Où est Charlie ?

March was a sitting
March was a sitting

I just came back from the March in Paris that mobilized 2 million people. 3 million in France total. In my small hometown, 9000 people marched which is huge considering we’re only 17000 people.

Like all French now I’m still shocked. It feels like I woke up with a big nasty hangover that won’t go away. 12 people were killed for a tasteless drawing of Mahommet. And it seems like it’s only the beginning.

We are going to have all this violence going on now. All those problems. And as if it was not already big enough, since news are worldwide, we have to listen to all those comment from English media. And it’s nerve wracking.

I’ve heard all and everything :

  • It was a journal of white privileged men who wrote racist/anti-muslim stuff.
  • I am not Charlie because I don’t agree with their drawings
  • Freedom of speech is good but insulting a religion is bad
  • They were discriminatory toward minority community
  • … And so on.

And it hurts that people would be so sure of the information they got from an English speaking media, with badly translated from French drawings, of an event they are not even present at, that they would push those ideas as the truth.

Honestly, every person that say this, is one that uses the same answer for every problem they have. Your thing is to use discrimination as a reason ? Let’s say it’s discrimination ! You think everything revolves around racism and community clashes ? It was racist privileged white men. You’re as close minded as it can and by trying to highlight those issues you’re actually widening them.

Every time you say, ‘nothing justify the violence but‘, you implied they deserved it. Period.

That said, and if you’re still reading this, let’s move on.

Of the white racist privileged men

They weren’t. One of killed was Mustapha a French-Algerian journalist and George a French-Italian-Polish Jew cartoonist. Part of the cartoonist (not killed) was Riad the French-Syrian. Much white, much privileged.

Of racist/anti-muslim stuff

Get your facts right. They targeted the far right and our government more often than everything else (what a minority) !

The drawing were often tasteless to be honest. Doesn’t mean they were racist. They were shocking and bad. Not racist and anti-muslims always. If you want to see racism, fair enough, but have you read Charlie Hebdo or did you just see somewhere that they were racists, looked at two-three front pages of the magazine, followed a quick look at a bad translation and assumed it had to be true ? Because it’s that easy to accuse the racism of the victim for a terrorist attack instead of explaining it’s the work of dangerous lunatic who said is part of religion that actually reject the very attack.

Indeed, it’s true that it’s easier to accuse the victim than to educate the people. Easier to say it was because of racism than to explain what extremism is and how it doesn’t represent a religion. Racism accusations always buy you the support of the public, while education is a long, slow and hard process. And you’re the lazy kind, ain’t you ?

Of am I not Charlie

This one makes me want to die. You’re not Charlie ? How can you not understand that I am Charlie isn’t just about their drawings ? It isn’t even about it at all ! It’s all about not supporting terrorist attacks ! I am Charlie stands for I am against what happened not for I like their drawings. It seems so incredible to me that you could be shocked by their drawings to the point that you would close yourself to the most elementary slogan marketing techniques.

To say

I am for freedom of speech but I can’t say I am Charlie because the drawing were tasteless and I don’t support their message

is lacking basic comprehension of the problem. It’s like saying

I am for freedom of speech but I am against freedom of speech because someone used freedom of speech.

To make it simple :

I am Charlie = I support freedom of speech

Don’t be a blockhead and learn how to read messages. Do not take everything at the first degree.


You can debate on whether or not Charlie Hebdo is a good magazine which I’m not sure it is. You can question if they were racist or not. But you can’t use the terrorist attack as ground for debate on whether it is all because they were racist. You shouldn’t use a terrorist attack to talk about discrimination because you’re going to make it worst. You’re going to create bigger discrimination. You’re going to justify the violence.

And if you feel like your article needs to start with “I don’t justify the violence but”, then, you probably need to rewrite your article.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s