxism from economic terms into the cultural terms. The objective of cultural Marxists is to tear down Western freemarket capitalism by subverting the education system, smashing religion, replacing traditional moral values with 'politically correct' socialist values, etc, etc.

So, no, I don't think left/liberal moral relativity is at all well intentioned unless you believe that radically transforming Western civilization as we know it into Marx's conception of a socialist paradise is a desirable objective (even if this were feasible).

Anonymous said...

Most moral relativist in the West are often liberals not Marxist and their idea is not about tearing down capitalism and bringing in Marxism. It is rather about the idea that we are all human beings and having a more diverse society will lead to more diverse opinions (they point out firms that are more diverse tend to be more profitable than ones who are not) and will also help us in international relations. Marxist tend to be about punishing the haves whereas most liberal moral relativist are the idea that all cultures can live peacefully together. And I believe if there is a give and take on both sides it is possible Canada has a higher per capita immigration than any developed country and is more ethnically diverse than anywhere in Europe yet we have fewer problems so while multiculturalism is not perfect it hasn't been a disaster like some think. What allows it to work in Canada is its a two way street. We welcome immigrants and treat them as fellow citizens and in return they reciprocate by integrating into our culture. In today's high schools, many people have friends from all cultures and likewise you go to a hockey match which is about as quintessentially Canadian as you can get, you will see people of all faiths and skin colours there. Whereas you go to a football match in most European countries, its all white native people and likewise in high schools generally people stick to their own. I've travelled to many major cities in Europe while grew up in Vancouver and live in Toronto and despite the fact Vancouver and Toronto are more ethnically diverse than any European city, you don't see the segregation and division like you do in much of Europe.

JR said...

You have a point that most ordinary people's moral relativism may be "well intentioned". But that would be largely out of ignorance. Most likely do not understand the true providence, meaning and intent of these ideas. Which is why it is accurate to call them "subversive" ideas. They probably don't realize that they have been indoctrinated relentlessly and systematically from K thru U.

However, it does not take much effort to discover that our university faculties (education and the humanities in particular) are chock-a-block with academics who are definitely sympathetic to not just cultural Marxism but economic Marxism as well. They promote and perpetuate these highly subversive, inherently anti-capitalistic ideas through their courses and their published papers. Graduate teachers pass them on, knowingly and unknowingly, to their students at all levels. That so many modern liberals hold these views almost as articles of "well intentioned" faith is testament to the success of the strategy.

I agree that Canada is in better shape than most European countries in terms of assimilating its immigrants - in spite of the efforts of our uber-liberal political and academic 'elites'.

What about the long run? My bright young niece recently graduated with honours from a Canadian University and went to the UK to study for her masters degree in social science. In her academic profile she lists among her research interests: "Radical Democracy", "Social Change", "MARXISM" and "Feminist Theory" (Women's Studies is also a hot bed of Marxist thought). Take a wild guess at the content of her undergraduate studies! My guess is that if free market capitalism ever came up in her studies it would only have been to demonize it as evil; and it would never occur to her to list "Capitalism" among her research interests.

Anonymous said...

I agree universities at least in some faculties live in a fantasy world and no doubt promote hard left views, I am fully aware of that from my university years. However some like business faculties tend to be fairly practical while most of the sciences are generally non-political. It's more the arts faculties that have the strong leftist bias although even there it depends what university you go to. Some like York University are notorious as bastions of hard leftist views while others like UWO are actually fairly conservative.

That being said a lot of the politicians promoting multiculturalism are liberals and if you look at their policies on other issues they are centrist to centre-left not hard left and likewise much of the business community who are about as far from being Marxist as possible tend to be pro multicultural too. Much of that is we live in a global community so a more diverse workforce makes it easier to market products in other countries. So as pointed out its a mix.

I should note my degree was in business at SFU, which is known as a radical university, yet almost all the profs I had were quite pro free enterprise, although I will agree if I did my degree in a different department it probably would have been much different. Our student union was quite Marxist although voter turnout was usually only around 5% so tough to know what most thought and during elections most surveys showed the majority of students abstained and of those who voted, a sizeable minority did support centre-right parties. When I was there, the BC Liberals club (this was over a decade ago before the BC Conservatives really existed) had double the membership the BC NDP club and likewise there was an active Progressive Conservative and Canadian Alliance clubs back then with sizeable membership while the federal Liberal club was the largest, not the NDP.