# 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:** 22
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2019, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/421 "2019-11-10T23:13:10Z")
As much as you may think it is completely straightforward the question of what is that direct threat and actual plan is where the line Constitutionally gets drawn, as has been discussed in this thread quite extensively. The usual context of the “accusation in a mirror” is more commonly the other direction: Supremacists chanting “You will not replace us” is the prep. To them it is inherently obvious that “they” are being replaced as the dominant culture by some variety of others and thems, an existential threat, therefore pre-emptive strikes to push the them and the others out instead are justified. I specifically did not use the phrase “white supremacists” as it has been used in other contexts too … it was a technique used by the Hutus against the Tutsis for example. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2019, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/422 "2019-11-10T23:19:41Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > I strongly suspect that a hate speech law similar to Canada’s would not pass SCOTUS muster in the United States and I see no evidence that Canadian Hate Speech laws, despite having great _intentions_, have functioned as a bulwark against … well anything. They remind me a bit of greenwashing in that they may allow you to feel like you are doing something and to signify to others, but actually accomplishes fairly bupkiss. I’m curious, what’s your benchmark law that justifies itself? Homicide laws are probably good at reducing murder, jaywalking laws are basically nothing. What’s your measure as a functioning bulwark that Canadian hate speech laws fail to meet? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2019, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/423 "2019-11-10T23:42:59Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > It’s a hijack because you are deliberately obfuscating the differences between hate speech laws and laws generally about inciting violence. > Sound familiar? We havent actually agreed on what is "hate speech’ what is “protected speech” and what sort of speech such as incitement to violence isnt protected even without a Hate speech law. You may think that your opinion has settled it, and thus we have to use your definitions, but that’s what this debate is about. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2019, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/424 "2019-11-10T23:44:28Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > When they come marching through your neighbourhood or campus with swastika tattoos and baseball bats, it sort of gives the game away. > … As opposed to black masks and baseball bats? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2019, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/425 "2019-11-10T23:50:15Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > As much as you may think it is completely straightforward the question of what is that direct threat and actual plan is where the line Constitutionally gets drawn, as has been discussed in this thread quite extensively. > … Right. This is a very complicated debate. What is a direct threat? What is heat speech? what laws can we pass under the 1st Ad? Do we want to dump the 1st Ad to have strong laws vs hate speech- whatever that might be. It’s not simplistic, it’s extremely complex and layered. And of course to some "hate speech is whatever i say it is, against the groups I want to protect’ is simplistic, but morally incorrect. “Hate speech= bad” looks good, but it dissolves under the microscope pf details. The devil is always in the details. I have no simple answers, other than I want to defend the Bill of Rights. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2019, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/426 "2019-11-10T23:54:55Z")
Evidence that since passage it has effectively reduced hate crimes or even hate speech, or at least reduced their rise relative to the United States, would be a start. Something that shows it has actually accomplished some real good. The analysis I am wanting is to me similar to another amendment level item, Prohibition - it was fairly ineffective at decreasing alcohol consumption let alone alcoholism, and had unintended impacts as well. Discussions about it that were only about whether its intent was good (or not), or if alcoholism was a bad thing, were the wrong, or at least insufficient, discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/427 "2019-11-11T00:03:58Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > As opposed to black masks and baseball bats? You realize that it’s literally not possible for an antifa group to form up without fas to be anti- _of_, right ? Antifascism, by definition, is reactive, not proactive. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/428 "2019-11-11T00:07:25Z")
Yeah, that’s what anti-Semites say too. They are reactive, not proactive. You sure you want to stick with that logic? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/429 "2019-11-11T00:09:39Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Do you think self-defense is abhorrent, or otherwise morally equivalent with murder (hateful or otherwise) ? Because that’s really what’s at stake with antifascistic action, even violent antifa action. It’s trying to avoid being murdered by Nazi assholes ; or trying to prevent others from being murdered by Nazi assholes. > > When they’re actively planning on hurting you, I for one think it’s, if not automatically OK, at least a worthwhile consideration to possibly think about hurting them right back. > But that’s just me. > > (and no, “kill all the Bernie bros” would not be acceptable. Because Bernie isn’t advocating violence and murder either explicitly or implicitly, and Bernie’s ideology & politics aren’t _predicated_ on violence & murder either. Violence against Nazis isn’t violence based on their “political beliefs”. It’s violence based on _their being fucking Nazis_. You know, the baddies ? With all the skulls on their uniforms ?) That’s nonsense. The nutty Antifa label anyone to the right of Stalin fascists. They are intimidating octogenarians in walkers now. They are clearly the modern version of the men who stormed the Normandy beaches. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/430 "2019-11-11T00:27:38Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > You realize that it’s literally not possible for an antifa group to form up without fas to be anti- _of_, right ? Antifascism, by definition, is reactive, not proactive. That’s like arguing that Trump must be correct, because, well, he talks about how he’s going to Make America Great Again, right? Is it literally not possible for him to say that unless America used to be great and he’s now in fact making it great again? After all, he said “Again” just after saying “Great” and “America” — and, shucks, how could he _say_ stuff like that without it simply being so? ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/431 "2019-11-11T00:49:52Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Yeah, that’s what anti-Semites say too. They are reactive, not proactive. > > You sure you want to stick with that logic? Are you for real ? Did you really just equate “Jewish people existing” and “violent Nazi shitheads doing violent Nazi shithead things” ? I mean, OK, you do you I guess. I do feel like suggesting that maybe you might have both-sidism’d straight up your own arse, however. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/432 "2019-11-11T00:53:10Z")
Antifa is almost entirely peaceful. Disruptive, sure, but the number of injuries caused by Antifa is tiny, and they’ve never killed anyone. There are a few violent assholes among them, but Antifa is mostly a peaceful (but disruptive) protest group. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/433 "2019-11-11T00:53:38Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > That’s like arguing that Trump must be correct, because, well, he talks about how he’s going to Make America Great Again, right? Is it literally not possible for him to say that unless America used to be great and he’s now in fact making it great again? After all, he said “Again” just after saying “Great” and “America” — and, shucks, how could he _say_ stuff like that without it simply being so? Can you come up with an actual, real world example of a freewheeling antifa group, just generally antifa’ing at nobody in particular ? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/434 "2019-11-11T00:56:52Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Can you come up with an actual, real world example of a freewheeling antifa group, just generally antifa’ing at nobody in particular ? Uh, no; I’m not aware of them “just generally antifa’ing at nobody in particular”. What an exceedingly strange question. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/435 "2019-11-11T00:58:45Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Uh, no; I’m not aware of them “just generally antifa’ing at nobody in particular”. > > What an exceedingly strange question. Deliberately so. Think about what you just said. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/436 "2019-11-11T01:04:24Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Deliberately so. Think about what you just said. Oh, uh, right back at you, I guess. Incidentally, is it your view that I can just form a group called “anti-evil” and thereby establish that anyone my group opposes is evil, because, well, it’s literally not possible for my group to call itself that and not be correct? ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/437 "2019-11-11T01:15:06Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Incidentally, is it your view that I can just form a group called “anti-evil” and thereby establish that anyone my group opposes is evil, because, well, it’s literally not possible for my group to call itself that and not be correct? Given the number of deaths caused by communist regimes surly we can punch Marxists? Right? ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/438 "2019-11-11T01:18:02Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > Oh, uh, right back at you, I guess. > > Incidentally, is it your view that I can just form a group called “anti-evil” and thereby establish that anyone my group opposes is evil, because, well, it’s literally not possible for my group to call itself that and not be correct? OK, can you produce an antifa group protesting non-fascists, then ? ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/439 "2019-11-11T01:22:11Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Are you for real ? … To the best of my knowledge I am neither something you are hallucinating nor an AI. Let’s make what several have said very explicit: attaching “anti-” in front of something is not proof of there being anything to be anti- about or that what is opposed has any basis in fact. Someone saying that someone else is “fa” does not mean much. They could in fact be “la la la” … Your comment that they must be reactive because they have “anti” in their name was inane at best. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2019, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/440 "2019-11-11T01:22:53Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > OK, can you produce an antifa group protesting non-fascists, then ? Hold up. I asked you about MAGA, and you replied by — well, asking me a question, which I answered. And then I asked you the “anti-evil” question, and you’ve — now replied by asking me a question. Is there going to come a time when you actually get around to answering me, or are you planning to keep this one-sided? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699.md?page=21) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699.md?page=23)