This weekend I wrote a column for the Washington Post on the crackdown of free speech in France. The column suggested that, if the French really wanted to honor the dead at Charlie Hebdo, they would rescind the laws used to hound them and threaten them with criminal prosecution for years. (Indeed, at least one surviving journalist expressed contempt for those who now support free speech but remained silent in the face of past efforts to shut down the magazine). Now, however, news reports indicate that the French government is doubling down on criminalizing speech in the name of free speech after the massacre. France has reportedly made dozens of arrests of people who glorify terrorism and engage in hateful or antiSemitic speech.
Prosecutors have gone out of their way to make it known that they are prosecuting people for speech — a remarkably ironic twist since the victims were prosecuted for the very same thing and died defending free speech against such private or governmental speech codes. Some 54 people have been arrested since the Paris terror attacks. The French justice department has encouraged more arrests for speech violations.
Notably, one of those detained was mentioned in my column, the comedian Dieudonne, who has been prosecuted for anti-Semitic jokes. For earlier posts and columns on Dieudonne, click here and here and here. We have previously discussed the alarming rollback on free speech rights in the West, particularly in France (here and here and here and here and here and here) and England ( here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here). Much of this trend is tied to the expansion of hate speech and non-discrimination laws. We have seen comedians targets with such court orders under this expanding and worrisome trend. (here and here).
The crackdown in France shows that this is really not about free speech despite the rally in Paris. The West seems to be falling out of faith with free speech, which is now something to be prosecuted rather than protected. Of course, the prosecutions will do little to change minds and will only make the West appear hypocritical and arbitrary. Notably, the arrests this week include four minors. The government is also ramping greater surveillance and searches. So, to recap, the French government just rallied millions for liberty this weekend and then used the attacks to further deny free speech and privacy rights.
In the case of Dieudonne, he ran afoul of the laws by posing a Facebook statement that he felt like “Charlie Coulibaly” — merging the names of Charlie Hebdo and Amedy Coulibaly, the gunman who seized a kosher market and killed four hostages. It was later taken down. He later wrote to the Interior Minister that “Whenever I speak, you do not try to understand what I’m trying to say, you do not want to listen to me. You are looking for a pretext to forbid me. You consider me like Amedy Coulibaly when I am not any different from Charlie.”
The Bill of Rights wasn’t very new. The British fought for their rights starting with the Magna Carta. There was even a Republic with Women Suffrage in Corsica several decades before the American Revolution. This Republic was destroyed… by the French.
The ideas of Enlightements were propagating for more than a century before it found a fertile ground in the USA. It was fertile because… it was empty. The new population could go anywhere to settle since 95% of the native population had been eradicated through disease, war and slavery. So, ressources were a lot more plentiful than in Europe, which was heavily populated for 2 millenia. Just compare the average farm size in Ireland with respect to the Great Prairies.
It’s easier to get rich, when you don’t have to share with a lot of other people. It’s also easier to have minimal laws when your neighbour is 5 km away and not 5m away.
olicou – the Magna Carta only protected the rights of the nobility.
Interesting case involving free speech and fantasy role play. NYC Cannibal cop case conviction overturned.
The conviction of a former New York police officer for conspiring to kidnap, torture, cook and eat women has been overturned by a federal judge,
who ruled that the evidence against him amounted to “fantasy role-play.”
“Despite the highly disturbing nature of Gil Valle’s deviant and depraved sexual interests, his chats and emails about these interests are not sufficient
— standing alone — to make out the elements of conspiracy to commit kidnapping,” Valle’s lawyer added.
Isaac, You are probably one of those losers who tries and explains why their hockey team lost but really should of won. Paralysis by analysis.
Sticks and stones may break my bones… But cartoons and words can never hurt me.
Vive le cowards!
Vile speach is just that, vile. But should people be punished for the use of vile language? And if so, who exactly gets the privilege to determine who’s contemptable and who’s not.
As a result, we can mock and ridicule Muslims… But not Jews.
Odd, Oui?
More people, bigger army, that’s all. Let some air out, Nick. If Hitler had of done what his generals wanted, we’d all be speaking German now. W’s grandfather’s bank was laundering Nazi money through Switzerland well past 1942. Gold fillings melted down into bullion to buy materiel for the Nazi war machine. The government caught the bank and said, stop that, or he would have continued.
Hitler, against his generals’ advice stopped short of wiping out 400,000 British and French troops at Dunkirk.
