| |
Hate speech or free speech? What much of West bans is protected in U.S. - International Herald Tribune
by ubernoir at 7:54 am EDT, Jun 12, 2008 |
A couple of years ago, a Canadian magazine published an article arguing that the rise of Islam threatened Western values. The article s tone was mocking and biting, but it said nothing that conservative magazines and blogs in the United States did not say every day without fear of legal reprisal. Things are different here. The magazine is on trial.
edit having recommended this i note a, that i recommend it not to express an opinion but because it is a good article
but it also occurs to me b, clearly i generally believe in a marketplace of ideas (why else would I be attracted to a site about memes?)
and c, America protects hate speech yet America, first amongst the western nations, is potentially on the verge of electing a black leader. This doesn't prove anything but it is interesting to note. |
| |
RE: Hate speech or free speech? What much of West bans is protected in U.S. - International Herald Tribune
by Stefanie at 11:43 am EDT, Jun 12, 2008 |
ubernoir wrote:
edit having recommended this i note a, that i recommend it not to express an opinion but because it is a good article but it also occurs to me b, clearly i generally believe in a marketplace of ideas (why else would I be attracted to a site about memes?) and c, America protects hate speech yet America, first amongst the western nations, is potentially on the verge of electing a black leader. This doesn't prove anything but it is interesting to note.
Interesting indeed. article:
Some prominent legal scholars say the United States should reconsider its position on hate speech. "It is not clear to me that the Europeans are mistaken," Jeremy Waldron, a legal philosopher, wrote in The New York Review of Books last month, "when they say that a liberal democracy must take affirmative responsibility for protecting the atmosphere of mutual respect against certain forms of vicious attack."
I think "the atmosphere of mutual respect" would benefit from the truly open communication afforded by the right to free speech, rather than be hindered by it. |
|
| | |
RE: Hate speech or free speech? What much of West bans is protected in U.S. - International Herald Tribune
by Decius at 12:04 pm EDT, Jun 12, 2008 |
Stefanie wrote:
I think "the atmosphere of mutual respect" would benefit from the truly open communication afforded by the right to free speech, rather than be hindered by it.
Well put. Threatening people with fines and imprisonment for expressing the wrong point of view is not a particularly good way of showing respect for their right to make up their own minds about what they think. |
|
Hate speech or free speech? What much of West bans is protected in U.S. - International Herald Tribune
by Decius at 8:59 am EDT, Jun 12, 2008 |
A couple of years ago, a Canadian magazine published an article arguing that the rise of Islam threatened Western values. The article s tone was mocking and biting, but it said nothing that conservative magazines and blogs in the United States did not say every day without fear of legal reprisal. Things are different here. The magazine is on trial.
I am embarrassed by whats going in Canada. The U.S. tolerates the expression of a lot of despicable views, and it is particularly frustrating to see the large cross section of conservatives who are vocally opposed to hate speech codes but completely silent or on the other side of other important first amendment issues, as it reveals their sympathy for ideas they claim that they reject. However, government regulation of this speech is a slippery slope that leads to all sorts of silly results such as the German ban on the Wolfenstein games and this trial in Canada, which clearly intends to squelch a political view. You can't stop people from being assholes. Censoring this sort of material doesn't make these opinions go away, and it removes the opportunity to confront them directly in open dialog. If these muslims wanted to make a counterpoint to this article they ought to do it through sound advocacy in the pages of Macleans rather than coersion in a court. Reliance on the later leads one to suspect that you can't win at the former. |
What much of West bans is protected in US
by noteworthy at 6:18 am EDT, Jun 13, 2008 |
"The best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market," wrote Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in his 1919 dissent in Abrams v. United States, which eventually formed the basis for modern First Amendment law. "Canadians do not have a cast-iron stomach for offensive speech," said Jason Gratl, a lawyer for the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association. "We don't subscribe to a marketplace of ideas." "Western governments are becoming increasingly comfortable with the regulation of opinion. The First Amendment really does distinguish the U.S., not just from Canada but from the rest of the Western world."
|
|
|
