Is Charlie Freedom?

            I have said many times before that I live under a rock – as such, it takes something really big in the news to find its way to me. Such is the case with the Charlie Hebdo attack this past week.

            For those who haven’t heard of it yet, last Wednesday two gunmen attacked the headquarters of Charlie Hebdo (a weekly satirical newspaper in France), killing twelve people and wounding another eleven. The attack led to a global cry to support free speech.

            On the surface, it is a very simple matter. People were silenced for the ideas they expressed and the world has spoken up saying we’ll stand behind Charlie Hebdo and the right to free speech. I thought it was incredible, at first, until I looked into more facts and the matter became far more complicated.

            As I mentioned earlier, Charlie Hebdo is a satirical paper – more than that, it is a far left-wing one, openly poking fun at all religions and politics, sometimes in very vulgar ways. This particular attack was carried out by a pair of Muslims who saw their Prophet being made fun of in the paper.

            Now, does that justify murder? No, of course not – nothing does. Their religion wasn't the only one being made fun of and none of the others took this sort of drastic action. However, I think that this is a good time to stop and think on what freedom of speech actually means.

            I'veblogged before about freedom and how complicated it actually is, and this situation goes to demonstrate that fact. You see, the freedom to say anything you want doesn't mean you should say it. A big part of freedom is responsibility and the biggest responsibility is respecting other peoples’ freedom. The freedom to think, believe, say and do as they will.

            When you take that freedom of speech and start throwing it in people’s faces, you are expressing your freedom by denying others’ theirs. That is what Charlie Hebdo does, at least as far as I can gather. They make jokes about whatever they can and, when people say they get hurt, they claim “free speech!” This same claim is regularly made all over the internet by people who have hurt others. “I have free speech, so you aren't allowed to get mad at me for what I say, even if I am stomping all over everything you believe.”

            I'm confident that the contents of Charlie Hebdo have never been intended to hurt anyone. Quite the opposite – it’s meant to make people laugh! Words are powerful, though. That’s why people try to ban certain books. We’re taught from childhood that “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me”. It’s a lie. Words hurt – we just tell ourselves that they don’t to try and make them hurt less.

            Humour is all well and good, but why must it come at the expense of others? It’s important to be able to laugh at yourself, but not everyone has been able to acquire that skill. All some people can see are others laughing at them and what they care about. Of course they’re going to retaliate.

            Following the attack, a huge campaign has started: “Je Suis Charlie”, or “I Am Charlie” - the support of free speech. On one level, I completely support it because freedom is so important. At the same time, I cannot condone the content of Charlie Hebdo which, while intended to be funny, can also be inflammatory and insulting – taking freedom of speech to the extreme that spits in the face of others’ freedom.

            Now, there is a simple solution to this sort of conundrum: simply don’t read things that offend you. Is it Charlie Hebdo’s fault that the attackers read their paper? No. That doesn't stop people though – it seems to be in human nature to poke at wounds; to seek out that which causes us pain. We’re drawn like bugs to lamps, with this dread fascination, toward things we know we should keep away from.

            In the end, it doesn't really matter, though, does it? The cards have been played and there are only two possible outcomes: we raise our voices in support of Charlie Hebdo or we are seen to be bowing to the wishes of the attackers – a success for them that will spread the word worldwide that violence can end free speech and more attacks will quickly follow until everyone is afraid to say anything. It’s ironic, really, that this attack has led to the exact opposite of what the attackers intended – partially because we've been left with no other options. We have to stand behind Charlie, or witness the death of freedom.

            So, I guess I don’t have a choice. I am Charlie. I have to be, or I encourage more tragedies.

            I wish that this situation could have been resolved without anyone being hurt or killed. I wish that Charlie Hebdo hadn't become the face of freedom. I wish there was more humour in the world that didn't rely hurting people.

            I wish I lived in a world where I didn't have to support something I don't believe in to support something I do believe in.

Click here to find the charity anthology containing a couple of my short stories.

If there's any subject you'd like to see me ramble on about, feel free to leave a comment asking me to do so.

Workshopping with Homeschoolers

            Last Monday I had a delightful experience. My wife and I taught a chainmaille workshop for a homeschooling group.

            When I was first asked to run this workshop, I asked the mother who’d suggested the idea to have the kids look through my website to pick projects they’d like to learn. The reply I got was that they wanted to learn the techniques and be allowed to make what they wanted after that.

