Freedom of expression has been a hot topic again since Dutch columnist Ebru Umar was arrested for insulting Turkish President Erdogan. Opinions on this are divided. Why insult people, we live in a civilized country after all? But crude jokes also serve a purpose. Satirists have been denouncing abuses for centuries. To shut up or not?
Recep Tayyip Erdogan is on track. Last April, he persuaded German Chancellor Angela Merkel to allow satirist Jan Böhmermann to be prosecuted for insulting a foreign head of state. Böhmermann referred to the Turkish president as a goat fucker, a pedophile and more of this kind in a recited poem. This is indeed prohibited under German law. Our own Hans Teeuwen then went the extra mile during an interview on this subject. The satire in this interview was too crude for my taste and I had a hard time finishing it, even though Böhmermann's poem made me laugh.
Hans Teeuwen is asked by RTL Nieuws to comment on Erdogan's indictment of German satirist Böhmermann and responds in his own way. His response can be felt to people as "unnecessarily rude." Watch at your own risk.
As far as is known, Mark Rutte has not received a fire letter from Turkey and the film as such has no consequences for Hans Teeuwen, but it could have been. In the Netherlands there is a maximum of two years in prison for insulting a foreign head of state and five years for insulting our own king. Time to scrap these outdated laws? Or is it completely the fence of the dam when it comes to insults and slander in the media? While Böhmermann mainly received acclaim, Teeuwen was also criticized a lot, including from some fellow comedians who found him unnecessarily rude. But where is the limit? Is there such a thing as general civilization, even within satire?
Role of satirist
If we want to answer this question through history, I have bad news for the haters of gross jokes. For the NWO research program ‘The power of satire:cultural boundries contested’ scientists looked at the use of humor as a weapon over the centuries. This shows that public figures and administrators in particular could be seriously insulted in the media. Take, for example, Stadtholder Willem V, who is depicted as a pig pissing and drinking in an anonymous pamphlet from 1786. Not exactly a civilized drawing, but the stadtholder was made fun of for good reason. Satire exposed abuses and in this case it was disorderly governance.
The political opponents at the end of the 18 e century, the liberal patriots against the conservative Orangists (adherents of the Oranges) denounced each other by means of satire for everything that the daylight could not bear. The many gross shit and piss jokes and references to drunkenness or deviant sexual behavior could have such an impact that administrative careers have been destroyed. This was partly the intention of the politically inspired writers and therefore mainly occurred in politically turbulent times. But there were just as well commercial types, the 'Johan Derksens' of the time, who made bad jokes because it simply sold well. Could drivers just be insulted? Not in itself, but those administrators were unable – especially in times of crisis – to tackle the mainly anonymous pranksters.
Not every satirist was rude. In his book 'Under the guise of satire', Ivo Nieuwenhuis shows how diplomat and writer Pieter van Woensel wanted to make his readers think by continuously misleading them. As his Turkish alias Amurath-Effendi Hekim-Bachi, he bluntly criticized the spirit of enlightenment in the young Batavian society. If the Arjan Lubach of the 18 e century, this intellectual satirist showed the political and social truths where the administrators failed. But without offending. So it was possible, and as now these two different forms of satire – the offensive and the intellectual – co-existed.
Sanding
Not only failing politicians or other abuses are made fun of. The worldwide web has ensured that everyone with an opinion and/or a big mouth can be heard. The Internet is a repository of the most crude, racist, sexist and discriminatory comments imaginable. This kind of insults has nothing to do with satire, but with lack of civilization and brains.
Anyone who does classify this under the same heading as the crude protests of Jan Böhmermann and Hans Teeuwen is wrong. It is precisely because their message is so abrasive that it arrives. Does he make you think about what is happening in Turkey that cannot bear the light of day. Satire, just when it's over the edge, keeps us on our toes. Perhaps Teeuwen hoped for a fire-breathing Erdogan who would demand retaliation with great fanfare. Wisely enough, the Turkish president did not do that, because then Teeuwen's message would have really arrived.
Video by de Volkskrant about the reduced freedom of the press in Turkey.