I was afraid that I would come back from my semester abroad in England with little material to write about. I was wrong, but in no way could I have dreamt of writing an editorial on a terrorist attack right after I came back to Dickinson.

Let me first start out by saying that my title (translated as “I am not Charlie.”) is in no way a justification of the terrorist attacks. There is no justification for the killings that happened in Paris at the French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo. Anybody who views this article as my supporting the terrorists’ actions, or some other form of anarchy, probably just read the title and nothing else.

Instead, the article’s title is intended as a rebuke of the overly simplistic message of “Je suis Charlie.” This slogan was used as a rallying cry for supporters of free speech in the aftermath of the terrorist attack. Anyone who used the phrase “Je suis Charlie” was considered a supporter of free speech; this particular emotion has dominated the airwaves since the attacks.

The problem with saying “Je suis Charlie” is that a lot of people have not thought about what this phrase implies, or what it should imply. To me, this phrase should imply that one would be willing and happy to be the human embodiment of the magazine. This human embodiment would involve disrespecting a number of religious practices and beliefs, notably the Muslim belief that images of the prophet Muhammad (both good and bad) should be banned and the Catholic ideal that communion should be sacred part of the Mass. The human embodiment of Charlie Hebdo would also try to justify its insults directed at various religions by saying that it’s all done in the name of “freedom of speech.”

The problem with this argument is that it does not fully understand the meaning of freedom of speech. While the movement is right that nobody should be killed for exercising free speech, I am not so sure whether a lot of the “Je suis Charlie” supporters understand how “freedom of speech” is not necessarily freedom from civilized criticism. In fact, based on the past religious intolerance of the magazine, Charlie Hebdo should not be protected from the civil and peaceful criticism that is also a crucial aspect of freedom of speech. It is this peaceful criticism that should be used to reject the ideals of the killers but treat the message of “Je suis Charlie” with skepticism.