3 ms·
The author is conflating 'hate' with 'facts'. Denying the holocaust is one thing. Saying 'I hate group X' is altogether another. And saying 'I hate group X a
by jariel 7y ago
The author is conflating 'hate' with 'facts'.
Denying the holocaust is one thing.
Saying 'I hate group X' is altogether another.
And saying 'I hate group X and we should go and harm them' is yet another.
But this is all academic because few people support any of that kind of stuff really.
The concerns around hate speech are on the margins:
Making jokes about sensitive things (i.e. comedian in Quebec fined $30 000 for making joke about a man in a wheelchair)
Policies which have possibly a racial angle, and yet which may or may not be racist (i.e. banning travel from China, complaints that top Canadian Health bureaucrat who is Chinese native and deep ties to the WHO is 'compromised' being perceived as specifically racist)
Policies which affect some groups more than others like those intended to ostensibly help groups (i.e. UCal system banning teachers from language that could be perceived as 'microaggression' like telling someone of African American descent who is being too aggressive/lound in class ... that they are being too loud/aggressive in class, or things like affirmative action, Quebec banning certain religious garb which affects specific groups)
Requiring 'affirmative' language for controversial things (i.e Jordan Peterson complaint that he must legally refer to someone given whatever of any number of genders they someone chooses to describe themselves as).
Racially oriented identity politics policies such as 'Black Lives Matter' trying to address real problems of racism, while requiring white people to 'march at the back of the line' given that they are ostensibly secondary to the nature of their status concerning the issue and their presence could overwhelm the authenticity of the message ... could be perceived as a form of hate speech.
Casual aggressive language which is really tantamount to 'very crude speech' but sometimes 'actual hate speech' sometimes not really hatefully oriented, but which could be categorized as hate speech. (You hear this in online game rooms a lot, occasionally some very crass language that I don't think is meant to be hateful so much as crass, but maybe it is by some definition)
These are where the streams cross and things get harder.
- afiori 7y ago> Making jokes about sensitive things (i.e. comedian in Quebec fined $30 000 for making joke about a man in a wheelchair) I feel like many people do not know about some more of the context. Essentially the fine was in terms of damages, as in those jokes fueled bullying from many of his classmates. Personally I feel that this is more properly part of a conversation about the boundaries of defamation rather than the boundaries of free speech.
- jariel 7y agoThat's a good thought, but 'defamation' is right in the centre of free speech conversations. It's a good example you bring up because it's as old as time and there doesn't seem to be a universal way to think about it just yet.
- afiori 7y agoI would say that defamation is different as it is about damages between individuals. There the concept is directly related to proving that damages have occurred, and a fine is in part meant to "correct the records." It is less about an abstract of what is the limit of free speech.