October 28, 2009

Retaliation for Hate Speech?


This essay was rational until the last paragraph asking, "How, then, are we supposed to react to people like Wilders? The first step is giving them a taste of their own medicine." John Stuart Mill supported free expression so that in case we are wrong about a belief we can correct our misconception. If we are correct we can affirm what we believe. Responding to unpopular speech with more unpopular speech "to give them a taste of their own medicine" is childish. Censoring speech restricts freedom. Repeatedly in the name of religion violence was used to silence speech critical of Islam. There is the concurrent harm of the chilling effect. How many people now fear speaking out because of fear of being killed? The notion of free speech is to protect speech that you hate. If it is wrong show how. If hate speech is correct it needs to be adopted no matter how hateful. But if it is censored how can it be evaluated?

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2009/10/26/why-hate-speech

Why hate speech?
Banning hate speech ultimately prevents us from supporting the principle of free speech.
By Derek Turner
Columbia Spectator
Published Monday 26 October 2009 07:24pm EST.

No comments: