Did anyone hear the woman defending Charlie Hebdo on R4 Today?

[Icantthinkofabettername]

I read about the awful attack on the teacher in France last night. It is just horrific an no one should face that risk.

However, the spokesperson on the Today programme was spectacularly missing the point. She was defending freedom of speech and advocating children being taught about satire.

In my view, there is nothing groundbreaking about using satire to perpetuate the prevailing view and the view of the elite in society, particularly when groups on the lowest rungs of that society feel it is directed at them.

Much in the same way that Trump uses 'Freedom of Speech' and defending 'Liberty' to sanction the oppression of already oppressed members of society.

I don't know what the answer is, terrorism cannot suceed as a tool for change. However, what Charlie Hebdo stood for cannot continue to be blindly defended, without seeing it for what it was.

I grew up Muslim in the UK. I am an immigrant to the UK. I'm here to say that there is no excuse for the terrorist's behaviour. It happened because the terrorist was a violent maniac, that's the root cause. The teacher did nothing wrong.

If a person absolutely can't deal with the laws and customs of the country in which they reside, they ought to leave and live in a country that aligns to their beliefs. It's that simple. We don't have the right to murder people for offending us.

This type of hand-wringing over poor terrorists really hacks me off - any decent Muslim is against this line of thought.

Satire mocks all sorts of targets, including Trump. Should people stop using any form of satire at all in case the target of their satire feels uncomfortable?

If you are going to say that one group is entitled to claim a right to be protected from satire, it's the start of a very slippery slope.

@Icantthinkofabettername

I get that religious satire seeks to question and undermine the oppressive power of organised religion. What I think is missed in it, is that those subject to/following that religion often feel that the satire is mocking them. Being a Muslim in France is not a comfortable position to be in, the satire creates more discomfort and alienation.

I would like for terrorist incidents of this kind to never happen again, surely you need to consider why it happens?

I used to be a practising Catholic. I promise you that some of the satirical cartoons and jokes about the Pope and some Catholic beliefs deeply hurt and offended some of my co-believers. They didn't use it as an excuse to behead or stab people they disagreed with.

Its an internet forum, raddle, you dont earn points for how emotional and angry you can get about a subject.

I don't think you can tell a posters emotional state from most posts.

Your issue with this thread is that some posters have been a bit rude about OP's 'wont somebody think of the terrorists' proposals?

@Icantthinkofabettername

I get that religious satire seeks to question and undermine the oppressive power of organised religion. What I think is missed in it, is that those subject to/following that religion often feel that the satire is mocking them. Being a Muslim in France is not a comfortable position to be in, the satire creates more discomfort and alienation.

I would like for terrorist incidents of this kind to never happen again, surely you need to consider why it happens?

IF you feel so strongly about Islam that you are willing to hack someones head off, then nothing short of changing western society into an Islamic state will do.

Is that what you want?

My Mum was a committed Christian, she used to watch Dave Allen and be in stitches.

The problem is with these religious fanatics, not with the satirists or teachers, just doing their job.

What I think is missed in it, is that those subject to/following that religion often feel that the satire is mocking them

Oh. So they were asking for it then by being satirical. Good to know.

You are not making anything even approaching a point.

A teacher was beheaded for teaching his students about a huge and impact full terrorist incident that happened in their country. He didn't add his own opinions or commentary or say "all Muslims should die!". He simply showed his students the cartoons and talked about the impact.

Now you seem to think that he was asking for it? The only oppressed person here is the one being decapitated.

Its a political discussion, remember when we used to have them properly without the abusing of each otherand kicking your tv in cos itv has a black person on?

A terrorist is only a terrorist once they commit an act of terrorism. It would be best if that person did not become a terrorist by committing an act of terror.

How can we intervene better to prevent it? How can we look at how minorities in communities may be alienated from wider culture?

You are not making anything even approaching a point.

I'm sorry, I think the last few posts from OP have made her position perfectly clear, it's just some people think she can't possibly mean that.

Now you seem to think that he was asking for it?

Yes. That is her point. She wants the law to punish people like the teacher so the terrorists don't get their machetes dirty.

Because you feel teased, mocked, disrespected, offended, hurt or verbally attacked does NOT give anyone the right to murder another person. That is morally quite clear to me.

I think it is you @Icantthinkofabettername OP that is spectacularly missing the point.

The point, as I see it, is that freedom of speech means you can say (and indeed think) anything. No one has the right to murder, imprison or fine you for saying or thinking anything.

And that's why I do not agree with 'hate crime'. Crime yes, hate... it's between you and your conscience.

Freedom of expression is fundamentally important. Not only that, the type of satire that Charlie Hebdo uses has a long tradition in Europe. It is edgy. It is designed to make the view feel uncomfortable at times. It is often layered in meaning. It is also not plastered on a billboard where you are forced to look at it. If someone doesn't like it then they don't need to buy the magazine. There is nothing that Charlie Hebdo needs to change.