Hitler ignored Rommel who could easily have rolled the British back through the Middle East and then taken Russia in a pincer from the West and the South West.
Hitler was so racist he wouldn’t allow the Jewish physicists to work on atomic energy.
Hitler diverted German technology away from rockets and jet planes until it was too late.
If Hitler had of continued the Battle of Britain, he would have out manufactured GB and then invaded. Britain would have done exactly like France.
Japan had two thirds of their troops in China and three quarters of its air force there as well. The US fought less than a third of Japan’s army and air force. They wiped out the navy, however.
If Germany had of whipped the Brits in Egypt and in GB they would have rolled right across India and met up with Japan. The US would have stayed out of it and ceded the Pacific to Japan.
The three main reasons the US was the primary force in WW2 are population, manufacturing ability away from being bombed, and the enemy’s mistakes: Russia a year too soon, not invading GB, not taking North Africa, and Hitler not listening to Goering and the generals.
The US is lucky to be where it is with a great ocean buffer on both sides. The US is a great country because of its diverse mix of people and a lot of geographical luck.
So, Nick, I know you let the French off many times but cut them a break. Almost ten percent of their population is Islamic. Most of those are second class citizens. Their religion is straight out of the middle ages. The US has similar problems with different ingredients and is in no position to lecture. The words written 238 years ago have been selectively interpreted at the convenience of the bigotry and racism of the moment. The greatest compliment one can pay the US is that it doesn’t give up trying to meet the ideals set out so long ago. The main ingredient in reaching ideals is focusing on one’s shortcomings.
Vive la France et l’Amerique, et tout le monde. Roughly translated, We’re all bozos on this bus.
issac – I have said this before. The best general the Allies had was Hitler. Actually, for each of those things you noted they were partially correct and partially incorrect. A really good course in the military strategy of WWII would be a help for you.
Not being from France, I don’t take it personally. But, France would probably be speaking Russian, not German, as the winner against the Nazi are clearly the Soviets. On the Pacific side, it’s an American victory.
I suspect you weren’t part of that war, though and, consequently, you can’t take any pride from it as it is you grandfathers that fought, not you. I don’t think the French take any pride for the generous help they provided during the Revolutionary war.
The fact that French people in the 1940’s majoritarly supported Vichy shouldn’t be the burden of the current generation, as I don’t accuse a teenager from Boston of the massive Indian Genocide that occured on USA territory at the arrival of his ancestors.
However, we can accuse GW Bush, D Cheney and others, for war of agression and crime against humanity since they are still alive. But, on that note again, there is no American Exceptionalism since the French and British dignitaries have also blood on their hands.
olicou – you have a really warped view of history. Is your major political science?
What country tortured terrorism suspects, speaking of exceptionalism and human rights.
We are certainly flawed. Our drug laws are draconian. I personally don’t believe in the death penalty. So, that means I will never need to serve on a capital crime jury. You tax people to death, and have a horseshit economy. Neither country is perfect.
Olicou,
American Exceptionalism is not the chain but the anchor. We ARE anchored in certain principles that are not “anchored” elsewhere. We are not immune from the influence of human nature; just like every other nation. We will have bad people do bad things; just like every other nation. We’ll even reelect them because those bad things didn’t hurt me; just like other nations. Ultimately though, no matter how much chain we let out, we are still anchored. And as long as the big government progressives are prevented from pulling up the anchor, then we will at our core, remain Exceptional.
How many gears do French tanks have? 5 reverse and 1 forward. The 1 forward is in case the enemy is behind them.
You Frenchmen would be speaking German if not for us. So, there’s that! There are probably still quite a few, Viva la Vichy. Listen, you are clueless as to our Constitution and we don’t abide your speech restrictions. To each their own. But, w/ the attitude you folks have, don’t look for us to bail your asses out again. I tried to be kind to you folks, but that French pomposity came spewing out.
Yes, what that guy says is DESPICABLE. But, here it is protected speech. Nice speech doesn’t need protection. You folks are hypocrites. That rally was hypocritical.
Nick – the French might be speaking German if it were not for the Japanese, not us. We were isolationists. Hitler declared war on us after Pearl Harbor. And had it not been for the valiant defense by the French the British would have been trapped at Dunkirk. Actually, de Gaulle’s tank attack against the extended German supply lines convinced the German General Staff to halt the German advance, allowing for Dunkirk to occur. The French then protected the British as they were being evacuated off Europe.
Please stop with this American Exceptionalism. On human rights, USA have an averaged record among developed countries. USA is 18th, France is 20th, but Sweden, Norway and Australia makes up the top third.
