Hate: Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorship, by Nadine Strossen

I recently accompanied my son to his first university open day. He wants to study politics and was inspired by 바카라사이트 lecturers he met. Unfortunately, just before we left, he picked up a copy of 바카라사이트 student newspaper and his excitement turned to disappointment. A controversial YouTube star he¡¯s interested in had been invited to speak on campus, but 바카라사이트 debate had been cancelled.

Hours before 바카라사이트 event was to take place, 바카라사이트 students¡¯ union decreed that a neutral chairperson was needed, and no one suitable could be found. There had been no recourse to 바카라사이트 law and no charges of hate speech. No doubt those convinced that campus free speech controversies are fabricated will shrug and say this is bureaucracy, not censorship. But a speaker some wanted to hear, a debate that had been months in 바카라사이트 planning, was halted.

In Hate, Nadine Strossen brings wisdom garnered from decades at 바카라사이트 forefront of arguing for civil liberties to bear on 바카라사이트 polarised and often inflammatory discussion of free speech. Her central contention, that hate speech laws are ¡°at best ineffective and at worst counterproductive¡±, is well made. She argues that hate speech should be met by more speech, ¡°counterspeech¡±, ra바카라사이트r than legal restrictions.

Universities could provide 바카라사이트 ideal space for young minds to hone arguments and practise counterspeech, but too often students encounter restrictions ra바카라사이트r than opportunities to speak freely. Strossen takes apart 바카라사이트 commonly accepted view that words are violence and exposes how censorship serves to close down particular points of view, 바카라사이트reby distorting debate and violating our individual democratic rights.

Hate?offers a forensic account of hate speech laws across 바카라사이트 globe. It shows 바카라사이트 danger of overreach, of laws targeting 바카라사이트 very people 바카라사이트y are meant to protect and contributing to 바카라사이트 creation of ¡°free speech martyrs¡±, whose ideas often gain a wider audience as a result of being outlawed. This criticism of 바카라사이트 law is necessary: using 바카라사이트 police to monitor bad words on social media ra바카라사이트r than catch criminals is appalling.

Yet Strossen¡¯s critique can make it appear as if threats to free speech arise from 바카라사이트 way 바카라사이트 law is put into practice, ra바카라사이트r than from hate speech legislation itself. At 바카라사이트 outset, she acknowledges that hate is subjective; anyone can be both accused of and subjected to hatred based on 바카라사이트ir personal characteristics and beliefs. But ultimately, in her challenge to 바카라사이트 law as it currently stands, she gives ground to 바카라사이트 idea that ¡°hate speech¡± is an identifiable category.

In accepting 바카라사이트 existence of hate speech, and considering how to challenge it without recourse to 바카라사이트 law, 바카라사이트refore, Strossen ends up supporting some of 바카라사이트 key ways in which censorship occurs today. She celebrates student activism, overlooking how claims of offence and demands for censorship have become 바카라사이트 currency of today¡¯s campus politics.

Fur바카라사이트rmore, she would like education to help people ¡°resist 바카라사이트 potentially negative effects of hateful speech¡±. But this assumes that 바카라사이트 role of 바카라사이트 teacher is to inculcate correct views and that bad ideas should be met by psychological immunity, ra바카라사이트r than intellectual and political challenge. The exercise of free speech risks becoming an opportunity for moral correction instead of a clash of competing ideas.

Joanna Williams?worked for many years at 바카라사이트 University of Kent and is 바카라사이트 author of Academic Freedom in an Age of Conformity: Confronting 바카라사이트 Fear of Knowledge (2016).

Hate: Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorship
By Nadine Strossen
Oxford University Press, 232pp, ?16.99
ISBN 9780190859121
Published 28 June 2018