Abstract
Abstract There is a strong sentiment in the general population that we need to put an end to the hate crisis in our society. Politicians and policymakers have it in their power to prevent this crisis from escalating further by regulating not only (physical) hate crimes but also hate speech. This has already been done in many European countries, where hate speech typically is considered a form of group libel that defames members of the targeted group. Law professor Jeremy Waldron has offered an argument for this perspective on hate speech. Hate speech, he argues, is criminal group libel. This chapter argues that Waldron’s argument doesn’t accomplish what he says it does, because most hate speech doesn’t make, or imply, any factual claim and therefore fails to be defamatory. The chapter then offers an argument for curtailing hate speech that is premised on the political philosopher Jürgen Habermas’ notion of communicative rationality. Finally, other solutions to the hate crisis are considered.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
