Originally posted by Serial_Apologist
View Post
Paris, anyone?
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Richard Barrett
Originally posted by aka Calum Da Jazbo View Postgiven the history and our current military adventurism and drone attacks it ill behoves us to tell any group what would be appropriate conduct
Something else occurred to me on the freedom-of-speech angle here, continuing from some earlier contributions to this thread (and don't forget that nothing I say on this subject is intended in any way to excuse the murders in Paris!). Looking at the kind of cartoons published by Charlie Hebdo it strikes me that the offending items would never have been published by a British magazine, on the grounds of crassness if not outright racism (and, as I've said, I do think many of them are racist). Does this mean that political satire in the UK is tongue-tied by "political correctness"? I don't think so. I've never heard that opinion from anyone. I would say that satire is alive and well in Britain, yet without feeling the need to publish material like the Charlie Hebdo material we've all seen. One might tentatively say that this is one of the beneficial results of the greater degree of multiculturalism in the UK as opposed to France. Then again, as Robert Fisk writes in today's Independent, the incredibly barbaric (on both sides) Algerian war of independence of 1954-62 casts its shadow over the events under discussion, given that the murderers were indeed of Algerian origin as are the majority of French Muslims, and this has no real equivalent in British history.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Richard Barrett View PostQuite. Many people in the Muslim world (and their coreligionists and sympathisers in the west) see daily evidence the enormous gap between the rhetoric of freedom, democracy and tolerance on the one hand, and the reality of occupation, remote-controlled violence and profiteering on the other.
Something else occurred to me on the freedom-of-speech angle here, continuing from some earlier contributions to this thread (and don't forget that nothing I say on this subject is intended in any way to excuse the murders in Paris!). Looking at the kind of cartoons published by Charlie Hebdo it strikes me that the offending items would never have been published by a British magazine, on the grounds of crassness if not outright racism (and, as I've said, I do think many of them are racist). Does this mean that political satire in the UK is tongue-tied by "political correctness"? I don't think so. I've never heard that opinion from anyone. I would say that satire is alive and well in Britain, yet without feeling the need to publish material like the Charlie Hebdo material we've all seen. One might tentatively say that this is one of the beneficial results of the greater degree of multiculturalism in the UK as opposed to France. Then again, as Robert Fisk writes in today's Independent, the incredibly barbaric (on both sides) Algerian war of independence of 1954-62 casts its shadow over the events under discussion, given that the murderers were indeed of Algerian origin as are the majority of French Muslims, and this has no real equivalent in British history.
Comment
-
-
Many thanks, Richard and S_A, for those enlightening comments on Islam religion, and religions from further East.
What upsets me about Islam is that it seems a great vehicle for males with monster egos. It may, as its proponents say, be intended as a means of creating love and good feeling throughout, but we have been shown the relative ease at which these intentions can be abused. Certainly for females and non-believers , one is presented with a very hard face. This is to be contrasted with religions from further East, which take very great care to analyse the ego and put it in its proper place. I'm looking at Islam, where a great number of its followers choose to live peacefully in Europe; I'm not sure that commercial exploitation by the West of the Mid-East can or ought to explain away apparent defects in Islam.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Richard Barrett View PostQuite. Many people in the Muslim world (and their coreligionists and sympathisers in the west) see daily evidence the enormous gap between the rhetoric of freedom, democracy and tolerance on the one hand, and the reality of occupation, remote-controlled violence and profiteering on the other.
Something else occurred to me on the freedom-of-speech angle here, continuing from some earlier contributions to this thread (and don't forget that nothing I say on this subject is intended in any way to excuse the murders in Paris!).
Looking at the kind of cartoons published by Charlie Hebdo it strikes me that the offending items would never have been published by a British magazine, on the grounds of crassness if not outright racism (and, as I've said, I do think many of them are racist). Does this mean that political satire in the UK is tongue-tied by "political correctness"? I don't think so. I've never heard that opinion from anyone. I would say that satire is alive and well in Britain, yet without feeling the need to publish material like the Charlie Hebdo material we've all seen.
One might tentatively say that this is one of the beneficial results of the greater degree of multiculturalism in the UK as opposed to France. Then again, as Robert Fisk writes in today's Independent, the incredibly barbaric (on both sides) Algerian war of independence of 1954-62 casts its shadow over the events under discussion, given that the murderers were indeed of Algerian origin as are the majority of French Muslims, and this has no real equivalent in British history.
Comment
-
-
Richard Tarleton
Originally posted by Richard Barrett View Postit strikes me that the offending items would never have been published by a British magazine, on the grounds of crassness if not outright racism (and, as I've said, I do think many of them are racist). Does this mean that political satire in the UK is tongue-tied by "political correctness"? I don't think so. I've never heard that opinion from anyone. I would say that satire is alive and well in Britain, yet without feeling the need to publish material like the Charlie Hebdo material we've all seen.
Comment
-
Richard Barrett
Originally posted by Oddball View PostWhat upsets me about Islam is that it seems a great vehicle for males with monster egos.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Richard Barrett View PostQuite. Many people in the Muslim world (and their coreligionists and sympathisers in the west) see daily evidence the enormous gap between the rhetoric of freedom, democracy and tolerance on the one hand, and the reality of occupation, remote-controlled violence and profiteering on the other.
