Freedom of Expression: France vs. America
An American lawyer has doubt about freedom of expression in France. It’s really no better in his country: Sophie Coignard’s analysis.
“The biggest threat to French free speech isn’t terrorism. It’s the government.” In mid-January, Professor of U.S. Constitutional Law Jonathan Turley published an article in The Washington Post under this provocative title. Turley is certainly considered unique for his positions, which don’t correspond to any political alignment, but for once, many Americans share his point of view. In the USA, the First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees freedom of expression. Thus, it is possible to make racist statements or engage in hate speech without worry. So, an American Dieudonné* might not find space to house his show, since with a little luck, his prophecies would interest no one, but it would not be prohibited.
From America’s point of view, France is full of means for limiting free speech. In addition to legislation, which is plentiful, the speech of political leaders is always going in the same direction: that is, toward limitation. When the caricatures of Mohammed were published in 2006, Jacques Chirac said that freedom of speech must be exercised in the spirit of responsibility. Six years later, on the same subject, Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault in turn issued a warning, recalling “the limits of the law.”
The Blasphemy Standard Revisited
Being a good sport, the law professor recognizes that the U.S. government is driven by the same motivation as France. He mentions that the Obama administration has considered installing a new blasphemy standard “to avoid a return to the old patterns of division.” When she was secretary of state, Hillary Clinton even hosted delegations to try to move this agenda forward. In France, such a backward step wouldn’t occur to any reputed decision maker. And it is Obama who declared, before the United Nations assembly, that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” What Turley omits is that many American newspapers, starting with The New York Times, published neither the cartoons nor the cover of the latest Charlie Hebdo. Even in the land of the First Amendment, freedom of expression is threatened, above all, by ... Americans.
* Translator’s note: Dieudonné is a controversial French comedian, criticized for his anti-Semitic views.
“The biggest threat to French free speech isn’t terrorism. It’s the government.” In mid-January, Professor of U.S. Constitutional Law Jonathan Turley published an article in The Washington Post under this provocative title. Turley is certainly considered unique for his positions, which don’t correspond to any political alignment, but for once, many Americans share his point of view. In the USA, the First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees freedom of expression. Thus, it is possible to make racist statements or engage in hate speech without worry. So, an American Dieudonné* might not find space to house his show, since with a little luck, his prophecies would interest no one, but it would not be prohibited.
From America’s point of view, France is full of means for limiting free speech. In addition to legislation, which is plentiful, the speech of political leaders is always going in the same direction: that is, toward limitation. When the caricatures of Mohammed were published in 2006, Jacques Chirac said that freedom of speech must be exercised in the spirit of responsibility. Six years later, on the same subject, Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault in turn issued a warning, recalling “the limits of the law.”
The Blasphemy Standard Revisited
Being a good sport, the law professor recognizes that the U.S. government is driven by the same motivation as France. He mentions that the Obama administration has considered installing a new blasphemy standard “to avoid a return to the old patterns of division.” When she was secretary of state, Hillary Clinton even hosted delegations to try to move this agenda forward. In France, such a backward step wouldn’t occur to any reputed decision maker. And it is Obama who declared, before the United Nations assembly, that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” What Turley omits is that many American newspapers, starting with The New York Times, published neither the cartoons nor the cover of the latest Charlie Hebdo. Even in the land of the First Amendment, freedom of expression is threatened, above all, by ... Americans.
* Translator’s note: Dieudonné is a controversial French comedian, criticized for his anti-Semitic views.