Liberdade sem «mas»

Leio boa parte dos liberais modernos com reservas e distâncias, sobretudo em matéria económico-social. Em compensação, nunca deixo de me entusiasmar com os autores do liberalismo clássico, sobretudo com a veemente defesa das liberdades individuais. O texto de Constant sobre a imprensa, por exemplo, podia ter sido escrito ontem. Por isso, é bom encontrar na imprensa liberal de agora uma formulação impecável sobre o ataque ao Charlie Hebdo: «The magazine had the right to publish everything it did, and French law is right to allow it to. There can be no “but” in that sentence. Even when a picture or opinion is imprudent or tasteless, unless it directly incites violence it should not be banned. Charlie Hebdo lampoons all religions, not just Islam—but it would have the right to single out that faith if it wanted to, just as Islamists in Europe are entitled to denounce Western decadence if they so choose. In any case, there is a world of difference, and several centuries of liberal political thought, between giving and taking offence and killing people over it. Nothing can be done with a pencil or a keyboard that warrants a reprisal with a Kalashnikov». [do editorial da Economist].