Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

The slippery slope of hate speech

Unsurprisingly, the testing grounds for nannystatist encroachment on speech at the municipal level (the feds, predicatably, have set the tone by caving to aggrieved identity groups and legislating them into a kind of de facto “endangered species” status) is Boulder, CO—about 10 minutes west of my future home.  Which should make for some interesting times.  From David Harsanyi, The Denver Post:

There’s a famous joke that goes like this:

What’s the difference between a Rottweiler and a Jewish mother? Eventually, the Rottweiler lets go.

Now, some Jews may find that joke offensive. I don’t. But if you’re insulted, and you live in Boulder, you’re in luck. Soon enough, you may be able to report me to the authorities.

Tuesday, the Boulder City Council will take up the matter of allocating public funding for a “hate hotline,” which would give residents an opportunity to report incidents in which Boulderites use tactless language.

“Our concern—and there are many—is that there is no confidentiality, no legal confidentiality,” explains Judd Golden, chairman of the Boulder American Civil Liberties Union, which has not yet taken an official position on the hate-line. “So it’s potentially chilling if people think they are providing this information in confidence and then that information were provided to the government or the government sought access to it. That would chill free speech.”

Amazingly, what worries the ACLU is not so much that a hotline to report tactless language is being set up by the local government—and that such a hotline might by used to enforce what is beginning to take shape as a municipal speech code—but rather that the person reporting the “speech offense” doesn’t have confidentiality, meaning that the problem is, should any kind of legal consequence proceed from the misuse of speech, the ACLU is bothered by the accuser’s not receiving the equivalent of rape shield law protections. 

Can this be right?  No.  I refuse to believe it.

Harsanyi continues:

Golden says the agenda item on the hotline is “extensive” and a “real dilemma” for the ACLU. There are some very “broad standards” laid out in the resolution.

There is, for instance, the policy statement condemning the usual individual or collective acts of racism and bigotry. Great. But it also condemns those who attack “personal beliefs and values.”

“Well, for the ACLU, that goes over the line,” Golden says. “You can object to free speech just because someone is a Republican or a Democrat.”

And here is where the slippery slope enters into things:  how does one who is already pre-disposed to see “racism” and “bigotry” in speech as a widespread problem in need of government intervention differentiate between legitimate political speech and “hate speech”? Which is to say, at what point does, for instance, vocal criticism of race-based affirmative action or the suggestion that physiological differences (rather than cultural pressures) account for the disparity of femal representation in certain vocations or fields of enquiry become grounds for levying charges of “intolerance”? 

Already, such opinions are increasingly unwelcome in our universities (where is Larry Summers these days, by the way?)—frowned upon when espoused by faculty, and when espoused by students, often used as a pretense to send the “intolerant” student off to “cultural sensitivity” class.

Which, as I’ve argued before, is the clearest indication imaginable that, in certain venues, identity politics is the ascendent social organizing principle.  And the result is that tolerance has perforce officially come to mean its opposite.

But let’s continue:

[…] So, it seems that since purifying our thoughts is still beyond technology’s reach, Boulder will now attempt to achieve politically correct speech codes in other ways.

The council should realize, however ugly it may be, Americans still have the constitutional right to be racist, homophobic, Jew-hating or even to make bad jokes—as anyone who’s heard the one about the redneck who invented the ejection seat on the helicopter can tell you.

The most serious question, however, is will the hate-line folks forward their files to the Boulder police or City Council?

Precisely.  There are no grounds whatsoever on which the ACLU can support this kind of thing, and yet—because they have become an organization increasingly interested in defending groups they feel have been socially marginalized (rather than protecting civil liberties in the abstract)—they are struggling with how to come to grips with Boulder’s “good intentions.”

Which is rubbish.  No one has a constitional right not to be offended.  And nothing the Boulder City Council says about it either way should matter in the slightest.

Still, as the ACLU’s Golden notes:

“The devil’s in the details” …  There is no present indication that they intend to do anything like [forward their files to the Boulder police or City Council] in the future.”

Well, that’s certainly reassuring.  Because never once has legislation been finessed or expanded to score easy political points. After all, who doesn’t hate racism and sexism?  So what can possibly be the harm in bringing charges against haters—or at least, fining them or requiring them to attend sensitivity training (just as today the city can mandate one attend a 12-Step program for alcohol or drug abuse as a condition of his or her reduction in sentencing)?

