Free Speech Defended: Saluting Samuel Paty

 

The brutal murder of French teacher, Samuel Paty, on October 16 came as a double blow: the loss of a fellow-teacher and an attack on free speech itself. As it did when Leeds teacher Anne Maguire was killed by a pupil in 2014, my heart, and that of many others, went out to this man's family - a man slain simply for doing his job. It also called into question the vexed issue of free speech. Now, this blog is intended as a free speech forum, but people of the far right would gleefully point out that views of theirs are not welcome. Indeed they are not, but this points to a misconception that many ignoramuses have, usually expressed thus: 

"If it's all right to have free speech, then why can't we speak out against immigration, multiculturalism and the Jews?".

 If they have sufficient intelligence, they quote the master of Liberal theory, John Stuart Mill, seen above. Mill said: in "On Liberty":

“If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”

Mill did say that, but a careful reading of "On Liberty" would show that he recognised that free speech has its limits, He admits that it would be wrong to make an inflammatory speech to an angry mob outside a corn-dealer's door. Hate speech directed towards ethnic or religious minorities or any such material which leads to violence or fraudulent vilification against an individual (i.e. slander or libel). would have been unacceptable to Mill (and is to most of us today).

Problems happen though, when freedom of speech impinges upon matters of religion. Many people of many faiths dislike seeing their faith mocked or unfairly (to them) criticised. In the UK, for instance, the Church of England has been a target for comedians ever since the "Beyond the Fringe" review of the early 60s. Jehovah's Witnesses receive much mild mockery from many commentators (including me) for their "prophecies" which never seem to happen. For the most part, the adherents of these faiths react with good humour, stoic silence, or serious debate. 

As we all know, this does not always happen. In the USA, some true Christian believers have carried out attacks on abortion clinics - even to the extent of murdering staff. There have been attacks by Muslim terrorists on cartoonists in Denmark, Holland and, in 2015, the Charlie Hebdo killings. The religious justification for these crimes by Jihadis is, as the BBC comments: 

"Depictions of the Prophet Muhammad can cause serious offence to Muslims because Islamic tradition explicitly forbids images of Muhammad and Allah (God)."

It's not widely known that it is only Sunni Muslims who abide strictly to this belief; Shia Muslims include images of the Prophet Muhammed in their murals.

These Islamist attacks do impact upon freedom of expression. I recall the comedian, Rory Bremner, saying some time back that jokes about Osama Bin laden might lead to comedians being shot. Intimidation by fear is worse than fear of censorship - but what becomes of us, in a free society, if we let ourselves be intimidated? This is not say that we should not be cautious elsewhere...

In 2007, Gill Gibbons, a teacher at Unity High School in Sudan was arrested for letting her class of 6-year olds call a teddy bear "Muhammad". Although there is evidence to show that her arrest was initiated by an aggrieved member of staff, and the fact that no parent had ever complained, she was thrown into a Khartoum jail for 8 days, during which she lived in fear of violence from guards and a 10,000-strong demonstration calling for her execution. To their credit, the Muslim Council of Britain condemned her arrest, and two Muslim peers flew out to plead for her release, which happened during their visit, after which she flew back to Britain.

Now, I happen to know Gill Gibbons, although I have not seen her since the 1990s, when she was married to my Head teacher at a school in Liverpool. I can only repeat what I said at the time of her arrest in Sudan - that she is a dedicated, hard-working teacher who would never knowingly offend anyone. Upon her return to UK, she said: 

'I blame myself because I shouldn't have done it...Ignorance of the law is no defence.'

That is a gracious admission, considering the way Gill was treated - but her case points to the problems that can apply to expatriates in countries governed by a different belief system to their own. It should be noted, however, that Islamists of a similar ilk to the extremists who locked up Gill Gibbons make far more offensive statements in Western countries than naming a teddy bear. Gill's actions harmed no-one, and she was acting in ignorance. The same can not be said for the Charlie Hebdo terror gang or the 7/7 bombers.

To be fair, you can suffer penalties for free speech in secular countries as well. Offend Vladimir Putin and expect a one-way ticket out of Russia. On the other hand, if you'd offended Stalin, you'd have been lucky to get out alive.

Samuel Paty broke no law. As part of a class discussion, he showed his class the Charlie Hebdo cartoons but had given Muslim students the option of leaving the room. Apparently, all but one did. The one student remaining, a girl, stayed to be offended (what a choice!) and wrote about the lesson on social media, which inspired this dedicated teacher's murder and mutilation. 

Now, there will be repercussions following this attack, as might be expected. The BBC points out that it has already worsened divisions in France. Significantly: 

".State secularism - or laïcité - is central to France's national identity. It's as important as the concepts of "liberty, equality, fraternity" that make up its post-Revolutionary motto...Curbing freedom of expression to protect the feelings of one particular community, the state says, undermines the country's unity.
But there is evidence that a growing number of people in France are uncomfortable with this argument and want the boundaries around secularism and free speech to change."

This could herald a period of conflict on this issue in France, with Islamophobes and Jihadis - extremists on both sides of the debate - seeking to inflame the situation.

But this is not exclusively a French problem. Last year, Muslim parents at a school in Birmingham protested against lessons on LGBT issues. It raises the question: how far can we accommodate dissenting voices in society without letting ourselves being intimidated and diminishing freedom of speech? If there are limits to be set on freedom of expression, at what point do we restrict those limits?

Whatever our answers, they come too late for Samuel Paty. It can only be hoped that we can resolve this matter without any more violence or murders. To Samuel's family, friends and fellow citizens, we can only say:

"Nous vous prions d'accepter nos sincères condoléances".

Repose en Paix.