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.”
This is a common misperception.
Phoenix is actually 1,000 ft. higher than London.
LSE to be on the same level as the University of Phoenix.
—————————————
Is that some kind of joke????
justagurl – the LSE was the butt of many jokes on the comedy program “Yes, Minister.”
Tyger Gilbert
perhaps that word will go the way of “pickaninny,” which was probably last used prominently in public by Evan Mecham, a racially controversial, Mormon governor of Arizona, elected in 1986 and impeached in early 1988. Interestingly, a rap group named Public Enemy made a video depicting them blowing up the governor’s limo, and no one prosecuted them for making a threat on the life of a public official.
———————————————————-
That video was NOT depicting a threat on the life of a public official….
—————
Do you REALLY think that he thought his life was in danger from that video???
No reasonable person would have thought that Public Enemy was
going to blow up his limo…. LOL
justagurl – Ev Mecham was quoting a textbook, but since the major press here in Arizona hated him (he owned a rival newspaper) they went after him. He was impeached for a lesser reason than the impeachment of Clinton, but his party did convict him, unlike the cowards in the Clinton case.
Nick Spinelli
You Frenchmen would be speaking German if not for us. So, there’s that!
———————————————————-
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL…..
Actually, if their was a change of language, it would have been Russian…
as Russia would have been the winner…
JAG Blood was spilled there as well….
Please do NOT act like America got involved to help Europe….
the ONLY reason the USA got involved was purely selfish…..
and MOST Americans did NOT want to help the Europeans…
——————————–
I REALLY like @Olicou ….
and they have been dead RIGHT ON this whole discussion…
———————————————–
as an American who LIVES in Europe, I totally understand what Olicou is saying…
for ONE… Freedom to offend, I have no PROBLEM with… this should be protected…
Freedom to INCITE Violence, that, is NOT Freedom of speech….
and Europe, understands why this is so dangerous….
Talking openly about radical groups is allowed…
Those Radical Groups talking about killing is NOT allowed….
That is inciting violence…. and is NOT covered under Free Speech laws in the USA either…..
That is what the French are going after….
NOT speech that offends others….
Speech that calls for the KILLING of others….
—————————————————
America is NOT special….
People are dying trying to get to Turkey….
People are dying trying to get to a LOT of different countries…
Please don’t act as if people are ONLY trying to get to the USA…
It could NOT be further from the truth….
————————————————–
You want to talk about Freedom….
The other day, on NATIONAL TV, a Muslim Dutch Mayor
of Rotterdam told Muslims if they don’t like Free Western Society,
they could F**** Off….
I can’t even say that on this blog….
and you certainly will NOT hear that word on TV in the USA…
Even if it is an important part of the News Story…
In Europe, They will write this word in the paper, and say this word on TV…
Now, that is FREEDOM….
——————————————
You want to talk about how America is Number ONE….
It is Number one is Gun Deaths…
Number one is Murder, in the Western world…
Number one in Prisons…
Number one in Incarcerations….
Number one in Death Penalty…..
Number ONE in Infant Mortality in the Western Developed world…
there are a LOT of Areas, that America is Number ONE…
and NOT ONE of them is an area to be PROUD of….
and on a side note….
America is Number 46th in Press Freedom
————————————————-
How anybody can be proud of these things is beyond me…
————————————————–
You talk about how Refugees are dying to get to America….
Yet, How do American Citizens greet these desperate people, children???
With marches and chants… telling them to GO HOME…..
Please stop acting like Americans are so welcoming to these Refugees…
It is embarrassing watching from Europe, as my country does these things,
then to watch as my fellow Americans claim that America is the Greatest Country in the world….
Words can not describe….
justagurl – that was quite the rant. Nothing you ranted about has anything to do with American Exceptionalism.
justagurlinseattle wrote: “Number one is Murder, in the Western world…”
Wow, talk about sleight of hand with statistics. First you qualify your statement by saying “in the Western world” because you know it would be too easy to falsify your claim if you didn’t. There is just too much murder and mayhem elsewhere in the world. But even using that qualifier, your alleged fact is plainly false.
You would think it would be true because the U.S. is by far the largest country in the Western world. Looking at a map of the countries, you would think your statement surely must be true. With so many more people than the other countries in the West, there must be more murders. Well, it is NOT true.
In 2012, the U.S. had 14,827 intentional homicides. Venezuela had more murders (16,072). Brazil had more murders (50,108). Mexico had more murders (26,037).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
So why lead us astray with your verbiage? Were you deceived yourself, or did you intend to deceive us?
REALLY David???
