Yes, the cycles of warfare and despotism in the Middle East have been a breeding ground for beliefs that motivate people to do horrible deeds. But no one seems to have the knowledge or will to take the steps needed to pacify and establish legitimate governments in the region.

Yes, many of the nation’s Governors have warned, and Federal authorities know, resettling refugees from war-torn regions to the United States is risky. But traditions, laws, and humanitarian instincts, here and elsewhere, mean that restrictive immigration policies are not likely to get very far, no matter how much anxious publics want them.

In any case, such policies would create a false sense of security. For the attacks in Paris, as well as those recently in the United States, were largely the work of home-grown extremists, legal residents, part of the societies in which they lived. However, they used the liberal values these countries embrace – freedom of speech, religion, privacy rights, and the like – to pursue decidedly illiberal ends.

Neither military action abroad nor tougher immigration rules at home will prevent that. If they want to avoid a repeat of what happened in Paris, the United States, France and other countries will once again have to confront the challenge of deciding how much freedom more security is worth.

Sources

Bret Stephens, “The Islamist Tantrum,” The Wall Street Journal, November 16, 2015.

Michael Schmidt et. al., “ U. S. Investigators Struggle to Track Homegrown ISIS Suspects,” The New York Times, November 19, 2015.

The publication in “Charlie Hebdo” of a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammed raises issues beyond free speech. The violent murder of staff at “Charlie Hebdo” is rightly condemned.

These events in Paris raise the issue of the power of words. Words and images can hurt, insult and deeply offend. They are sometimes powerful in the feelings they evoke. But that is the point—they evoke feelings but do not harm the way physical assault does.

Words and images arise from thoughts and feelings that will not go away because we try to outlaw their use. Banning words and images does not work any better than banning thoughts.

As I’ve said, some words and images evoke very strong negative reactions in others. This means that I should not say everything I may think or feel. Self-restraint in my expression is important in family life as well as in the Public Square.

Of course, there will always be those who will not or cannot resist saying offensive and hurtful things. When this happens the perpetrator should be subject to harsh social, but not legal, sanction.

Some say certain words should be banned in public because they give extreme offense or may incite violence. The power of such words is actually reduced if we realize that we will sometimes feel offended in life but that we do not have to react with violent action. This realization reduces the power of the words and enhances our sense of personal power and control. Once we realize this then we can again say “Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me.”