Charli Hebdo attack: the echo of “I am Charlie”

Charli Hebdo attack: the echo of “I am Charlie”

Info Box

Name	Charlie Hebdo
What is it?	A satirical magazine in France
Why it makes news?	Publication of controversial cartoons or being satirical l
Why it is in news recently?	An attack on its office in France on January 7, 2015
When it all began?	In 2006, publishing a controversial cartoon on Prophet Mohamed
Why it matters now?	An attack on its office by Islamist gun men meant to be an attack on ‘Freedom of expression’.
Who are the victims?	Editor, staff of Charli Hebdo
Who are the perpetrators?	Islamist terrorist having allegiance to AQA
India’s response	India has condemned the attack
Franc’s response	Tightened the security, gunned down the perpetrators and people in large number expressing their support for the attacked magazine.
Connection	Charli Hebdo published a Danish’s cartoon depicting prophet Mohamed
Extremist’s view	Should not have depicted prophet Mohamed in the cartoon in such a way it hurt the religious feeling of Islam
Defender’s view	Democracy has freedom of speech as a central pillar and one should not attack on it
The middle path view	All though one has freedom to express in a democratic set up, one has to be conscious in her/his in exercising this freedom so as to not to create ethical issues in free expression

Discussion:

Almost all constitutional governments have ‘ freedom of speech’ assured to its citizen with some sort of rational restrictions. This restrictive part over freedom of speech by any form of legal government poses many question from time to time. It’s often in to controversial notion when free speech is condemned, it arises a detailed look out on free speech and ethical issues involved in it.

The legality of freedom of speech, for everyone, is a natural law beyond any doubt. The controversial expression on privacy, public life, customs and traditions are lightly taken, even thought, at times, it may appear controversial. The reason behind this “slight approach” is  clearly understood when one think of the present day’s world as a ‘Global Village’ – countries across the continent beginning to merge in all walks of life. This scenario presents a ‘true challenge’ to the home country where the changes due to assimilation of people. As a result of the this, inter-continental and inter-racial and mixtures  are apparent. These changes appear to be dominant in due course. If the particular change is positive, people right away accept it. If not, they resist it. It is the later – resistance to change are put to hard criticism if it comes in the way of religion.Often the changes are adjusted with dissent. It would not provoke large scale of violence. It won’t take anti-social elements fighting against the society or government.

For instance, the dress code in India for girls may be concerned. The radicalisms and a section of liberals would want the girls to be dressed as they like.  On the contrary, the conservatives would argue that the modern westernised dresses for girls is indignity to our Indian culture.

The argument for both section is still existing. It is likely to continue even with modern upgraded views, as our time goes on. Clearly, if one takes cognisance here, neither section of the argument take arms to win over their argument.  And neither the liberals nor the conservatives take path of violence to resolve their part of rights. So it continues as a topic under Indian culture. And the issue of dress code for the girls, surely is going to be  a topic for discussion for the years to come. Is  anything missing here? Yes, of course, why don’t this new age’s freedom fighters discuss on men’s dress code. Observe silence.

Before taking up a view, let us illustrate a few instances where freedom of expression and its proponents put in a lot of struggle to fight back their right to speak freely. Arunthathi Roy, social activist and the author of God of small things claims to a question in BBC podcasts that India is not really growing and the caste paradox still exist. And her views on far right groups and Gandhi are critical that they brought her many protest.

Sulman Rushdi is acclaimed writer, his remarks often turn controversial and people protest against him. Tasleema Nasren is another example where she had to obtain Indian citizenship to stay out of Bangladesh on account of her controversial book ‘Lajja’.

Wendy’s book, “Hinduism: an alternate history” caused the Hindu far right group to protest. And in its aggressive form the group made copies of the book withdrawn. Another famous Tamil writer Perumal Murugan, was put to hard criticism for his noval ‘Madhuorubhagam’.  Of course he was supported by many for his free speech. Charlie Hebdo attack in France is a recent testimony to the danger that the freedom of expression faces.

Now, let us take a final view on when the freedom of expression takes a violent form. Clearly, going by the news digest and reports one can conclude in observation the freedom of speech is at danger when the particular expression has particular relation to a religious faith. The end result is in violent form if that particular expression offends religious sentiments as the claimant’s argue.

At the end of  the day, every one has to realise that changes are welcome as a result of free speech. If the free speech brings ‘peace and love’ the same has to be fought and prevailed at any cost.