Despite the theoretical rights garanteed by the Bill of Rights and the amendments, USA still has the highest fraction of its population in jail, is still proud of its painful death penalty for guilty and innocent people, is trailling behind for gay mariage, has illegal jails spread around the world, etc. Nothing to be proud of. Just an averaged country with average problems, nothing exceptional.
olicou wrote: “Please stop with this American Exceptionalism. On human rights, USA have an averaged record among developed countries.”
Who made human rights the standard of exceptionalism? Furthermore, who is defining human rights and how do they define it? Most countries make a mess of defining human rights, thinking it has something to do with going against nature and abolishing gender diversity and sexual morality. For those of us who believe in American exceptionalism, it has more to do with understanding the importance of the freedom of individuals to live their lives without fear of government oppression. Our exceptionalism is defined in our U.S. Constitution, and it has led to the greatest economy on earth. Our economy is still twice that of the contender for second place, which is China. We have made the whole world rich through our wealth, and here you are claiming that we are mediocre? We have some problems to be sure, and Americans being persuaded to hate America is one of them, but to claim American exceptionalism is a myth is to deny reality.
olicou – American Exceptionalism has nothing to do with the crime rate or the death penalty. You really have no concept of what it is, do you?
Government should regulate only actions, not speech. Speech is in the realm of religion. In our system, religion uses persuasion instead of force while government uses force instead of persuasion. So speech that calls for Jihad ought to be protected speech, as long as it is not followed immediately with action. If the speech is not inducing an imminent response of violence, then it is protected speech. Counter protected speech with speech, not prosecution.
In the Islamic Republics, it is different because they seek to merge mosque and state together into one unified whole. For them, government enforces religious ideology and practice. It is written right there in their constitutions, even in the new governments of Iraq and Afghanistan that our Harvard lawyers helped establish. For Islamic fundamentalists, there is no difference between belief, words, and action. In the eyes of Islam, they are all the same and they all ought to be regulated by government.
We cannot effectively fight these Islamic terrorists unless we understand their ideology. We either agree with their views on not separating mosque and state, or we confront it for what it is and the evil that this ideology represents. These terrorists are simply following the example of Mohammed who was all about using war and killing as the mechanism to establish Islam. They see the governments that exist as forsaking Mohammed and his example. This is why they complain that they have been too westernized. ISIL seeks to re-establish the caliphate and cause all to submit unto Islam through the use of force. Al Qaeda is about the same thing. There are hundreds of Islamic groups who are about following the example of Mohammed and establish Islam through the use of force.
Of course Paul. My acceptance of limits is built into the social contract. If that contract changes to where I do not accept then I hopefully remain free to live elsewhere or seek to change the contract.
It seems western cultures are tilting towards an unacceptable limit on freedoms and the United States may no longer remain the safe harbor for those freedoms. I believe this is the mark of American Exceptionalism. Our nation is anchored in these freedoms and as long as we can retain this in the American DNA then we’ll overcome these infringements.
France can do their citizens a great favor by printing the “approved” words and leave the edict: “Anything off script is arrestable. Je suis
CharlieDoubleplusgood!”Paul,
Since they both have the intent of infringing the rights of others; no difference. There are elements of responsibility and reasonableness that have to be factored in. Yelling to an angry mob from atop a lamppost to “burn the b!itch down!” carries with it reasonable expectation for actual harm; but to yell the same thing inside your Amish barn to your dairy cows, well not quite the same. Yelling fire in a theater doesn’t carry the same expectation of harm if you’re the only one in there.
I’m sure you know all this so what point do you want to make?
Olly – just trying to figure out if you are willing to put limits on ‘free speech.’
@Paul C. Schulte:
I’m just joking.
Hey they even have nipples on Animal Planet!
http://www.webanswers.com/post-images/B/BA/7EAABE15-B9CE-40C1-94A81ACF303CAFA0.jpg
There is this dude in Wisconsin who has a whole blog devoted to them.
I find it rather disingenuous that some groups or individuals proffer themselves as being champions of civil liberties and free speech will often be the ones who ardently criticize and castigate entities they disagree with and go on to proclaim these others must be silenced and excluded from society and participation in government. In fact, this approach has become so innate, they cannot even recognize they are doing this and in fact lash out at others who point this out to them.
“…you can see male nipples on regular access tv”
Geez, that’s awful.
Pogo – we all have nipples, I am not sure why it is such a big deal.