Charlie Hebdo Massacre Reactions: ‘I’m All for Free Speech and Murder is Wrong, But…’
Anthony L. Fisher|Jan. 8, 2015 11:40 am
The massacre at the Paris offices of the venerable satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo has been met with near-universal condemnation, but a growing chorus of self-appointed arbiters of good taste are going public, following up cursory denunciations of the murders with caveats that Charlie Hebdo is a “provocative,” “racist,” “Islamophobic,” “homophobic” publication who brought much of its trouble on itself.Twitter/Carlos Latuff
Richard Seymour at Jacobin makes this point most succinctly in the final paragraph of his article:
No, the offices of Charlie Hebdo should not be raided by gun-wielding murderers. No, journalists are not legitimate targets for killing. But no, we also shouldn’t line up with the inevitable statist backlash against Muslims, or the ideological charge to defend a fetishized, racialized “secularism,” or concede to the blackmail which forces us into solidarity with a racist institution.
Earlier in the piece, Seymour explains why he presents no evidence, or even argument, that Charlie Hebdo is a “racist institution”:
I will not waste time arguing over this point here: I simply take it as read that — irrespective of whatever else it does, and whatever valid comment it makes — the way in which that publication represents Islam is racist.
https://reason.com/blog/2015/01/08/charlie-hebdo-agnostics-im-against-murde
We have selective outrage over certain “free speech” issues, as controlled by the mainstream media. Gross depictions of Bush, Palin, Christie, etc., are seen as fine examples of the spirit of free speech and self-expression. The Virgin Mary in excrement was cheered on as art a few years ago during the Guiliani administration in New York. However, there was outrage and a concerted effort to rid Internet servers everywhere of unflattering ape-like images of Michelle Obama. In fact, any depiction of the President is considered racist. Almost every commercial today is a white male shown as a complete idiot, while his smart wife fixes the problem. Any commercial that even remotely puts any person, other than a while male, in a negative light, and there are campaigns to boycot the company.
If you truly believe in free speech and freedom of expression, then mean it. Not just when it suits you.
And no one was harmed after cartoons lampooning Bush, Clinton or Palin. What is funny satire to one may be insulting to another.
Satire is legal – get over it.
Re-written to correct one typo.
You have completely missed my point, or more likely, conveniently, missed my point. I am completely fine with satire. I just hate the selective outrage. Tell the likes of Rachel Maddow and all those Upper West Side liberals to get over it when someone satirizes Michelle Obama.