Should Democracies Ban Hate Speech? Hate Speech Laws and Counterspeech.
The paper's main goal is to compare laws banning hate speech with counterspeech as an effective method of curtailing hate speech. In the first part, the paper discussed three normative justifications for hate speech bans. Firstly, the line of argument developed by critical race theorists that assume...
| Publicado en: | Ethical Theory & Moral Practice Vol. 26; no. 4; pp. 511 - 533 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Sep2023
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=172867424&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 172867424 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 13862820 OEY jtl: Ethical Theory & Moral Practice issn: 13862820 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Sep2023 vid: 26 iid: 4 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 172867424 10.1007/s10677-022-10336-2 ppf: 511 ppct: 22 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 794KB tig: atl: Should Democracies Ban Hate Speech? Hate Speech Laws and Counterspeech. aug: au: Kulenović, Enes affil: https://ror.org/00mv6sv71 Faculty of Political Science, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia su: Hate speech Human rights violations Discrimination (Sociology) Equality Freedom of speech sug: subj: Hate speech Human rights violations Discrimination (Sociology) Equality Freedom of speech keyword: counterspeech discrimination extreme speech freedom of speech hate speech incitement to violence ab: The paper's main goal is to compare laws banning hate speech with counterspeech as an effective method of curtailing hate speech. In the first part, the paper discussed three normative justifications for hate speech bans. Firstly, the line of argument developed by critical race theorists that assumes that hate speech leads to the direct harm and violation of individuals' rights. Secondly, paper examines the Weimar model that rests on the assumption that hate speech can lead to indirect harm to members of vulnerable minorities by creating a toxic environment, which opens the door to discrimination and even violence. Thirdly, the justification which is derived from the idea that such forms of extreme public speech violate the basic values and principles – such as inclusiveness, equality and mutual respect - on which constitutional democracies are built. This approach extends its argument from general values to the status of citizens by arguing that hate speech violates the equal standing of citizens by attempting to exclude certain members of society from the process of democratic deliberation based on their ascriptive characteristics. The second part of the paper looks at counterspeech as an efficient approach to limit harms that arise from hate speech. The author argues that legal bans should be reserved only for the most extreme forms of hateful rhetoric, while counterspeech is a valid option for tackling all other forms of hate speech. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Ethical Theory & Moral Practice is a copyright of Springer, 2023. All Rights Reserved. item: Ethical Theory & Moral Practice holder: Springer Nature dt: @attributes: year: 2023 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|