Freedom of Speech...again...

Yesterday, David Irving, the 'historian' was jailed for three years, for denying the holocaust. Initially, I was shocked. Shocked not that someone had denied the holocaust - Anti-semetists do this all the time - rather shocked that he was sentenced for offering his opinion. At least that's how I judged the case from the BBC news. However, I delved deeper. It turns out Irving, gave the first speech in Austria in 1989. Following this, and in accordance with Austria's strict laws surrounding the holocaust, a warrant was issued for Irving's arrest, along with refused reentry to Austria. Some time late, he returned to Austria, to give a similar speech. This is where my sympathy waned. Yes, Austria is a European (read Western) state and such restrictions of freedom of speech may see a little Draconian, but with such a history where speech has incited racism of phenomonal magnitude it is at least understandable. But Irving decided to go back.

But still, does that justify it? Well, yes - the law was violated. To what extent he violated the law is not something I am authorised to comment on, but I imagine it crossed the line into anti-semetism, perhaps in the guise of history - I make the assumption it was harmful. There is of course the issue of the accuracy of what Irving asserts, but, although it is a weak argument on my part, I'm confident we have substantial evidence supporting the atrocities of the holocaust.

But my important point here is that Irving was jailed, effectively, for inciting racial hatred, specifically against the Jewish people. Which draws parallels to the blasphemous cartoons. And I am finding it difficult to find any distinctions. We cannot use the race card, as the Jews are an ethno-religious group, which, to some extent, blurs this boundary. So the other direction is to understand the hate-level of the cartoons. Although, not perhaps as blatant, the cartoons are still hateful (the notion of parody may have held some sway initially, but not now). Furthermore, the cartoons had a much wider circulation; a little bit of hate spread widely may be much more effective than a lot of hate spread thinnly.

Should the cartoonists/publishers be jailed? No, it is not in their particular constitutions. Should they be condemmned? That's the reader's decision. Either way, swap the Jews for the muslims, or swap blacks for muslims, and we get a totally different picture. We are justifiably cautious and censored over negativity toward ethnicity and ethno-religiousness, but not yet to religiousness - not fully at least. It may just be a matter of time.