Je suis Charlie

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... However there is a difference between the right to free speech and the right to offend?...

Of course the right to free speech doesn't mean that anything goes...

If by "anything goes" you mean very, very, very few exceptions that the Supreme Court of the US has allowed, mostly to deal with an imminent and personal threat of violence, than you would be right, Bart. Otherwise, it is pretty much "anything goes."

And Stamper, the right to offend is an inseparable part of the right to free speech. If only "proper" words are allowed, it ain't free speech. If only politically correct words are allowed, it ain't free speech.

 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

You can always outsource it -

http://youtu.be/Xj58TavOIqg

While I agree with Bill Maher, I said something similar on my Facebook page before his statements went public:

"Funny how the PC media goes to great lengths trying to hide, in news summaries, the fact that it was a Muslim terrorist attack. If you don't go beyond the news summary, you wouldn't know. Thanks god for Fox News (I never thought I'd say that), the only one calling a spade a spade."

[shawnino]

After this attack, I'm more disappointed than ever.
These cowardly murders never should have occurred, but I thought to myself OK--it's an attack on a media outlet. Maybe the largely leftist media will finally stop making excuses for islam and stop contorting itself to try to say that all religions are equally worthy of respect.

In recent years for instance, most people in the media believe in equal rights for women.
But islam gets a pass.
The Taliban blows up girls' schools... "Oh well, we made them angry with Western Imperialism."
Female genital mutilation continues to be practiced... "Well, it's not all muslims doing it, and Jews and others circumcise baby boys, so, hey."
Girls and women are treated like property ... "Well, that's their traditional way of life."

I'd been hoping over the last couple days, with an issue so allegedly close to journalists' own hearts, that journalists would finally collectively say that enough was enough, we don't live in the eighth century anymore, and it's time to expose islam for what it is: a violent, misogynistic belief system that gives cover to terrorism. So far I haven't had much luck. It's "not all muslims think that way", it's "well, when you offend people, that comes with a risk", it's "muslims who grow up in the West often grow up in poverty, so what they do isn't their fault, it's society's fault".

I'm about ready to give up.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

If by "anything goes" you mean very, very, very few exceptions that the Supreme Court of the US has allowed, mostly to deal with an imminent and personal threat of violence, than you would be right, Bart. Otherwise, it is pretty much "anything goes."

With the right of free speech, comes the obligation to use it wisely.

There is also a difference between insulting for the sake of insulting, and e.g. exposing hypocrisy by using a sensitive subject in a satirical context which could be perceived as an insult. There are also degrees of sophistication in insults, and this is one of my all time favorites.

Cheers,
Bart

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Probably working in a low paid factory job or the family shop in a dull provincial town...

Once again, it is someone else's fault. We are not paying them enough and we are not entertaining them enough. No matter how "dull" that provincial town is, and how low that job is paid, the overall quality of life is centuries (often literally) ahead of the places they (or their parents) left behind. Besides, if they despise western values so much, who's stopping them from returning to places where their preferred lifestyle flourishes. instead of trying to turn their hew homeland into a caliphate?

[chex]

I don't understand why the vast majority of people are looking at this in a vacuum. Things do not happen in a vacuum. These events are nothing more than blowback from interventionism in the middle east for the last 100 years.

While this does not justify any violence people need to start thinking about why things happen and be more contrarian towards politicians and the media; they are all pushing their own agendas.

It is clear that this is how the inhabitants of the ME deal with their problems and what we get for sticking our noses in their business is the same treatment they give each other. Politicians never do anything before it's too late (and most in the west are profiteering on instability in the ME); this is going to escalate into something very ugly over the next century.

As for the fundamentalist christianity rebuttals - the pendulum swings both ways. A few centuries ago it was the christians behaving in this way and the islamic empires were tolerant. Now it's the reverse. In the future it may swing around in a completely different direction. Human nature never changes, the idea of a 'modern' world is BS. As long as ego exists so will war.

This is the only decent article I found

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/charlie-hebdo-paris-attack-brothers-campaign-of-terror-can-be-traced-back-to-algeria-in-1954-9969184.html

[Jeremy Roussak]

With the right of free speech, comes the obligation to use it wisely.

No, Bart, that's fundamentally misguided. Free means free. There's no obligation to use it in any way at all, wisely or otherwise. Whoever is privileged to define "wisely" takes on the role of negating freedom of speech.

There is no right to live free from offence. Voltaire's assertion that "I disagree with every word you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it" is often quoted, but that doesn't diminish its epitomisation of the nature of free speech.

Jeremy

[Jeremy Roussak]

Ah, Jeremy, my good mate, you didn't get it... It wasn't them, it was CIA dressed as them, you see, practicing for months to shout "Allah Akbar" without a Yankee accent 

Ah, of course. I get it now. God, I'm slow at times.

Jeremy

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... A few centuries ago it was the christians behaving in this way...

Yes, agreed, but at the same time, this is the whole point, as Islamists seem to be a few centuries late to the party.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I don't understand why the vast majority of people are looking at this in a vacuum... These events are nothing more than blowback from interventionism in the middle east for the last 100 years...

Oh, we are not, we just find that argument true, but irrelevant, at best, and pathetic at worst. As a matter of fact, our forum member shawnino, in post #42, preempted your argument:

The Taliban blows up girls' schools... "Oh well, we made them angry with Western Imperialism."

EDIT: Corrected for the post number.

