Except for Every Other

I completely agree with Matthew Yglesias when he writes that the Mohammed cartoons aren't really much of a challenge to basic liberal principles. I've been avoiding reading Andrew Sullivan for about a week precisely because his response is so predictably asinine.

The key thing to remember is that free speech is a legal right to publish your views, not a right against criticism of those views. It is perfectly consistent to say that someone has a right to publish something but that you wish he wouldn't. I don't like to see racially offensive material published in the US, but that doesn't make me an enemy of free speech. I also like to see productive criticism of institutions like religion, but that doesn't mean I have to celebrate every sloppy, humorless swipe at Islam.

I also don't think it's a stretch for liberals to condemn violence, especially when that violence is meant to intimidate free speech. If anything it's conservatives who should be explaining why faith, which is such a wonderful thing, leads people to respond so poorly to provocation.

Now, it may come as a surprise to liberals that some Muslims will use violent methods to react to perceived threats. Once again, though, is this really a challenge to liberalism? Might the West's religious diversity, secular government, and distrust of authority be better protectors of human rights than enforced religious homogeneity?

The only hard part for liberals, it seems to me, is figuring out how to defuse the situation now that it's gotten to such a state. That's not a problem unique to liberals, though, and I suspect that in the long run a liberal program of democracy, free speech, and respect for minority viewpoints would prevent such nonsense.