I’m Not Charlie

~ Clarissa

I’m not nearly brave enough to defy religious fanatics like that.

But I admire people who are.

Unknown's avatar

Published by Clarissa

53 thoughts on “I’m Not Charlie”

  1. Least your honest about it. I have yet to see a ‘fighting pencil’ cartoon that depicts Mohammad. Until then, it’s cowards who recognize the value of courage, yet want nothing more than to cloak themselves in someone else’s.

    But things are moving, and one day out from the mass of #jesuischarlie will arise Je suis Charles Martel.

    Like

    Reply

    2. In other words Ahmed is truly civilized (unlike many of the “yes but…” commenters). And muslim extremist weirdos victimize fellow muslims even more than they do non-muslisms. Both sides need to join together to smash the insects into the dirt.

      Like

      Reply

  3. I really hope a thousand ironists bloom out of this terrible event. When satire is attacked, we need to sit up and realize the power of satire.

    French culture REALLY IS the only culture, because others make their culture subservient to political pressures. You have to really, really believe in culture not to do this. Vive la France

    Like

    Reply

    1. \ French culture REALLY IS the only culture, because others make their culture subservient to political pressures.

      What about Germany? There are huge demonstrations there (in part) against being subservient.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Who knows. I am parroting Julia Kristeva.

        In any case, if you are right-wing baiting me, that is a very boring tactic. I’m not even a right-winger. New tactics will be needed and new devices.

        Like

        Reply

        1. \ In any case, if you are right-wing baiting me, that is a very boring tactic.

          I am from Israel, not USA. And am not sure what “right-wing baiting” means. 🙂

          I simply got the impression that out of three states – France, England and Germany – France is the weakest nowadays. Jews from France began immigrating to Israel, Clarissa said that many academics are leaving the country too (partly) because lack of discipline in universities and that many French want to run away. Seems to be the opposite of “the only culture” claim.

          Like

          Reply

          1. It may be so. I’ve never been to France. But Kristeva asserted that “culture” is definitively French. I’m inclined to believe this, because other groups subserviate their literary texts to interpretations that are politically driven, but the French still have some room to be purely literary.

            Like

            Reply

          2. Why did you choose these 3 countries? They sound kind of random.

            What about Spain, which is culturally more vibrant than these random three combined?

            Like

            Reply

            1. \ Why did you choose these 3 countries? They sound kind of random.

              They represent Europe to me (and I suppose to many others), not Spain.
              Each was / is a leading European culture at some point in the relatively recent past.

              Like

              Reply

  4. I support freedom of expression and the secular state. I abhor religious fundamentalism of any variety. And, frankly, I am suspicious even of moderate religion. No one should be killed because of their convictions. No one deserves to die for caricatures.
    But I am not Charlie. First, because I would not produce or consume something so distasteful. But it is not just a matter of personal taste that should now be subjugated to the common goal of the civilized people. I do not want THAT to be on the banner of the struggle that I believe is otherwise good, necessary and enlightened. Can’t the European civilization produce some better unifying images?
    Even if the killers were just some ISIS-affiliated jihadists – Putin must be laughing out loud now, laughing to tears. The western civilization put a wonderful thing on its banners… And of course it is useful to Putin in other ways – boosting the le Pen’s Front Nationale political clout, for example. Conservatives of the world unite, etc, 100 points to Putin (even if he had nothing to do with it).

    Like

    Reply

    1. I wonder whether much of the paucity in contemporary ethics and social criticism comes out of a desire to consider oneself from an identity point of view, rather than an ethical one. If I am of the mind that I have to police others and draw boundaries for them regarding what they are allowed to stand for OR put out there as their image, then I will have a totally different perspective on the world than if I simply said, “It’s not an image game.” Back when 9-11 occurred, the rightists were saying, “Oh, those Islamic types don’t respect us because we don’t control our women!” How sensitive of them to be concerned with how they appeared to others. Nowadays, contemporary leftists are saying the same: “We appear to others in a negative light — us, the collective West and Borg Mind.”

