Hate Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship

The updated paperback edition of HATE dispels misunderstandings plaguing our perennial debates about "hate speech vs. free speech," showing that the First Amendment approach promotes free speech and democracy, equality, and societal harmony. As "hate speech" has no generally accepted definition, we hear many incorrect assumptions that it is either absolutely unprotected or absolutely protected from censorship. Rather, U.S. law allows government to punish hateful or discriminatory speech in specific contexts when it directly causes imminent serious harm. Yet, government may not punish such speech solely because its message is disfavored, disturbing, or vaguely feared to possibly contribute to some future harm. "Hate speech" censorship proponents stress the potential harms such speech might further: discrimination, violence, and psychic injuries. However, there has been little analysis of whether censorship effectively counters the feared injuries. Citing evidence from many countries, this book shows that "hate speech" are at best ineffective and at worst counterproductive. Therefore, prominent social justice advocates worldwide maintain that the best way to resist hate and promote equality is not censorship, but rather, vigorous "counterspeech" and activism.

Nadine Strossen, a constitutional law professor at New York Law School, is also the Past President of the American Civil Liberties Union, having served in that position from 1991 through 2008. She is a frequent speaker and media commentator on constitutional law and civil liberties issues.

Acknowledgments
Editor's Note
Key Terms and Concepts
Preface to the Paperback
Introduction
Chapter 1: Overview
Chapter 2: "Hate Speech" Laws Violate Fundamental Free Speech and Equality Principles
Chapter 3: When "Hate Speech" Is Protected and When It Is Punishable
Chapter 4: Because of Their Intractable Vagueness and Overbreadth, "Hate Speech" Laws Undermine Free Speech and Equality
Chapter 5: Is It Possible to Draft a "Hate Speech" Law That Is Not Unduly Vague or Overbroad?
Chapter 6: Does Constitutionally Protected "Hate Speech" Actually Cause the Feared Harms?
Chapter 7: "Hate Speech" Laws are at Best Ineffective and at Worst Counterproductive
Chapter 8: Non-Censorial Methods Effectively Curb the Potential Harms of Constitutionally Protected "Hate Speech"
Chapter 9: Conclusion: Looking Back--and Forward
Index