Specific well-defined instances of hate speech like “all members of group XYZ deserve to die” should be banned IMO. More ambiguous things should not, otherwise the government can start banning political sentiments that it does not like.
Putin and his friends absolutely deserve to die. I’m not really killing anyone, but I can say that (well, outside of Russia, because freedom of speech doesn’t work there). Freedom of speech allows me to say how exactly I don’t like him and his gang.
Also, from reading about cases where people were jailed for something they have said - if it’s allowed to prosecute people for anything, somebody might try to mess with your words to make you look guilty. For example, the law regarding “rehabilitating nazism” was used to prosecute people who were saying something about USSR working with nazi Germany in the beginning of WW2, or similar. Examples (sorry, too long to type so It’s llm summaries:
A person in Perm was fined 200,000 rubles for sharing an article that mentioned the “joint attack on Poland by the USSR and Germany” in 1939, which the authorities portrayed as “rehabilitating Nazism.”
A woman in Smolensk was fined for posting a historical photo of her home under Nazi occupation, where a Wehrmacht flag and soldiers appeared in the background.
So if you make a word or a concept “bad”, someone will try to use it maliciously, at some point. It doesn’t help when court is not independent, that opens up a road to charging many people you don’t like on daily basis.
That does not sound like a charitable interpretation of my argument. For example
A woman in Smolensk was fined for posting a historical photo of her home under Nazi occupation, where a Wehrmacht flag and soldiers appeared in the background.
This has nothing to do with well-defined instances of hate speech. Even the Putin example is quite far fetched, though I guess I should have used a more precise example
Specific well-defined instances of hate speech like “all members of group XYZ deserve to die” should be banned IMO. More ambiguous things should not, otherwise the government can start banning political sentiments that it does not like.
Putin and his friends absolutely deserve to die. I’m not really killing anyone, but I can say that (well, outside of Russia, because freedom of speech doesn’t work there). Freedom of speech allows me to say how exactly I don’t like him and his gang.
Also, from reading about cases where people were jailed for something they have said - if it’s allowed to prosecute people for anything, somebody might try to mess with your words to make you look guilty. For example, the law regarding “rehabilitating nazism” was used to prosecute people who were saying something about USSR working with nazi Germany in the beginning of WW2, or similar. Examples (sorry, too long to type so It’s llm summaries:
So if you make a word or a concept “bad”, someone will try to use it maliciously, at some point. It doesn’t help when court is not independent, that opens up a road to charging many people you don’t like on daily basis.
That does not sound like a charitable interpretation of my argument. For example
This has nothing to do with well-defined instances of hate speech. Even the Putin example is quite far fetched, though I guess I should have used a more precise example