And it is important that teachers are able to use this material in an educational context, so that students can compare the images and the message with equivalent publications in the past, so that they can unpack what this means about clashes in culture in a multicultural world... France has a very clear constitutional position on religion. It is a secular republic. No one gets special treatment when it comes to being off limits for satire and criticism, well no one except Napoleon perhaps :-).

@Icantthinkofabettername

A terrorist is only a terrorist once they commit an act of terrorism. It would be best if that person did not become a terrorist by committing an act of terror.

How can we intervene better to prevent it? How can we look at how minorities in communities may be alienated from wider culture?

I really don't know the answer to that OP. I'm not entirely sure it is about marginalisation though - look at white supremacists groups, they consist of people who are the default in their societies, yet they still aren't happy.

@Icantthinkofabettername

A terrorist is only a terrorist once they commit an act of terrorism. It would be best if that person did not become a terrorist by committing an act of terror.

How can we intervene better to prevent it? How can we look at how minorities in communities may be alienated from wider culture?

He was being taught in a french school, paid for by the taxes of the french people.... i think france was doing their bit to integrate him & prevent alienation but it takes willingness on his part too.

You cannot reason with someone whose views & actions are so extreme, they will commit murder to "defend" them

How can we intervene better to prevent it? How can we look at how minorities in communities may be alienated from wider culture?

Has it ever occured to you that these people who commit acts of terror DO NOT want to be apart of our community? Many of these individuals disagree with so much of our western values that they would turn us into a society similar to Saudi Arabia if they could.

Women being allowed out on their own without an accompanying man.

Women being allowed to dress how they want.

Free speech.

Freedom from cruel and unusual punishment.

This is where this goes. First we can't say what we want. Then we need to dress more conservatively or we're "whores" and it's open season. And so on...

What you advocate is giving in to their primitive values and changing the very fabric of our society. The reality is if these are their strongly held beliefs, that we are so wrong, there are many countries under Sharia law in which they can live.

I think you’re wrong about Charlie Hebdo and about the teacher, but from what has so far been reported, I think you are even more wrong to equate the two. Doing something provocative and potentially offensive in the name of satire is in no way the same thing as teaching about it.

@Icantthinkofabettername

A terrorist is only a terrorist once they commit an act of terrorism. It would be best if that person did not become a terrorist by committing an act of terror.

How can we intervene better to prevent it? How can we look at how minorities in communities may be alienated from wider culture?

I know let's teach it in schools! Oh wait....

I am absolutely not advocating a move to Sharia Law. I'm advocating assimilation by other means than laughing at and mocking something fundamental to a person's identity.

@Icantthinkofabettername

A terrorist is only a terrorist once they commit an act of terrorism. It would be best if that person did not become a terrorist by committing an act of terror.

How can we intervene better to prevent it? How can we look at how minorities in communities may be alienated from wider culture?

Some people are just violent and looking for an excuse to be violent.

Speaking as a Muslim immigrant, I'm telling you that many minority groups wilfully alienate themselves from wider culture. You have some communities who are carving out their own 'space' and wilfully not integrating, because it's easier to be Muslim in a group. Any policy which tries to force these people to integrate is going to be criticised by the group themselves and westerners who want to appear anti-racist.

It's a complicated issue, and the solution is largely dependent on the minority groups themselves to report people within their community who voice extremist opinions. But similar policies (like Prevent) also face massive criticism.

There are no easy answers, but the solution isn't just to tip-toe around Islam and hope for the best. As others have said, Catholicism has also had similar (if not worse!) criticism directed at it but that doesn't mean Catholics are justified to murder anyone who makes a joke about Jesus or priests or the Church...

Freedom of expression...is applicable not only to 'information' or 'ideas' that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population
I post this ECtHR quote a lot these days

I think the white supremecists in the US and elsewhere feel their supremecy is threatened and they risk becoming marginalised like the people they hate.

@Icantthinkofabettername

A terrorist is only a terrorist once they commit an act of terrorism. It would be best if that person did not become a terrorist by committing an act of terror.

How can we intervene better to prevent it? How can we look at how minorities in communities may be alienated from wider culture?

Maybe by teaching about free speech, including how to handle it if you don't like the views of the person exercising that right?

@Icantthinkofabettername

A terrorist is only a terrorist once they commit an act of terrorism. It would be best if that person did not become a terrorist by committing an act of terror.

How can we intervene better to prevent it? How can we look at how minorities in communities may be alienated from wider culture?

We can't intervene in any way to achieve this.

As a PP said, perhaps if a person is offended by the basic tenets of the country they are living in, they might want to move to a country more in line with their beliefs. As that PP stated, there are plenty to choose from.

I'm advocating assimilation by other means than laughing at and mocking something fundamental to a person's identity.

Then you are advocating assimilation of the society to the extremist groups view.

Without the right to speak against the majority view and mock others we'd still have slavery , still be a theocracy and women would not have the vote.

I'm fat. It's fundamental to my identity. If I blow someone up will you criminalise fat jokes?