Connect with us

The Sentinel

Je Ne Suis Pas Charlie

Opinion

Je Ne Suis Pas Charlie

While the entire rally in Paris following the shooting at Charlie Hebdo was inspiring, the image of world leaders linking arms in solidarity and support of free speech really was the icing on the cake.

Among the many countries present, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt were represented, all catalysts of free speech, except for the occasional flogging and imprisonment of journalists.

It was a shining example that free speech is not always free and hypocrisy runs rampant.

Charlie Hebdo has been portrayed as a sort of martyr; the leading example of free speech that has tried to be silenced, but fights on.

I would say this perception is just a bit off. Charlie is more of a leading example of vulgar, racist, and offensive published material that refuses to stop, even when it surpasses common sense.

It takes a deeper realization of French culture to better understand the situation. France has a history deeply rooted in racism and prejudice against Jewish and immigrants, especially those from Morocco, Algeria, and neighboring north African countries.

The Muslim people in France are already greatly alienated in their country. Islamophobia was already on the rise in France and this entire situation has only inflamed it. Right-wing extremist governments are taking hold in Europe and they don’t even try to hide their agenda. One such party is named the Islamophobic Party for Freedom and is gaining power in France. Some think that Marine Le Pen, leader of the party, is set to be France’s new president.

France likes to call itself a great leader of freedom of speech and expression, but just this last year, banned the wearing of headscarves, a common head-wear of Muslim women. It seems as though free expression is allowed in France when it agrees with their policies.

Now, throw Charlie Hebdo in this whole equation and it’s difficult not to question the magazine’s complete lack of foresight.

In 2012, Charlie published an entire page full of nude caricatures of Muhammad, the prophet of Muslims. It is already considered blasphemous to many Muslims to depict Muhammad, but to depict him in such a lewd and pornographic manner was a step too far.

The French president asked Charlie not to publish the cartoon out of fear for public safety. Charlie refused and France ordered the closure of schools, embassies, and cultural centers.

Even the White House condemned the cartoons and questioned Charlie’s judgment for going ahead with the publishing.

France’s Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius criticized the magazine asking, “Is is pertinent, intelligent, in this context to pour oil on the fire? The answer is no.”

Charlie defended itself, saying that it wasn’t Islamophobic or racist and that it was only trying to poke fun at extremist Muslims.

You have the right to make fun of the Muslim religion. You have the right to put the most foul, disgusting things on the front page of a nationally distributed magazine, if you so wish. But besides inflaming extremists of the Muslim religion, whom will most likely do something violent in retribution, what will this accomplish?

In an amusing twist following the attack, despite the “free speech” ideology of the U.S., many American newspapers decided not to publish samples of Charlie Hebdo’s glorious works of art.

Accused of cowardice, executive editor Martin Baron of the Washington Post defended the newspaper’s decision saying that the paper doesn’t publish material “that is pointedly, deliberately, or needlessly offensive to members of religious groups.”

New York Times executive editor Baquet explained the paper’s decision not to publish the cartoons:

“We have a standard that is long held and that serves us well: that there is a line between gratuitous insult and satire. Most of these are gratuitous insult.”

I applaud their decision; it shows a deeper understanding than the editors who worked at Charlie Hebdo.

Indeed, out off all the platforms of free speech to stand on, does it really have to be a magazine that repeatedly crossed into the territory of bigotry? Is that the kind of free speech we have decided to support?

Satire is not supposed to be simply insulting, its supposed to make a point; bring a message

Extremists are not going to laugh or understand the cartoons. They’re not going to drop their weapons and have change of heart. They will, however, get angry and attack.

Everyone else knows and understands that extremists are too deep in their beliefs, so what change does publishing obscene caricatures bring, besides violence?

The Washington Post editor really hit the nail on the head with his “pointedly, deliberately, or needlessly offensive” remark. Charlie’s satirical caricatures fit the bill for all three of those descriptions.

It brings to mind the expression: “It doesn’t mean that we can that we should.”

If everyone knows there’s a monster lurking in the corner, why would you go up and jab at it? It doesn’t achieve anything.

I do not support the actions of the Algerian brothers and accomplices who murdered 10 editors and staff members of Charlie Hebdo and two police officers who came to their aid. I in fact despair at what they have done. But I cannot find Charlie Hebdo without fault either.

Many supporters of free speech rallied around the magazine after the shooting crying out “Je Suis Charlie”, but in this case, I find that I must say “Je Ne Suis Pas Charlie.”

