It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Does hate speech incite you to hatred?

page: 1
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Beware those who support laws against speech, which in the last analysis, is a vast segment of the human population. Not only do they impede the foundation of democracy and inhibit the cure for tyranny and violence to save their feelings, but their vehement insistence that “hate speech” can lead to hatred and violence gives us insight into their own fears.

What I mean is: those who favour hate speech laws are prime candidates for having the capacity for hatred. Why else would these censors insist that speech can incite hatred, unless they themselves were in some way incited by said speech? Their insistence is not a comment on you or I, mind you, for they can not know what kind of speech incites us or not, but they might be painting a picture of their own inclinations.

Or maybe it is that they hold a suspiciously low view of humanity. Perhaps they are worried the plebs tend to turn wherever the winds of rhetoric and propaganda point, and are not speaking about their own projections. But the common assumption made by legislators regarding hate speech is that it “incites” hatred, violence and discrimination. This sort of language, as magical in thought as it is, is found in the laws of most liberal democracies.

I’m not sure about you, but if anything it’s the contrary—hate speech repulses me. I am certainly not “incited” to hatred and discrimination upon hearing it, and if anything, I am incited in the exact opposite direction.

In the United States, where hate speech is still legal, the KKK and the American Nazi Party require police protection when holding rallies, lest they be beaten or run out of town. Hatred is incited towards the haters more so than the supposed victims of their hate speech. In my own case, it takes a sheer act of will to defend the rights of racists to speak their mind, and I certainly won’t be found goose-stepping down any street, singing racist hymns, anytime after hearing to it.

It’s weird, though, because given the hate speech laws throughout the world, one might expect that having no laws against hate speech leads to higher incidences of hate crimes; except hate crimes, especially violent ones, have shown a general downward trend in the United States since it first started recording them. And it is also strange that, despite the modern and stringent hate speech laws and censorship of hatred in Weimar Germany, Nazism and genocide was able to flourish and take power there. On the other hand, In the United States, where racism, slavery, and violence against minorities was was once ubiquitous, and hate speech protected, the power of racists has steadily declined.

It appears censorship is more likely to contribute to hate crime than free speech. I would argue that nothing incites hatred more than the suppression of hatred, forced into the underground where it festers, far away from the eyes and ears of reasonable people, whom are denied the right to hear and thus know what hatreds are being promoted. And because hate speech is illegal, so to is its analysis and refutation, and so to is its defeat and ridicule in public debate.

Does hate speech incite you to hatred? If not, then why say hate speech incites hatred?
edit on 2-4-2018 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 04:22 PM
link   
No speech inspires me to anything.

You are all F***ing crazy in my opinion by default. So not talking to people or getting distracted by your idiosyncrasies is my default setting.



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I would, personally, attribute the 'rise' in hate crimes in other countries to the laws of said countries. What constitutes a hate crime in one country - at least for the moment - wont apply somewhere else, as you pointed out.
Britain for example, where I am now, has ridiculous laws on 'hate'. Draconian, Orwellian style laws, ones that no longer even require a person to be witness to, or even give evidence of, crimes they report at being 'hateful'.

Your post reminds me of a video I watched years ago from the RSE.



Sometimes telling people what their emotions should be regarding anything, even hatred, will push them further into their own minds. Eventually they'll just shut down (which is what I think the opposition wants) and give up.

Hate speech doesn't incite me to anything, I don't think it exists. There's words, that's all. The emotions that the words incite in me would be down to my own worldviews and prejudices.
I think the reason people say that hate speech inspires hatred is twofold. The first thing adding the word 'hate' does is conjure up a negative connotation, and the second thing adding hate does is that it allows the 'hated' to have instant virtue on the grounds that they're being attacked somehow.

edit on 11/10/2012 by Joneselius because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


Does hate speech incite you to hatred?

That is its intent. Hate begets hate, if you let it.

Pure hatred on the other hand, doesn't care how you react.



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 04:36 PM
link   
I try and recognize hate speech for what it is - a persons uneducated attempt at communication. It doesn’t incite me to anything but sadness, as it indicates another mind with unlimited potential has gone to complete and utter waste.

In other words...STICKS AND STONES MAY BREAK MY BONES BUT NAMES WILL NEVER HURT ME!



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Hasn't happened yet. But then I'm not easily lead around by the nose, either.



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 04:43 PM
link   
It's hard to hate the little round headed boys when they just don't know any better.
Prayer and compassion is the answer...




edit on 2-4-2018 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 04:44 PM
link   
In my opinion people who want hate speech laws are ideological cowards. meaning they are afraid of ideas. These types do not want their mind stretched or pushed.



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 04:46 PM
link   
I do find that David Hogg gets to me.

Not because of what he says about the 2nd Amendment. I've heard that all before.

What incites me about him is his smug, arrogant attitude and language. As a parent, that I find enormously grating. I can't believe the little [I can't type what I'd like to] has been allowed to carry that attitude as long as he has without someone laying a serious correction down on him.



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Good points. What's more important than free speech? Nothing really. Everything stems from there. If you control speech then you control what thoughts are communicated and to whom, when, where and how. That's total control.

Hate speech is bad too though, when it could insight violence. I think that's the key.

Normal people like most of us here on ATS won't be insighted but if we have a religous leader telling his flock to kill all jews...some of them might. That's a problem. It's happened and continues to happen across the world.

So hate speech that's dangerous would be speech that incites someone to commit violence but only when speaking to a subset or subsection of humans. Such as a Christian leader telling his flock that it's okay to stone homosexuals. Or an Islamic leader telling muslims to kill the infidels or to whip their females with sticks when they don't follow orders, or an Israeli leaders telling his citizens that all Palestinians deserve death.



