Firstly, I am appalled as any other right thinking person would be
over these murders. There is *never* a justification for violence,
never mind murder, and the cowards that broke into the offices of
this magazine and shot people need to be brought to justice. I hope
that justice is swift and severe under French law, and my heart goes
out to the victims and their families.
What I am about to say is NOT a justification for violence or
murder, but a criminological analysis. We have to understand why
people do what they do.
The magazine, Charlie Hebdo, has been publishing some pretty vile
stuff about Islam and the Prophet Mohammed for some time. As this quote explains:
Charlie Hebdo has been the subject of violent attacks in the
past, following its publication of cartoons of the prophet Muhammad.
Its offices were firebombed in 2011, and recent threats have also
been made against it and other media groups. Riot police were
deployed to its offices in 2012 after it published more Muhammad
cartoons, including images of him naked.
I am 100% in support of Free Speech: it is a right that is not
granted by a government, but inherent in each and every person. I am
also in support of a Free Press. But, I am also in support of
rational action.
France is a deeply divided nation, with a fast dropping native
French birthrate and a growing immigrant population, largely from
Muslim former French colonies. As we see in Germany, the native
French culture and people are feeling at odds with and increasingly
disliking the Muslim newcomers, which make up now 5-10% of the
population according to the CIA Factbook. And, just as we saw in 2006
with the publication of the Islam mocking cartoons by the newspaper
Jyllands-Posten in Denmark, a very strong reaction is going to come
out of such actions.
Just because a person has an inherent Right to do something,that
doesn't make it wise. Charlie Hebdo was threatened and attacked
multiple times for these cartoons. And I'd like to point out, these
were not well researched pieces of journalism that showed problems in
Islam, or at least well thought opinion pieces, but vile things
showing Mohammed to be gay, using the bathroom, etc.
Freedom of Speech means that the government cannot interfere with
your political speech. It doesn't mean that you have the right to say
anything you want, wherever you want. It further doesn't protect one
from indignation and violence from people that would like to do harm
over that speech. Imagine if I were racist and were putting out
newspaper articles depicting African Americans as stereotypical
dullards, eating fried chicken and popping out kids to add to welfare
roles. Would I have the right to publish my nonsense? Sure. Would it
be surprising if my office suddenly burned down, or I came to harm
from some nuts who would like to do me in for that speech? Hardly. It
doesn't *justify* their crimes, but I would certainly be indirectly
provoking my own victimization (what we call "passive victim
provocation" in criminology.)
The people that committed this crime are uncivilized trash. They
need to be brought to justice. Civilized people do not use guns to
deal with issues, but protest, boycott and other non-violent types of
acts. But there are nuts out there that are waiting to do harm. What
if I get mugged at an ATM at 3AM in a really seedy part of town?
While the robbers should not have mugged me, haven't I indirectly put
myself in danger by choosing dangerous surroundings?
The publishers of Charlie Hebdo had the right to publish what they
wanted. Sadly, they provoked the wrong people, and death was the
result. I realize this is an unpopular viewpoint, but I think they
should have used a bit more circumspect judgment in deciding what to
print. The balance between Freedom and Responsibility is pretty thin
at times, and unfortunately, not everyone out there is sane,
rational, or willing to deal with things in a civilized manner.
