The cowardice and intolerance of slapping a Darwin fish on your car bumper
I find Darwin fish offensive. First, there’s the smugness. The undeniable message: Those Jesus fish people are less evolved, less sophisticated than we Darwin fishers.
Evolution of religious bigotry
I just watched “Fitna,” a 17-minute film by Geert Wilders, head of the Dutch Freedom Party, which takes a hard-line stance against Muslim immigration.
Released on the Internet on Thursday, “Fitna” juxtaposes verses from the Koran with images and speeches from the world of jihad. Heads cut off, bodies blown apart, gays executed, toddlers taught to denounce Jews as “apes and pigs,” imams calling for global domination, protesters holding up signs reading “God Bless Hitler” and “Freedom go to Hell” — these are just some of the powerful images from “Fitna,” an Arabic word that means “ordeal.”
Predictably, various Muslim governments have condemned the film. Half the Jordanian parliament voted to sever ties with the Netherlands. Egypt’s grand imam threatened “severe” consequences if the Dutch government didn’t ban the film.
Meanwhile, European and U.N. leaders are going through the usual motions of theatrical hand-wringing, heaping all of their anger on Wilders for sowing “hatred.”
Me? I keep thinking about Jesus fish.
During a 1991 visit to Istanbul, a buddy and I found ourselves in a small restaurant drinking, dancing and singing with a bunch of middle-class Turkish businessmen, mostly shop owners. It was a hilariously joyful evening, even though they spoke nearly no English and we spoke considerably less Turkish.
At the end of the night, after imbibing unquantifiable quantities of raki, an ouzo-like Turkish liquor, one of the men came up to me and gave me a worn-out business card. On the back, he’d scribbled an image. It was little more than a curlicue, but he seemed intent on showing it to me (and nobody else). It was, I realized, a Jesus fish.
It was an eye-opening moment for me, though obviously trivial compared with the experiences of others. Here in this cosmopolitan and self-styled European city, this fellow felt the need to surreptitiously clue me in that he was a Christian just like me (or so he thought).
Traditionally, the fish pictogram conjures the miracle of the loaves and fishes as well as the Greek word IXOYE, which not only means fish but serves as an acronym, in Greek, for “Jesus Christ the Son of God [Is] Savior.” Christians persecuted by the Romans used to draw the Jesus fish in the dirt with a stick or a finger as a way to tip off fellow Christians that they weren’t alone.
In America, the easiest place to find this ancient symbol is on the back of cars. Recently, however, it seems as if Jesus fish have become outnumbered by Darwin fish. No doubt you’ve seen these too. The fish symbol is “updated” with little feet coming off the bottom, and “IXOYE” or “Jesus” is replaced with either “Darwin” or “Evolve.”
I find Darwin fish offensive. First, there’s the smugness. The undeniable message: Those Jesus fish people are less evolved, less sophisticated than we Darwin fishers.
The hypocrisy is even more glaring. Darwin fish are often stuck next to bumper stickers promoting tolerance or admonishing random motorists that “hate is not a family value.” But the whole point of the Darwin fish is intolerance; similar mockery of a cherished symbol would rightly be condemned as bigoted if aimed at blacks or women or, yes, Muslims.
As Christopher Caldwell once observed in the Weekly Standard, Darwin fish flout the agreed-on etiquette of identity politics. “Namely: It’s acceptable to assert identity and abhorrent to attack it. A plaque with ‘Shalom’ written inside a Star of David would hardly attract notice; a plaque with ‘Usury’ written inside the same symbol would be an outrage.”
But the most annoying aspect of the Darwin fish is the false bravado it represents. It’s a courageous pose without consequence. Like so much other Christian-baiting in American popular culture, sporting your Darwin fish is a way to speak truth to power on the cheap.
Whatever the faults of “Fitna,” it ain’t no Darwin fish.
Geert Wilders’ film could very, very easily get him killed. (He’s already guarded around the clock.) It essentially picks up the work of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh, who was murdered in 2004 by a jihadi for criticizing Islam.
“Fitna” is certainly provocative, yet it has good reason to provoke. A cancer of violence, bigotry and cruelty is metastasizing within the Islamic world.
It’s fine for Muslim moderates to say they aren’t part of the cancer; and that some have, in response to the film, is a positive sign. But more often, diagnosing or even observing this cancer — in film, book or cartoon — is dubbed “intolerant” while calls for violence, censorship and even murder are treated as understandable, if regrettable, expressions of well-deserved anger.