Continue Reading
You may also like...

Sally Balcaen is on the staff of the Sentinel and covers news stories.

3 Comments

3 Comments

  1. Abbé Melier

    February 6, 2015 at 7:32 am

    I never read something so wrong, false and disconnect with reality of what was Charlie Hebdo. Maybe it’s because of a very bigot and christian way of thinking in the USA.

    But, please, renseign yourself before colporting so much silly thought, travel in France, reads books of the french Enlightenment times, read philosophy.

    How can you seriously write someting so far from reality than: ” – Charlie is more of a leading example of vulgar, racist, and offensive published material that refuses to stop, even when it surpasses common sense.”
    Have you ever read with attention this journal, have you ever try to understand the real sense of it? Do you speak french? In nord america, all paper of Quebec were solidaire with Charlie Hebdo… not lot of anglo-saxon.. and you know why? Because you don’t understand at all any french word, although you have to, to understand Charlie Hebdo.

    All of the people who died was people who were working with association against racismus, against conservatism, against war, the people who died weren’t racist but HIPPIES !

    Thi paper was at the top of the fight for feminism, anti-racism, xenophobia, conservatism and was one of the most liberal and progressif view of all paper in french and in this violent and stupid world.

    But they use intellectual drawing, that need a minimum set of literary and political culture to understand it.. Exactly what the world miss.

    Are you really thinking that 7 millions exemplary of this paper will be sell, like it was after the attacks, if it was this garbage paper you imagine ?

    Like many anglo saxon, you confound racism and atheism. In france, lots of peaple are atheist: it means that we found ridiculous to believe, to pray, to think that a God exist and to believe in dogms. And we aggressivly mock of that: because mocking an empty and dangerous idea ( = to believe in god, like christian, musulman, judaist ) is very different that mocking people for what they are : Charlie hebdo was definetly not mocking black or asian or green people because of any stupid racism idea, they were mocking people who believe in any dogmatism!! they were anarchist, rebel, idealist hippies and punk people, very very far away of your little narrow-minded paper.

    To finish, the people who are just believing in mankink have the right but almost the obligation to mock about all ridiculous comportment like believing in supernatural and magical thought like the gods.

    Bien à vous,
    l’abbé Meslier

    • Sally Balcaen

      February 7, 2015 at 2:15 am

      Un grand merci pour votre commentaire Abbé. Vous êtes la première a me repondre!
      First, I would like to clarify something. I do speak French; I also read it fluently. If you know French so well, my last name should have been an easy indicator. Do you know many Americans with the last name Balcaen? You see, I am a Belgian citizen with knowledge of European culture. My entire family lives in Belgium and I have spent summers there. As far as France, while I have only traveled through it sparingly, I do know some basics. What I do not know, I ask my parents, whom spent much of their lives in Europe.
      Secondly, yes, garbage sells. Tabloids are an excellent example of this.
      It is true that the newer generation in Europe are increasingly rejecting the Catholic faith and turning to atheism; in my family, it is the older members in my family that attend church while the younger ones do not. But atheism is not the point that I am addressing. The point that I am making is that I believe Charlie went too far in mocking the Muslim people and religion in so blatant a way. The Muslim subculture in France are more and more alienated, as well as in Belgium. I would know, I have Moroccan family who live there. And I believe it is dangerous to target an already-alienated minority.
      Perhaps you, as a French-speaking atheist would not find Charlie offensive; “progressive”, I believe, was the word you used. Well, then I ask you to look at it from the perspective of a religious Muslim, or anyone that practiced a religion, for that matter. It’s downright insulting. I would not use “intellectual drawing” (as you called it) so much as “disgusting”. Pornographic and lewd poses and racist depictions are not intellectual. I know that I would be embarrassed to show any of Charlie’s Muhammad cartoons to my Moroccan cousins. It would be insulting to them and their faith. You found that the cartoons simply mocked dogmatic faith, but that was not my interpretation. You would be naïve to say that France is not Islamophobic. I know for a fact that it is.
      It is possible that Charlie did manage to produce some valid content. But I believe that validity is lost with vulgarity.
      If Charlie is the shining light of France’s publications, then I must breathe a sigh of relief that I am Belgian, not French.

      Sincèrement,
      Sally Balcaen

  2. Carol Thompson

    December 29, 2015 at 11:56 am

    What Sally has so clearly expressed in her paper and response to a critic is my favorite saying ” freedom is self control, no more no less”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

More in Opinion

To Top