Hate speech

{{langnav}}
"'''Hate speech'''" refers to [[Inflammatory language|inflammatory]] statements made directly or indirectly towards an individual or group based on said individual or group's [[racism|race]], skin colour, [[religion]], [[belief]]s, background, mental health, physical ability, [[social class]], [[sexual orientation]], [[gender]], and so forth that may incite violence or encourage [[discrimination]].

Due to power dynamics in many [[Multiculturalism|multicultural societies]], most hate-speech laws aim to protect historically-persecuted people (People of color, [[LGBT]] groups, immigrants, refugees, and [[Muslims]]) from groups with power (mostly cis white people).

Because some governments have sought to exploit the [[vague]]ness of hate speech by suppressing the speech of [[journalist]]s, political opponents and minorities (e.g., in [[Hungary]], [[India]], Rwanda, and [[Kazakhstan]]), the Dangerous Speech Project has promoted the use of the term 'dangerous speech' as a more accurate term to use. The project defines the term as:<ref>[https://www.dangerousspeech.org/libraries/guide Dangerous Speech: A Practical Guide] (April 19, 2021) ''Dangerous Speech Project''.</ref>
{{cquote|Any form of expression (e.g. speech, text, or images) that can increase the risk that its audience will condone or commit violence against members of another group.}}

==Difference from hate crime==
In the U.S., hate speech is distinguished from a "[[hate crime]]" in that no one is physically hurt by the former and it isn't illegal. A hate crime is a crime of violence against a person or their property motivated by hatred of the victim for reasons of their religious, racial, disabled, or sexual status. Hate speech uttered in the commission of a crime may be taken as evidence of the hate-driven motive for it.

==Freedom of speech==
Some argue<ref>{{Cite book |last=Strossen |first=Nadine |title=HATE: Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2018 |isbn=978-0190859121 |edition=1st |language=en-US}}</ref> that [[freedom of speech]] should not encompass hateful speech about men, women, or various minorities {{--}} sexual, religious, or racial. In some countries (i.e. the UK), a balance is sought between freedom of speech (which people should have) and people's [[right not to be offended]]. By contrast, in the U.S., political speech is protected above all other categories of protected speech, and, therefore, no balancing test occurs. However, speech is still restricted in immigrants, who can be denied naturalization based on political affiliation.<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/16/communist-party-members-still-barred-us-citizenship-trump Communist party members may still be barred from US citizenship: As Donald Trump calls for ‘extreme vetting’ of Muslim immigrants, he has pointed to old measures to bar communists – which still echo in today’s rules] by Nicole Puglise (16 Aug 2016 12.57 EDT) ''The Guardian''.</ref> Moreover, the fact that, say, some Christians regard any critical examination of Christianity or the Bible as hate speech<ref>[https://archive.ph/wtb2v Atheists Continue Hate Speech Against Christians] (5:54 AM Aug. 12, 2011) [[American Center for Law and Justice]] (archived from 7 Jul 2013 13:16:58 UTC).</ref><ref>[https://archive.ph/JhRfb Speech Against Christians and the Bible] ''The Bible Study Social Network'' (archived from 7 Jul 2013 13:16:04 UTC).</ref><ref>[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/sanal-edamaruku-indian-rationalist-weeping-christ-miracle-hoax-faces-jail_n_2201897.html Sanal Edamaruku, Indian Rationalist, Proves 'Weeping Christ' Miracle A Hoax, Now Faces Years In Jail] by Meredith Bennett-Smith (Nov 28, 2012, 01:08 PM EST; Updated Dec 6, 2017) ''HuffPost''.</ref> shows that one person's hate speech is another person's political (and merely critical, not hateful) speech.

