You know, 2015
has started in utterly rubbish fashion.
Political parties gearing up for the oncoming UK General Election and
utterly failing to understand the trouble ordinary people are in.
Then there’s the
attack on the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.
 |
| David Brown from The Independent's take on the Charlie Hebdo attack. |
As an outsider,
it does look like Charlie Hebdo does sail very close to the bone with its
subject matter. Looking at the covers,
they are more strident and forthright than their nearest British equivalent
Private Eye. For all that the cover in
the aftermath of the death of the Princess of Wales and the New York terrorist
attacks were controversial, Charlie Hebdo is consistently controversial. There’s the one with Francois Holland being
led by his penis and there’s one that is about as close to the bone as possible
about Michael Jackson… quite literally.
Then there’s the one’s that show the Islamic prophet Mohammed.
If I’m honest,
the thought that people are offended at an image just seems so absurd… so quaint...
so old fashioned. Add to that the
thought that the message that, arguably, Charlie Hebdo’s most controversial
cover is obscured by that, misplaced, offence.
That cover shows the prophet being killed by someone who resembles an
IS/ISIS/ISL thug. The message that these
Neanderthals wouldn’t know the true meaning of Islam being obscured by the use
of the prophet is such a block on the true interpretation of these
cartoons. To quote another Charlie Hebdo
cartoon “It’s hard to be liked by jerks…”.
Jerks who happen to behave more like bullyboy gangsters than religious figureheads
mind, but still jerks.
It’s not just
France that are having issues regarding the attacks. Here in the UK, our media shamefully decided
to not give any context to the story by pointedly not showing any of the
cartoons, at least until they were pressed.
The BBC’s Newsnight showed the front page of “the survivors” issue, whilst
someone tried to show it on Qatar Airlines sponsored Sky News. Up here, the talk has been more on the
offence caused by Charlie Hebdo more than anything else. Last Wednesday’s Scotland 2015 was something
of a low when it’s edition was a po faced discussion on… well why do these people do it?
It’s not just the
motives behind poking fun at Islamic fundamentalism that Scotland has failed
the Je Suis Charlie test. Supporters of
both the SNP and Labour have continued to bitch, argue, fight and be nasty
towards each other. Two incidents come
to mind. Firstly, you may remember the
case of the four Renfrewshire councillors suspended for protesting against the
weak “Smith Report” – Indeed Smith himself dealt with the situation with more
humor than any of the Labour representatives on the media. In the past couple of weeks it came out that
the punishment given to the “Renfrewshire Four” did not cover running for the
SNP after 2016. Cue hoardes of Labour
empty vessels with their pitchforks out raged at this… well to be honest I’m not sure why they are
outraged.
The second
incident involved a group called “Comedians for Independence” who, with a
shocking lack of self awareness, called for the sacking of the journalist Paul
Hutcheon for writing something critical of the SNP. Words just fail…
For all of the so
called similarities between Scotland and France, there are also lots of
differences – France’s secular outlook is not a majority viewpoint here in
Scotland. It’s why I’ve felt that we (in
Scotland) have never really understood why Je Suis Charlie resonates. To me it’s about freedom of speech, freedom
to make arguments and to make the case for things that may sound
unsayable.
It’s about being
grown up and accepting ideas contrary to your own and responding to those views
and ideas in a grown up fashion. It is
not about regurgitating decades discredited views, mistaking diplomacy with
appeasement, surrendering to intimidation and abuse or giving into frustration
and the temptation to abuse. Those are
the values that should be defended and adopted as we go into a General Election
campaign hard on the tails of a bruising Referendum campaign.
