NewYou can listen to Fox News articles now!
“Stand with Charlie!” This message spontaneously appeared around the world after violent attacks that were unexpressible by extremists. No, this is not right Murdering Charlie Kirk this week. That was 10 years ago and mentioned the Paris-based satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo’s killing of employees. World leaders, including French, German and Turkish presidents, joined the free speech march despite their own crackdown on speeches, including previous attacks on magazines and victims.
Chief Editor Stéphane Charbonnier refused to be silent by the French government and declared: “I would rather die than live on my knees.” He was the first person the gunman asked for in the attack on the office, and he was one of the first to be killed.
At that time, I Written It was breathtakingly hypocritical, and noted that one of the few remaining editors of the magazine refused to attend the parade with those who relentlessly investigated it. After the march, France, Germany and other Western governments Expanded their censorship laws Prosecution of views is considered inflammatory or hateful.
In the ultimate shame in the memory of Charlie Hebdo staff, French officials subsequently murdered themselves to justify the prosecution of the remarks.
In a key aspect, the assassination in the United States on Wednesday was obviously different. There won’t be any”I’m Charlie“Leftist movement. Some even celebrated the killing, while others regretted, attacked Kirk and suggested that he bring it to himself.
Editors of the satirical French magazine Charlie Hebdo said his publications would no longer attract Mohammed. (AP)
This is not surprising. Kirk tragically briefly exposes the hypocrisy and intolerance of the left, especially in higher education. They hate him. Colleges and universities have long been bastions of the left, with the liquidation of conservative or Republican teachers in most departments and the bastions of maintaining academic echo chambers in classrooms.
Kirk challenged it all. He invited them to debate the issue, driving many people crazy. The response is often violent, including wasting the table on the table of his team Turning Point, which was set up by the campus quadrilateral. Eventually, he was killed for insisting he was heard.
Charlie Kirk attended the TPUSA event in Arizona in 2024. (Rebecca Noble/AFP via Getty Images)
But, ten years after the other Charlie shootings, we face the same danger of hypocrisy. Some on the right called for condemning Kirk or celebrating the fired. From professors to public employees.
I know Charlie. While I can’t call myself a close friend, we talked about the lack of freedom of speech on our campus and the efforts to cancel or fire those who have objections. Kirk has more than anyone today, revealing this hypocrisy by putting himself and his team at the risk.
The way to respect Charlie Kirk’s life and legacy is not hypocrisy and intolerance. That’s why he died in the fight against it.
Fired people who speak out to Kirk on campus will totally laugh at his work and death. It’s like banning the LGBTQ community in response to the 1978 Harvey Milk assassination.
Kirk wants an unrestrained debate. He wants people to express themselves, regardless of how most people think of their own views. He was a victim of the cancellation campaign, not an advocate.
Click here for more Fox News comments
In some cases, abominable views may cause reasons for termination. Secret Service agent is Investigation is under investigation After firing and assassination. Given the need to protect conservative and liberal figures (including those in the current government), bias in posts can provide legitimate reasons for inquiry.
Likewise, those who use their official, academic or corporate positions to embrace hateful news risks termination.
However, many of them speak in individuals outside their positions and their hate comments do not necessarily harm or conflict with their positions.
In the United States, hate speech is protected speech. The crackdown on remarks that are considered hateful, inflammatory or intolerant has been the signature of the left, which is the matter of Kirk’s campaign.
When you are angry or sad, it is never easy to show restraint. After all, many today’s people who oppose these cases have silenced or supported the crackdown on conservatives on campus and on campus for years. They lack any sense of self or shame and have few objections in the protections required. That is the value of the era of anger. It provides you with permission to silence and attack others’ opinions while insisting that you are the real victim.
But we cannot be the ones in the free speech community that have long been in the fight against it. More importantly, we can’t be the ones Charlie fight against at the moment of the murder. We respect Charlie’s legacy by protecting what he cherishes most. We need to “stand with Charlie” and support freedom of expression.
Click here to read more about Jonathan Turley
