Summary

In October 2020, Samuel Paty, a French teacher, was murdered following a false accusation by a 13-year-old student who claimed he’d shown anti-Muslim bias. The girl had made up the story to cover the fact she had been suspended from school for bad behaviour.

In reality, Paty’s lesson on free speech included optional viewing of Charlie Hebdo cartoons, but he hadn’t excluded anyone. The student’s story triggered a social media campaign led by her father, who, along with others, is now on trial for inciting hatred and connections to Paty’s attacker, an 18-year-old radicalized Chechen.

The school will be named the Samuel Paty School from next year.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    20717 days ago

    jfc when is the human species going to grow up and see religion as the make-believe bullshit that it is

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      7917 days ago

      It will be a glorious day in the name of Humans when we finally dump the dumb shit and act like we control our own actions and future

    • John Richard
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1317 days ago

      The funny thing is that most politicians know it is make believe yet they pretend to be religious just to get the votes. It is also a highly effective mechanism to subdue and control the population and manipulate them.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        16
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        Organized religion is a really effective way and tool for brainwashing. Of course there are many other tools as well, but religion is probably the best one. That’s why it’s so popular.

        Just like with guns. If you control and ban firerarms, there are still going to be some murders. But much-much less, because you take away the easiest way of commiting one.

        • The Stoned Hacker
          link
          fedilink
          English
          417 days ago

          I’m of the opinion that a lot of gun control is ineffective, especially given what guns are supposed to mean. Yes places like Australia have been extremely successful in removing guns, but also look at their policing system and governmental overreach which is honestly quite terrible. I’m of the opinion that the most effective gun control is changing the culture surrounding guns. Bring back (optional) shooting classes in schools, teach kids (and adults) gun safety and actual useful knowledge about firearms. Regulate the access, storage, and use of ammunition. Change the culture from people thinking they’ll be John Wick once they get their glock to people who actually understand that firearms are tools that can be used as weapons, and that they require time, effort, training, and a lot of responsibility to use safely. The cat is out of the bag in the US; guns aren’t going away. Acting like we can remove them is silly, but we can change the perception around them.

          I also think we need similar movements for a lot of things, like cars.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            417 days ago

            In most developed countries you don’t even need a gun. Why would you need a gun if you are living in Paris, or Rome for example, or New York.

            • The Stoned Hacker
              link
              fedilink
              English
              117 days ago

              In Paris and Rome most of the police don’t have automatic rifles.

              And I think plenty of people would tell and show you exactly why you need a gun in NYC.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            417 days ago

            My post was actually about religion and I only used gun control as a theoretical comparison.

            However, it seems funny to me that you start by stating that ‘gun control is ineffective’, and then proceed to describe gun control in great detail and praise it.

            Gun control =/= banning all guns.

          • @Fedegenerate
            link
            English
            4
            edit-2
            17 days ago

            As a counter point, America has fewer gun restrictions and more convicts than Australia. Gun laws and government overreach do not seem connected.

            • The Stoned Hacker
              link
              fedilink
              English
              317 days ago

              America has a lot of government overreach too, don’t get me wrong. I’m just saying that American gun laws were originally meant to be modeled after Swiss gun laws and if we had also adopted Swiss gun culture we wouldn’t have the problems we do today.

              • @Fedegenerate
                link
                English
                317 days ago

                I understood your point. I was showing that not only does America have “a lot” of government overreach, it has “more” government overreach. An Australian is less likely to be shot by another of its citizens and less likely to be imprisoned, enslaved, or killed by its government.

                • The Stoned Hacker
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  217 days ago

                  Sure, I can agree with that. But the amount of police corruption is also quite high in Australia. Not saying the US doesn’t have that, but it’s a lot of the same issues just without guns. I mean look at FriendlyJordies getting firebombed for whistleblowing on politicians.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            217 days ago

            Why do you need guns in schools? Even if it’s just to teach about them, it’s not the place to bring guns into, and giving them to kids creates this expectation that they should own one, and it’s normal to own one. It’s kind of fucked up. You can have a class discussing them, but they should be expected to handle one. Nobody in the world does that.

