HATE: Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship (Inalienable Rights) 1st Edition by Nadine Strossen (PDF)

Description

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 manycountries, 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.

User’s Reviews

Editorial Reviews: Review “Nadine Strossen makes these arguments better than anyone.” -Jonathan Marks, The Wall Street Journal “HATEmarshals a vast amount of legal, historical, social science, psychological, and transnational research in service of [the] premise that all ideas, no matter how hateful, deserve First Amendment protection.” -Stephen Rohde, Los Angeles Review of Books “Nadine Strossen speaks power to Hate.” –Sloane Crosley, Vanity Fair “I have said it before about books, but this time I couldn’t be more emphatic about it: everyone should read this book.” –Lucy Kogler, LitHub “Nadine Strossen speaks power to Hate.” -Vanity Fair “While other countries provide significant protection for free expression, the United States provides a significantly elevated level of protection, particularly for hateful speech. Nadine Strossen’s insightful and eminently readable study on why we protect such speech and why we should continue to do so is an all-too-rare example of first-rate legal scholarship that the public at large can learn from and savor reading.” — Floyd Abrams, Senior Counsel, Cahill Gordon & Reindel; Adjunct Professor, NYU Law School; Author, The Soul of the First Amendment “Strossen has accomplished something remarkable in this slim book – she has ventured into a complex and heavily examined field and produced a book that is original, insightful, and clear-headed. My guess: this book will become the go-to work in the field.” — Ronald Collins, Harold S. Shefelman Scholar at the UW School of Law, Publisher of First Amendment News “One of life’s hardest tasks is to tell natural allies they are wrong. Nadine Strossen is clear in a time of confusion, consistent in an era of hypocrisy, and brave in an environment of intimidation. Her book is a fitting capstone to a career in defense of our civil liberties.” — Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr., President of Purdue University, former Indiana Governor “In this work, Strossen stakes out a bold and important claim about how best to protect both equality and freedom. Anyone who wants to advocate for ‘hate speech’ laws and policies in the future now has the `Devil’s Advocate’ right at hand. No one can address this issue in the foreseeable future without taking on this formidable and compelling analysis. It lays the foundation for all debates on this issue for years to come.” — Geoffrey Stone, Edward H. Levi Distinguished Service Professor of Law at University of Chicago Law School “Nadine Strossen is one of the great civil libertarians of our day. This book provides a powerful and subtle defense of free speech. Don’t miss it!” — Dr. Cornel West, Professor of the Practice of Public Philosophy, Harvard Divinity School “As Nadine Strossen writes eloquently in her new book, HATE: Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorship, a democracy succeeds only when the rights, thoughts, and aspirations of all its citizens are respected and given voice, and the citizenry believes that this is true, regardless of viewpoint.” — Maryanne Wolf, John DiBiaggio Professor of Citizenship and Public Service at Tufts University and author of Reader, Come Home: The Reading Brain in a Digital Culture “In this impressive work, Strossen offers an overarching perspective on the challenges of reconciling a concept of “hate speech” with a broad commitment to freedom of expression. This is an original, insightful, and compelling analysis, both timely and enduring, that has academic, constitutional, and international importance.” — Robert Zimmer, University of Chicago President “Indeed, in yet a third new book in this area, Hate, former American Civil Liberties Union President Nadine Strossen points out that federal courts during the civil-rights era “refused to halt speeches and demonstrations by civil-rights advocates because of threatened and even actual violence by opponents of their cause.” – Carlin Romano, The Chronicle “As Strossen shows in her important and comprehensive (yet brilliantly concise) new book, HATE, fighting hatred and bigotry by banning hate speech is like fighting global warming by banning thermometers. Even on its own terms, it does not work.” – Jonathan Rauch, Senior Fellow at Brookings Institution “She advocates noncensorial strategies of counterspeech, education