      Ouch! It’s as if there were a very, very finely balanced fulcrum out there in the world and we had to make sure that nobody made any sudden moves to unbalance it. A spate of terrorism? “Oh you must have unbalanced the fulcrum in some way! Better look within. Or police ourselves to death.’

      This state of mind is very, very infantile. I don’t blame people, though, or not as much as I might, since I have also thought in this manner. When I realized the gargantuan proportions of my error, I revised the script and returned to one that was more based in reason and historical knowledge.

      People in the contemporary West do need to get over their concern with how others see them and their magical thinking concerning invisible balancing fulcrums. There really are better, more mature ways to engage with the world. A deeper understanding of the real origins of historical tensions would even allow us to be much more ethical and humane in our dealings with others. We just have to give up the self-obsession with “how we seem” and the power trip of policing others.

      Like

      Reply

      1. I am not sure I fully understand everything you just said, so just in case I will clarify – for me it is not about how others see the West. The question is – is West doing things for which it can meaningfully respect itself, according to its own values?

        Like

        Reply

        2. I meaningfully respect my right to a goofy sense of humor. 🙂

          Gosh, people the world over laugh at Monty Python, and those same people want to teach me how to pick my nose? 🙂

          Like

          Reply

      2. I’ve got to agree with musteryou. Nobody fid anything to “provoke” Putin into invading Ukraine. Nobody did anything to provoke these terrorists into killing the cartoonists. They were all provoked by things inside their own minds.

        It is an illusion that if we sit very quietly and make ourselves as imperceptible as possible, the big bad wolf will pass us by and not do us any harm.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. I’m also bothered by the idea that “we always have to be on our best behavior” because if we relax for a second, laugh at a silly joke, fart or snooze, everybody else will go right out of their weak and unstable little minds. But it isn’t how things work. Other people are not feeble – minded. They are just as capable of hearing an “a rabbi, a priest and a mullah walk into a bar” joke without collapsing as I am. They might choose to react differently but that’s their choice. Let’s not deny them agency.

          I wonder, is anybody in ISIS or Kremlin hotly debating right now how to make a good impression on us? I don’t really think they are.

          Like

          Reply

          1. By the way, I just found out that the Russians are blaming the US for the murder of the cartoonists. They say that the CIA did it on purpose to punish Hollande for supporting Putin.

            Like

            Reply

          2. ” hotly debating right now how to make a good impression on us?”

            It’s really unhealthy and very jittery to be thinking in those terms. Your eyes should be turned outward, not inwardly, always scutinising yourself. Otherwise you won’t begin to see it when a real enemy comes up.

            The current Western obsession with trying to track down a trace of sin within, along with the equally false notion of an intrinsically just world, leads to scapegoating and infighting.

            I’ve wasted so much of my time in my life trying to cater to the idiots who demanded that I keep looking for a trace of sin within to find out why I had been targeted by bullies. Later, I gained much more insight and started to realize that those encouraging me always to look inwards were the bullies. They were actually frenzied bullies who kept demanding I look inwards and inwards and inwards some more. And when I did, they said I was self-obsessed and I deserved everything that was coming to me.

            I learned along a hard and long road what underlies this Western frenzy. It’s a desire to deny responsibility and to feel superior to others next to you.

            Like

            Reply

            1. I agree completely! This attitude does stem from the need to feel superior to everybody else. The pseudo Liberals who can’t accept that they are not the center of the universe freak out when attention shifts from them. No, how is it possible that they are not the alpha and omega of existence? What’s next? You will suggest they didn’t hang the Moon? ?? How dare you?

              Liked by 1 person

              Reply

          3. —I wonder, is anybody in ISIS or Kremlin hotly debating right now how to make a good impression on us?