Concludes Harsanyi—in language that should sound familiar to pw readers (particularly those that followed my posts on the Bill Bennett “racism” dustup):

Intention? Sorry, that’s not good enough.

[…]

Should everyone keep the hate-line number on their cellphone speed dial from now on? And remember, only call if your attacker uses racist or insensitive language while beating you to a pulp. After all, according to hate-law advocates, it’s not genuine hate unless the perpetrator makes fun of your heritage.

Now, Coloradans don’t always consider Boulder a reality-based community. But we all betray a serious lack of confidence in our system of freedoms when we take these sorts of measures.

When that incomparable dope the Rev. Fred Phelps and his hate-mongering brood hit town mocking dead soldiers and gays, we handed them their biggest victory: curbing free speech through legislation to shut them up.

“These things have come up with attempts to criminalize hate speech on campus, those kinds of situations,” explains Golden. “Certainly, if it just provides an opportunity to call and have a welcome voice and some kinds of soothing response to their concerns, that would be fine. Speech is good.”

Speech is good? Well, not always. But it should generally be free.

[my emphasis]

Indeed.  But progressive sensibilities—couched in easy bromides about “tolerance” and “respect” and a distaste for any number of given -ism and -phobias (racism, sexism, homophobia, etc)—are too often readily adopted by legislators looking to score easy points by coming out “against hate” (or some other equally ostentatious attempt to establish moral bona fides).  And once these sensibilities make their way into the body politic by way of legislation, the more difficult it is to turn the tide against them.

As I’ve noted here on several occasions, such pieces of legislation—even ones as seemingly innocuous as a “hate-speech” hotline that could potentially do nothing more than provide callers with “a welcome voice and some kinds of soothing response to their concerns”—are dangerous inasmuch as they lend credence to the victim culture and reinforce the idea that we are wronged (in the eyes of the government) when we are offended.

Thankfully, the Constitution acts as a final stop gap against such mission creep.  But given the way interpretation is often understood by a “socially conscious” court (and this applies as much to certain “conservative” justices as it does to the more “progressively liberal” justices; see, for instance, former Justice O’Connor’s strained justification for the legality of race-based affirmative action; or Scalia’s strained ruling in Raich), even that august document is no longer a guarantee that our speech rights will be maintained (McCain-Feingold springs to mind) or that our thoughts won’t be criminalized, and in the process, our very worth determined to be hierarchical under the law (“Hate-crime” legislation).

****

(h/t for the WSJ piece, Terry Hastings)

44 Replies to “The slippery slope of hate speech”

  1. A fine scotch says:

    From the immortal shreaking of Eric Cartman:

    “Gahhhh. Hippies!  I hate hippies!”

    I try not to get too close to Boulder, lest the patchouli stink permeate my clothes.

  2. Paul Zrimsek says:

    And here is where the slippery slope enters into things:  how does one who is already pre-disposed to see “racism” and “bigotry” in speech as a widespread problem in need of government intervention differentiate between legitimate political speech and “hate speech”? 

    He simply calls up Glenn Greenwald or Mona and asks to borrow the Secret Decoder Ring.

  3. alppuccino says:

    “Spic and Span”

    “Chink in the armor”

    “Mick Jagger”

    “Sauer Kraut”

    “Refritos Negroes”

    misdemeanors?

  4. MarkD says:

    I think the fifth one is a felony, but Jesse jackson could tell you for sure.

  5. Major John says:

    If nobody is going to forward the complaints on to the City Council or the cops – what is the hotline for?  To let people vent? To preserve the record for the coming of the Age of the Revolutionary Block Committes?

    I have but one request of Boulder, CO and the the ACLU. If you choose to lie to me, at least lie to me convincingly, ok?

  6. McGehee says:

    It may get me in dutch for saying so, but it really gets my irish up when someone welshes on their commitments and get off scot-free. Things like this are so obviously jerry-rigged that the inevitable result can only be a continuing payment of danegeld.

    Fucking commies.

  7. lee says:

    These people are morons! It’s like an ant-American religion where any and all cherished American beliefs (such as free-speech, sovereignty,

    Ahhhh, hang on, a policeman is at the door, I’ll be right back.

