|
(Fred Speaking) |
||||||
|
|
|
MAIN PATH: Ann |
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Let's look at university speech codes in general and the new code at
this university in particular.
It seems to me that this is a case in which we should protect some
undesirable speech for the reasons John has suggested. I think Vera is
right that calling someone "nigger" or printing graffiti like the one in
the physics building certainly doesn't help us search for truth or
practice democracy. In other words, this 'speech' has little or no value.
But who says we should only protect speech that has value or that we think
has value? This speech may be outside the "core" that John referred to.
But we should still protect it for two reasons:
- We shouldn't set ourselves or anyone else up as the people who decide which speech has value. Those decisions could easily become politicized and that could lead to banning more and more speech.
- We need to protect speech outside the core in order to guarantee that we will not restrict speech within the core.
Racist speech is a perfect example of the undesirable speech outside the core that we should protect in order to protect the core.
| Ariadne Home | Hate
Speech Bibliography |
Hate Speech Home |