Tweet
AGAINST STATE-BACKED TRUTHS
By The Crimson Staff
Harvard Crimson, MA
Oct 16 2006
The French bill that criminalizes Armenian genocide should not
become law
Last Thursday, the French parliament exacerbated existing tensions
between European states and Turkey, which is in talks to join the
European Union. In an overwhelming 109-19 vote, the lower chamber of
the French National Assembly unwisely passed a bill to criminalize
the denial of the 1915 genocide of Armenians on Turkish soil. The
French Senate and President have the chance to bury the bill, and we
hope they take it.
Unsurprisingly, the Turkish government reacted swiftly against
this bill, as have Turkish emigrants all over Europe. Some Turkish
parliament members proposed a law criminalizing the denial of the
French colonial genocide of Algerians (historians prefer to deem it
colonial warfare). In France this weekend, vandals defaced one of
the many existing monuments to the massacred Armenians.
These actions must be understood in a larger context. Under the
proposed French bill, Armenian genocide deniers would face fines and
prison terms equivalent to those mandated by anti-Holocaust-denying
laws in some central European nations. Although the motivations
for these laws may have been understandable in the post-war era,
governments should not impose their version of the truth over their
citizens.
The French bill is well intentioned; its goal is to force Turkey to
confront the atrocities committed by the ruling Committee for Union
and Progress during World War I. But we cannot help but be skeptical
of any state trying to impose its version of history and truth.
States should simply avoid this business. Thus, our opposition extends
beyond the French bill to the laws like those in Germany, Poland,
Austria, and Switzerland which criminalize Holocaust denial.
France's passage of this bill would be an ironic parallel to the
circumstances in Turkey, which tried Orhan Pamuk, this year's
Nobel laureate for literature, for speaking about the Armenian
genocide-which violates Article 301 of the Turkish penal code. In
defending free speech, even the expatriate Pamuk spoke against the
French bill. A free market of ideas, not laws imposed by the state,
should establish what is true.
By The Crimson Staff
Harvard Crimson, MA
Oct 16 2006
The French bill that criminalizes Armenian genocide should not
become law
Last Thursday, the French parliament exacerbated existing tensions
between European states and Turkey, which is in talks to join the
European Union. In an overwhelming 109-19 vote, the lower chamber of
the French National Assembly unwisely passed a bill to criminalize
the denial of the 1915 genocide of Armenians on Turkish soil. The
French Senate and President have the chance to bury the bill, and we
hope they take it.
Unsurprisingly, the Turkish government reacted swiftly against
this bill, as have Turkish emigrants all over Europe. Some Turkish
parliament members proposed a law criminalizing the denial of the
French colonial genocide of Algerians (historians prefer to deem it
colonial warfare). In France this weekend, vandals defaced one of
the many existing monuments to the massacred Armenians.
These actions must be understood in a larger context. Under the
proposed French bill, Armenian genocide deniers would face fines and
prison terms equivalent to those mandated by anti-Holocaust-denying
laws in some central European nations. Although the motivations
for these laws may have been understandable in the post-war era,
governments should not impose their version of the truth over their
citizens.
The French bill is well intentioned; its goal is to force Turkey to
confront the atrocities committed by the ruling Committee for Union
and Progress during World War I. But we cannot help but be skeptical
of any state trying to impose its version of history and truth.
States should simply avoid this business. Thus, our opposition extends
beyond the French bill to the laws like those in Germany, Poland,
Austria, and Switzerland which criminalize Holocaust denial.
France's passage of this bill would be an ironic parallel to the
circumstances in Turkey, which tried Orhan Pamuk, this year's
Nobel laureate for literature, for speaking about the Armenian
genocide-which violates Article 301 of the Turkish penal code. In
defending free speech, even the expatriate Pamuk spoke against the
French bill. A free market of ideas, not laws imposed by the state,
should establish what is true.