  8. mojo says:

    “Fageddaboudit, Jake…”

  9. Tman says:

    I see the PC-ification of Boulder continues. I left in ‘92 to chase some musical dreams, the last year they were allowed to have the Pearl Street mall crawl.

    I still remember when I came back to visit in ‘96 and I made the mistake of lighting up a cigarette OUTSIDE ON THE STREET while waiting for a bus.

    I was condemned as if I had just stabbed an infant with an icepick or something. Friends of mine who still live there tell me it has continued down that slippery slop ever since. This just confirms it.

  10. Jim in KC says:

    Major John took the words right out of my mouth.  WTF is the hotline for, exactly?  Providing jobs to a councilman’s friends and/or relatives? (That’s what it would be for around here, but in Jackson County, MO political corruption is nothing if not a freakin’ art form.)

  11. Brett says:

    I hope the progressives get around to outlawing themselves; they offend millions with their hatred every day.

  12. Scary AND stupid!

    Those Boulderites sure know

    how to be efficient.

  13. Idly Awed says:

    Once the “HateLine” number has been established, how about everyone nauseated by this nonsense calls the number at least three times a day to register nonsensical complaints?  Sort of a Ma’ Bell DOS attack:

    A man on Canyon Blvd. called me a ninnypatootyhooter!

    A man named Ward Churchill called me a little Eichmann!

    My little brother called me a poopyhead!

    I’d like a large sausage & mushroom for delivery, please…

    Imagine a sustained attack of this nature that lasted for weeks, starting day one!

    C’MON PEOPLE, THIS IS A CALL TO ACTION!!!

  14. Merovign says:

    And remember, tolerance means never having to hear an opinion you don’t like!

    Boy am I glad I don’t live in Boulder! I live in Califo… well, crap.

  15. Diana says:

    Very much related is an article in the May 22 issue of the “Western Standard” … an interview with Hitchens.

    “Multiculturalism is very often now the excuse to tell you to shut up.”

    Want it?

  16. Merovign says:

    Idly Awed – imagine the carnage if they made it toll-free…

  17. Sticky B says:

    Can they get a hotline set up through the schools so that children can report their parents? I mean, seriously, what would Stalin do?

  18. rls says:

    Can they get a hotline set up through the schools so that children can report their parents?

    Er…I think you are late to the party.  Said hotline already exists.  At least here in KC.

  19. MarkD says:

    Merovign, Toll-free merely adds to Jeff’s abuse when he pays his taxes… There is no escape from these insanities.  The People’s Republic of Ithaca near me is circulating their own “currency” – maybe the idea is that taxes are OK as long as they are paid by others.

    Gotta stick it to the man…

  20. 4 handicap says:

    I’m sure it would apply to these groups also:

    Christian

    Capitalist

    Republican

    Conservative

    NASCAR Fan

    Hunter

    TW: very The very essense of liberalism.

  21. Thanks for linking to my column Jeff.

    Sadly, the city council OKed the hateline last night. The vote was 7-2. Having followed Boulder politics (the gift that keeps giving), it’s certainly possible that a nay vote may have been cast because the hateline doesn’t go far enough in chilling offensive speech. Just a guess.

    http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_3830869

  22. The_Real_JeffS says:

    Well, I hope this hate hotline has a significant budget set aside for IT and staffers, and lotsa bandwidth.  I can see this American version of the Stasi getting thousands of phone calls every day.

    And a decent filing system.  For future reference.

  23. Phil Smith says:

    Bowdlerizing is now Boulderizing.

  24. Paul Zrimsek says:

    Hey, good one, Phil!

    TW: The Victorians are back!

  25. Major John says:

    JeffS,

    Not all the former Stasi could get work in the CIS doing, er, work in the financial services field.  Maybe Boulder could ask a few to come on board?

  26. Gary says:

    The city still has to fund-raise $8740 to make the hotline happen.  You can access the entire motion at –> http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/Clerk/Agendas/2006/051606/5Brevised.pdf

    Excerpt:

    “Staff supports BCU’s concept of a pilot hotline to determine its level of use and the

    necessity for future operations. Staff recommends that the $8,000 in carryover 2005 HRC

    funds be granted, and that Council match this amount with an additional $8,000, coming

    from the Department of Housing & Human Services 2006 budget. These funds would be

    made available to the Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center upon its ability to fundraise

    the additional $8,740 CUAH/BCU has indicated is necessary to run a 6-month pilot project.