and even developing a thicker skin to combat speech that we may not like but that should be protected.” – The Harvard Law Bulletin “HATE tackles the many misunderstandings that fuel and confuse current political life… There is a lot to like about this book.” – David Cowan, The Global Legal Post “A principled and persuasive analysis of how hate speech prohibitions are threatening free speech, written eloquently and comprehensibly. A powerful contribution, not only to First Amendment thinking but to other legal systems where expression rights are less well protected.” – Geoffrey Robertson QC, Doughty Street Chambers “A well-informed, strongly argued perspective on a hot topic.” – Kirkus Reviews “Nadine Strossen makes these arguments better than anyone.” – Jonathan Marks, The Wall Street Journal “In HATE [Strossen]… marshals a vast amount of legal, historical, social science, psychological, and transnational research in service of her premise that all ideas, no matter how hateful, deserve First Amendment protection.” – Stephen Rohde, Los Angeles Review of Books “Nadine is one of America’s most important defenders of liberal values and free speech.” – David Boaz, Executive Vice President, Cato Institute “…[I]t is welcome to hear voices like Strossen’s making themselves heard and reminding us why the urge to limit speech in the name of protection ultimately offers no protection at all.” – Jodie Ginsberg, CEO of Index on Censorship, Spiked “[Nadine Strossen’s new book] lays out a compelling argument against policies that try to restrict what individuals are allowed to say.” – Nick Gillespie, Reason Magazine “What our students need… is a solid grounding in fundamental First Amendment principles. Strossen’s book is an excellent place to start.” – Carolyn Schurr Levin, College Media Review “Nadine Strossen remains the powerful voice of a dangerously jeopardised tradition. She understands the social problems associated with hate speech but explains why censorship, which may be a facile solution, is neither politically defensible nor socially effective in the age of the electronic revolution. This book is for those who think they already know all the free speech arguments.” – Eric Heinze, Queen Mary University of London “Engagement, not censorship is the answer… [the world] needs to hear Strossen’s cautionary tale of how the practice and application of hate speech laws widely undermine the good intentions, ultimately leading to frustration over legless political correctness or at worst, paving a path from liberal democracy towards totalitarianism.” – Chloë M. Gilgan, University of York “Strossen has written a book that should be widely read.” – John Samples, Economic Blogs “Professor Strossen gives an impassioned and articulate argument for why the best medicine for offensive speech is more speech… [P]erhaps the best remedy for hate speech is not restriction of offensive speech but rather a more robust debate, requiring that all people of good will exercise their right not to remain silent.” – Lawrence Siry, Collaborateur de Recherche, University of Luxembourg”Strossen has accomplished something remarkable in this slim book – she has ventured into a complex and heavily examined field and produced a book that is original, insightful, and clear-headed. My guess: this book will become the go-to work in the field.” – Ronald Collins, Harold S. Shefelman Scholar at the UW School of Law, Publisher of First Amendment News “As Nadine Strossen writes eloquently in her new book, HATE, a democracy succeeds only when the rights, thoughts, and aspirations of all its citizens are respected and given voice, and the citizenry believes that this is true, regardless of viewpoint.” – Maryanne Wolf, John DiBiaggio Professor of Citizenship and Public Service at Tufts University and author of Reader, Come Home: The Reading Brain in a Digital Culture About the Author New York Law School professor Nadine Strossen, the immediate past President of the American Civil Liberties Union (1991-2008), is a leading expert and frequent speaker/media commentator on constitutional law and civil liberties, who has testified before Congress on multiple occasions. She serves on the advisory boards of the ACLU, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), and Heterodox Academy. The National Law Journal has named Strossen one of America’s “100 Most Influential Lawyers,” and several other national publications have named her one of the country’s most influential women. HATE was selected by Washington University as its 2019 “Common Read.”

