French terror attacks

[politicus]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30710883

This is horrible.

Indeed and in the literal sense.

[politicus]

Charb, Cabu, Wolinski and Tignous. It's confirmed.

May these brave free-thinkers rest in peace.

[politicus]

Wolinski:



Cabu:



Tignous:



Charb:

[politicus]

It is almost unbearable that someone can just gun down a guy like him.

[politicus]

I'm also in favour that tomorrow, every major newspaper in Europe should print a joint Mohammed caricature/cartoon to show the fundies that freedom of speech cannot be gunned down.

Seems unproductive. an al-Baghdadi cartoon, maybe.

It would not only be unproductive, but counterproductive because it would allow the terrorists to justify their actions as defending Islam (they would make the link from the death cartoonists to this new attack on the Prophet, which would work despite being completely illogical). Al-Baghdadi on the other hand would be a fine solution. He is widely hated in the Islamic world as well.

[politicus]

Yes, the most important thing here is for us to be concerned with hurting the terrosists' feelings.

No one are concerned with the terrorists feelings, some of us are concerned with how the far right (ab)uses this and how ISIS may abuse a stupid reaction to gain sympathy among (minor parts of) the Muslim community in Europe and the Middle East.

[politicus]

Yes, the most important thing here is for us to be concerned with hurting the terrosists' feelings.

No one are concerned with the terrorists feelings, some of us are concerned with how the far right (ab)uses this and how ISIS may abuse a stupid reaction to gain sympathy among (minor parts of) the Muslim community in Europe and the Middle East.

If someone sees an equivalence between expressing an idea and what ISIS does, there's no reason to cater to them. These "Muslim moderates" who might become terrorists if we make fun of their religion or kill too many people with drones, if they actually exist, they are not moderates.

Free speech is an issue where you need to draw a line in the sand.  You shouldn't allow anyone to chill free speech with threats of violence.  That means you can't silence people because you think they're stupid, or unhelpful, or extreme, or racist, or anything.  We need to have a marketplace of ideas where everyone is on an equal footing.  That means Muslims can't keep bullying people.  So, I think the media should publish offensive cartoons in solidarity.  They can do this to a few brave outlets, but they can't do this to everyone.

I am not talking about "moderates" here,

I care more about free speech than most people and generally support going quite far to defend it, but there is a time and place for everything. Honouring the memory of witty, sophisticated, talented humanists with a reenactment of the crude and divisive Muhammed-crisis would be wrong.
This is a time to stand united against the Jihadists and demonstrate our contempt for them by mocking them in a clever and funny way in the spirit of the dead masters.

[politicus]

Everyone please show some decency. This isn't the place to continue old debates and reignite clashes of civilization.

I agree. I think we might have to divide it into a memorial and factual update thread here and a "what should be done" thread on political debate.

[politicus]

Yes, the most important thing here is for us to be concerned with hurting the terrosists' feelings.

No one are concerned with the terrorists feelings, some of us are concerned with how the far right (ab)uses this and how ISIS may abuse a stupid reaction to gain sympathy among (minor parts of) the Muslim community in Europe and the Middle East.

If someone sees an equivalence between expressing an idea and what ISIS does, there's no reason to cater to them. These "Muslim moderates" who might become terrorists if we make fun of their religion or kill too many people with drones, if they actually exist, they are not moderates.

Free speech is an issue where you need to draw a line in the sand.  You shouldn't allow anyone to chill free speech with threats of violence.  That means you can't silence people because you think they're stupid, or unhelpful, or extreme, or racist, or anything.  We need to have a marketplace of ideas where everyone is on an equal footing.  That means Muslims can't keep bullying people.  So, I think the media should publish offensive cartoons in solidarity.  They can do this to a few brave outlets, but they can't do this to everyone.

I am not talking about "moderates" here,

I care more about free speech than most people and generally support going quite far to defend it, but there is a time and place for everything. Honouring the memory of witty, sophisticated, talented humanists with a reenactment of the crude and divisive Muhammed-crisis would be wrong.
This is a time to stand united against the Jihadists and demonstrate our contempt for them by mocking them in a clever and funny way in the spirit of the dead masters.

If we have to censor ourselves to stand united with someone, we shouldn't do that.  If free speech is divisive, we've got a long way to go as a society.  This is one of those areas where Europe is far behind the United States.  And, by the way, there's nothing wrong with insulting a religion or making fun of Jesus, or Moses, or Mohammed, or L. Ron Hubbard.  

If we make it taboo as a society to offend one religion because its adherents constantly use violence and constantly play the victim card, we reward their tactics and we legitimize their behavior.  We also insult Muslims because we turn them into infantile victims who can't participate in the marketplace of ideas without special rules.  That's the problem here.  Making fun of Islam should be no different from making fun of libertarianism or socialism.  Until it is, we need people like this poking them with a stick.  

All that does not take into consideration who the dead were and what they represented. Which is important in this case.

I basically agree with you in all of the above, but this is the wrong time to do it in that way. There is no point in doing it the crude and divisive way right now. Nothing will be gained.

What we debated was the best way to react, not what people should be "allowed" to do. The media are obviously allowed to react as they prefer. Some of us just hope they do it in a non-divisive, clever, funny way to honour the dead and promote unity.

[politicus]

Everyone please show some decency. This isn't the place to continue old debates and reignite clashes of civilization.

I agree. I think we might have to divide it into a memorial and factual update thread here and a "what should be done" thread on political debate.

What do you think? Should we move thread? This is not going all that well.

[politicus]

The concept of "second generation immigrant" (or even "third generation immigrant") is relatively widespread in several European countries. It is not logical, but is used to differentiate from the aboriginal population. Immigrant in this context only means ethnic minority.

Given that most ethnic minorities in Europe are descended from people immigrated during the last  50 years it makes some sense.