Paris, anyone?

[Serial_Apologist]

We're not talking party politics here: we're drawing attention to those who answer to the call to the indivisibility of free speech by wanting to shut others up, which, it should be obvious, has nasty echoes. Just now watching Channel 4 News, French people don't appear to want to shut up debate.

[Ian Thumwood]

I must admit that I am really surprised at the support given to the magazine "Charlie Hebdo" as it's vindictive and provocative attitude towards Islam surely meant that the attacks shouldn't have been a surprise. No one in their right mind can condone the attack yet I am surprised how few people have commented about the incongruities within the nation where the protection freedom of speech (no matter how offensive against a religion) seems to be more valuable than the risible attitude towards it's Muslim community who account for 1/6th of it's population. I haven't heard anyone comment that the so-called humour mocking the Prophet was pretty crass and far from sophisticated. I think we are kidding ourselves if we believe that this magazine is as sophisticated as "Private Eye." French humour is still rooted in the 1970's and there is no case to be had to argue that this magazine was defending freedom of speech.

I think the West needs to be more tolerant of other cultures and wake up to the fact that there are those who consider Enlightenment as an anathema which is sometimes offensive to their religious convictions. Given that France has the largest Muslim population in Europe, the stupidity of publishing these cartoons can no more be defended than the shootings themselves.

France is my favourite foreign country yet it's attitude to race is akin to where the UK was around the early 1980's. They seem to favour freedom of expression as long as it is mirrors Western and Enlightenment values so that Burkhas are banned even though they have no bearing on the lives of the secular population. Further more, as was reiterated in the BBC article about the French author Houllebecq where mention was made of the fact that French Muslims have been abandoned by the political system as they are hated by the Right (far more right wing than in the UK) and the Left who despise their perception of Islam's lack of tolerance. Basically, Muslims in France are not represented by the political system - only adding to issues regarding income, unemployment , prison population, etc, etc.

France is a paradox. It wears it's passion for liberty like a badge whilst interfering with the elections in countries like Algeria where they effectively help depose of a democratically elected Islamic government in the 1990's.

[Richard Barrett]

We're not talking party politics here: we're drawing attention to those who answer to the call to the indivisibility of free speech by wanting to shut others up, which, it should be obvious, has nasty echoes. Just now watching Channel 4 News, French people don't appear to want to shut up debate.

Indeed. Let's look at the facts, put them in context and see what implications can be drawn from them. That is "what we should be thinking about" surely. As Ian also says. The Charlie Hebdo magazine attempts to cover its tracks by saying it satirises all religions, but making crass jibes at the Pope in France where Catholicism is the establishment is rather different from making crass jibes at Islam which is the religion of an already stigmatised minority. The latter achieves nothing aside from adding insult to injury.

[Ian Thumwood]

Totally agree, Richard

The West was got it all wrong. I think that what we are seeing is that Islam is beginning to understand it's own significance on a global scale just as Christianity did in the Middle Ages. I am by no means religious but the West needs to recognize that what we are seeing is Islam becoming the dominant global religion. #islam is already the second most practised religion in the UK behind the Roman Catholic church - it already has more adherents in the UK than the State religion. It is the fastest growing religion in the UK yet all we ever read are negative images in the media. Dangerous idiots like Nigel Farage are given a platform to express their own odious views whereas anyone trying to argue even moderately in favour of Islam is deemed a threat to "Western value." I don't feel that "Charlie Hebdo" is any more worthy than Farage and they are easily far more crass.

I really believe that the West needs to start to accommodate Islam more. No one can deny that Islam is become more vociferous and confident but I don't feel that this equates with "fundamentalism" or "terrorism" and is more due to the fact that we are probably witnessing something of a counter-Enlightenment as people search for something more spiritual . Please do not equate poor-quality satire with freedom of speech especially when against a religion

[ardcarp]

France is my favourite foreign country

Mine too.

French humour is still rooted in the 1970's

No it isn't.

They seem to favour freedom of expression as long as it mirrors Western and Enlightenment values

Charlie Hebdo?

It wears it's passion for liberty like a badge

Good for them.

whilst interfering with the elections in countries like Algeria

Regime change? Heard that somewhere else.......

