[LINK] Two Daily Kos links on the cartoons of Charlie Hebdo
"[O]ffensively anti-Muslim" is a completely wrong description of Charlie Hebdo's cartoons, at least from the point of view of the people who drew them. As a rule, the cartoonists did not attack Muslims as Muslims (whereas the sacked cartoonist did attack Jews as Jews, hence the sacking), and they did not even attack Islam per se. Rather, they attacked Islam as one element of a larger set of revealed religion, all equally hateful. They expressed a deep hatred of organized religious institutions, first and foremost, and for most of them (but not all) a rejection of all religious thinking. This is what their work was all about: attacking religious authorities and sometimes religion in general, and this blanket attack grew straight from the French revolt against an extremely oppressive Catholic Church in the 18th century.
The visual and intellectual equipment of both anticlericalism (attacking religious institutions) and antireligion (attacking religion in general) was consolidated around 1900. Anticlericalism was at the heart of the secularization of all public spaces (including schools) which took place in France between 1880 and 1910. But Jules Ferry, one of the leaders of the secularizing movement, took pains to explain that what had to be destroyed was not religion in itself, but the political and institutional power of religion (for anybody reading French, here is his "Letter to schoolteachers" which is a perfect presentation of what the original version of French laïcité was really all about).
A second, more virulent strain of secularizers did think that religious beliefs in and of themselves were medieval superstitions to be rooted out, that reason and enlightenment would eventually lead humanity on the road to complete atheism. For these "free-thinkers" (as they styled themselves), New Age types from Boulder would be just as bad as Fundamentalist Christians from the Bible Belt, or Islamists for that matter; all would be denounced as benighted brains clutching at shadows.
[. . .]
A second group of cartoons came also straight from the 18th century anticlerical fighters' handbook, and would have been eagerly endorsed by Voltaire or Diderot, and probably Ferry and many IIIrd Republic secularizers as well (as far as contents were concerned only of course; the raunchy 21st century presentation would have shocked!). These cartoons took aim at the distance between the actual teachings of various religious leaders, primarily Muhammad and Jesus, and the behavior of their followers. The following covers illustrate this (and contain representations of Muhammad, so, for those who don't want to see that, don't click!). In one, Cabu's Muhammad, seated on a cloud, has his head in his hands, weeping and saying "It's tough to be loved by a--holes". This cover by Charb, captioned "If Muhammad came back..." shows a kneeling Prophet about to have his throat slit by a Jihadi fighter, with the following dialogue: -"I am the Prophet, stupid!" / "Shut up, you infidel!".
I think many (though perhaps not all) of their biggest controversies are cases of what I call Onion Fail. You know, like that one time when Iranian state media quoted an article from The Onion that said Rural Whites Prefer Ahmadinejad To Obama, or that other time when North Korean media quoted a story that said Kim Jong-Un Named the Onion's Sexiest Man Alive for 2012. Quoting a satirical magazine is risky business, especially if the magazine is in another language or requires some understanding or the politics or culture of another country. Satire is about mockery. So, clearly, instead of actually praising Ahmadinejad or Kim Jong-Un, they are actually ridiculing them. Simply reporting a word-for-word translation of these farcical articles is going to get the intended message exactly backwards. You'd think the part about Kim Jong-Un having abs to rival Matthew McConaughey’s would have been a tip off, but alas, one of the truly boundless qualities of the universe is the ability to kiss ass and the willingness to receive it."
[. . .]
As you will see, someone in the Twitterverse has cited the image as an example of racism and has blasted it out under #JeNeSuisPasCharlie. The image shows a cartoon depicting Justice Minister Christiane Taubira, who was born in French Guiana, as a monkey. An open an shut case of racism, right? Actually, au contraire.
There are a number of glaring problems with the claim that this anti-racist cartoon is actually pro-racist. First, note that it is drawn by Charb himself. As mentioned in the beginning, his girlfriend was of North African decent and is also chair of the French Equal Opportunities and Anti-Discrimination Commission. So, it might seem a little strange for him to be promoting a racist image.
Second, look at what the text says: "Rassemblement Bleu Raciste." This is a parody of the slogan "Rassemblement Bleu Marine," which is used by Marine Le Pen's Front National. Also notice the tricolor flame next to the image. That is a mock up of the party's logo.
This cartoon came out following a controversy in which a politician from Front National shared a photoshopped image on Facebook that showed the Justice Minister as a monkey. The Charlie cartoon is doing a parody of this and saying Front National is racist. Ironically, some people outside of France are using it to say Charlie Hebdo is racist.