Reviews from Amazon users which were colected at the time this book was published on the website:

⭐I write this review on a Sunday when the New York Times has just published a long article quoting a claim by one of our sitting Supreme Court Justices that the Roberts court has “weaponized” free speech. If in fact the court is tilting against liberal petitioners for their free speech rights and in favor of conservatives, that is a deeply troubling development. The US has the most permissive speech rights of any country in the world, indeed in the history of the world, guaranteed by the First Amendment. These rights depend on the trust of citizens that enforcement of freedom of speech will be viewpoint neutral, and not a scrim for advancing a political position, whether on the right or the left.Just think. A sitting justice speaks out in the paper of record against the principle of free speech. This situation amounts to an emergency. We are at a point in our democracy where an increasing number of citizens seem ready to give up on the ideal “free speech,” because to them it looks like simply another piece on the chess board that the group-in-power can use to win the political game.These people need to read Nadine Strossen’s “Hate: Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorship.” This thorough and cogently written book reveals, in meticulous historical detail, the important resource that freedom of speech has offered to vulnerable groups—ethnic and racial minorities, war protesters, international human rights advocates—who have successfully through history advanced their cause under the protection of the viewpoint neutrality promised by the First Amendment.As Strossen’s balanced but passionate analysis demonstrates, if there is anything that can be “weaponized” (a word that I think is itself being “weaponized”), it is restraint of speech. The groups in power have consistently used “hate speech” regulations against the very people that such rules were intended to protect. This point has been well documented in the civil rights movement of the 1960s. But it is still relevant. Read in Strossen’s book about the unequal enforcement of the University of Michigan’s hate speech code against African Americans in the late 1980s (88-89) or about the experience of a black mother who posted racial epithets directed at her young sons on Facebook only to see her objection to “hate speech” taken down because its content could not be distinguished electronically from the real thing. Restraints on speech cannot themselves be restrained.A better response, as Strossen argues persuasively, is to do as she does: argue back. She provides the evidence that the psychological harms of even noxious speech are over-rated, especially when their targets are encouraged to resist speech with more speech. As she concludes, exercise your right “not to be silent” (182).The American tradition of free speech is, like all human institutions, imperfect. The only thing worse would be to lose it.

⭐In this incredibly intelligent yet easy to read book, every argument in favor of hate speech laws is thoroughly taken apart. It was rather refreshing to read someone who is politically more liberal actually defend freedom of speech, as I don’t see that very often anymore. If you do believe in hate speech codes as a solution to hate, this book will change your mind.

⭐This beautifully written and thoughtful explanation of why “hate speech” laws harm freedom should be a must read for school administrators, lawmakers, and the President of the United States. It makes clear why laws against offensive ideas and actions, like burning or desecrating the flag of the U.S. are harmful in the long run. Unless the expression causes immediate physical harm, like yelling “fire” in a crowded theater when there is no fire, the speech should be protected as free expression, even if offensive to almost all thinking members of our society. We need to learn from Germany and France who have found that enforcing their “hate speech” laws leads to more, not less, hate.

⭐This book does a great job at showing why we could engage with those who think differently from us than try to censor what we don’t want to hear.

⭐There is a war on free speech, and this book does a great job of explaining why that is a bad idea which can only make things worse. Read it!

⭐This book is incredible and important, perhaps more than ever. Not only does Strossen lay out the most common and powerful arguments in favor of having hate speech laws, but she also answers them in a way that is compelling, nuanced, and informed. At the end of the day, it serves as an excellent reminder of why we need the First Amendment and to continue to defend it

⭐This gives a strong argument that legislation against “Hate Speech” does not work. A school I attended had all incoming freshmen read this book.

⭐Excellent book that directly covers many vital questions pertaining to the regulation of “hate speech”. I’ve read quite a few books on free speech and tolerance, many of which are heavily overlapping; this book, however, is very inique in it’s scope and contributions.

