The New Yorker vs. Free Speech

America’s most prestigious weekly seems determined to express solidarity with radicals who want to silence their ideological foes by any means necessary

Two days after Islamists killed nine staffers of the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo for publishing cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in January 2015, a writer for the most renowned magazine in the English-speaking world compared the victims to Nazis. On the website of the New Yorker, the Nigerian-American author Teju Cole wrote that while the slaughter was “an appalling offense to human life and dignity,” it was nonetheless necessary to realize that such violence takes “place against the backdrop of France’s ugly colonial history, its sizable Muslim population, and the suppression, in the name of secularism, of some Islamic cultural expressions, such as the hijab.” Invoking a paradigmatic free-speech test case, Cole stated that Charlie Hebdo had a right to publish blasphemous cartoons in the same way that the National Socialist Party of America had had a right to march in Skokie, Illinois, in 1979.

And Cole was just getting started.

  • Drunk_by_Noon

    I wished this article focused more on the noxious Teju Cole, an affirmative action beneficiary if I ever saw one.
    Cole does have a point, and an even far bigger one than even he attempts, in that not only should all aid to Africa be discontinued (not his thesis) but that black authors that are hacks, should not be read (my thesis).
    The white paternalism he rails against (he instead thinks we should redistribute to blacks to give to other blacks) is precisely what puts food on his table.
    Effing moron and about as intellectually deep as the cat’s milk saucer.

    • Aid to Africa has long been a sinkhole. It is deplorable.

    • Millie_Woods

      He has a point, but his hat covers it.

  • Hard Little Machine

    My only response to these morons is to punch them in the face, kick them when they fall.