Am I alone in finding the #JeSuisCharlie campaign somewhat
misguided?
Let's be honest: whilst nobody in their right mind believes
the Paris attacks were justified let's not kid ourselves that this is about
free speech. It's simply not. There are certain views in the western world that
are deemed acceptable and others that aren't.
The Huffington Post’s
Mehdi Hassan said it well in his article of 13th January: ‘When you say
"Je suis Charlie", is that an endorsement of Charlie Hebdo's depiction of the French justice minister,
Christiane Taubira, who is black, drawn as a monkey?...Lampooning racism by
reproducing brazenly racist imagery is a pretty dubious satirical tactic.’ He
also hits the nail on the head when he refers to what has been dubbed ‘free
speech’ as really being ‘the right to offend’. Mr Hassan does miss the point
somewhat with the remark ‘Muslims, I guess, are expected to have thicker skins
than their Christian and Jewish brethren.’ Presumably he failed to notice the
plethora of equally grotesque and sexual cartoons directed at Jews and
Christians.
I preferred another Twitter hashtag #JeSuisAhmed named for
the French Muslim policeman shot by the terrorists on 7th January
who it can be argued died protecting the right of Charlie Hebdo to ridicule
his beliefs.
José Antonio Gutiérrez argues that ‘…that to condemn the attack on Charlie
Hebdo is not the same as celebrating a magazine that
is, fundamentally, a monument to intolerance, racism and colonial arrogance’ in
his article ‘Je ne suis pas Charlie (I am not Charlie)’ for anarkismo.net.
People of faith, particularly the big three, have to qualify
any profession of belief. “I’m a Christian but I don’t support homophobic abuse.”
“I’m a Muslim but I don’t believe that women are inferior.” “I’m a Jew but I
don’t support Israel’s atrocities.” Our ‘tolerance’ should be ‘embracing’ while
we are merely tolerated.
And now I had also best reiterate “I might detest what
Charlie Hebdo stands for but I don’t support terrorism.”
