James Kirchick, a writer and columnist, debates with Josh about free speech and hate speech in a chaotic world. They discuss hate speech laws in Germany, the use of swastikas, restrictions on teaching, book restrictions, and the relationship between civil unrest, ideological differences, and gun violence.
The podcast explores the complexities of free speech and hate speech laws, including the challenges of determining acceptable speech and the potential dangers of government censorship.
The episode raises the importance of upholding free speech principles in democratic societies and draws parallels between free speech and gun rights.
The conversation highlights instances where free speech is not upheld in American universities and discusses the delicate balance between combating disinformation and safeguarding free speech.
Deep dives
The tension between free speech and hate speech laws
The podcast episode explores the tension between free speech and hate speech laws in different societies. It discusses how hate speech laws are implemented in many countries, including examples from Australia. The conversation delves into the double standards and controversies surrounding the punishment and censorship of certain ideas and expressions, specifically in the context of Jewish students being vilified on American campuses. The episode raises the broader question of how much speech should be permissible in a civilized society.
The case of CJ Hopkins and freedom of expression in Germany
The episode recounts the case of an American writer residing in Germany, CJ Hopkins, who was charged with promoting national socialism for using a swastika symbol as a provocative image on the cover of his book. It discusses the complexities of free speech in Germany, where there are stringent hate speech laws due to the historical context of Nazi atrocities. The conversation examines the nuanced legal exceptions and debates surrounding the use of symbols and expressions related to Nazi ideology, highlighting the challenges in determining what constitutes acceptable speech and the potential dangers of granting the government censorship power.
The importance of maintaining free speech principles
The podcast episode emphasizes the importance of upholding free speech principles, particularly in democratic societies. It critiques the idea of granting the government the authority to regulate and censor speech, expressing concerns about the potential for abuse, subjective interpretations, and power shifts. The conversation draws parallels between the First Amendment and the Second Amendment in the United States, highlighting the American view of accepting negative consequences as the price to uphold these fundamental rights. It also compares free speech issues to debates surrounding gun control, exploring how Americans weigh the costs and benefits of maintaining these rights.
The threat of anti-free speech forces
The speaker emphasizes the danger posed by anti-free speech forces, primarily from the progressive left. They argue that these forces control influential American institutions such as the Academy, Hollywood, and the media. The speaker warns that if these individuals were to gain power, it would lead to a dystopian society where free speech is suppressed. They also mention instances where free speech principles are not upheld in American universities, with students and professors facing consequences for their speech.
Debating the limits of free speech
The conversation further delves into the debate over free speech limits, exemplified by recent policies and actions. The discussion highlights instances of both the left and the right cracking down on speech they disagree with. The speaker acknowledges the delicate balance between combating disinformation and safeguarding free speech, especially in the age of social media and algorithms. They argue that distinguishing between what constitutes banning or censorship can be complex, pointing out discrepancies in book availability and ideological capture in public libraries. The conversation concludes by questioning the trade-off between legal restrictions and cultural restraint in terms of their impact on free speech.
Should swastikas be banned? Should you be allowed to chant “Palestinians are terrorists”? What about “trans women aren’t women”? Or “Covid was a hoax”?
In an era of misinformation and hate speech, universities, governments and journalists are wrestling with whether to control what gets said. Should there be any limits?
You’ve seen James Kirchick on Bill Maher’s show. He’s a big free-speecher; a writer, columnist, and a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. He and Josh butt heads debating free speech and hate speech in a chaotic world.