Why You Should Stand With ‘Hate Speech’

The biggest companies in the tech world struck a historic deal with European Union officials to censor online “hate speech.” Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Microsoft all signed onto the mandate to cooperate with the continental body to regulate and restrict speech determined too offensive for the internet.

It’s never about “Hate Speech”, it’s always about censoring views the political class disagrees with.

  • DMB

    Hate Speech laws are North America’s, Europe’s version of blasphemy laws in the Islamic world and political censorship laws that are in place in more secular dictatorships i.e. Cuba, China. In these countries if you criticize Islam or the government/leaders you can go to prison or even get killed for they hate criticism therefore they will censor it. Free speech laws must always prevail.

    • Nothing to do with hate, everything to do with criminalizing dissent.

      • Alain


  • Denis

    so much for free speech in the world.

  • CodexCoder

    I don’t use Twitter, Facebook, and there are other alternatives to YouTube, and Microsoft. If you disagree, let them feel it in the pocket book – dump their applications. Political correctness will only be stopped by blatant disregard, and red in the financial accounts.

  • mauser 98

    …..off topic
    ……PGA going to regret this

    PGA snubs the Donald, moves tournament from Trump’s Doral resort to Mexico City


    • Daviddowntown

      I certainly hope Jordan Spieth takes a pass on that tournament.

      • mauser 98

        all should

    • Clink9

      What a bunch of grade 7 mean girls. Maybe the LPGA has more balls.

      • mauser 98

        this could get interesting

  • Dana Garcia

    It’s hate speech to say that immigration laws should be enforced. That’s how far it’s gone.

  • Hard Little Machine

    Just so we’re clear. Antisemitism and/or calling for the wholesale industrial extermination of Jews, white people, men or heterosexuals is not hate speech. In fact it’s a virtue and is to be encouraged.

  • Thinking From First Principles

    We need to be proactive in re-framing the debate, as Bill Warner has pointed out. Defending reprehensible speech, while correct in standing on principle, does not win over a crowd. Instead, make the point that there is a legitimate place for “hate” in this world:
    I hate discrimination. I will speak against it. Is that “hate speech?”
    I hate the act of taking advantage of the weak. I will speak against it. Is that “hate speech?”
    I hate the suppression of individual liberty. I will speak against it. Is that “hate speech?”
    The list goes on and on. It is virtuous to hate evil … to hate misogyny, to hate bigotry, to hate theft, to hate murder, to hate acts that willfully hurt others. I will speak against these – to say that they are wrong and that free people should choose better. Will such virtue be banned? You cannot ban “hate speech” without banning virtue.