Malik also takes issue with the idea that attacking Islam is actually “punching down,” pointing out the numerous writers and cartoonists within Muslim societies who have been jailed or killed for making anti-Islamic remarks. Finally, he outlines the very real danger of Western societies repeatedly capitulating—as Trudeau would have us do—to fear of Muslim outrage, leading to self-censorship:

In confusing criticism of Islam with hatred of Muslims, in assuming that those angered by Charlie Hebdoare in some way representative of Muslim communities, in claiming that Charlie Hebdo had ‘incited’ violence, in suggesting that as ‘hate speech’ the cartoons should not have been published, Trudeau is betraying such artists and cartoonists. Again, as I [Malik] wrote in my original Charlie Hebdo article:

“What nurtures the reactionaries, both within Muslim communities and outside it, is the pusillanimity of many so-called liberals, their unwillingness to stand up for basic liberal principles, their readiness to betray the progressives within minority communities. On the one hand, this allows Muslim extremists the room to operate. The more that society gives licence for people to be offended, the more that people will seize the opportunity to feel offended. And the more deadly they will become in expressing their outrage. There will always be extremists who respond as the Charlie Hebdo killers did. The real problem is that their actions are given a spurious moral legitimacy by liberals who proclaim it unacceptable to give offence.

Liberal pusillanimity also helps nurture anti-Muslim sentiment. It feeds the racist idea that all Muslims are reactionary, that Muslims themselves are the problem, that Muslim immigration should be stemmed, and the Muslim communities should be more harshly policed. It creates the room for organizations such as the Front National to spread its poison.”