The First Amendment mostly<ref>[https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/571/marsh-v-alabama ''Marsh v Alabama''], where a privately-owned town was compelled to allow a person to hand out religious literature in the name of freedom of expression and freedom of religion, both First Amendment rights.</ref> applies to the government and the actions it is constrained from; private entities generally may have speech codes or otherwise limit speech. Therefore, only state universities are prohibited from banning hate speech, although private universities also tend to respect freedom of speech as well as academic freedom. A few college hate speech codes were so egregious that the faculty overturned them before court action took place; one of the most notable instances occurred at the University of Wisconsin–Madison after a student attempted to have a professor sanctioned over explaining Geoffrey Chaucer's use of the word ''[[nigger#Similar sounding words|niggardly]]'' in an English class.<ref>[https://reason.com/archives/1999/07/01/cracking-the-speech-code Cracking the speech code] by Alan Kors (July 1999) ''Reason''.</ref> But such schemes have never been held to be Constitutional at public universities.

Unfortunately, the percentage of the public who believes legal bans on hate speech exist is depressingly high; the number of college students who also believe it is a cause for some alarm.<ref>[http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-colleges-hate-speech-1st-amendment-20151030-story.html Opinion: Sorry, kids, the 1st Amendment does protect ‘hate speech’] by Michael McGough (Oct. 30, 2015 1:10 PM PT) ''Los Angeles Times''.</ref><ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/07/no-theres-no-hate-speech-exception-to-the-first-amendment/ No, there’s no “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment] by Eugene Volokh (May 7, 2015 at 10:02 p.m. UTC) ''The Washington Post''.</ref> Of course, statements considered to constitute hate speech actually can be deleterious to the persons it is said about or directed at. But it is not the proper role of the state to play arbiter of what mere ideas a citizen may utter under penalty of criminal conviction and sanction.

==Hate speech correlating with suicide and mental illnesses==
Some research has examined the link between the prevalence of hate speech and the extensiveness of mental illness and [[suicide]] among the groups targeted by the hate speech.<ref>[https://www.bu.edu/sph/2016/06/19/a-hate-crime-against-lgbt-communities-with-weapons-of-war/ A Hate Crime Against LGBT Communities, With Weapons of War.] by Sandro Galea (June 19, 2016) ''Boston University School of Public Health''.</ref> Many groups who are often the victims of hate speech have higher suicide rates. In one study, LGBT youth who lived in neighborhoods with higher levels of LGBT assault crimes were more likely to report suicidal ideation.<ref>[https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301424 Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Hate Crimes and Suicidality Among a Population-Based Sample of Sexual-Minority Adolescents in Boston] by Dustin T. Duncan & Mark L. Hatzenbuehler (2014) American Journal of Public Health 104:272-278. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301424.</ref> In another study, LGBT youth who perceived more discrimination had higher rates of depressive symptomatology and suicidal ideation.<ref>[https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3707280/pdf/nihms261853.pdf Emotional Distress Among LGBT Youth: The Influence of Perceived Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation] by Joanna Almeida et al. (2009) ''J. Youth Adolesc.'' 38(7):1001–1014. doi:10.1007/s10964-009-9397-9.</ref> An investigation into immigrant suicide rates revealed that they were accurately predicted by the amount of hate speech directed towards the immigrant group, concluding "hate speech predicts death".<ref>[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15184693 Immigrant suicide rates as a function of ethnophaulisms: hate speech predicts death] by Brian Mullen & Joshua M Smyth (2004) ''Psychosom. Med.'' 66(3):343-8. doi:10.1097/01.psy.0000126197.59447.b3.</ref> This is the most common justification given for the existence of hate speech laws.

==See also==
{{collist|2|
*[[Alt-right glossary]]
*[[Mel Gibson]]
*[[Hate crime]]
*[[Holocaust denial]]
*[[Kiwi Farms]]
*[[Manosphere glossary]]
*[[Metapedia]]
*[[Neo-Nazi]]
*[[Fred Phelps]]
*[[Republican Party]]
*[[Stormfront]]
*[[Donald Trump]]
}}

==References==
{{reflist}}
[[Category:Law]]
[[Category:Language]]

Categories: Law, Language