            No, but this is not the point. The point is that there are at least two powerful enough groups of people who believe that they are in “civilization war” with us. Jihadists and Putinists. But you do not need consensus to have civilization war, it is enough that one side believes in it. So we may insist that we should not care of those “others” all we want. This will not prevent those others from using our mistakes against us.

            Like

            Reply

            1. They think that the rights of women and gays are an enormous mistake on our part. Should we apologize for these achievements now?

              I think that there is a profound error here which is that what terrorists and Russians doing is reactive. And I don’t think that for a second. Did you hear the frenzy Russians were in over the crucified boy? Do they care that he’s not real? Of course, not. If Charlie Hebdo never existed, there would have still been a terrorist attack two days ago.

              Is anybody here really thinking that the terror act happened because someone was offended by the cartoons?

              You’ve got to be shockingly naive to believe that.

              Like

              Reply

              1. I am sorry, but you are valiantly fighting a straw-man, IMHO.
                I did not say anything about this kind of terrorism being reactive. I am speaking about our optimal reaction to this act of terrorism once the act happened. The question is – which one of the many possible reactions is promoting our values in the best possible manner and leaves our enemies without advantages, space to maneuver, etc.

                Like

    2. “But I am not Charlie. First, because I would not produce or consume something so distasteful. But it is not just a matter of personal taste that should now be subjugated to the common goal of the civilized people. I do not want THAT to be on the banner of the struggle that I believe is otherwise good, necessary and enlightened. Can’t the European civilization produce some better unifying images?”

      Finally someone understands, I can’t believe it. That I find those so-called satires primitive, distasteful and infantile doesn’t mean I condone the massacre. Yep, the Charlie Hebdo “artworks” are very nice banners indeed, for example this one, it must be a real pleasure to march below it on a demonstration for the right of the free speech:

      Like

      Reply

        1. “Can’t stop laughing …”

          Maybe you can print it and put it up onto the wall besides your bed as a poster. Your preteen friends will like it, I’m sure 😎

          Like

          Reply

      2. Folks, we all have a different sense of humor. Mine is on the goofy and primitive side and I think the linked cartoon is hilarious. Those who don’t dig this humor and prefer more refined stuff are perfectly free not to consume it. But those who want to consume it should be free to do so.

        I have gag reflex when I see onion rings but this doesn’t mean it should be anybody else ‘ s problem.

        Like

        Reply

        1. —Folks, we all have a different sense of humor.

          Well… This discussion is getting more and more parallels with the discussions about the merits of the “choice feminism”… In the latter case you used to believe that no, not everything goes, it is not enough to call just whatever X a “feminism” for it to actually be feminism. Same with the “good joke”, in my opinion.
          Yes, many of us enjoy crude jokes in private. Public arena is different.
          And by the way – I do not see anyone here saying “these cartoonists had to be quiet, and since they were not, it was their fault”. Nobody. It’s killers’ fault. The point was – aren’t there better examples of the freedom of speech to use now? After the fact. (Before two days ago most of the world’s population heard nothing of Charlie, that was a small niche media outlet.) The jihadists (or whoever organized the false flag operation if it was a false flag operation) should not be able to determine what we unite around and what we consider the vanguard of the freedom of speech. Suppose they next shoot up the office of the pedophile party, that allegedly exists in the Netherlands… Will we post and repost endless “Je suis pedophile” then?

          Like

          Reply

          1. I’m not sure what you are saying here. People are reacting to a specific event. It would be quite weird to start discussing how we all unite around Cervantes or Proust at this point. Yes, everybody likes them but how is it relevant at this moment?

            As for choice feminism, if terrorists viciously slaughtered a group of choice feminists, of course I would only express support for the victims and not publish screeds of the “yes, but their feminism wasn’t the right kind” variety.

            We didn’t choose to unite around the cartoonists. Terrorists chose them for us. And we are drowning in existential nitpicking instead of standing together against this.

            This is totally reminding me of Michael Brown. He was also not 100% angelic and all that was discussed was how it would be great to have a more squeaky clean victim.

