HATE

Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship
Erscheinungsjahr 2020
ISBN: 978-0-19-008900-9
Verlag: Oxford University Press, USA

Buch, Englisch, 272 Seiten, Print PDF, Format (B × H): 140 mm x 210 mm, Gewicht: 330 g

The updated paperback edition of HATE dispels misunderstandings plaguing our perennial debates about "hate speech vs. free speech," showing that the First Amendment approach promotes free speech and democracy, equality, and societal harmony. As "hate speech" has no generally accepted definition, we hear many incorrect assumptions that it is either absolutely unprotected or absolutely protected from censorship. Rather, U.S. law allows government to punish hateful or discriminatory speech in specific contexts when it directly causes imminent serious harm. Yet, government may not punish such speech solely because its message is disfavored, disturbing, or vaguely feared to possibly contribute to some future harm. "Hate speech" censorship proponents stress the potential harms such speech might further: discrimination, violence, and psychic injuries. However, there has been little analysis of whether censorship effectively counters the feared injuries. Citing evidence from many countries, this book shows that "hate speech" are at best ineffective and at worst counterproductive. Therefore, prominent social justice advocates worldwide maintain that the best way to resist hate and promote equality is not censorship, but rather, vigorous "counterspeech" and activism.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Strossen, Nadine

Fachgebiete

• Rechtswissenschaften Öffentliches Recht
• Sozialwissenschaften Politikwissenschaft Politikwissenschaft Allgemein
• Rechtswissenschaften Sozialrecht

Inhaltsverzeichnis

- Acknowledgments

- Editor's Note

- Key Terms and Concepts

- Preface to the Paperback

- Introduction

- Chapter 1: Overview

- Chapter 2: "Hate Speech" Laws Violate Fundamental Free Speech and Equality Principles

- Chapter 3: When "Hate Speech" Is Protected and When It Is Punishable

- Chapter 4: Because of Their Intractable Vagueness and Overbreadth, "Hate Speech" Laws Undermine Free Speech and Equality

- Chapter 5: Is It Possible to Draft a "Hate Speech" Law That Is Not Unduly Vague or Overbroad?

- Chapter 6: Does Constitutionally Protected "Hate Speech" Actually Cause the Feared Harms?

- Chapter 7: "Hate Speech" Laws are at Best Ineffective and at Worst Counterproductive

- Chapter 8: Non-Censorial Methods Effectively Curb the Potential Harms of Constitutionally Protected "Hate Speech"

- Chapter 9: Conclusion: Looking Back--and Forward

- Index

Über Autor(innen)

Nadine Strossen is John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law at New York Law School and the first woman national President of the American Civil Liberties Union, where she served from 1991 through 2008. A frequent speaker on constitutional and civil liberties issues, her media appearances include 60 Minutes, CBS Sunday Morning, Today, Good Morning America, The Daily Show, and other news programs on CNN, C-SPAN, Fox, Al-Jazeera, and in Australia, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain. Her op-eds have appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Washington Times, and USA Today, among others.