The Holocaust memorial in Berlin is immersive and disturbing.
Taking up an entire city square, it is composed simply of tall square pillars of smooth dark stone. Within, figures appear and disappear silently representing the millions who vanished under the Nazis.
By solemn coincidence, I was visiting the memorial on the very afternoon that Jewish hostages were being murdered by Islamic extremists in France. You wouldn't have known. There was no sense that home grown anti-Semitism was back in business in Europe. Even in the Jewish museum itself there were no obvious expressions of outrage or black arm bands.
The assumption is that, in Berlin at least, racialism is nowadays almost inconceivable. Berlin is founded on tolerance of everything - except intolerance. It's what everyone says here. In the rest of Germany, however, things aren't quite so harmonious. A new movement, Pegida, Patriotic Europeans against the Islamicisation of the West, has been holding mass demonstrations.
Last week in Dresden, up to 30,000 gathered to complain about immigration. The authorities in Berlin turned off the lights on the Brandenburg gate to express disapproval - disapproval of Pegida that is, not immigration.
Yet Pegida is less extreme than Britain's Ukip. It seeks only a tightening of the rules on the 200,000 asylum seekers who came here last year. In Britain, even 17,000 is seen as too much. These things are relative. David Cameron's call for an end to free movement in Europe is regarded as racist here.
However, there is a clash of intolerances which is causing some ideological dissonance among Berlin liberals. This week Pegida will be on the streets targeting, not immigration, but Islamic extremism, and wearing black arm bands in solidarity with millions in France who marched in defence of freedom of speech.
So keen are some liberals to distance themselves from Pegida that they are wondering if freedom of speech is always worth defending. You wouldn't tolerate anti-Semitic cartoons that offended Jewish people, except in a Jewish museum, so why should Charlie Hebdo be allowed unlimited freedom to offend Muslims?
This echoes those remarks in the leaked emails from Al Jazeera journalists who warned that, if you offend 1.5 billion Muslims, then some of them might want to kill you. "What Charlie Hebdo did was not free speech" wrote the Doha-based journalist Mohamed Vall Salem, "it was an abuse of free speech". This attitude has been widely aired on twitter in the UK often by people on the liberal left.
It is quite wrong-headed and illiberal, however. The Hebdo cartoons were not hate speak. They were tested in court in 2006 and judged to be inoffensive satire. Moreover, Hebdo's cartoons poke fun at all religions equally: Christian, Jewish, Hindu. The trouble is, almost any representation of the prophet is seen as offensive by Islamic extremists.
We cannot allow religious obscurantists to abolish freedom of speech. I find it sad to hear Western liberals arguing that we have no right to represent faith in an unflattering light. This is creating, effectively, a law of blasphemy. For, if we cannot lampoon Islam, then how can cartoonists continue to represent Roman Catholics in this way?
Then, what would prevent ethnic minorities from insisting that they should not be represented in a way they find offensive? I don't particularly like jokes about Scots but I would defend the right of comedians to make them. Are we going to have the Guardian's Steve Bell arraigned in the court of public offence for that cartoon telling Scotland to go f*** itself, those grotesque portrayals of Alex Salmond in a kilt?
The Guardian implied that it had not reproduced the Hebdo cartoons because it considered them to be infantile. But their cartoonist Martin Rowson presents all manner of people in public life as sewage rats, including members of the Royal Family. Should the people who find that offensive have the right curb the cartoons?
We really cannot go down this road. Hate speak and racialism are already illegal; that is a diversion. If we proscribe images of religious icons because certain believers are offended then our concept of liberty is dead and buried. And it is the millions who died fighting fascism who are mocked.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article