Who would you have define hate speech in the US? SCOTUS?
Citizens may agree on the definition, but I wouldn’t trust our government to draw those lines.
I disagree since I think censorship can be desired when combatting hate speech. Maybe we just disagree how exactly we use the word ‘censorship’.
disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 6 hours ago
Many countries have working anti-hate speech laws. It’s not really a big problem for freedom of speech in those countries.
sukhmel@programming.dev 1 hour ago
Except for the countries that have anti-hate laws that are deliberately vague and specifically used to jail anyone who is disliked by the government. China and Russia come to mind as examples, but I’m sure they aren’t the only ones.
Besides hate-speech, I’m not sure how much should be censored really. China does a lot of censoring to ‘protect’ their citizens from everything, I’m not sure this would be a good thing even if that really was a goal.
And protecting children from traumatising content looks like another good thing to do, but under that banner I usually see governments doing whatever they want without caring about children past using their image.
disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Those countries don’t have partisan polarization propaganda kindergarteners writing their legislation.
RandomVideos@programming.dev 1 hour ago
Romania has a law against hate speech
Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee 3 hours ago
Yep it’s great
Hate speech ✖️
Alliteration ✔️
Simple :)
theneverfox@pawb.social 33 minutes ago
No, the community needs to cyber bully them off the platform. They need to feel rejection for their words, not censorship. Censorship lets them frame themselves as the victim as they seek out a smaller echo chamber on the fringes. They need to learn their words will turn the community against them
We still have to live with them. We can’t ignore them or silence them - we have to correct them