I am Charlie

Below text from here.

If speech rights don’t protect rude cartoons and dumb movies, they don’t protect anything.

[…]

But if you care about freedom, you don’t always have the luxury of defending monumental art.

If speech rights only protected polite comments that everyone could agree with, we wouldn’t need them.

The killers in Paris may have been lashing out at cartoons you never saw and would never have wanted to.

But the same attack was also against something you would be interested in. You just may never know it, because you’ll never get to see it.

Below text from here:

Satire must always accompany any free society. It is an absolute necessity.

Even in the most repressive medieval kingdoms, they understood the need for the court jester, the one soul allowed to tell the truth through laughter.

It is, in many ways, the most powerful form of free speech because it is aimed at those in power, or those whose ideas would spread hate.

It is the canary in the coalmine, a cultural thermometer, and it always has to push, push, push the boundaries of society to see how much it’s grown.

Charlie Hebdo attack, i am charlie

This cartoon by Robert Mankoff from The New Yorker Sept 2012. Image from here.

Below text from here:

At different points, even France’s devoutly secular politicians have questioned whether the magazine went too far.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius once asked of its cartoons, “Is it really sensible or intelligent to pour oil on the fire?

It is, actually.

Part of Charlie Hebdo’s point was that respecting these taboos strengthens their censorial power.

Worse, allowing extremists to set the limits of conversation validates and entrenches the extremists’ premises: that free speech and religion are inherently at odds (they are not), and that there is some civilizational conflict between Islam and the West (there isn’t).

Read More

Comment Using Facebook

Comments Till Now

  1. I do not think it is rational to believe that you reach the highest level of intellectual standards by adopting satire as legal form of free thinking. I strongly believe the west is regular in maintaining its hypocrisy.

    In the United States of America if you make a racist comment on someone’s color or ethnicity you lose your job, why cant this be a form of freedom of speech ? why can’t you call someone a “nigger” ? “why” ? This is because the state has realized that people have sensitivities they feel hurt when someone comments on their color.

    Now moving swiftly on one hand the west realize people’s sensitivities and fails to realize the sensitivities of an other community “Even they (Muslims) do get hurt and even their sensitivities get affected if someone makes fun or insult a Man they love the most ( Prophet Muhammed) this is a man where 1.6 billion people all over the world respect.

    But you are strongly allowed to come up with intellectual articles , publications , speeches, conferences etc as to why Islam is not a true religion or why Prophet Muhammad is not a prophet ,let their be a intellectual debate on such issues BUT not immoral manifestation by insulting a man whom billions of people love him all around the world.

Or Comment Here Anonymously

*

X