⭐Although this book, at its heart concerns America, it is at least as important for Europeans and certainly for those of us in the UK. Professor Strossen makes extensive reference to the world outside the USA, but even without that its relevance for all of us is striking.We do not have the First Amendment to protect the precious status to say and write what we feel and think without fear or favour. There are restrictions on freedom of expression in America, but they come nowhere close to those imposed by our range of hate laws.Until the infection of political correctness – paradoxically originating largely in America – spread over recent decades, there were very few subjects indeed on which we could not speak openly. The erosion of that healthy state has spread rapidly and there is little to suggest that the juggernaut can be decelerated, let alone halted.As Strossen argues hate speech and hate crimes demonise and threaten to punish much that is part of a valued democratic tradition. At the heart of her argument is that laws against hate speech are not only an infringement of vital liberties, but are in fact counterproductive. They do more harm than good. Her other major point is that we “cherish speech precisely because of its unique capacity to influence us, both positively and negatively. To punish ideas is a dangerous path to advance along. Significantly, some of those in the vanguard for more free speech in America are Afro-Caribbean thinkers and representatives of minority groups, often taken to be the targets of hate speech. It is worth mentioning here that the author has, herself, been the target of both anti-Semitic and misogynistic abuse.Freedom of speech does not exist in a vacuum; it is intimately connected with all our other rights and freedoms. It facilitates the search for truth. Furthermore, hate speech is subjective. “One person’s hate speech is another’s cherished speech.” Hate speech codes in universities- – supposedly places of learning and the free exchange of ideas – are especially sinister and alarmingly widespread. We end up with all manner of paradoxes, which might belong to the comedy of the absurd, were it not that they are akin to the political oppression of regimes from the recent past – Hitler and Stalin et al – to those very much in evidence today. It is not just that people have been arrested for quoting Winston Churchill. Minority groups end up at war with each other: to attack Mohammed is to be guilty of Islamophobia, yet those of the Islamic faith can be brought to justice for homophobia and misogyny. Even quoting a word or expression to denounce it can bring retribution. It is all frankly farcical. It is the death knell of humour and resilience and diminishes people by placing them in the “victim” category. Few seem to realise how far we have moved towards those very authoritarian regimes that we have fought against to protect our essential liberties.Perhaps, those so enthusiastic about enforcing the hate speech laws might like to ponder Noam Chomsky’s words: “It is a poor service to the memory of the victims of the Holocaust to adopt a central doctrine of their murderers.”! Professor Strossen favours as an alternative to hate speech laws “counterspeech”, quite simply the response of meeting hatred with calm, dignified rational argument. She cites many examples of how despite scepticism it can work. Martin Luther King and President Obama were both advocates of free speech.I will conclude this review of what I consider to be a profoundly important book with words from Nelson Mandela:“No one is born hating another person because of the colour of his skin or his background or his religion….People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can learn to love.”

⭐One of America’s leading First Amendment scholars, lays out the inanity of attempts to regulate “hate speech” and the often perverse outcomes yielded in many jurisdictions that attempt to abridge speech on such vague grounds, while defending the proud tradition of American exceptionalism under the jurisprudential framework of the viewpoint neutrality and imminence principles developed by the Supreme Court since the latter half of the 20th Century.

⭐Por que a Humans Right Watch e a Anistia Internacional são a favor da liberdade de expressão sem limites, mesmo que abominem o que está sendo falado? Leitura absolutamente indispensável em tempos de indignação seletiva e censura “do bem”. Entre outros motivos, só quem se aproveita da proteção aos ofendidos são os governos, seja de direita ou esquerda, totalitário ou democrata.-Took some searching but amazon had a copy. Excellent reading.

Keywords

Free Download HATE: Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship (Inalienable Rights) 1st Edition in PDF format
HATE: Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship (Inalienable Rights) 1st Edition PDF Free Download
Download HATE: Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship (Inalienable Rights) 1st Edition 2018 PDF Free
HATE: Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship (Inalienable Rights) 1st Edition 2018 PDF Free Download
Download HATE: Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship (Inalienable Rights) 1st Edition PDF
Free Download Ebook HATE: Why We Should Resist it With Free Speech, Not Censorship (Inalienable Rights) 1st Edition