background preloader

CharlieHebdo

Facebook Twitter

« Notre société a produit ce qu’elle rejette aujourd’hui comme une monstruosité infâme » Par Didier Fassin, professeur de sciences sociales à l’Institute for Advanced Study de Princeton (New Jersey) Après le temps de la sidération, le temps de la communion et le temps du recueillement autour des victimes des assassinats des 7, 8 et 9 janvier, devra venir le temps de la réflexion sur ces événements tragiques.

« Notre société a produit ce qu’elle rejette aujourd’hui comme une monstruosité infâme »

Or l’émotion légitime et l’apparent consensus qui en a résulté tendent à délimiter l’espace du pensable et a fortiori du dicible. Un périmètre de sécurité idéologique impose ce qu’il est acceptable d’interroger et ce qui ne saurait l’être. Condamner est nécessaire, analyser devient suspect. « Il y en a assez de toujours essayer de comprendre. À force de trop vouloir expliquer, nous avons fait preuve de complaisance depuis trop longtemps », me disait une personnalité de gauche connue pour ses engagements citoyens.

. « Excuses sociologiques » How Orwell's 'Animal Farm' Led A Radical Muslim To Moderation. At age 16, Maajid Nawaz joined the Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir.

How Orwell's 'Animal Farm' Led A Radical Muslim To Moderation

But after four years in prison, he decided to leave the group. He co-founded the think tank Quilliam, which is dedicated to countering extremist beliefs, and he's now running for Parliament in England. Courtesy of the Quilliam Foundation hide caption itoggle caption Courtesy of the Quilliam Foundation At age 16, Maajid Nawaz joined the Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir. Courtesy of the Quilliam Foundation When Maajid Nawaz was growing up in Essex, England, in the 1990s, the son of Pakistani parents, he first found his voice of rebellion through American hip-hop. "It gave me a feeling that my identity could matter — and did matter — growing up as a British Pakistani who was facing racism from whiter society," Nawaz tells Fresh Air's Terry Gross, "but also confusion about where my family was from and not really fitting into either culture.

" The Charlie Hebdo shootings explained to my American Friends. 4.

The Charlie Hebdo shootings explained to my American Friends

What is Free Speech in France? As Jon Stewart put it in The Daily Show, Free speech in France doesn’t look like free speech to a lot of Americans. I know it’s not easy to understand: Free Speech is free speech and that’s it, right? Well, no. Free speech in the U.S. is as much the product of American history as the French “Liberté d’expression” is the product of French history. Some things are forbidden in France. Everything that is considered as “incitation to racial hate,” for example. The rules are very specific: You cannot say that the Holocaust didn’t exist, for example. Mathieu Davy, a French lawyer, explains in the New York Times : “There are clear limits in our legal system. This doesn’t mean that France is perfect in terms of free speech (far from it, really) : after the Charlie Hebdo attack, like after 9/11, several persons have been prosecuted in France for “Vindication of terrorism”. In France, it is seen as courage and resistance, an act of freedom from publishers.

« Evidemment, je suis contre le terrorisme, mais pas davantage en faveur de ces caricatures » Philippe Lançon: «J’allais partir quand les tueurs sont entrés…» Chers amis de Charlie et Libération, Il ne me reste pour l’instant que trois doigts émergeant des bandelettes, une mâchoire sous pansement et quelques minutes d’énergie au-delà desquelles mon ticket n’est plus valable pour vous dire toute mon affection et vous remercier de votre soutien et de votre amitié.

Philippe Lançon: «J’allais partir quand les tueurs sont entrés…»

Je voulais vous dire simplement ceci : s’il y a une chose que cet attentat m’a rappelée, sinon apprise, c’est bien pourquoi je pratique ce métier dans ces deux journaux – par esprit de liberté et par goût de la manifester, à travers l’information ou la caricature, en bonne compagnie, de toutes les façons possibles, même ratées, sans qu’il soit nécessaire de les juger. Charlie Hebdo: The new issue’s editor’s note is a defense of secularism.

Photo by Aurelien Meunier/Getty Images This week’s issue of Charlie Hebdo has drawn tons of attention and also criticism for its cover, which depicts the Prophet Mohammed holding a “Je Suis Charlie” sign.

Charlie Hebdo: The new issue’s editor’s note is a defense of secularism.

But the editor’s note on the flip side of the cover is almost as provocative: Under the headline “Will There Still Be ‘Yes, But’s? ,” Charlie’s surviving editors have published a spirited defense of their own work and of secularism, one of France’s core national values. The editors begin by joking that Charlie Hebdo has “accomplished more miracles than all the saints and prophets combined” in the last week—chief among them putting out a newspaper despite losing eight of their staffers to a terrorist attack. The editors then thank everyone who has supported them, those “who are truly on our side, who sincerely and deeply ‘are Charlie.’ ” And to those who aren’t: “We say fuck you to the others, who don’t give a shit anyway.”