# WaPo editorial "Why America needs a hate speech law" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 30, 2019, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699 "2019-10-30T14:13:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/21 "2019-10-30T17:05:31Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > There has been a frightening decline in support for the principle of free speech in this country. Under the generally accepted definition of “Free Speech”, or under a particular definition you support? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/22 "2019-10-30T17:11:28Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > From various dictionaries: “abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation.” > > From Wiki: “Hate speech is a statement intended to demean and brutalize another, or the use of cruel and derogatory language on the basis of real or alleged membership in a social group. Hate speech is speech that attacks a person or a group on the basis of protected attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity.” I can’t go along with making that a crime. People should be held accountable for the actual results of such speech, but I’m not going to go along with censoring opinions, no matter how odious. And I truly wish there was a way to do that without resulting in the suppression of valid and necessary speech. It does suck, but freedom comes at a price, and abiding the existence of such garbage and the humans who spout it is one of those prices. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/23 "2019-10-30T17:14:25Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Under the generally accepted definition of “Free Speech”, or under a particular definition you support? I don’t think the principle of free speech has a precise, agreed-upon definition. I’m not even sure what you mean by ‘the generally accepted definition of “free speech”’. If you’re looking to discuss it though, I’d offer [this](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/23/books/timothy-garton-ash-puts-forth-a-free-speech-manifesto.html) as starting point. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/24 "2019-10-30T17:18:37Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I don’t think the principle of free speech has a precise, agreed-upon definition. I’m not even sure what you mean by ‘the generally accepted definition of “free speech”’. If you’re looking to discuss it though, I’d offer [this](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/23/books/timothy-garton-ash-puts-forth-a-free-speech-manifesto.html) as starting point. Paywall-blocked. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/25 "2019-10-30T17:33:29Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Paywall-blocked. (well, those newspapers won’t sell themselves) [Here](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/48sWnzCJfTj3GptSzx6PXmq/the-10-principles-for-free-speech) and [here](https://www.wired.com/beyond-the-beyond/2016/07/ten-principles-free-speech-timothy-garton-ash/) are (non-paywalled) links to his list of 10 principles of free speech, as at least a starting point. ---
**Author:** ![FlikTheBlue](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fliktheblue/32/10972_2.png) [@FlikTheBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FlikTheBlue)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/26 "2019-10-30T17:35:01Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > The only difference is who hates the message. Which goes back to what I said - if it is only hate speech if it offends me but not if it offends you, that is not a useful definition of hate speech. > > Regards, > Shodan I think any law curtailing hate speech is bound to be abused by those enforcing it. That being said, I understand where the frustration from those on the left comes from. The problem is that on the right, hate speech is largely of the “I hate blacks, Muslims, gays, Mexicans, etc. because they are black, Muslim, gay, Mexican, etc.” Someone from one those groups then responds with “I hate you because you hate me.” The original haters on the right then respond to the effect of saying, “see, there is hate speech on the left to.” Those are hardly equivalent in terms of hate speech, but many on the right make them out to be the same. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/27 "2019-10-30T17:43:51Z")
There’s a fair bit of the “I hate white men because they are white men” variety of hate speech coming from the Left these days too. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/28 "2019-10-30T17:47:59Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > There’s a fair bit of the “I hate white men because they are white men” variety of hate speech coming from the Left these days too. A fair amount? If you’ve got cites from any non-obscure left-wingers, would you mind posting them? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/29 "2019-10-30T17:49:25Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > There’s a fair bit of the “I hate white men because they are white men” variety of hate speech coming from the Left these days too. Got even one instance of that happening? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/30 "2019-10-30T18:22:55Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > A fair amount? > If you’ve got cites from any non-obscure left-wingers, would you mind posting them? > [@TriPolar](#): > > Got even one instance of that happening? Let’s start with an easy one: Sarah Jeong ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/31 "2019-10-30T18:25:40Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Let’s start with an easy one: Sarah Jeong That’s not even within ten miles of being a good cite. Give a pertinent quote. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/32 "2019-10-30T18:25:41Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > In no country that has passed hate speech laws would Biden’s musings about punching Trump be covered. How about Thailand’s _lèse-majesté_ law? From Wiki: > [@](#): > > It is illegal to defame, insult, or threaten the king, queen, heir-apparent, or regent. The lèse-majesté law has been on the statute books since 1908. The punishment is three to fifteen years of imprisonment per count … > > There is no legal definition, however, of what actions constitute lèse majesté, and there is plenty of room for interpretation. The Supreme Court decided that the law also applies to any previous monarchs. Criticism of any privy council member also raised the question. Even “attempting” to commit lèse majesté, and making sarcastic comment about the King’s pet have been prosecuted for lèse majesté. And what would have been the fate of someone in Russia or China making such comments about Stalin or Mao? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/33 "2019-10-30T18:29:25Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > That’s not even within ten miles of being a good cite. Give a pertinent quote. [“White men are bullshit” - Sarah Jeong](http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/08/sarah-jeong-new-york-times-anti-white-racism.html) ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/34 "2019-10-30T18:33:33Z")
