To be or not to be: Bridging diverging positions in the case of Charlie Hebdo
- Autores: Irina Charlotte Ranaivosoa
- Localización: Les ciències humanes i socials: perspectives emergents per als reptes de les societats multiculturals / Esther Monzó Nebot (ed. lit.), 2020, ISBN 978-84-17900-71-7, págs. 19-32
- Idioma: inglés
- Enlaces
-
Resumen
In the aatermath of the 7th January 2015 attacks, when jihadist shot and killed 12 people at the headquarters of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris, the slogan Je suis Charlie («I am Charlie») quickly spread on media platforms in support of the magazine and the victims. However, few –if not many– people did not support the –entire– slogan and would even claim Je ne suis pas Charlie («I am not Charlie»). Such diverging points of view o,en led to heated debate –when not arguments– on social media or long discussions between friends. Finding common grounds between these two sides has to be thoroughly scrutinized yet with a view to reaching reconciliation points. +e resolution and even positive transformation of this conflict guide this paper. The conflict finds its roots in satire, the controversial tool used by Charlie Hebdo in its weekly issues. +e sustained imbalance of power between different cultures residing in France also fuels the conflict. +e right to freedom of expression and the value of laïcité have been claimed so far in support of the newspaper in France. Although such views barely find support around the world, no solution has been suggested to date with a view to finding reconciliation. +is contribution will apply approaches taken from peace studies to bridge the diverging positions emanating from ‘apparently’ conflicting identities. Indeed, the need for dialogue and cultural diversity ought to be promoted through education and communication to lower the affective filter that hampers mutual understanding.
