“Without Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as public Liberty, without Freedom of Speech.”
Benjamin Franklin
The attack on French weekly Charlie Hebdo is not the first incident which has strangled the voice of free speech and expression. Novelist Salman Rushdie, a victim/perpetrator of such violence, has called this “art of satire”, a “force of liberty against tyranny.” Spanish painter Francisco Goya was at odds with Fernando VII for the cartoons that he sketched. Before I continue, there are two disclaimers: first, interrogating the value of humour or satire does not in any way imply justifying the attack and the killing, for these are separate categories. Second, several of the anti-Islamic cartoons of Charlie Hebdo are not really ‘satires’ in the strict sense, for they seem to lack the complexity and the nuances implicit in the genre.
Charlie Hebdo has a right to publish whatever it wants. At the same time, the material was racist. It did not matter if the images were reflecting Muslims, blacks or Jews; it was always about reinforcing racial and religious hierarchies. In a country where women’s headgear is legislated, religious expression is curtailed; a mock on their belief is seen as threat to their community at large.
However, this is a community that sees itself as besieged. They provided a sense of revenge and power.This type of response would allow the extremists to create a larger pool for recruiting members and drive the larger Muslim community to feeling even more alienated.
Looking at the incident from a single viewpoint will lead to missing out a larger picture. The fate of Tamil novelist Perumal Murugan is the latest example of the shrinking space for freedom in an age of intolerance. Murugan, author of a 2010 novel, Madhorubhagan, translated into English as One Part Woman, has given up writing and declared himself dead as a writer after he was forced to reach a settlement with people who objected to the content of the book and wanted it banned.
Like it or not, some people feel very strongly about their religion even if you do not. As such it would be wise and respectful to not openly mock them about this. No one is taking away anyone's freedom, just pointing out cause and effect. As the saying goes ' you are free to make whatever choices you want, but you are not free from the consequences of your choices'.
I feel there are limits to freedom of expression, when religion is insulted. Islamophobia is visceral and let’s not mock at its ideological pretext. All I can say now is that are we not evolved enough to reveal life’s hypocrisies without exhorting to cruelty and insult, however much the latter may seem part of our Birth right.