From her Wiki page: > [@](#): > > In August 2018, Jeong was hired by The New York Times to join its editorial board as lead writer on technology. The hiring sparked a strongly negative reaction in conservative media, which highlighted derogatory tweets about white people that Jeong had posted mostly in 2013 and 2014. Critics characterized her tweets as being racist; Jeong released an apology, saying that the tweets were meant to satirize online harassment toward her as a woman of color. Editors at The Verge defended Jeong, saying that the tweets had been disingenuously taken out of context and comparing the episode to the harassment of women during the Gamergate controversy. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/35 "2019-10-30T18:34:44Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > No, you clearly misunderstand. In no country that has passed hate speech laws would Biden’s musings about punching Trump be covered. No, I understand perfectly. We are discussing Stengel’s suggestions for how we should curtail free speech by labeling as “hate speech” > [@](#): > > speech that can cause violence by one group against another. Biden’s threat can cause violence and would therefore be “hate speech” under Stengel’s rules. It would therefore have to be outlawed. That’s if consistency and the equal protection of the laws is of concern. If it’s just “punching Trump doesn’t bother me but evicting Muslims does so the first isn’t hate speech but the second is” then it’s a question of whose ox is being gored and that doesn’t work as a definition either. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/36 "2019-10-30T18:36:00Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > From her Wiki page: What’s the “context” around “white men are bullshit” that you think would make it acceptable? or not ‘hate speech’? or, most importantly, not a perfect example of ‘the “I hate white men because they are white men” variety of hate speech coming from the Left’? ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/37 "2019-10-30T18:42:06Z")
On top of hiring that outspoken racist, Sarah Jeong, the NY Times also [published](https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/929697510494531585?lang=en) a racist rant titled “Can My Children Be Friends with White People” in 2017, by a professor named Ekow Yankah. The Washington Post [published](http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-cant-we-hate-men/2018/06/08/f1a3a8e0-6451-11e8-a69c-b944de66d9e7_story.html?.5841cc655067) a pile of sexist bilge under the title “Why Can’t We Hate Men” in 2018. As the OP showed, both the Washington Post and the New York Times have recently published calls for censorship of “hate speech”, thus turning away from their history of supporting a free press in past generations. Luckily those two newspapers don’t govern the country and the First Amendment clearly makes any ban on “hate speech” unconstitutional. But if the First Amendment were overturned and hate speech were made illegal, then obviously the New York Times and the Washington Post should be the first two entities to be prosecuted under the new law, because they are the most powerful publishers of hate speech in the country. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/38 "2019-10-30T18:47:57Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > From various dictionaries: “abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation.” > > From Wiki: “Hate speech is a statement intended to demean and brutalize another, or the use of cruel and derogatory language on the basis of real or alleged membership in a social group. Hate speech is speech that attacks a person or a group on the basis of protected attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity.” Again, this is all fine and well in theory, but how is it going to work out in practice? There is likely to be a punch-up vs. punch-down phenomenon at play in real life, whereby if someone from a disadvantaged group spews hate speech against a privileged group, it won’t be considered as prosecute-able as vice versa. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/39 "2019-10-30T18:53:38Z")
> [@FlikTheBlue](#): > > The problem is that on the right, hate speech is largely of the “I hate blacks, Muslims, gays, Mexicans, etc. because they are black, Muslim, gay, Mexican, etc.” Another part of the problem is that the left labels opposition to (for instance) illegal immigration as being “that is because you hate brown people therefore it’s hate speech”. And when the response is “no, I just don’t like illegal immigration” they say “yes it is because you hate brown people”. Which goes back to what I said earlier. If you give the government the power to decide what you meant, there is no way in principle to stop the government from abusing that power even against you, or groups you favor. And then Trump issues an executive order that desecrating a US flag is an incitement to violent overthrow of the government and there is no consistent way to argue against it. I don’t want a government controlled by SJWs to tell me what I can say. You presumably don’t want a government controlled by fascists telling you what you can say. So we compromise and agree that the government doesn’t get to tell anyone what to say, absent some kind of incitement to immediate violence. It’s not a perfect compromise, but it’s better than if either side wins. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2019, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/40 "2019-10-30T18:55:48Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > What’s the “context” around “white men are bullshit” that you think would make it acceptable? or not ‘hate speech’? or, most importantly, not a perfect example of ‘the “I hate white men because they are white men” variety of hate speech coming from the Left’? You did provide one example. They are rare, and certainly not accepted by the so called ‘left’ except for a few extremists. That is no where near a ‘fair bit’ of that kind of speech though, it’s one of the weakest ‘what aboutisms’ I’ve ever seen. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699.md?page=3)