[Gulag]

... but some speech is free-er...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions

[chex]

Oh, we are not, we just find that argument true, but irrelevant, at best, and pathetic at worst. As a matter of fact, our forum member shawnino, in post #46, preempted your argument:

That's not the same point. My point is that the reason these attacks are happening in the west (and Kenya) are that we have interfered with them. If we hadn't interfered, the taliban would still be blowing up the girls' schools but they would not be trying to blow the rest of us up. And speaking of imperialism, who armed and trained the taliban?

post #46 for me shows up as kikashi; regardless, he mentions Voltaire. Voltaire's Candide makes a point that everything is cause and effect. It is ridiculous to think that there is no reason for these attacks other than 'they hate our freedoms'. We have forcefully included ourselves in their society and we are being treated the same as they treat each other, indeed, they kills tens of thousands in the Middle East, and are only killing dozens outside it. The worst is a long way from coming.

It really annoys me that the bigoted response after these attacks seems to focus on the Sikhs who, ironically, have been fighting extremist Islam for 600 years and were practically borne as a rebellion to it.

[chex]

Yes, agreed, but at the same time, this is the whole point, as Islamists seem to be a few centuries late to the party.

You miss the point. It's all swings and roundabouts, we all take turns being the idiot at the party. Human nature does not change so it does not matter how late or early anyone is. Historically this is a very peaceful period in humanity.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

No, Bart, that's fundamentally misguided. Free means free. There's no obligation to use it in any way at all, wisely or otherwise. Whoever is privileged to define "wisely" takes on the role of negating freedom of speech.

And herein lies the crux of the matter. Wisely is not the same a politically correct! Using it wisely is using it effectively. There is nothing effective about stifling the discussion by intentionally insulting for the sake of insulting. Effective is raising questions about the validity of opposing (or even one's own) opinions. This can be done in provocative ways, to provoke a reaction, and to not have 'the others' entrench in their preconceived/misguided notions. Entrenchment means no-progress can be made, a stale-mate at best, and that's not wise (unless one is afraid of losing the confrontation).

Cheers,
Bart

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... post #46 for me shows up as...

My bad... should have said #42.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... It is ridiculous to think that there is no reason for these attacks other than 'they hate our freedoms'...

That's a straw-man argument. Who among us, on this forum, used that simpletonistic logic? Or blamed the Sikhs?

As for the "reasons," if someone runs toward me with a weapon, with the intent to kill, I am not going to analyze the reasons, I am going to do whatever is possible to neutralize the threat first. Any analysis as to why, rests upon me staying alive.

[shawnino]

That's not the same point. My point is that the reason these attacks are happening in the west (and Kenya) are that we have interfered with them. If we hadn't interfered, the taliban would still be blowing up the girls' schools but they would not be trying to blow the rest of us up.

There's no basis for that.
They want to establish a worldwide caliphate, not merely enslave their own women.

[mezzoduomo]

....Historically this is a very peaceful period in humanity.

OK, I feel so much better now! And I'm sure this is very comforting to the 9/11 families, the London transport families, the families of Peshawar, Sydney, the Christians in the path of ISIS in Iraq, the families of the schoolgirls in Nigeria, the thousands killed just running their Sunday errands in Iraq and Syria, etc., etc., ad nauseam.

There's no possibility that these 3 French butchers had any semblance of historical awareness of Algeria's colonial period, blah, blah, blah. They got sucked into a death cult by a preacher, period. Are we supposed to just ignore their self-professed motivations, in favor of convoluted socio-economic and historical theories that neither they nor their sponsors have ever mentioned? Rubbish.

[Colorado David]

I wasn't going to comment on this thread, but I've been sucked in.  There is a difference in meaning for certain common words between the West and the Middle East.  First understand that Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic, and English are very euphemistic languages.  For example, for centuries important documents in the english-speaking world were written in Latin.  The meaning of some words can change based on a number of characteristics.  Greek, on the other hand, is a very concrete language which is why the New Testament was written in Greek.  Now for an example.  And this is an example and not a sermon so spare me the indignation.  Christ, at the last supper, commanded the disciples to "do this in remembrance of me."  What does remembrance, remember, memory mean?  Well in the West, we interpret it roughly "to look back fondly."  However that is most certainly not the meaning in the Middle East.  In Middle Eastern cultures it means to experience again as if for the first time. That is what Christ was commanding and that is what the people understood and understand to this day.  Okay, so what effect does that have?  It means that there is a culture of people who will avenge a perceived affront from hundreds of years ago with their very being, their treasure, their lives, everything.  I know that I have struggled to understand why people would be willing to wager their life to avenge an affront.  Why can't they just say meh and shrug their shoulders or shake their heads and turn away?  Well their culture won't allow it.  Does that mean that every Middle Easterner is going to strap on a suicide vest and go after Frenchmen? No, but a certain segment will.  Does it mean that free speech provokes them to violence?  No.  It is their culture that provokes them to violence.  At the very foundation of Western culture is the notion that free speech is sacred and if there is any hierarchy to freedom, then political and religious speech is at the top.  Anything less is not free.  Our civilization is based on the sacred trust that the free expression of ideas is unencumbered or it is not free.  Anything less is some degree of totalitarianism.  And that is a slippery slope.  And no, you shouldn't yell "fire" in a crowded theatre.

[stamper]

If by "anything goes" you mean very, very, very few exceptions that the Supreme Court of the US has allowed, mostly to deal with an imminent and personal threat of violence, than you would be right, Bart. Otherwise, it is pretty much "anything goes."

And Stamper, the right to offend is an inseparable part of the right to free speech. If only "proper" words are allowed, it ain't free speech. If only politically correct words are allowed, it ain't free speech.

 

In respect to the right to offend I think you have been practising it for years?   :)As to free speech it is in reality a myth. There are laws of defamation and punch in the mouth to deter people from free speech. I don't know about the USA but there are people in the UK who are getting jailed for trolling on the internet for practising "free speech" The French cartoonists paid with their lives but was it really worth it?