![](https://image.librarything.com/pics/fugue21/magnifier-left.png)
![](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/P/0190859121.01._SX180_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg)
Auf ein Miniaturbild klicken, um zu Google Books zu gelangen.
Lädt ... Hate: Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorshipvon Nadine Strossen
![]() Keine Keine aktuelle Diskussion zu diesem Buch. ![]() A clear and thorough review of the arguments against additional hate speech laws, suitable for arming oneself for debates on the topic. I say additional because, as Strossen helpfully points out, we already have emergency, direct incitement, and harassment laws on the books. "Hate" is a bit dry overall. More treatment of horror stories of the abuses of hate speech statutes in Europe would have been very welcome, perhaps even a very egregious story with a personal interview, to open the book and prime the reader, as is usual with popular muckraking books. Otherwise, Strossen seems to be preaching to the law profession choir. Some readers might not make it to the all-important counterspeech, or what to do instead, section at the end, but the book is quite short. Zeige 2 von 2 keine Rezensionen | Rezension hinzufügen
Gehört zur Reihe
We live in an era in which offensive speech is on the rise. The emergence of the alt-right alone has fueled a marked increase in racist and anti-Semitic speech. Given its potential for harm, should this speech be banned? Nadine Strossen's HATE dispels the many misunderstandings that have clouded the perpetual debates about "hate speech vs. free speech." She argues that an expansive approach to the First Amendment is most effective at promoting democracy, equality, and societal harmony. Proponents of anti-hate speech laws stress the harms that they fear such speech might lead to: discrimination, violence, and psychic injuries. However, there has been no rigorous analysis to date of whether the laws effectively counter the feared harms. This book fills that gap, examining our actual experience with such laws. It shows that they are not effective in reducing the feared harms, and worse yet, are likely counterproductive. Even in established democracies, enforcement officials use the power these laws give them to suppress vital expression and target minority viewpoints, as was the case in earlier periods of U.S. history. The solution instead, as Strossen shows, is to promote equality and societal harmony through the increasingly vibrant "counterspeech" activism that has been flourishing on U.S. college campuses and in some global human rights movements. Strossen's powerful argument on behalf of free expression promises to shift the debate around this perennially contentious topic. --
"Dispelling rampant confusion about "hate speech," this book explains how U.S. law appropriately distinguishes between punishable and protected discriminatory speech. It shows that more speech-restrictive laws consistently have suppressed vital expression about public issues, targeting minority viewpoints and speakers; and that "counterspeech" has more effectively promoted equality and societal harmony"-- Keine Bibliotheksbeschreibungen gefunden. |
Aktuelle DiskussionenKeineBeliebte Umschlagbilder
![]() GenresMelvil Decimal System (DDC)342.7308Social sciences Law Constitutional and administrative law North America Constitutional law--United States Jurisdiction over personsKlassifikation der Library of Congress [LCC] (USA)BewertungDurchschnitt:![]()
Bist das du?Werde ein LibraryThing-Autor. |