[Purcellian]

May we take a well-earned break from all this intense stuff and take a few minutes ( or even a few seconds) to look at and contemplate that humble icon - the possessive apostrophe?

[Serial_Apologist]

I must admit that I am really surprised at the support given to the magazine "Charlie Hebdo" as it's vindictive and provocative attitude towards Islam surely meant that the attacks shouldn't have been a surprise. No one in their right mind can condone the attack yet I am surprised how few people have commented about the incongruities within the nation where the protection freedom of speech (no matter how offensive against a religion) seems to be more valuable than the risible attitude towards it's Muslim community who account for 1/6th of it's population. I haven't heard anyone comment that the so-called humour mocking the Prophet was pretty crass and far from sophisticated. I think we are kidding ourselves if we believe that this magazine is as sophisticated as "Private Eye." French humour is still rooted in the 1970's and there is no case to be had to argue that this magazine was defending freedom of speech.

I think the West needs to be more tolerant of other cultures and wake up to the fact that there are those who consider Enlightenment as an anathema which is sometimes offensive to their religious convictions. Given that France has the largest Muslim population in Europe, the stupidity of publishing these cartoons can no more be defended than the shootings themselves.

France is my favourite foreign country yet it's attitude to race is akin to where the UK was around the early 1980's. They seem to favour freedom of expression as long as it is mirrors Western and Enlightenment values so that Burkhas are banned even though they have no bearing on the lives of the secular population. Further more, as was reiterated in the BBC article about the French author Houllebecq where mention was made of the fact that French Muslims have been abandoned by the political system as they are hated by the Right (far more right wing than in the UK) and the Left who despise their perception of Islam's lack of tolerance. Basically, Muslims in France are not represented by the political system - only adding to issues regarding income, unemployment , prison population, etc, etc.

France is a paradox. It wears it's passion for liberty like a badge whilst interfering with the elections in countries like Algeria where they effectively help depose of a democratically elected Islamic government in the 1990's.

I agree with what you say about French duplicity, but it's maybe worth remarking that, regardless of how progressive a religion may in some of its aspects have once been, no cause is more likely to rally people around the banner of the Enlightenment more than a cause split right down the middle between its two main factions almost from its beginnings, which unlike Christian denominations (for all their problems) has no accountability for its views and actions other than what hangs on the selective readings of its adherents, mediated or not by its own scribes, and thus no way of resolving its inner contradictions.

I think one has to weigh the stupidity or tastelessness of Hebdo's cartoonists against the murderous response and say which side one has to be on. The analogy is with the Buddha's questioning of those demanding answers on questions of origination, which he likened to a man shot through with an arrow who refuses its removal until he knows all that there is to be known about his assailant. It really is as final as that, imv.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

May we take a well-earned break from all this intense stuff and take a few minutes ( or even a few seconds) to look at and contemplate that humble icon - the possessive apostrophe?

We generally do that on "Pedants' Paradise".

[Serial_Apologist]

We generally do that on "Pedants' Paradise".

[Beef Oven!]

I must admit that I am really surprised at the support given to the magazine "Charlie Hebdo" as it's vindictive and provocative attitude towards Islam surely meant that the attacks shouldn't have been a surprise.

They should have expected the attacks because of the magazine's attitude?

No one in their right mind can condone the attack yet I am surprised how few people have commented about the incongruities within the nation where the protection freedom of speech (no matter how offensive against a religion) seems to be more valuable than the risible attitude towards it's Muslim community who account for 1/6th of it's population

France's attitude towards its muslim citizens is not 'risible'. Apart from these recent atrocities perpetrated against France, there seems, on my observations, good relations between France and its muslim community.

I haven't heard anyone comment that the so-called humour mocking the Prophet was pretty crass and far from sophisticated. I think we are kidding ourselves if we believe that this magazine is as sophisticated as "Private Eye." French humour is still rooted in the 1970's and there is no case to be had to argue that this magazine was defending freedom of speech.

Whether Private Eye is a more sophisticated magazine, or 'The Life Of Brian' a far cleverer satire on religion is irrelevant, and certainly no reason why Charlie Hebdo deserves worse treatment thereby.

I think the West needs to be more tolerant of other cultures and wake up to the fact that there are those who consider Enlightenment as an anathema which is sometimes offensive to their religious convictions. Given that France has the largest Muslim population in Europe, the stupidity of publishing these cartoons can no more be defended than the shootings themselves.

