This chapter explains the understanding of all who seek to advance both free speech and equality anywhere in the world. It discusses supports the conclusions of many expert individuals and organizations around the world – that counterspeech and other non-censorial alternatives are much more likely than hate speech laws to prove effective in limiting hate speech and its possible harmful effects. Social scientists have confirmed that counterspeech by leaders in the pertinent community is especially persuasive in rebutting hateful speech and in countering its potential harmful effects. Speech that counters the potentially harmful impact of hate speech comprises a broad range of expression, including information and ideas that directly refute the hateful message; broader, proactive educational initiatives; and expressions of remorse by discriminatory speakers. The ensuing protracted legal proceedings ultimately resulted, in 1996, in a one-year suspended sentence, one year of probation, and 200 hours of community service.
Cite to original publication