            The government should just mandate that, to own a firearm, you need a license. This license can be obtained like a car license, after attending a number of classes, passing a written test and a practice test, where you show the examiner you know about gun safety. Then you have to renew every two years or how long it is, pass a medical exam and on you go. If you get caught intoxicated while holding or near an unsafe firearm, your license is taken away from you, with all your firearms, for a period of time, or permanently for repeat offenses, like with cars.

            Just make guns act like cars, if it’s fine one way, it’s fine the other too. Putting restrictions instead of giving guns away like you’re Brian from Family Guy trying to buy a carton of milk in Texas will drastically reduce the number of people who even want one. If it’s too much of a hassle to own one, most people will just do without.

            • The Stoned Hacker
              link
              fedilink
              English
              217 days ago

              Nobody in the world does that.

              The Swiss do, which is where our gun laws originate from. The founding fathers were trying to emulate Swiss gun laws and culture, but they only really managed to solidify the laws not the culture. I’m not saying the founding fathers are the end all be all of legal interpretation, but I don’t think they missed with trying to emulate the Swiss here.

              Why do you need guns in schools?

              Same reason i think we should bring back shop classes, auto classes, home economics, and stuff like that. There are practical skills that are useful to learn that kids should be given the option to explore. Acting like firearms have no purpose, use, or value is silly. And it gives a good and dedicated space to learn how to use them safely, just like other tools should and did have, and just like guns used to have. Shooting classes in schools are not a novel idea and were actually common at point. Sure, in a coty it might not be the most useful but the majority of the population doesn’t live in cities.

              Just make guns act like cars, if it’s fine one way, it’s fine the other too.

              I don’t actually think the way we handle cars is fine, it’s actually quite fucked. But my issue is mainly with how we view and treat cars, which is a cultural issue. I have the same gripe with firearms, hence why I suggest reforms that target changing gun culture.

              Putting restrictions instead of giving guns away like you’re Brian from Family Guy trying to buy a carton of milk in Texas will drastically reduce the number of people who even want one.

              No, changing the way we view and frame firearms as a society will. People often want guns because they either have a legitimate need or because it makes them feel strong/tough/cool/secure in their identity. Adding restrictions mainly hurts the former, while the latter will still go to obtain them but with less oversight and control. The way to actually address the second group is with cultural changes on the perception of firearms. Again, we should look to Swiss gun culture for this.

              The government should just mandate that, to own a firearm, you need a license.

              In most places you do. The places you don’t are mainly Texas. I’m not arguing we become Texas. If you want to own a firearm in most states you need a Firearm Owner’s ID. If you want to carry your firearm you usually need a Concealed Carry License. This is not what I take issue with. However if this were extended to a firearm owner’s registry, I would take issue with that for the same reasons I take issue with forming registries of people who have done nothing wrong.

              Then you have to renew every two years or how long it is, pass a medical exam and on you go.

              This won’t work for the same reason it doesn’t currently work with cars.

              If you get caught intoxicated while holding or near an unsafe firearm, your license is taken away from you, with all your firearms, for a period of time, or permanently for repeat offenses, like with cars.

              You really, really don’t see how this can go wrong do you? I understand the sentiment and agree with what you want to accomplish with this, but this is rife for abuse. And not theoretical abuse, but the exact same type of abuse that has been used to incarcerate a lot of black and brown people in the US. It also is somewhat antithetical to the point of citizens being able to possess firearms if the government can just waltz in and take them away.

              If it’s too much of a hassle to own one, most people will just do without.

              No because like drugs and prostitution people will just find another way. Legalize all of those things because the way to address those issues is with safety regulation and cultural shifts.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      8
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      The most deadly religion isn’t even recognized by those who claim to oppose… As long as people bow down to costumed cops, robed judges, and phony politicians… As long as people worship their slaver “fathers” and swear their lives to defend some slaver’s pact… There will be zero rationality as we regularly see.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_religion

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          117 days ago

          And let’s not fool ourselves. It is all about controlling the masses.

          Right now politics and religion is one dividing factor that fuels enormously the racist views of the population. It simply divides us more than it unites us.

    • Ogmios
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      The problem is that it’s not just make believe bullshit, but over thousands of years, and being abused repeatedly by those seeking to derive power from it, the original message/intent gets lost entirely.

    • AItoothbrush
      link
      fedilink
      English
      316 days ago

      As i always say confront the collective not the individual. If you follow your personal believes i dont have a problem with you but dont force it onto others and dont make it overly structured because it will be used to manipulate people.

