University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review


Robert A. Khan


The publication of cartoons insulting the prophet Mohammed created afar greater controversy in Europe than it did in the United States. In this article, I attempt to trace this difference to broader differences in the way Americans and Europeans think about offensive speech. While Americans have developed a language of "libertarian regret, " which allows them to criticize speech that they nevertheless concede the legal system must protect, Europeans are much more concerned about the threat posed by acts of intolerance. As a result, Europeans tended to view Muslim protests against the cartoons as a potential harbinger of totalitarianism. By contrast, most American commentators-while defending the right of the Danish paper to run the cartoons were more likely to trace the Muslim opposition to the cartoons to religious sensitivities. In a concluding section of the article, I link this to the European fears that Muslims will undermine secular norms.