Here’s the problem: it doesn’t. Restricting free speech serves one key purpose, which is to allow authorities to control knowledge and thought, using it to their own ends. For Islam, like most religions including Christianity, it fosters an us-vs-them mentality which is critical for keeping people in tow. For large regimes like China (who also voted for the abolishment) it provides a powerful weapon in fighting dissidents or anyone likely to question official propaganda.

Todays decision gives ammunition to the chest-thumping bullies proclaiming that the rest of the world must adhere to their arbitrary laws and customs, despite their own belief systems. Of course the apologist will retort that one must respect all cultures which I would completely agree with. However an appropriate response to disrespectful actions would be a united tut-tutting of the guilty party, a rap across the knuckles, and perhaps some soul searching as to what instigated the matter in the first place. Who knows, some dialog between those involved might even help. If the Fitna movie is really such an outrageous slur on Islam then surely it would be an easy task to rebut the points made in the film, followed up with some pointing and laughing at its creators for the simple minded cretans they obviously are. One starts to wonder whether there is perhaps a shard of truth in the film’s message given the actual response.

What is more likely is that the film’s message is actually not at all important in this whole affair; we are actually witnessing a power struggle perpetrated by certain groups attempting to upset the dynamics of todays world (and doing a good job of it). And this is where the attitudes of countries like Singapore and China really makes sense – they are attempting to position themselves in a new world order, one where natural resources will continue to become scarce and select countries will hold all the ace cards. Anyway, such attitudes are not out of place in Singapore; this is a country who’s government has a stranglehold grip on a people who are quite content to live uneventfully in their comfort bubble.

It is also quite interesting that the film is being tagged as the Dutch film (as I intentionally referred to it in the opening paragraph), just like the Danish cartoons. It doesn’t matter that the government of the Netherlands officially renounced the film; an entire country makes a better ‘them’ enemy than does an individual. This is classic tribalism at work. And freedom of speech only gets in the way of the fun.