    • Cethin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      117 days ago

      Probably never sadly. There’s always going to be something people go towards that gives their life meaning, and that will (almost by requirement) create a group that is against them. Even if it isn’t “religion” it’ll be something like politics or something else, which people don’t actually think about and just believe in.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      Just fyi, it’s “sweep it under the rug.” Swiping is a doing small motion, used mostly for smart phones and sleight of hand, whereas sweeping can be a much larger motion, and often involves a broom or a careless aspect. My husband has the best non-native English I’ve ever heard from someone who didn’t live in an anglophone country as a kid, and he cannot keep those two and swab straight, so I’d consider it a pretty easy mistake to make :)

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1317 days ago

          Swish is what you do with something in water, like to rinse it off. Or rinse your mouth out with water or mouthwash. Or the sound those things make.

          Swipe is a small hand motion you might perform with an object like a credit card you swipe through a card reader. It can also mean to steal something, since that usually involves a quick hand movement. And of course a gesture on a touch device like a phone or tablet.

          Swap is to exchange one item for another item. To trade. In the US we have things called “swap meets” which are like things called “flea markets” where you can trade things. Usually you are trading cash for some type of used item. You swap out old parts for new ones when performing maintenance on a car or machine or computer.

          Sweep you do with a broom. Like you might sweep dust under a rug as a shortcut rather than using a dustpan to collect it and properly dispose of it into a garbage can. But it can also refer to a broad approach. For example a police sweep of the area. Or sweeping legislation for broad laws. Or sweeping changes within say an organization.

          Swoop is what a bird does when it comes in to grab its prey, or to grab your sandwich. Or what your manager does when out of nowhere he shows up looking over your shoulder to “swoop in.” Or the shape of the path the bird takes when it performs this action could be a swooping motion. Superman might also do this when he flies in to rescue you.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        016 days ago

        You a Baha’i? Cause with what they’ve done in India and Myanmar, Hinduism and Buddhism are out.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1616 days ago

        I don’t care who they believe for if they are so upset about a cartoon that they’ll kill people and commit other violent acts. Fuck those people and anyone defending that shit.

        • AItoothbrush
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -516 days ago

          Nobodys defending that just that these same these phrases are usually said by those who later attack the religious people. Just so you know im an athiest but not a douchebag.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            716 days ago

            And what’s bad about attacking the sort of people who think it’s okay to commit violence in the name of their religion, especially fucking kill people over a cartoon?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -616 days ago

              Absolutely nothing.

              People on the left (myself included) often conflate “recognizing the religion of Islam as harmful brainrot” with “people who follow Islam suck and should be hated.”

              I don’t hate the people, but I sure do hate the brainrot. Same with Christianity, really.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -1016 days ago

      Can these people just fuck off with their „religion of peace“ dogwhistle it’s so annoying and obvious

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        716 days ago

        I’m not sure what you think is the dogwhistle, it’s directly mocking the claim of Islam being a “religion of peace”

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  015 days ago

                  Why would I be nice to bigots? That’s what got us in the whole mess that is another Trump presidency and Europe sliding into fascism in the first place. If you want to have a taste of what tolerating this ”I‘m just pointing out facts“ leads to go back to any random politics subreddit and see what has happened there. I don’t need this in here. I’m tired of it. I‘m not special, I’m like 99% of people out there, I’m nice if you are. Being a bigot isn’t being nice.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -1116 days ago

          It’s a racist dog whistle because you are indicting the entirety of a religion based on the actions of a single person and their view of that religion. It is bigoted and ignorant, which is not the solution to this problem of religious radicalization.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            716 days ago

            Nothing racist about it. I don’t care if you’re white, black, or purple. I don’t hate the followers of Islam, but the religion itself is utter trash - as are all religions, and especially Abrahimic ones. Patriarchal bullshit.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            316 days ago

            Islamic extremism isn’t some one off instance. Even violence over cartoons and such isn’t a singular instance. So fuck off defending that shit.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -316 days ago

              Of course it’s not a one off instance. It’s the 2nd biggest religion in the world. There’s a lot of people who identify as Muslim. Just because some of them fall to extremism and commit atrocities does not damn the entire faith. If that’s the case then declare your faith or lack of it and I will fill an unlimited count of its crimes.

