Terrorist attack in a cartoonist office in Paris leaves at least 17 dead

It's a bit hypocritical to arrest someone for also having free speech but eh, the French thinks that what he's doing is promoting hate while the Charlie Hebdo thing is just a satire.
 
free speech isn't quite as "free" in most countries outside the us; there are plenty of cases like this in canada as well

you could argue that charlie hebdo was provoking hate, which is just as dangerous to the public safety, but eh. i'm not french so i can't claim to know what the laws and culture around this are
 
Well the French are quite against Holocaust denial because, er, WWII and Hitler did directly affect them, I'm guessing.
 
Javelin said:
free speech isn't quite as "free" in most countries outside the us; there are plenty of cases like this in canada as well

you could argue that charlie hebdo was provoking hate, which is just as dangerous to the public safety, but eh. i'm not french so i can't claim to know what the laws and culture around this are
Click to expand...
I said earlier, Charlie Hebdo was provocative, that's their entire point. But you can't justify the terrorist's actions, and besides, I think it's very French to use biting satire like a weapon. Charlie Hebdo would probably be never sold in stores in the U.S., but Charlie Hebdo is found in public stores in France.

The U.S. is more touchy on sensitive subjects, that's what I can discern.
 
us culture might be more sensitive but us laws aren't
Magikrazy said:
http://www.vox.com/2015/1/14/7545501/dieudonne-charlie-hebdo-arrest

Not sure what to say about this.
Click to expand...
this would never have happened in the us, for example. our culture would be like "wow this guy's a nutcase arrest pls" but he would be totally innocent
 
Javelin said:
us culture might be more sensitive but us laws aren't
Magikrazy said:
http://www.vox.com/2015/1/14/7545501/dieudonne-charlie-hebdo-arrest

Not sure what to say about this.
Click to expand...
this would never have happened in the us, for example. our culture would be like "wow this guy's a nutcase arrest pls" but he would be totally innocent
Click to expand...
I think it falls in tandem with antisemitism. So, some aspects of French is more restrained, others aren't. After all, Dieudonne has spouted crap like usual. According to the article, he claims that Jewish "slave drivers" secretly run France and has said that "the big crooks of the planet are all Jews."

This sentence shows the contrast well.
Charlie Hebdo was attempting to mock religion, hatred, and racism (though the cartoons may unintentionally have reinforced prejudice directed at French Muslims). Dieudonné, by contrast, promotes hate. The French view of free speech sees those two things very differently.
Click to expand...

Per the New York Times, speech that defames the humanity of a group or community can be restricted in France, as can speech that represents a threat to public order. Holocaust denial is banned.
Click to expand...

I have to side with the French view for this.
 
so... what's your point

all i'm saying is that free speech has more limits outside the us than inside the us (for example, banning anti-semitism)
 
Free speech is defined differently, not necessarily more or less restricted.

It's not like hate speech has anything of substance, but it may get difficult at categorizing what is hate speech or not.
 
Javelin said:
really

in what way is free speech "more" restricted in the us than in france
Click to expand...
Newspapers and other journalistic organizations in the U.S. don't show Charlie Hebdo covers in the name of "journalistic integrity" or "offense-free reporting".

Hell, Charlie Hebdo, just by covers alone (topless women, private parts), can't be even published in the U.S. Sex-related stuff-wise, France is more lenient on penises, women nipples, and other things.

I wouldn't even argue that anti-Semitic speech qualify as free speech since it promotes only hate, but I guess enforcing it would be a pain in the ass. We don't need Fred Phelps types promoting hatred, honestly.
 
Javelin said:
that's self-censorship though, which is different than legal restrictions
Click to expand...
You probably can't publish Charlie Hebdo stuff in the newstands though.
 
aagh
Javelin said:
all i'm saying is that free speech has more LEGAL limits outside the us than inside the us (for example, banning anti-semitism)
Click to expand...
is that precise enough for your technical mind
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back