[ad_1]
There are often reasons to sigh for France and the French. They hit too much, they get dragged with too big budget deficits and they like protectionism. But after the horrible beheading of the master Samuel Paty, France has shown a side that shows great respect.
Tens of thousands of French people have demonstrated in support of freedom of expression. President Emmanuel Macron has launched an offensive against violent Islamism in both speech and action. The master has been honored with a national commemoration ceremony and posthumously awarded the Legion of Honor, the highest award a French citizen can receive.
No one needs to doubt France’s determination to stand up to barbarism. When the French ambassador to Sweden, Etienne de Gonneville, was interviewed at SVT Diary Sunday night showed the same moral backbone. He warned against letting extremists shift the discussion from acts of terrorism to criticism of violations of Islam.
That is a key observation. False contradictions often arise from forces that claim to represent a certain group. Islamists, for example, want to create a conflict between the West and Islam. But in reality, it is the world’s Muslims, as well as vulnerable minorities in these regions, the main targets of ISIS and al-Qaeda terrorism.
The geopolitical game also follows clear interests. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has spoken out strongly against France, urging Macron to undergo a psychic test. This is not because Erdogan’s faith is stronger than anyone else’s, but because Turkey’s economy is in free fall and he aspires to become a leader of the world’s Sunni Muslims.
A bitter is happening Fight for power in the Middle East with Turkey in one of the leading roles. It is in this light that the protests against France’s resolute response to terrorism must be viewed.
The alternative is an inclined plan of self-censorship, where the burden of blame is shifted from the executioners to the victims according to the same logic as the rape victim in inappropriate clothing.
But shouldn’t the hurt feelings of ordinary Muslims be taken seriously in the face of, for example, the Jyllands-Posten cartoons of Muhammad? This is a perspective that may be reasonable to consider in relation to publications or exhibitions. Is the purpose to offend a minority or to test the limits of freedom of expression, for example? That is a big difference.
But freedom of expression also contains the offensive and the inappropriate. And when that right is threatened by forces that use terror as a means, liberal democracy must go on the defensive.
The alternative is an inclined plan of self-censorship, where the burden of blame is shifted from the executioners to the victims according to the same logic as the rape victim in inappropriate clothing.
And it doesn’t stop there, as the murder of Samuel Paty demonstrated. Even those who display “the taboo” in the public interest or educational purpose may be forced with their lives.
France is a leader in fundamental freedoms and rights that deserve all the support and the most sincere thanks.
.
