Wendy Kaminer
Lawyer and social critic

A democratic society must be free to hate

This is the price we pay for freedom of speech, conscience and belief. The state would effectively be policing our emotions if it denied us the freedom to hate. Similarly, we do not have the right not to be hated - not to be the victims of hate speech. The freedom to express things that are deeply distasteful to the majority is what allowed the flourishing of our civil rights, feminist, and gay rights movements. It is this very same freedom that was exercised by certain members of the Westboro Baptist church when held up offensive signs at a recent military funeral.

The state owes us physical protection, but leave our emotions out of it

We accept the state’s protection of our physical beings; that is why we have a police force. But we can’t quantify emotional harm in the same way that we can show a bruise or a cut. If we give the state the power to regulate emotional harm, we correspondingly give the state the power to reach deeply into our emotional lives. I believe the state has no role in protecting self esteem – that is the business of your family and your school.

Hate speech laws are dangerous, biased and unpredictable

Hate speech laws are based on speculations about possible indirect future harm – which is unquantifiable, not only because it hasn’t happened yet. If we leave it up to the state to define what is and what is not hate speech – the answer will invariably be what falls in line with the biases and sensitivities of the body in power. The harm caused by hate speech is speculative, whereas the harm caused by criminalising hate speech is immediate and especially pernicious in a society that values liberty.

Freedom of speech is a fundamental moral value

Without freedom of speech we have no individual autonomy, no basic right to define ourselves, to formulate our own ideals, to love and hate whomever and whatever we like, nor express our loves and hatreds. If we clamp down on it we are restricting a plurality of ideologies and ideas. Perhaps the US and the UK differ on this point – but I for one wouldn’t feel safe to live in the UK, a country that evidently chooses authoritarianism over individual liberty.

Femi Otitoju
Equality campaigner; Founder, Challenge Consultancy

‘Hate’ and ‘hate speech’ are different and should be separated by law

I am not talking about restricting what people feel or think – but rather what they do. Anyone is free to hate whatever and whoever they like.

Why should we expect absolute freedom of speech?

We don’t have complete freedom in anything else that we do – I can’t walk wherever I like because sooner or later I will be trespassing. In the UK, article 10 (the right to freedom of expression) is tempered and superseded by the UK law preventing incitement to religious hatred and racial hatred. Having these checks on freedom of speech didn’t prevent the UK from having a vibrant feminist movement.

The impact of hate speech on individuals represents a serious harm

It’s clear that hate speech causes harm. Other actions that cause harm are regulated or prohibited, so it’s right that it should be too. I’m concerned about the effect that it has on individuals – because although it is often aimed at a whole group, it is the individuals who feel it. Hate speech can quickly influence the thoughts and behaviour of others, so it is unacceptable to say “let’s hear it and then deal with it” because by that point the damage has been done.

The state does have a role in protecting our emotions

It’s incumbent upon the state to protect us physically – but it can’t be right that the state can only help you if you’ve been physically bruised but not when you’ve been emotionally damaged. Even subtle damage to one’s sense of self worth can have lasting and widespread effects on one’s work, relationships etc. Any argument that emotional harm is not quantifiable falls flat in our courtrooms, where, on a daily basis, lawyers and judges are called to put a sum of money on it.

The UK law protects liberty and dignity

I am proud to live in a country that doesn’t tolerate hate speech, and I often think UK restrictions don’t go far enough. Human rights activist Dominique de Menil rightly said: “we lose dignity if we tolerate the intolerable”. Don’t equate my clamping down on hate speech as an attack on liberty. I want to protect people’s liberty – especially their liberty to live dignified lives in a safe environment.