 Image via Wikipedia |
| September 11, 2001 |
Read related » Wait Wait...Don't Tell Me!What are Mr. Grosz's points here, which the WWDTM audience so appreciates? One underlying point is that the proposed site for the World Trade Center mosque is insignificant. Another is that opposition to an event amounts to intolerance of the idea of the event. And, the motivating force driving Mr. Grosz and his audience toward the punchline is that old favorite -- the need to show who's a clever boy, then. Clever enough to be dangerous, but not intelligent enough to grasp the concepts one so blithely tosses about.
Lightning Fill In The Blank
[Reading this related transcript in its entirety is recommended.]
“GROSZ: Among those opposed to the proposed ...
(Soundbite of gong)
GROSZ: ...world trade center mosque is the financial backer for Manhattan's brand new museum of blank.
Mr. BLOUNT: Oh, of Islam.
GROSZ: No, it's the Museum of Tolerance.
Mr. BLOUNT: Oh, tolerance. Yeah.
(Soundbite of laughter)
GROSZ: The Museum of Tolerance does not want the World Trade Center mosque built.
GROSZ: The stated mission, of course, of the Museum of Tolerance, quote, "To confront all forms of prejudice and discrimination in our world today." But the Wiesenthal Center, which runs the Museum of Tolerance, says the idea of an Islamic cultural center near ground zero is, well, intolerable.
(Soundbite of laughter)
GROSZ: But in other news, an exhibit about the Museum of Tolerance just opened up at the Museum of Irony.
(Soundbite of laughter)
(Soundbite of applause)”
— Copyright © 2010 National Public Radio®. August 14, 2010
The proposed site for the World Trade Center community center and mosque is not insignificant. Is Mr. Grosz suggesting that the Cordoba Initiative had no other options in choosing a site for the community center/mosque? Is there a suggestion that this is the most convenient location for an Islamic community center/mosque because it is central to a large Muslim population? Doesn't it seem more likely that the Cordoba Initiative chose the proposed site precisely for its symbolic value? For some Americans, the symbolic value of a World Trade Center mosque has a positive valence; but for many more the valence is negative. The controversy over the Cordoba Initiative's proposed location is exactly because the location is significant. Ignoring this (or pretending otherwise) is ignorant (or pretentious).
How is opposition to locating the Cordoba Initiative on the ruins of the World Trade Center -- a location that has become one of great significance in our national consciousness -- an act of intolerance?
Intolerance is the unwillingness or inability to tolerate circumstances that are important for other people's well-being and are not overly burdensome to one's own. The virtue of tolerance in no way demands that one accepts, or goes along with, or supports all propositions. Individuals, groups of individuals, communities, and organizations throughout this country oppose proposed building plans regularly (the location of a Walmart, for example, or of a neighbor's shed). Opposition is not intolerance. People who are engaged with their communities and their local environments have ideas (often very passionate ideas) about how those communities and those local environments ought to be organized. Stating one's opposition to proposals that contradict one's own beliefs is not an act of intolerance. Effacing oneself in the face of another's self-assertion is not practicing the virtue of tolerance, nor is it sound ethical behavior.
It is funny, to some people I suppose, to reduce the concept of tolerance to the point of cliche (especially if one can throw in a clever reference to Irony). It's slightly grating, though -- the self-congratulatory laughter of the NPR audience, much like the regular mock self-mockery on NPR of the nerdy (read:smart) NPR community, which as a life-long NPR listener I can confess I find particularly cringe-inducing.
The Smartest Monkeys
Post 1,386 The Smartest Monkey
No comments:
Post a Comment