Yes… I am talking First World Western Democracies/ Developed Countries ….
Yes… I am comparing nations that are pretty equal, as far as freedom
and development….
To do otherwise, is just… Well…. STUPID….
Developing nations often have high crime and murder rates..
So, Yes… Lets talk size, shall we… Population that is….
The EU has 500 Million people …. I will use the EU to compare …
The EU has many different cultures and areas, so, you can’t claim that
it is because the USA is more Multicultural than the EU….
I will even use YOUR Link for this little LESSON…
The USA has a Murder Rate of 4.7
Austria- 0.9
Belgium – 1.6
Bulgaria – 1.9
Croatia – 1.2
Cyprus – 2.0
Czech Republic – 1.0
Denmark- 0.8
Estonia – 5.0
Finland – 1.6
France – 1.0
Germany – 0.8
Greece – 1.7
Hungry – 1.3
Ireland- 1.2
Italy – 0.9
Latvia – 4.7
Lithuania – 6.7
Luxembourg – 0.8
Malta – 2.8
Netherlands- 0.9
Poland – 1.2
Portugal – 1.2
Romania – 1.7
Slovakia – 1.4
Spain – 0.8
Sweden- 0.7
United Kingdom – 1.0
—————-
If my math is right…. (I did this by hand..)
Equals= 46.8
Divided by 27 = 1.73333 etc..
So, EU member states 500 Million with a murder rate of 1.7
USA Population 350 Million Murder rate 4.7
The USA has a Murder rate of 2.76 TIMES the EU Murder rate…
Yeah… The USA sure leads in this area….
and don’t think that I didn’t notice that Lithuania has a high murder rate,
I do notice, I would also point out, that it is NOT on par with the USA as far as
being equal to size, economy .. etc…
Justagurl, it is amazing how you cherry pick what countries fit your conclusion and how you eliminate those countries don’t fit. Your statement was still false. You make the mistake of confirmation bias. Now, seeing how you defend yourself, it is very difficult to take you seriously. Either you are interested in the truth, or you are interested in spreading your ideology. You are clearly invested in the latter.
David, You are here too infrequently. I know you have other responsibilities. So, I don’t say this as a guilt trip. I don’t do guilt tripping. Just as a way of saying we are diminished by your absence.
DBQ, it sounds like you are historically correct. I would emphasize the freedom to speak about ANY subject openly without fear of retribution is important as a concept. When “things get messy and fuzzy” is only when people forget that it applies to any idea or belief, no matter who originally writes or says it.
Sandi, perhaps that word will go the way of “pickaninny,” which was probably last used prominently in public by Evan Mecham, a racially controversial, Mormon governor of Arizona, elected in 1986 and impeached in early 1988. Interestingly, a rap group named Public Enemy made a video depicting them blowing up the governor’s limo, and no one prosecuted them for making a threat on the life of a public official. No one even vigorously objected to it in the news media as they frequently do today. Times have changed.
And David, it’s not Christianity that I criticize, it’s Fundamentalism. Whatever religion it’s attached to, doesn’t matter.
No David. That is a mischaracterization of my comment. Defending one’s position or belief is expected and totally acceptable. Attacking the speaker personally, by using character assassination and doxxing in retaliation of that speech is what I’m referring to. That happens all too often around here. Defend away, but don’t use underhanded methods to discredit the speaker. I’m not saying you do this David, but others here do, often.
DBQ, I think you have a good idea. We’ve taken free speech too far? Didn’t it mean against government?
Another quick thought.
George W. was answering questions and said this “I can’t make everybody love one another” and how true.
The blacks want equality, but want to be called African-American. After complaining for years there were no blacks in Congress, when blacks got elected they formed a black caucus.
Separate, but equal, but separate?
When Halle Berry won an Oscar she told the time people “don’t stop me because we have waited 75 years for this” and she talked for about ten minutes. No one else got to do that; the rest were signaled when their time was up. Well, how about we’ve been waiting 75 years for a winning performance?
I’m sure we call her the first African-AmericanFemale to win an Oscar, because they weren’t called that the last time a black won.
There seems to be an effusion of hate we cannot control. Or some cannot control. As President Bush meant, it cannot be forced. There are still people using nigger. Not as much and you don’t hear it often except from blacks. If they didn’t say it maybe it could be lost forever.
There are people who want to change wording in Mark Twain’s books because they are no longer acceptable. Change Mark Twain’s books! We have lost our minds!
I wonder if the forces that be here will allow that word, I hope so.
Words to the wise, keep your mouth shut and don’t write anything down!
