La Ciudad Espléndida

I am not Charlie Hebdo… nor I´m Cherif nor Said Kouachi. I am Carlos and as much as I might regret the senseless deaths of the 12 innocent victims of terrorism, I regret as well the death of their perpetrators. As much as this might sound preposterous, I think every life is precious and nobody has the right to take it away. Also, the death of the Kouachi brothers was a missed opportunity for justice as their trial might have set an example to aspiring kamikaze/terrorists.

However, the main reason I am not Charlie Hebdo, nor the Kouachi brothers is that I live (or at least try to live) by the Golden Rule: Do to others, as you would have them do to you. It is that simple.

I can´t be either of them simply because I respect others regardless of their faith, politics or ideology as much as I would like them to do the same for me. I can´t be them either because I think my liberty is limited by other´s liberty and don´t hold my own form of liberty as supreme.

I don´t agree that being Charlie Hebdo is about defending our Freedom of Speech, because I think there is responsibility  to freedom and one freedom cannot trump over another freedom.  Freedom of Speech ought to be, limited by respect for the human person, by love for the other and for oneself.  I am not endorsing the Kouachi brothers either, because as much as I respect other people´s faith, God will never ask from us to defend him nor his messengers from silly cartoons. He is almighty He can perfectly do that for himself, right? Nor He will ask us to kill others in His name because since He is Love He has forbidden this in the first place (You shall not kill).

If both the magazine martyrs and the Kouachi brothers had lived by the Golden Rule, these senseless deaths would have never happened, because love and respect for the other would have ruled supreme over extreme interpretations of Freedom of Speech and Religious and Political Freedoms. Not mocking for mockery sake is not tantamount to self-censorship; it is both prudent and charitable. Does this mean that I think the 12 murdered cartoonists and journalists had it coming? Of course not! Making others pay with blood an offense done with ink is not only extremely unfair but also barbarous  and criminal and ought not to be tolerated.

However, saying you are like them is not only false, but also unhelpful as it overlooks the possible origins of this extreme and barbarous reaction: the constant expression of a bigoted view against religious/ethnic groups and the abuse of those things they hold most dear which adds to the social inequality they live every day, not only by a certain magazine but by mass media and society in general.  Isn´t this why some countries have forbidden hate speech or banned anything that might affect/offend minorities? Or…is it the case some minorities are more equal than others? Isn´t this kind of bullying environment that has radicalised some marginalised youth?

I would suggest thinking about this before saying you are someone who you might not be really like.

What do you think?