The Harm in Hate Speech is important and an invaluable resource. I read it with great interest.
Waldron argues that there is a sort of public good of inclusiveness that our society sponsors and that it is committed to. Hate speech undermines this public good, or it makes the task of sustaining it much more difficult than it would otherwise be. Hate speech creates an environmental threat to social peace, a "sort of slow-acting poison, accumulating here and there, word by word, so that eventually it becomes harder and less natural for even the good-hearted members of the society to play their part in maintaining this public good".
Waldron maintains that hate speech undermines the dignity of the person. A person's dignity is not just some Kantian aura. It is their social standing, the fundamentals of basic reputation that entitle them to be treated as equals in the ordinary operations of society. Hate speech aims "to besmirch the basics of their reputation, by associating ascriptive characteristics like ethnicity, or race, or religion with conduct or attributes that should disqualify someone from being treated as a member of society in good standing". Hate messages undermine the targets' equal status in the community, their entitlement to basic justice and to the fundamentals of their reputation.
In his critique of Ed Baker's view, Jeremy Waldron rightly notes that it remains the case that hate speech damages the dignity and reputation of individuals in vulnerable groups; it undermines the public good of socially furnished assurance with which the dignity of ordinary people is supported; it remains the case that the hateful disclosure of racist attitudes through public speech defaces and pollutes the environment in which members of vulnerable groups have to live their lives and bring up their children.
In his critique of the American First Amendment position, Waldron notes that Britain has laws that prohibit racial and religious hatred (Public Order Act 1986) and racial discrimination (Race Relations Act 1976). Are these laws illegitimate? Was their enactment inappropriate and their enforcement morally wrong? Furthermore, almost all democracies have hate speech laws. Are they all wrong and only the United States, which protects hate speech, is right?
The Harm in Hate Speech is the best comprehensive book from a liberal perspective, written by legal philosopher, endorsing hate speech legislation. Waldron makes a powerful argument that surely promotes exchange and debate.
Some of Waldron's American colleagues might now tag him as pseudo-liberal and quasi-fascist. Some of them might drop the `quasi' qualification. Most non-American liberal scholars will find Waldron sensible and applaud his careful reasoning.
Kudos to Waldron for this important contribution. Kudos to Harvard for publishing it.
Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime and start saving today with fast, free delivery
