# 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:** 6
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/101 "2019-10-31T13:27:46Z")
The problem with laws protecting persecuted minorities is that in America, _everyone_ thinks they’re a persecuted minority. ---
**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 31, 2019, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/102 "2019-10-31T14:18:39Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > The problem with laws protecting persecuted minorities is that in America, _everyone_ thinks they’re a persecuted minority. No, the problem is people that claim that spurious claims like that is evidence that there are no persecuted minorities at all. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/103 "2019-10-31T14:27:00Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I’d have to review, but could we conclude that since you’ve _chosen_ to discuss only the Jeong case, it implies you do not believe there are other cases? That doesn’t seem like a reasonable or logical conclusion at all, but I did choose her as an example because it was such an obvious one. I thought most reasonable people would accept it. If I could have thought of a better example off the top of my head, I would have used that one instead. None of that implies that she’s the only one. And if Sarah could have thought of a better example of her responding to racist tweets, like, for example, ones that happened around the time she was first posting racist shit, she probably should have used those instead of the ones she did. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/104 "2019-10-31T14:31:34Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > A. Regardless of whether _Americans_ approve of _American_ free speech traditions, I’m stunned that an intelligent person wouldn’t understand that some cultures and some good-spirited people might want to ban such things as Koran burning. I think you’ve entirely missed the point here. Free speech advocates absolutely do understand why good-spirited people might want to ban such things as Koran burning. The whole point of free speech protection is to allow expression of ideas that many people find unpleasant / offensive / dangerous / obnoxious, etc. The assumption (based on much history) is that endorsing legal suppression of unpopular views leads to bad things - far worse than allowing them. > [@](#): > > C. [confused] America’s news media now has dismal quality; and it is getting worse. This is a separate (though closely related) topic. The question is: what’s it doing in an article about suppressing hate speech? It gives a clear impression that the author has a conspicuously broad view of what constitutes hatred and is thus in need of suppression. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/105 "2019-10-31T14:46:05Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Hate speech should be tied to actual plausible threat of violence. > > I’m OK with tying that to historic plausibility. > > This is why I’d consider an American White person calling an American Black person the word “nigger” to be hate speech, while the latter calling the former the word "cracker’ is not. Both _are_ racist\*, but only one carries the history of enslavement and lynching and burning crosses with it. > > There are hate speech laws in my country. Just gratuitously flying the flag of the old regime is now hate speech. And I’m fine with that. > > - the caveat here being of course that they are _not_ engaging in friendly banter where both are accepting of the speech. This is just “hate speech for thee but not for me”. Like attempts to justify Sarah Jeong’s hate speech, it’s just a lame attempt to give political cover to one side of the current political divide. ETA: I think this bears repeating here: > [@Shodan](#): > > … 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:** ![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:** [October 31, 2019, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/106 "2019-10-31T14:48:24Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > That doesn’t seem like a reasonable or logical conclusion at all, but I did choose her as an example because it was such an obvious one. I thought most reasonable people would accept it. If I could have thought of a better example off the top of my head, I would have used that one instead. None of that implies that she’s the only one. And if Sarah could have thought of a better example of her responding to racist tweets, like, for example, ones that happened around the time she was first posting racist shit, she probably should have used those instead of the ones she did. She apologized and explained at length what the context of those tweets was. If she was so obviously and unquestionably REVERSE RACIST, you should be able to point out evidence of that in her extensive body of work, be it her articles at the NYT or Verge, the book she wrote specifically about online harassment and its possible avenues of moderation, the causes she openly supports, the talks she gives. You wouldn’t have to hang your entire hat on a handful of tweets from 5 years ago. [She’s just yet another in a long line of progressives (most often women, most often Other in some way) who get harassed and defamed by the alt-right and the ultraconservative media circus for cynical purposes in yet another iteration/incarnation of gamergate](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2018/08/03/an-asian-american-womans-tweets-ignite-a-debate-is-it-okay-to-make-fun-of-white-people-online/) (WaPo paywall, but you can use your browser in incognito mode to access the article). ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/107 "2019-10-31T14:52:39Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > … Do you oppose other restrictions on speech, like fire/crowded theater or defamation? Not particularly. At least, I see that there are well-established laws in this country and that fighting against them would be a waste of time and energy, so I’m not going to do it now. If the rest of the country were ready to repeal them, I doubt I’d object much. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/108 "2019-10-31T14:54:47Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > This is just “hate speech for thee but not for me”. Like attempts to justify Sarah Jeong’s hate speech, it’s just a lame attempt to give political cover to one side of the current political divide. I don’t give a rat’s ass about Sarah Jeong, but it seems to be a variation on the right-wing complaint about hate crimes. If a white man is mugged by a black man, we get the Trump nationalists screaming “It’s a hate crime!!! Black on white crime!! But the black man never gets charged with a hate crime!!!” Meanwhile, the other side says, “Dude, that’s not how hate crimes work. Hate crimes are prosecuted not when assailant and victim are of different races, but when there’s evidence that the crime is an expression of a particular bias.” So now for hate speech, the MAGA crowd is saying, “Sarah Jeong! Look what she said!!!” It seems a reasonable point that saying something mean about another race isn’t the defintion of hate speech, that it would be closer to applying the hate crimes model to offensive speech. For example, remember the Dave Chappelle skit where he was an African American white supremacist who said all sorts of awful things about black people? That wouldn’t be hate speech. Maybe Jeong is a racist. Maybe she says inflammatory things that are terrible, maybe there’s some context like the Chappelle skit. I don’t know. But I know I’m a white guy who doesn’t think that minorities in this country have it soooooo easy they concocted a plan to ruin white people and it has any chance of succeeding. ---
**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:** [October 31, 2019, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/109 "2019-10-31T14:55:30Z")
Oh, also, [the good people at 4chan have openly admitted the “outrage” they deliberately ginned up against Jeong had an ultimately insanely antisemitic agenda](https://twitter.com/jcassano/status/1025331815941332994/photo/1) But do go on, **HurricaneDitka**. Tell us again why we should hate this nasty femme. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/110 "2019-10-31T14:58:21Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > She apologized and explained at length what the context of those tweets was. If she was so obviously and unquestionably REVERSE RACIST, you should be able to point out evidence of that in her extensive body of work, be it her articles at the NYT or Verge, the book she wrote specifically about online harassment and its possible avenues of moderation, the causes she openly supports, the talks she gives. You wouldn’t have to hang your entire hat on a handful of tweets from 5 years ago. > > [She’s just yet another in a long line of progressives (most often women, most often Other in some way) who get harassed and defamed by the alt-right and the ultraconservative media circus for cynical purposes in yet another iteration/incarnation of gamergate](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2018/08/03/an-asian-american-womans-tweets-ignite-a-debate-is-it-okay-to-make-fun-of-white-people-online/) (WaPo paywall, but you can use your browser in incognito mode to access the article). [Brett Stephens wrote](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/09/opinion/sarah-jeong-tweets-opinion-section.html): > [@](#): > > … We should call many of these tweets for what they are: racist. I’ve seen some acrobatic efforts to explain why Jeong’s tweets should be treated as “quasi-satirical,” hyperbolical and a function of “social context.” But the criterion for racism is either objective or it’s meaningless: If liberals get to decide for themselves who is or isn’t a racist according to their political lights, conservatives will be within their rights to ignore them. > > Also worth noting is the leftist double standard when it comes to social-media transgressions. In February, my centrist colleague Bari Weiss celebrated U.S. figure skater Mirai Nagasu’s historic triple axel by tweeting a line from the musical “Hamilton”: “Immigrants: They get the job done.” Left-wing social media went berserk over this alleged “othering” of Nagasu, who was born in California to immigrant parents. > > By contrast, the left has been nothing if not aggressive in its defense of Jeong. That’s the right thing to do, but it’s also rank hypocrisy coming from many of the same people who loudly demanded the ouster of Williamson, Weiss, or, well, me. The tests for who gets to work at publications like The Times or The Atlantic ought to revolve around considerations of liveliness, integrity, maturity, and talent. When ideology becomes the litmus test, we’re on the road to Pravda. … ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/111 "2019-10-31T14:58:35Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Not particularly. At least, I see that there are well-established laws in this country and that fighting against them would be a waste of time and energy, so I’m not going to do it now. If the rest of the country were ready to repeal them, I doubt I’d object much. Okay. You’re okay with people lying to ruin other people’s lives, but you just don’t have the energy to try to change the laws. I think defamation laws are generally fine, and so long as a judge or jury serve as the finders of fact, they can typically do a reasonable job of sorting out whether a statement is defamatory or not. Why can’t the same process apply to hate speech? Let’s just let a jury decide, like they do all the time in cases of libel or slander. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/112 "2019-10-31T14:59:19Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > No, the problem is people that claim that spurious claims like that is evidence that there are no persecuted minorities at all. Of course there are, and there’s no greater risk to them than majorities who are convinced that\* they’re\* the persecuted minorities, and who weaponize their own sense of victimization in order to victimize others. I don’t think they should be given more power. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/113 "2019-10-31T15:05:00Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > [Brett Stephens wrote](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/09/opinion/sarah-jeong-tweets-opinion-section.html): The same Brett Stephens, who melted down a couple months ago because a random college professor made a joke that he was like a bed bug? And he tried to get the professor fired? Oh yeah, he’s a good role model for keeping one’s wits about themselves when confronted with mere speech and not trying to stifle “opposing viewpoints.” Seriously, the guy deleted his Twitter account because someone called him a bed bug. I’m not exaggerating. Way to find just the A-number one-perfect spokesman for your views, **HD.** ---
**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:** [October 31, 2019, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/114 "2019-10-31T15:06:40Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > [Brett Stephens wrote](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/09/opinion/sarah-jeong-tweets-opinion-section.html): Non sequitur. Still hanging your hat on those tweets. Please show me all that sweet sweet hate rethoric hers, I wanna be outraged too ! I’m white, I should \*get \*to ! ---
**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:** [October 31, 2019, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/115 "2019-10-31T15:08:30Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > The same Brett Stephens, who melted down a couple months ago because a random college professor made a joke that he was like a bed bug? And he tried to get the professor fired? Oh shit, I didn’t even twig it was \*that \*guy ! Priceless. ETA : if anything, you’re understating the meltdown. He equated that one dude calling him a bed bug with the relentless hate speech against Jews of the Third Reich, and from thence claimed the professor was trying to get him murdered IIRC. It was a sight to behold. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/116 "2019-10-31T15:09:03Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > The same Brett Stephens, who melted down a couple months ago because a random college professor made a joke that he was like a bed bug? And he tried to get the professor fired? > > Oh yeah, he’s a good role model for keeping one’s wits about themselves when confronted with mere speech and not trying to stifle “opposing viewpoints.” > > Seriously, the guy deleted his Twitter account because someone called him a bed bug. I’m not exaggerating. > > Way to find just the A-number one-perfect spokesman for your views, **HD.** I’m aware of his imperfections. So is he, I think. And I think his points in the quote above are still good ones, and valid, even though he has at times failed to live up to the standards he has advocated for. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/117 "2019-10-31T15:17:56Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I’m aware of his imperfections. So is he, I think. And I think his points in the quote above are still good ones, and valid, even though he has at times failed to live up to the standards he has advocated for. I’m literally laughing at this post. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/118 "2019-10-31T15:30:23Z")
So this is now the Sarah jeong thread? 😛 ---
**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:** [October 31, 2019, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/119 "2019-10-31T15:32:21Z")
… You know what, you’re right. He did manage to derail the entire thread with the relentless nonsense. Well played, **HD**. Well played. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699/120 "2019-10-31T15:48:06Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > So this is now the Sarah jeong thread? 😛 Brett Stephens will not stand for that!!! Why can’t white men receive all the attention?!?!?! If this hijack continues, Brett Stephens is going to demonstrate his principles by ignoring them and quitting the Straight Dope. Because there’s literally _no better way_ to point out liberal hypocrisy than by citing a melted-down conservative who failed to live up to his own principles. (Also there’s _no more ironic way_ to do the same, but then I’d be just putting too fine a point on it.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wapo-editorial-why-america-needs-a-hate-speech-law/842699.md?page=7)