Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
Being equal opportunity doesn't mean the cartoons portraying Muslims were any less racist or xenophobic. I'm not exactly sure how these cartoons really fit the criteria for satire either, other than if the definition of satire is simply that something is satirical when it is deliberately inflammatory to large sections of the public, or specific groups.
|
I was merely responding to the argument that the magazine was targeting Islam. It does not appear that is the case. The magazine targets everybody.
I would, however, argue that you don't understand what satire is given your comment and the tweet you quoted. A lot of people are of the opinion of "I am offended by it, therefore it can't be satire". That is not valid. Nor is it true that the purpose of satire is "about challenging power". Satire is the ridicule of human vice and folly. And religion is one of man's greatest follies. Does
Charlie Hebdo often come off as being offensive? Yes, that seems to be the case. Does that mean it isn't satire? Nope. Does that mean they shouldn't be allowed to publish? Nope. The solution to speech you dislike is more speech.