Or maybe "speech crime" if you want to be precise. And why not be precise? As this post points out, a problem with these phrases is their vagueness and lack of definition.
I wonder what academicians and members of the justice system would think of a project to actually define all the terms that leftists use in the media, and even in court testimony as this post points out, to accuse opponents of the regime of thought crimes and speech crimes.
Here in south africa we have a lot of farm murders who are 98% inhabited by white people (sorry, don't jail me for.saying so). After EFF (a populistic black political party, funded by the rich elite , who have their greedy eyes on many enriching "things" like the vast richness of our mining territories) constantly yelled their famous "slogan" KILL THE BOER, and countless court cases about the legitimacy of it, the EFF won the court case.... it SAYS a lot of our lack of the rule of law and the futureless justice we have. Here since 1994 it is written in our green paper law that discrimination CAN NEVER happened from black to white, but only the other way round... i have no trust in our judiciary mafia since 1994, they did amazing good things yes, but failed the total citizens and their rights as citizens. .
“The term “hate speech” is a bizarre verbal construct that allows for a wide range of extrajudicial maneuvers to be pursued. One’s free speech is always another’s hate speech. The term didn’t even exist in the legal glossary half a century ago. One wonders who invented the term and introduced it into the law in the first place. Its abstract meaning allows judges or juries to define it however they want.”
Q. Is there any significant pushback in the Courts to undo unconstitutional made up terms?
A. I am neither a specialist nor a legal practitioner like the author of the article, but I can testify from personal experience that the wind is not blowing in that direction...
"Newspeak" is accompanied by "Newthink"...
The jurisprudence here in Belgium is subject to the doxa of "climate change" to justify trampling on private property, and I heard with my own ears a judge say without the slightest shame "the law, you sometimes have to put it in your pocket"!
Maybe some resist... but it does not pay not to howl with the wolves.
I'm in the process of reading The Gulag Archipelago. Too bad its massive length makes actually reading it too intimidating for most 21st century people. Because that book makes it clear that we in the West are now well on our way to a Soviet-style police state, complete with gulags.
This essay needs to be widely read, in my opinion.
Which creatures, since time immemorial, are the most versed and prolific ones to sow confusion in, for them, total alien and inferior populations ??? ... 🤔🤔🤔
Hate speech just means thought crime.
Or maybe "speech crime" if you want to be precise. And why not be precise? As this post points out, a problem with these phrases is their vagueness and lack of definition.
Hate crime means thought crime. Someone commits a crime, then an additional charge for what we claim he was thinking.
Exactly.
I wonder what academicians and members of the justice system would think of a project to actually define all the terms that leftists use in the media, and even in court testimony as this post points out, to accuse opponents of the regime of thought crimes and speech crimes.
Here in south africa we have a lot of farm murders who are 98% inhabited by white people (sorry, don't jail me for.saying so). After EFF (a populistic black political party, funded by the rich elite , who have their greedy eyes on many enriching "things" like the vast richness of our mining territories) constantly yelled their famous "slogan" KILL THE BOER, and countless court cases about the legitimacy of it, the EFF won the court case.... it SAYS a lot of our lack of the rule of law and the futureless justice we have. Here since 1994 it is written in our green paper law that discrimination CAN NEVER happened from black to white, but only the other way round... i have no trust in our judiciary mafia since 1994, they did amazing good things yes, but failed the total citizens and their rights as citizens. .
You:
“The term “hate speech” is a bizarre verbal construct that allows for a wide range of extrajudicial maneuvers to be pursued. One’s free speech is always another’s hate speech. The term didn’t even exist in the legal glossary half a century ago. One wonders who invented the term and introduced it into the law in the first place. Its abstract meaning allows judges or juries to define it however they want.”
Q. Is there any significant pushback in the Courts to undo unconstitutional made up terms?
A. I am neither a specialist nor a legal practitioner like the author of the article, but I can testify from personal experience that the wind is not blowing in that direction...
"Newspeak" is accompanied by "Newthink"...
The jurisprudence here in Belgium is subject to the doxa of "climate change" to justify trampling on private property, and I heard with my own ears a judge say without the slightest shame "the law, you sometimes have to put it in your pocket"!
Maybe some resist... but it does not pay not to howl with the wolves.
Terrific essay!
I'm in the process of reading The Gulag Archipelago. Too bad its massive length makes actually reading it too intimidating for most 21st century people. Because that book makes it clear that we in the West are now well on our way to a Soviet-style police state, complete with gulags.
This essay needs to be widely read, in my opinion.
Which creatures, since time immemorial, are the most versed and prolific ones to sow confusion in, for them, total alien and inferior populations ??? ... 🤔🤔🤔
🤣🤣🤣🤣 High-time to get out of their Matrix !!!
On Hate Crimes, some thoughts
https://drp314.substack.com/p/hate-crimes