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Lab4Us

Not all hate speakers are uneducated buffoons, some are quite eloquent humorous and convincing.

Should they be banned.. Naaw, should they lose their jobs and such over it, well that depends on the boss and presumed consumer reactions .ie the bottom line.
Should they be in a position of public trust??
edit on 2-4-2018 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Sidd Buddha once said "Hatred does not cease by hatred but only by LOVE; This is the eternal rule..."

So if it is 'eternal' this makes it 'dead true' as that is the definition of 'truth' something that NEVER changes; now that in itself is pretty difficult in an ever changing world...

So basically, it is akin to 'wanting' I WANT a beautiful new pair of pumps. So I scour the intraweb looking for some pumps that'll fit My Men's 10.5 E. Now the size alone 'might' make it difficult but I MUST match My sexy 'underthings'. Sure, there is a real good chance that I won't even leave My humble abode, but TaDa I found the pumps. My size? check √ Color? check√ Now that this "WANT" is taken care of, guess what? No, I didn't get arrested, no really guess.... You're right, that "WANT" is quickly replaced by another "WANT"...

'Hatred' is like 'jealousy' a truly wasted emotion. I mean really...

Stay Hydrated...



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
Good points. What's more important than free speech? Nothing really. Everything stems from there. If you control speech then you control what thoughts are communicated and to whom, when, where and how. That's total control.

Hate speech is bad too though, when it could insight violence. I think that's the key.

Normal people like most of us here on ATS won't be insighted but if we have a religous leader telling his flock to kill all jews...some of them might. That's a problem. It's happened and continues to happen across the world.

So hate speech that's dangerous would be speech that incites someone to commit violence but only when speaking to a subset or subsection of humans. Such as a Christian leader telling his flock that it's okay to stone homosexuals. Or an Islamic leader telling muslims to kill the infidels or to whip their females with sticks when they don't follow orders, or an Israeli leaders telling his citizens that all Palestinians deserve death.


For one, saying speech can "incite" anything is akin to saying speech can manipulate matter, which is sorcery. Humans act according to their own will and choices. Two, it isn't just the leader telling his flock to kill jews that leads them to do it. The censorship of dissent, contrary voices and information contributes greatly. It is why the Nazis had one of the most censorial regimes that ever existed. That is why if free speech was introduced to Islamic societies, criticism and dissent would flourish, eventually changing minds and cultures.



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


I just buy more bullets!

On a serious note though, I have noticed with all the ANTIFA tantrums on youtube that beating the hell out of someone is warranted based upon their so called hate speech, because their hate speech promotes violence???? Yep, we living in a world where right is wrong and up is down. I have noticed lately I have been drawn to posts talking about us living in a digitally created world......hmmmmmmmm
edit on 2-4-2018 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 05:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: amazing
Good points. What's more important than free speech? Nothing really. Everything stems from there. If you control speech then you control what thoughts are communicated and to whom, when, where and how. That's total control.

Hate speech is bad too though, when it could insight violence. I think that's the key.

Normal people like most of us here on ATS won't be insighted but if we have a religous leader telling his flock to kill all jews...some of them might. That's a problem. It's happened and continues to happen across the world.

So hate speech that's dangerous would be speech that incites someone to commit violence but only when speaking to a subset or subsection of humans. Such as a Christian leader telling his flock that it's okay to stone homosexuals. Or an Islamic leader telling muslims to kill the infidels or to whip their females with sticks when they don't follow orders, or an Israeli leaders telling his citizens that all Palestinians deserve death.


For one, saying speech can "incite" anything is akin to saying speech can manipulate matter, which is sorcery. Humans act according to their own will and choices. Two, it isn't just the leader telling his flock to kill jews that leads them to do it. The censorship of dissent, contrary voices and information contributes greatly. It is why the Nazis had one of the most censorial regimes that ever existed. That is why if free speech was introduced to Islamic societies, criticism and dissent would flourish, eventually changing minds and cultures.


You have a point. More free speech is always better and has changed society. But let's go back to the Nazis...they were beaten down to hard after world war 1 causing harsh living conditions. They were ripe for Hitler, who started placing blame on minoritie groups like Jews and Gypsies and Homosexuals, then started preaching nationalism etc. he got them all riled up. It's not as simple as saying there were outside contrary voices and information.

I think my first point is still valid. Hate speech can incite or influence another person who is already in a certain frame of mind to commit violence. Anyone who belongs to a religion is already in that certain frame of mind and can be manipulated by a good speaker spouting hate speech.



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

Consider what you wrote and then start thinking about what you hear coming out fo the mouths of some of the South African assemblymen these days.



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 05:10 PM
link   
To me hate speech is a social issue unless and until it reaches the point of action. Then and only then should the law come in to play in any way.

The best protection is for it to be visible to expose it for what it is. Real hate crime festers in secret.

Hate groups for the most part hurt only themselves by being social outcasts and their language is just words, nothing more.

I can't imagine anyone arguing that in a free society speech should be closed down or lead to any legal action. Hiding it does nothing.



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Ask some school shooters if they are tired of being bullied that seems to be a common connection.






posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: mikell

Yeah, but hate speech is more generalized whereas bullying is targeted.

You can be bullied with or without hate speech being involved.



posted on Apr, 2 2018 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: amazing

Consider what you wrote and then start thinking about what you hear coming out fo the mouths of some of the South African assemblymen these days.


Then that's hate speech. Because you're talking about violence to an audience that is primed for it. In this case it's poverty and an extreme sense that they've been done wrong and it's time for revenge to take back what is rightfully theirs.

That's hate speech pure and simple and it's wrong.




top topics



 
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join