If we can make killing somebody worse by calling it a hate crime, even if words aren’t spoken, then isn’t the t-shirt comment hateful? Hate by another word, despise, is a visceral emotion we all have. I see t-shirts all the time that diminish something. Do the wearers hate the subject?
You cannot defend the pen and then outlaw what it writes.
And who decides? Bardot doesn’t think Muslims have been good for the country. Is she lying? If she said Italians instead, no problem.
AT THIS POINT TWO PARAGRAPHS HAVE DISAPPEARED. TOO BAD, THEY WERE GOOD,
Tyger
It is my impression, belief, that the first amendment was mainly to protect the ability of the people to speak out on political issues. Either for or against the government or against or for political figures. Prior to the establishment of the First Amendment the people, the press, folks who printed pamphlets or flyers criticizing the government were subject to incarceration or worse.
Prior to the establishment in England and other European countries the Church or religion was an arm OF the government and speaking out against the established church was also a death sentence. Martin Luther risked his life to post his “speech” on the Cathedral doors. The founders not only wanted to protect political speech they wanted to protect religious speech.
Speaking out about,(for or against) the government and about religion is a protected right that we should never give up and never hedge about. THIS is why the current crackdown in Europe is troubling and why we should never EVER give in to the Muslims (or any other religious group) to muzzle our opinions about religion.
It was only later that the freedom of speech became a broader interpretation in the US and began to get out of the political or religious realm that things get messy and fuzzy.
Hey! Shaq got a masters @ the U. of Phoenix. Although not as impressive as a BS and MS @ Marquette! LOL!
Tyger, Good comment. People who don’t live in the US don’t have our same sensibilities regarding free speech. Our college campuses are a lot like Europe. http://www.thefire.org is a great website documenting the out of control university infringement on speech. I truly fear for our freedom. I was a liberal Dem when I was young. They were the protectors of free speech. Now, they’re the enemy of free speech. “Power corrupts.”
Freedom of speech is not a “right” for anyone. It’s a natural ability that all people have to say whatever they want to at anytime . . . until someone else beats the spit out of them for saying something they disagree with, which most of humanity believes is reasonable to do, either figuratively or physically. So people form governments to either protect this freedom, or to limit it, among other things. Since people are basically intolerant of the differences in other people, they eventually will demand that their government prevent certain ideas which they feel are harmful or wrong in some way from being expressed by anyone, upon penalty of being beat up by the government. It always comes down to whose beliefs are right and whose are wrong, and whose government is bigger and stronger and able to beat up on “bad” people and their governments. Unfortunately it’s always a matter of opinion on where to draw the line between good and bad, and that depends upon the experiences and perspectives of each individual drawing lines. Thus real freedom of speech exists only for those who are strong and brave enough to speak out, regardless of what they have to say. The consequences could be severe, or rewarding.
I will be straight w/ folks. I was a high school history teacher. History is my passion. The Cold War is my specialty, tying in w/ my being a “spy” as my kids called me when they were younger. WW2 is my next favorite topic. I have read virtually every book on Churchill and FDR. I KNOW THE HISTORY, but thank you very much.
Nick – I highly doubt that you have read every book on FDR and Churchill.
Max-1,
you know what i like most about Ms. Merkel? Her husband. Nobody really cares about him. You rarely see his picture in the paper. Nobody cares what clothes he wears. He doesn´t tell school children what books to read or what to eat. He´s a university professor and he has his own life.
“But instead we’re exceptional and never accuse other religions other than Islam.”
http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/58087427.jpg
IMO
Of all the world leaders that showed up… The only one with balls was Merkil. (Leave it to Israel to photoshop women out – Saudi does that, too). A few years back she was concerned about blended national identity… Now she’s changed her views.
http://m.aljazeera.com/story/201511371339763942
Annie
If we had a generation raised with the constant drum of Christianity linked with criminal acts, then we might truly experience what the Muslim community experiences… But instead we’re exceptional and never accuse other religions other than Islam. Isn’t this how we get western radicals going on National TV espousing true disdain for a religion and uttering, “eliminate Muslims” and Birmingham is a Muslim city. The garbage of slander is always wrapped in contemptable language. This is why France needs to publicize “approved” words and terms… “You’re free to use these words when slandering (insert religion). Eliminate confusion of who the targeted religious group is. I can imagine demanding Muslims self identify by wearing tags and placards on businesses of who’s business is Muslim… This way the French can pretend to be free. Free to know which side of the street to walk on and which businesses they are free to not patronize. Then, when Muslims refuse to leave… What will be their final solution be then? You know… Liberty.