    City funds would be allocated, but not made available until after sufficient fundraising is

    complete and documented.”

    If I read this right—appears the budget is around $24,740 for six months.

  27. Stephen_M says:

    Imagine a sustained attack of this nature that lasted for weeks, starting day one! C’MON PEOPLE, THIS IS A CALL TO ACTION!!!

    Skype recently started free calls within the U.S. & Canada to all phones. It works really well too.

  28. Jim in KC says:

    Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center

    I gotta stop laughing at this shit, or people will be coming in my cube asking if I’m alright…

    One thing you can always be sure of:  any body with the words “peace” and “justice” in its name is primarily interested in anything but.

    (Sorry if that runs counter to the intentionalism arguments elsewhere, but maybe leftists argue so strongly against plain meanings because they lack all respect for them.)

  29. lilgupi says:

    C’MON PEOPLE, THIS IS A CALL TO ACTION!!!

    I’m in baby! I’m creative as hell, work from home and I’m not scared of these PC bastards.

    Unless, of course, they have caller ID. ‘Cause then I gotta get me one of those throw-away cellphones. Do you get those at the Jihadmart or what?

  30. The_Real_JeffS says:

    If I read this right—appears the budget is around $24,740 for six months.

    Say what, Gary?  That’ll buy an answering machine, a dedicated phone line, and a student aide to do the work.  They must have an old computer sitting on a table in some corner for the “staff”.  They might need a special appropriation for a chair and light, though.

  31. commander0 says:

    Let’s not forget this example. http://www.slate.com/?id=2064530

    “HEMEPSTEAD, N.Y. – Did you hear the one about the two guys arrested for telling lawyer jokes?”

    Because hey, you know, lawyers are people too.

    “Slowly” I turned, step by step, inch by inch….

  32. The_Real_JeffS says:

    MAJ John—I imagine the Stasi would feel right at home with some people in Boulder.

    Jeff, do you speak German?  Maybe you can impersonate a Stasi agent, and contract out to the Boulder City Council.  You can work from home, raise your boy, blog, and chastise unknowing and insensitive people inside the city limits………all for a paycheck!

    Seem you won’t need to hold any more fund raisers!  And you will fulfilled that final requirement mandated by many of the clueless leftie trolls of late: get a job.

    And it’s for A Good Cause™, whipping the sheeple into line.  With your experience, this is a cinch.  A win-win scenario for all, indeed!

    TW: You can have it both ways!!!

  33. DeepTrope says:

    One thing you can always be sure of:  any body with the words “peace” and “justice” in its name is primarily interested in anything but.

    Jim in KC,

    Right on.  Their intent is to obscure their intent.

  34. Tom's Paine says:

    Let’s get Jeff reported:

    “How many feminists does it take to change a light bulb?”

    Deep Trope, Jim in KC:  Just as you can tell a lot about a country’s flaws by the vices it assigns to minority groups, you can tell what a country doesn’t have by what it puts in its name:

    “People’s Democratic Republic,” “United States,” “Great Britain…”

  35. JD says:

    Jeff – if you’re going anywhare near that nuthouse, then you’d better learn real quick how to use the little three seashells.

    Yeesh.

  36. Gary says:

    My point is that this “Hateline” is a feel good exercise.  The Council gets to pretend they’re doing “something” about “hate”—however that word is defined.  They still have to fundraise over $8000 and test the concept.

  37. The_Real_JeffS says:

    So I figured, Gary.  My snark overwhelmed my sarcasm.  downer

  38. Gary says:

    JeffS,

    I’m waiting for the telephone number to appear on their Website—then start the avalanche of call-ins.

  39. Jim in KC says:

    “How many feminists does it take to change a light bulb?”

    I’m dying to know the punchline to this one…

  40. The_Real_JeffS says:

    BUAWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

  41. McGehee says:

    “How many feminists does it take to change a light bulb?”

    Only one—but she has to withhold sex to do it.

    BECAUSE OF THE PATRIARCHY!

  42. Tom's Paine says:

    “How many feminists does it take to change a light bulb?”

    “THAT’S NOT FUNNY!”

  43. […] has always had some peculiar utopianistic ideas about health and safety – not to mention free speech. For instance, in Boulder County homeowners might soon be “discouraged” from building […]

Comments are closed.