IMV, the cartoons can be defended more than the shootings. I think we now live in a world where we look down on summary executions.

France is my favourite foreign country yet it's attitude to race is akin to where the UK was around the early 1980's. They seem to favour freedom of expression as long as it is mirrors Western and Enlightenment values so that Burkhas are banned even though they have no bearing on the lives of the secular population. Further more, as was reiterated in the BBC article about the French author Houllebecq where mention was made of the fact that French Muslims have been abandoned by the political system as they are hated by the Right (far more right wing than in the UK) and the Left who despise their perception of Islam's lack of tolerance. Basically, Muslims in France are not represented by the political system - only adding to issues regarding income, unemployment , prison population, etc, etc.

Muslims in France are indeed represented in the French parliamentary system, just as other French citizens are.

France is a paradox. It wears it's passion for liberty like a badge whilst interfering with the elections in countries like Algeria where they effectively help depose of a democratically elected Islamic government in the 1990's.

I don't know whether France is a Paradox. To me it's a relatively uninteresting country, but that has got little to do with these 12 summary executions.

[teamsaint]

the suggestion in Ardcarp's # 3 is the one that worries me.

Our governments are involved in all these issues , up to their necks in fact,from power politics and the support of appalling regimes like the Saudis, through arms sales to anybody who will buy, via the endless " my enemies enemy is my friend " manoeuvres, through to manipulation of domestic agendas for short term party political advantage.

and that is just the stuff that we know about.

[visualnickmos]

Mine too.



No it isn't.



Charlie Hebdo?



Good for them.



Regime change? Heard that somewhere else.......

Very well said.

[ahinton]

They should have expected the attacks because of the magazine's attitude?

France's attitude towards its muslim citizens is not 'risible'. Apart from these recent atrocities perpetrated against France, there seems, on my observations, good relations between France and its muslim community.

Whether Private Eye is a more sophisticated magazine, or 'The Life Of Brian' a far cleverer satire on religion is irrelevant, and certainly no reason why Charlie Hebdo deserves worse treatment thereby.

IMV, the cartoons can be defended more than the shootings. I think we now live in a world where we look down on summary executions.

Muslims in France are indeed represented in the French parliamentary system, just as other French citizens are.

I don't know whether France is a Paradox. To me it's a relatively uninteresting country, but that has got little to do with these 12 summary executions.

Apart from the fact that France doesn't especially interest you, all that you write here makes excellent sense and many thanks for it!

[P. G. Tipps]

Indeed. Let's look at the facts, put them in context and see what implications can be drawn from them. That is "what we should be thinking about" surely. As Ian also says. The Charlie Hebdo magazine attempts to cover its tracks by saying it satirises all religions, but making crass jibes at the Pope in France where Catholicism is the establishment is rather different from making crass jibes at Islam which is the religion of an already stigmatised minority. The latter achieves nothing aside from adding insult to injury.

This was a truly horrific event carried out by a bunch of savage barbarians. It will be condemned outright by those who value human life whatever the views of those brutally murdered. We must also remember that, apart from the magazine's staff, three police officers simply doing their job were gunned down by the thugs.

The Catholic Church in France is no more part of the Establishment than the French Communist Party. France is avowedly and officially a secular State. According to one ex-member of the magazine's staff there have been far more 'insulting' cartoons published about Catholics and Catholicism than any other group.

So be it ... a small price to pay for freedom of speech even if much of it is in very bad taste and that this freedom should apply to everybody. There are far too many around these days easily 'offended' and who simply want to shut others up because of their opposing views.

[Richard Barrett]

I think one has to weigh the stupidity or tastelessness of Hebdo's cartoonists against the murderous response and say which side one has to be on.

Right. Obviously stupidity and tastelessness doesn't deserve to be punished in this way. There's another element to it which came to mind yesterday: the satirical attacks on the prophet of Islam made by this magazine may not be intended as racist, but there are two groups that can be easily predicted to view them as racist: Muslims themselves, with disapproval; and the far right, with approval. Provoking a culturally and economically backward sector of society is one thing which one might think twice about doing, but aligning oneself with the "sense of humour" of neofascists is another.