            Yes, it would be easier if the terrorists had blown up an orphanage with cute fluffy kittens who never had a chance to hurt anybody ‘ s sensibilities. But shockingly, terrorists don’t find them interesting.

            Like

            Reply

        2. I thought I was the only one …

          Actually, I found a way to eat them, but only if they’re made of thinly shaved onion strips no wider than a millimetre. At that point, once they’re breaded and fried, you’re really eating onion-flavoured starch. 🙂

          Like

          Reply

        3. I can think of the following thought experiment: Suppose a friend of mine sent me one of Charlie’s caricatures… I probably would not think badly of this friend, unless he were sending me those caricatures systematically, and nothing but these caricatures. But I would not forward it to anybody… I would not post such a cartoon on my office door. I would not show it to my colleagues or students, even if I knew them as militant atheists. Etc.

          Like

          Reply

          1. “So how do you like this stuff I’m sending you?”

            “PLEASE SEND MORE! I’m making a scrapbook so I can show it to your children when they’re adults.”

            🙂

            Like

            Reply

    3. You don’t, I do. Let’s now have a discussion as to whose humor is more humorous.

      As for the Russians, yes, they are massively saying that the French deserved this. Like the people who came up with the Vovochka jokes can judge anybody ‘s humor.

      Like

      Reply

  5. Sometimes I am “Charlie”, and sometimes I’m better than that …

    I’ve upset quite a few “yes but-ters” over the years simply by pointing out the truth, although they probably didn’t appreciate having their faces rubbed in it as if it were a soiled nappy. 🙂

    Do keep in mind that when I’m occasionally messing with you, I have mellowed out considerably over the years. My hate mail bag used to be the stuff of legend.

    As for defending myself from the kind of people that once hunted down Salman Rushdie, that’s why I’m Jones.

    Besides, I look horrible in a dress. 🙂

    Like

    Reply

    1. Freaks exist everywhere. The Schadenfreude around the world is nothing short of horrifying.

      There is something so fucked up about such folks that it’s scary. And yes, Russian – speakers are among the greatest jerks about it.

      Like

      Reply

      1. If I gloat about something I don’t really want to gloat about, just so I can be seen gloating about it among people who will want me to gloat about it, is that in fact Schadenfraud? 🙂

        Like

        Reply

  7. Loved the article (by an academic) about (partly his experience of) shame / honor cultures and his thoughts about the dangers ahead for America:

    The World’s Most Toxic Value System
    http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/toxicval.htm

    // And yes, Russian – speakers are among the greatest jerks about it.

    I don’t think it’s true in Israel. Hers may be the mainstream Israeli view.

    Like

    Reply

  8. \ You are scaring me with this self-criticism.

    Self-criticism of my country? Why not? Here is a column from somebody from the Left, who writes for the major Israeli mainstream newspaper:

    The Muslim occupation of Europe
    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4612790,00.html

    May be, you’ll be interested in this article (with drawings):

    Arab caricaturists react to Charlie Hebdo shooting
    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4613108,00.html

    Can you access the ynet website, or still not?

    Like

    Reply

  9. In Israel (those sites aren’t ynet, so you may hopefully access them):

    “Hundreds of Israelis flocked to the home of the French Ambassador to Israel Patrick Maisonnave Thursday to express their solidarity with the French people after an attack on the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo left 12 people dead.
    Many of those in attendance were French born Israelis”

    Haven’t known one of cartoonists was Jewish:

    “Jewish caricaturist Georges Wolinski was among the 12 victims of an attack Wednesday on the Paris headquarters of the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine.”
    http://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-cartoonist-among-victims-of-massacre-at-french-newspaper/

    Last link – Israeli cartoonists respond (a Hebrew article but drawings are in English / French):
    http://www.mako.co.il/culture-online/articles/Article-3672d58a27bca41006.htm?sCh=3d385dd2dd5d4110&pId=1898243326

    I loved cartoons 18 and 20.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to musteryou Cancel reply