A 2014 YouTube monologue in which the speaker opens with personal anecdotes (New Year, visit to Google) then responds to a viewer comment about Jews, uses that to illustrate how personal exposure shapes social sensitivities, and pivots to discuss the "quenelle" gesture. The speaker frames the quenelle, summarizes public portrayals of it, and argues strongly for near-absolute freedom of expression while criticizing frequent legal responses to speech in France.
Hello, everyone. Welcome to the first video of 2014. Happy New Year again. And I took two or three days off because I needed a little break. But when I take three days off, I lose my touch a little bit. I mean, when I arrive, I'm a little bit like a, you know, like that shy girl on a first date. But hey, I'll get back on top of it very, very quickly. So what's happening is that I'm back from Google. I was invited because I was invited. Not for me, it's not because of my appearance that I was invited, but because of all the buzz that we've created together. That is to say, what caught their attention wasn't my videos, but your views. So you're the one who caught their attention. The number of interactions, the number of comments. And there you have it. You've been supporting me throughout 2013. They saw that and then they wanted to see me up close, that's all. Well, we talked a little bit and then they invited me to eat. And I can tell you that Google Food, the Google restaurant, really fits the idea that when it comes to that, I would like them to open a restaurant for the public. Ah. So the premises are huge, they're comfortable, there's plenty of free food and everything is great. I wasn't able to film it. We're not allowed to film it. But from the inside, I can tell you that it's a great experience. So what's happening today? I wanted to check my Facebook and boom. I came across a message from a year ago that said, why don't you ever attack Jews? So let's start 2014 with a Jewish story. Listen, I'll tell you very simply. Each of us, you, me, everyone, builds our sensitivity on the elements that form our mental universe. For example, if I go out at 6am and then I come across a little green guy who gives me a 15,000 V shock, then the first one is fine, the second one is fine, but maybe after 15 days in a row, you understand, it becomes a bit Pavlovian. That means that after a while, I see a little green guy, even if he's nice, he lives flowers, and I'm going to run away, you understand? That's it. Actually, that's how we are. Don't tell me that I'm racist against little boners or anything like that. That's why I took little boners into my mental universe. When I look, I haven't seen Jews, for example, massacring villages with knives. I haven't noticed that Judaism has become the religion of prisons in a country like France, where Judaism is a very small minority. I haven't seen news reports saying that Jews have killed people for a look for a cigarette. Do you understand things like that? I haven't seen Jews cutting off the head of what they consider their enemy with a knife and then eating their organs and posting the video online. Okay? That's all. Do you understand? That's it. It's just like I was saying, like little boners. Okay? So then there are people who will tell me, you know, because I've already been told, uh, the guy who massacred villages with knives, children, women, babies, fetuses, all that there's. There's a Jew behind it. Well, no, no, no. There's no Jew behind it. What's behind it? There's a guy like him. Okay, behind it. Exactly. A guy like him operates on the same concept as him. That's it. That's it. It's very straightforward. So there you have it. That's why. Because there weren't these phenomena there, because I wasn't able to witness these phenomena. I don't criticize the Jews. Now actually, the day I see that, I assure you that I won't do it half heartedly. Okay, so that's clear. I'll also talk to you about something else. The story of the quesnel. So in France, France surprises me. I was just telling you December 31st. I wanted something trivial. I didn't want any surprises. I didn't want any surprises. And I already have one. So this story about this quenelle. So the quinelle, it seems that it's an inverted salute. So if the quinelle is an inverted salute, that's a broken Nazi salute. And then upwards and I don't know which one. I watched a few videos of God Given before coming to talk about it. I'm not talking about opinion. I always speak with data in front of me. Uh, he's always presented the Quesnel as being something with sexual connotations. Okay, I'll put it up your ass. Okay? That's the term he uses when he describes Francois Hollande's quenelle. Because remember, during his election campaign, Francois Hollande and his buddies, they did that. Okay, okay. And how did he describe it? One in your. One in your mouth. Okay, so one in your tail. Knowing that the quenelle is a food product in the form of an elongated shape and therefore it has a, let's say, phallic shape. Excuse me, we're talking about extremely Freudian things today. But that's the level of the debate we're at. Okay, so let's go down the debate. So in fact, he presented it as a kind of response with sexual connotations. So I'm putting it in the tail. I'm putting it in the tail, knowing that usually it's a kind of metaphor used to say I, you. It's a bit like when you elect a regime and then that regime sells you to the various lobbies, sells you to the banks, sells you to the highest bidder. In reality. There you go. So at that point, your only response is to try to make a gesture. Okay, if we had been in the 60s, we would have done that. Today we throw out a. But generally, when I agree with a guy, when a guy comes to flatter me, to stroke my fur, I assure you that his freedom of expression is not an issue at all. It's when a guy comes to call me too much of a jerk, or a guy comes to criticize me, or a guy comes to tell me that I am this or that, that's when his freedom of expression comes into play. I agree. So I'm very. How can I say? That's why you often see me in the United States. I'm very pro American on these things. In other words, in another chapter, I'm even for carrying guns and all that. But I'm very pro American on these things. For me, it's total and absolute freedom of expression. Even if it bothers you, even if it annoys you, even if you think the guy hates you, even if you think the guy doesn't make you laugh and all that. I don't care. I really agree with the one who criticizes him. And I also agree with the one who criticizes him in the sense that I want both to be able to express themselves with thesis and the antithesis. I think it's more damaging to a society to limit expression than to try to give the state, for example, the ability to choose who has the right to speak and who doesn't. I think it causes more damage in this way, because today in France you have become the laughing stock of the entire world in terms of freedom of expression. Because three quarters of the articles I open in a French newspaper, 3/4 of the articles are about speech. He was convicted for speech and he was brought to court for speech. He was summoned to the police for speech and a complaint was filed for speech. That means we have reached the stage today, in a country that is in a pre insurrectional situation or near civil war, where the atmosphere is electric. Where every statement. Well, here it's my iPhone that's messing up. Where every statement needs a legal response. So at that point, it's better to ask the state to. It's better to just ask the state to say which statements have the right to be quoted. It's about creating a sort of book, okay? A Mao book. Okay? Like a little book like that, a little booklet. You open it, and then you see what you have the right to say. Or not, by the way, under a socialist regime. That's absolutely. It's completely in the spirit. Okay, I'll leave you guys, and then we'll.
