\n\n\n" }In recent days, I\u00e2\u0080\u0099ve heard various people calling for punishing the maker of Innocence of Muslims, and more broadly for suppressing such speech. During the Terry Jones planned Koran-burning controversy, I heard similar calls. Such expression leads to the deaths of people, including Americans. It worsens our relations with important foreign countries. It\u00e2\u0080\u0099s intended to stir up trouble. And it\u00e2\u0080\u0099s hardly high art, or thoughtful political arguments. It\u00e2\u0080\u0099s not like it\u00e2\u0080\u0099s Satanic Verses, or even South Park or Life of Brian. Why not shut it down, and punish those who engage in it (of course, while keeping Satanic Verses and the like protected)?
\nI think there are many reasons to resist such calls, but in this post I want to focus on one: I think such suppression would likely lead to more riots and more deaths, not less. Here\u00e2\u0080\u0099s why.
\nBehavior that gets rewarded, gets repeated. (Relatedly, \u00e2\u0080\u009conce you have paid him the Dane-geld, you never get rid of the Dane.\u00e2\u0080\u009d) Say that the murders in Libya lead us to pass a law banning some kinds of speech that Muslims find offensive or blasphemous, or reinterpreting our First Amendment rules to make it possible to punish such speech under some existing law.
\nWhat then will extremist Muslims see? They killed several Americans (maybe itself a plus from their view). In exchange, they\u00e2\u0080\u0099ve gotten America to submit to their will. And on top of that, they\u00e2\u0080\u0099ve gotten back at blasphemers, and deter future blasphemy. A triple victory.
\nWould this (a) satisfy them that now America is trying to prevent blasphemy, so there\u00e2\u0080\u0099s no reason to kill over the next offensive incident, or (b) make them want more such victories? My money would be on (b).
\n