Something else occurred to me on the freedom-of-speech angle here, continuing from some earlier contributions to this thread (and don't forget that nothing I say on this subject is intended in any way to excuse the murders in Paris!). Looking at the kind of cartoons published by Charlie Hebdo it strikes me that the offending items would never have been published by a British magazine, on the grounds of crassness if not outright racism (and, as I've said, I do think many of them are racist). Does this mean that political satire in the UK is tongue-tied by "political correctness"? I don't think so. I've never heard that opinion from anyone. I would say that satire is alive and well in Britain, yet without feeling the need to publish material like the Charlie Hebdo material we've all seen. One might tentatively say that this is one of the beneficial results of the greater degree of multiculturalism in the UK as opposed to France. Then again, as Robert Fisk writes in today's Independent, the incredibly barbaric (on both sides) Algerian war of independence of 1954-62 casts its shadow over the events under discussion, given that the murderers were indeed of Algerian origin as are the majority of French Muslims, and this has no real equivalent in British history.
I've got to say that I may disagree with you on music but your comments on this thread are absolutely spot on. I also think the Joe Sacco cartoon was hugely accurate - we should not be twisting this as a "freedom of speech" issue as it is purely a case of a publication making offensive and crass remarks that most right-thinking Britons would distance themselves from. There is no way that this vile attempt at humour would be tolerated in the UK. It is not satire and just pure, inexcusable bile. I do not condone the assassination of these cartoonists but I feel they brought this atrocity upon themselves and the Western world is doing great damage in making this a freedom of speech issue. I can't imagine these kind of cartoons being published without prosecution in the UK even though I feel that this country is largely pretty liberal in most cases. It is strange that the likes of Anjum Choudery is rightly slated for his twisted views yet people this week have been far too quick to support "Charlie Hebdo" which is something equally indefensible. I don't see anyone rushing to support Choudery's "freedom of expression" - even if it is something he probably wouldn't understand himself.
I also can't accept the observation about the Western world not being a threat to the Islamic one - it clearly is albeit I think Islamic extremists certainly offer a more visceral thread whether in Syria, Nigeria or Pakistan. It is not only a clash of religion and culture, but similarly one of technology where those not wishing to be subject to Western culture finding it too invasive and impossible to avoid. I feel this is not just an issue with media or even the internet but Islamic culture is constantly under attack from advertising, the universality of the English language, enhanced and quicker methods of transport, etc and a multitude of subliminal things which make our values encroach on theirs inch by inch. As the world has become smaller, I think Islam has been increasingly under threat from secularism. Islam has, in Western eyes, become something that is resisting secularism and is viewed as counter-enlightenment. I feel there is a battle between these two sets of values which may not be planned but has a momentum about it that we cannot control. In the light of this, I think the West needs to take heed that accepted behaviour / cultural values may not be shared and that with freedom of speech there comes a responsibility to use it wisely and diplomatically. Clearly, despite warning, the contributors of "Charlie Hebdo" refused to do this. I don't think their actions have only clearly brought a lot of sick extremists out of the woodwork but have also created a lot of disappointment and incomprehension to mainstream, French Muslims which, without tact, most "Westerners" still remain unable to recognise and appreciate. Certainly, the reaction of British Muslims has been one of condoning the inexcusable violence but bafflement at how such offensive material is allowed to be published and then held up as some kind of bastion of Western values.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Ian Thumwood View Post
There is no way that this vile attempt at humour would be tolerated in the UK. It is not satire and just pure, inexcusable bile. I do not condone the assassination of these cartoonists but I feel they brought this atrocity upon themselves and the Western world is doing great damage in making this a freedom of speech issue. I can't imagine these kind of cartoons being published without prosecution in the UK
I don't see anyone rushing to support Choudery's "freedom of expression" - even if it is something he probably wouldn't understand himself.
Islamic culture is constantly under attack from advertising, the universality of the English language, enhanced and quicker methods of transport, etc and a multitude of subliminal things...
Comment
-
-
Isn't it how you read the satire? It seemed to me that CH was frequently satirising the extremists themselves ("Muhammed outflanked by the fundamentalists") or attacking what we would see as barbaric practices ("100 lashes if you don't die laughing") or attacking what surely would be seen as anti-fundamentalist violence (masked man beheading Muhammed who protests that he is the Prophet and is told to "Shut up, infidel.")
The cartoon below by Banksy was removed from a wall because a member of the public called it racist:
It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Richard Barrett View Post
Looking at the kind of cartoons published by Charlie Hebdo it strikes me that the offending items would never have been published by a British magazine, on the grounds of crassness if not outright racism (and, as I've said, I do think many of them are racist). Does this mean that political satire in the UK is tongue-tied by "political correctness"? I don't think so. I've never heard that opinion from anyone. I would say that satire is alive and well in Britain, yet without feeling the need to publish material like the Charlie Hebdo material we've all seen. .
Comment
-
Comment