It’s not that secular progressives support Muslim religious fanatics, but they reserve their passion and scorn for religious Christians who are neither fanatical nor inclined to use violence.
The Darwin fish ostensibly symbolizes the superiority of progressive-minded science over backward-looking faith. I think this is a false juxtaposition, but I would have a lot more respect for the folks who believe it if they aimed their brave contempt for religion at those who might behead them for it.
Apr 02, 2008 @ 06:43:05
As I see it the Darwin fish is a joke, what is the reason Christians put their fish on their car? to protect their car? or to show off the numbers of their (superior) faith?
If there were more Muslims in the US and if they made as much fuss about the personal lives of others as the Christians I’m sure you’d see a lot more anti-Muslim stuff in the US.
It’s no coincidence that the Fitna movie was made in a European country, we have much more real problems with Muslims than the US has, European atheist and freethinker websites are much more focused on the Muslim faith than US sites.
Apr 02, 2008 @ 07:46:09
What this moron fails to grasp is that the Darwin fish is essentially the same symbol today that the jesus fish was in Roman times: a symbol to allow other members of an oppressed group know they’re not alone.
Gee, I wonder how the author would feel about my “The 9/11 hijackers prayed to god, too” bumper sticker.
I’m all about the intolerance…
Apr 02, 2008 @ 12:07:37
Here in the US, sometimes it feels as though a rational thinker can get lost in a sea of fundamentalist voices. The Christian right loudly proclaims the US to be a Christian nation, and tries to insert their preaching into our government and our schools. One of the effects of their ever-proliferating fish emblems is that they are constantly reassuring each other of how numerous and predominant they are. I find it a very good thing for the Fundies to occasionally be confronted with an emblem that says “you do not speak for me”. When I see one, I am comforted that I am not alone, just as Spoonman pointed out.
That being said, I don’t like the “Darwin” fish. Darwin was a very intelligent human being, not a semi-mythological god figure that one should prostrate onesself to. I much prefer the “evolve” fish, or just the ones with legs. They make the point better.
Or the one on my car – the Pastafarian pirate fish. My message? “All religions deserve equal treatment from the Government, even the really stupid ones” and “Science class is for Science, not mythology”.
Apr 04, 2008 @ 12:42:52
yall ready fo this
here are my criticisms:
1. The author states that : “sporting your Darwin fish is a way to speak truth to power on the cheap”
When he says this, what the hell is he talking about? How does one, speak truth to power on the cheap. If you think about this, and the rest of his article, you realize, none of this makes any sense. (you must aquit)
2. “Geert Wilders’ film could very, very easily get him killed.”
As a christian you should have some respect for people dying for their beliefs.
May 23, 2008 @ 11:07:33
uh yeah. i disagree with almost every point made in this article. comparing darwin fish to “fitna”? c’mon! as stated above, it’s a joke for one, and beyond that what about the jesus fish eating the darwin fish with “truth” written in it? everyone gets in on it. no one is offended. if someone is offended by a fish of any kind, they need to start praying to god to give them a sense of humor and an extra dash of tolerance.
Aug 07, 2008 @ 01:29:42
The author appears to be Christian. Whether that is true or not I can easily say that if he were Muslim “Fitna” would in no way be comparable to a bumper magnet. Whether a radical or moderate Muslim, living in the Middle East or elsewhere “Fitna” evokes a much larger issue within the Islamic faith than the Darwin fish does within the Christian.
On a side note, my personal favorite is the Jesus fish with “N’ Chips” in the center of it. While the author of this article may see that to be mockery, I see a clever play on words.
Feb 05, 2010 @ 11:53:43
“the whole point of the Darwin fish is intolerance;”
Yes it is, but it is intolerance of intolerance. And while on the surface that may sound like hypocrisy, it isn’t. If someone teaches their children to hate in the name of the Lord, there’s nothing hypocritical about me pointing it out.
I do have some sympathy for the author though. I suspect that the author would not have a problem with the Darwin fish if the original symbol (the Jesus fish) represented only the vocal minority of hate-first-Jesus-second Christians. Attacks on this minority often, unfortunately, also attack the majority of relatively tolerant Christians who don’t deserve it.
One the other hand, the Darwin Fish isn’t really an attack on Christian beliefs. It’s more of an alternative. Faith versus Skepticism.
“similar mockery of a cherished symbol would rightly be condemned as bigoted if aimed at blacks or women or, yes, Muslims”
I challenge the webmaster of this blog to spearhead a campaign to find a universal symbol for women and/or blacks. Why? Just so that I can watch the train wreck.