              There’s a difference between a religion having an extremism problem, such as Islam and a religion being inherently extremist. You ever consider why Islam has an extremism problem now in modern day and not say, the Islamic golden age?

              Bigoted and ignorant. As much as the extremists you hate. Your just not violent. Yet.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                016 days ago

                I’m not religious. Have at it.

                There’s a difference between a religion having an extremism problem, such as Islam and a religion being inherently extremist.

                There’s a saying about bad apples you might’ve heard. Especially true if there’s loads of those bad apples.

                Bigoted and ignorant. As much as the extremists you hate. Your just not violent. Yet.

                “You’re almost as bad as the fucked up murderous extremists, apart from being murderous.”

                I guess calling them out is almost as bad lmao.

    • Cethin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1017 days ago

      It’s because, as I’m sure you know, all religions have done the same. Speaking like you are is as hateful as what you’re claiming to be against. Fuck off.

      Criticism is valid. Criticism against an entire group of people without also giving voice to those in the group against it is fomenting hatred, which you should be against if you’re logically consistent (which I’m not accusing you of being because I doubt you are).

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        316 days ago

        Christianity is just as much a festering wound on society. Actions like beheading because of some religious zealousy should not be tolerated.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          When was the last time a Christian beheaded someone specifically in the name of Christianity? When was the last time you heard of a Jew or a Hindu or Buddhist doing a suicide bombing? When was the last time you saw a Bahá’í or Zoroastrian or Wiccan honor kill a woman in their family for being a rape victim?

          This whole all religions argument is bullshit and you all know it including the mods taking down my comments for being offensive even though it’s the truth.

          • Cethin
            link
            fedilink
            English
            4
            edit-2
            16 days ago

            There are lots of African nations who kill gays and other groups in the name of Christianity. I’m not certain on their policies in other religions, but regardless it isn’t good. So yeah, probably yesterday or today is your answer.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            16 days ago

            Dr George Tiller came to mind immediately. As well as Operation Rescue’s bombings.

  • John Richard
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    What I see in this story is a question of whether Brahim Chnina ever was actually in contact with Abdoullakh Anzorov, and if he was if he ever instructed or encouraged violence against Samuel Paty. I wouldn’t be surprised if he did, but I also wouldn’t be surprised if they are attempting to use this incident to criminalize free speech, which is exactly what it appears Samuel Paty would not have wanted.

    Here in the US, would we want the government locking people up for calling Trump a fascist or even a Nazi, especially if one of the alleged assassination attempts had been successful? If I make a video saying I hate Marjorie Taylor Greene and she’s a dangerous sociopath, and the next day they go and kill her, does that mean I should be locked up as well? What if I call Trump the antichrist… afterall, it could be claimed that I participated in a video presenting “false and distorted information intended to arouse hatred.”

      • John Richard
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -2
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        Yeah in may fascist countries you get locked up for saying things like Israel is committing genocide and are behaving like Nazis.

    • acargitz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1217 days ago

      Frankly, I think this is new territory. We have a new kind of phenomenon: stochastic terrorism, that has specifically as a vehicle the virality of social media. I don’t think old absolutes, like the American First Amendment, are useful, sort of like how your Second Amendment was written at a time of muskets, not assault weapons. Social media virality plus algorithms that prioritize engagement at all costs (including via rage) over accuracy are a new thing, causing a new problem. It’s right for courts, legal scholars, and lawmakers to be taking on this problem.

      Your concern over balancing the different social goods is of course legitimate and at the centre of this debate.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      517 days ago

      “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?”

      • Henry II, exercising his right to free speech.
  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -6
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    So what kind of blasphemous stuff did this teacher show about jesus? Colonialism? Or was it solely an attack on muslims? This is France so I think I know the answer…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3517 days ago

      It was a lesson on free speech. I’m certain there were plenty of talking points and examples but it really isn’t the point of this story.

      Muslims will remain as part of that topic for as long as they react the way they do about drawings of their imaginary friend, or anything else they try to impose onto everyone else.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1717 days ago

      You are missing the point that the girl who accused the teacher completely made it up, she was not even having a class with this teacher this day and she lied to her father because she was expelled that particular day for bad behaviour.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      316 days ago

      FYI the french high school curriculum includes lessons on (de-)colonisation, painting it as unjust and racist.