            This, in itself, was a bit of a challenge, since it’s hard to plan for such an unstructured lesson – particularly for materials. However, I also understood the benefit of allowing the children free reign with what they created.

            So I went and I taught a group of eight (including one of the mothers and the curator of the museum we were at) the basics, then stuck around to teach more to those who wanted to learn more patterns and help the others with what they were making on their own. It was a wonderful time – it felt like I was there having fun with a group of friends. It was also great to teach people so eager to learn.

            What impressed me most, however, was the only member of the group who didn't really take to the craft. He struggled with the pattern, but still gave it a good try. Instead of throwing a fit, like many kids his age would (and I could see the emotions that would accompany that written on his face), he tried his best and gave up when it became too frustrating.

            In response to this, where many mothers would scold him and tell him to keep trying, his mother thanked him for giving it a try and doing his best and gave no objection to him returning to playing with Lego (what they’d been doing before the workshop).

            I think this demonstrates one of the major advantages to homeschooling – there is a much greater level of respect and understanding between the parents and their children, since they spend so much more time together. Children are also encouraged to learn and ask questions, but not forced to learn if they don’t want to, which makes them more willing to learn. They even enjoy it! Whereas children in the school system usually rebel and take a great dislike for learning.

            I wonder if there is something our educational system can learn from this. Perhaps there’s away to teach children in large groups while respecting who they are instead of trying to change them to fit the system. It might even make a friendlier society at large.

            Oh, did I mention how polite homeschooled children are? At the end of the workshop, that same boy who had trouble learning made a point of coming up to me and thanking me for coming to teach. I'm looking forward to my next workshop with the group very much.

Click here to find the charity anthology containing a couple of my short stories.

If there's any subject you'd like to see me ramble on about, feel free to leave a comment asking me to do so.

Respect: Given or Earned?

            I don’t know about the rest of you, but I grew up with this phrase (or variations of it) being said: Respect isn't given, it has to be earned. I believed it, too, for a while. It seemed only logical. How can respect be given to someone who hasn't earned it?

            There is one problem with that method, though. Often the lack of respecting someone prior to them earning respect leads to disrespecting them. The result is that some people are never even given the chance to earn respect.

            This is most common in large businesses. New employees are next to worthless, so it’s very hard for them to get anywhere, let alone move up. The same goes for social circles – the new person entering a group is likely to be looked down on until they earn the respect of others. There’s a good chance that they’ll leave the group before that happens because of the inherent disrespect towards those who have not earned respect yet.

            This is why I came up with my own way of handling respect – by “came up with” I really mean “I was thinking about it one day and realised that this is what I do”. Rather than give respect (which can lead to severe disappointment and other problems) or requiring it to be earned, I loan people my respect.

            How do I do that? Well, it’s really quite simple. When I meet someone new, I treat them with the utmost respect. I take it on faith that they have qualities worth respecting, so I give them the benefit of the doubt and allow them to earn their respect without having to fight upstream. It’s far easier on them and I get to skip over suspiciously eyeballing them, wondering if I really want them around or not.

            That may sound a bit like giving respect, more than loaning it, apart from the respect still needing to be earned. You may be wondering how the loan gets paid back, but the answer is quite simple. When you treat someone with respect, they are more likely to respect you. The end result is that we both skip over the judgemental part of meeting someone new and everything gets off to a great start.

            What if someone doesn't earn the respect I loaned them? Well, I should start by telling you it’s exceedingly rare. So far, just about everyone I've ever met has deserved my respect – never underestimate the number of remarkable people who are out there.

            What the few people who don’t earn my respect have done is more easily described as losing my respect. In fact, it takes so much to lose my respect that I don’t think anyone who’s lost it has ever earned it back. That’s the consequence of defaulting on the loan. Do I somehow cash in on the respect I loaned? No. That is made up for by all the good that comes out of all the people who deserved my respect and might not have gotten it if I hadn't given them a chance.

            In the end, there’s no harm (at least to you) that can come from loaning out your respect, rather than demanding it be earned. You get to respect people faster and earn their respect faster in turn. And, since one good turn deserves another, you could always pass on this philosophy and help our society become more respectful and respected.

Click here to find the charity anthology containing a couple of my short stories.

If there's any subject you'd like to see me ramble on about, feel free to leave a comment asking me to do so.