I Am Not Charlie Hebdo

I wrote this story for the Chaffey Breeze, http://thebreezeonline.com.

At the Breeze we take pride in the way we tell stories. In an attempt to remain as objective as possible and not over editorialize, we take great efforts to remove ourselves from the stories we share. Today, however, I am going to break all those rules.

The attacks that took place on Jan. 7, 2015 in Paris dominated almost every news outlet and rightly so.

The attacks in Paris were polarizing. The shows of solidarity were powerful. The sentiment we were all left with was one of compassion and support. However, there is one issue; I am not Charlie Hebdo.

My name is Joshua Arnao, and I believe all men are created equal. I would die supporting our rights to freedom of expression. At its core, JeSuis Charlie, shared this conviction. The problem is, like most, there is always more.

I find Charlie Hebdo to be offensive, vulgar, bordering on racist. I am not Charlie Hebdo.

It would be counter-productive to leave it there. I didn’t remove myself from the safety of writing in third person just to share my opinion, but rather to define the things that I fear many are too scared to utter in public.

After 9/11, many left their trepidations at the door and an overwhelming sense of national pride spread faster than the recent measles outbreak in Southern California. The same was seen here: terror works because it scares us. Scared people will always find safety in numbers and huddle behind those they believe can protect them.

Still, I am Joshua Arnao. You are (insert name here). You are not part of some all agreeing collective but rather an individual who has nothing more important to bring to the banquet table of humanity than your unique and distinct opinion.

The actions of a few on Jan. 7 were atrocious, yet they achieved their goal. We sacrificed our identity and ability to dig deeper into a complex social and idealogical struggle to rally behind a hashtag.

It’s hard to find the answers when we don’t understand the questions. We also discredit the fundamentals of the rights afforded to us when we don’t give the questions the respect they deserve. The questions that we have to ask in the face of events like a terrorist attack are complex.

I don’t know what this looks like for you but I know where it starts.

Who are you?

Do Charlie Hebdo’s distasteful cartoons warrant the murder of some of its staff? Absolutely not. Does this mean we blindly take on the mantra they present? Hopefully not.

This will not be the last terrorist attack, the last time we are called to join together in support, or the last time we will stand united in opposition. Charlie Hebdo wouldn’t want all of us to be put under the same circumstances. Of course, all of our voices should be heard no matter how high the cost, even if our opinions aren’t welcomed.