You’re raging all the time. I think the laws are a good idea even more so now. We’ll see how it shakes out I suppose.
Or throw rocks at them
Cheers
Gript are telling you what they are
https://twitter.com/fatima_gunning/status/1736676056981983655
1 Like
We already have laws in place to deal with inciting violence and hate.
What we don’t have is the protection of gender other than male and female… Whatever that is.
Mcentee seems hell bent on bringing it in anyway so it’ll be done i imagine.
It strikes me that our government just seem to be relenting to a select group of NGO wokie types when it comes to a lot of their policies. There’s a gang of them advising the government that seem to pop up on every topic - and this same clique are all heavily involved in online US culture type battles… That’s a bubble we don’t want to be caught up in.
3 Likes
Incorrect.
An expert on this topic just agreed with me.
Fall in.
You’ve been one of the biggest pushers of batshit far right US culture war nonsense on this forum.
Yourself, @glenshane, @Tierneevin1979, @ttown_boy, @Hisenberg and @maroonandwhite should all move to Alabama and set up some Waco style cult.
You’d be much happier there.
1 Like
If you say so bud.
3 Likes
Who are this gang of ngo wokie types advising our government on every topic?
Incorrect again.
Quite the irony that one of the main far right US culture war headbangers the Irish “anti-woke” headbangers love to quote is a guy called Andy Ngo.
I don’t know names… I see the same heads appearing regularly as advisors on a wide range of topics. I’ll see if i can find them… If there’s a Harry Potter society of Ireland I’m sure they run it.
2 Likes
This wan is an advisor on everything @Juhniallio … She’s a big proponent of puberty blockers and cutting up children.
1 Like
Joe Humphreys
Mon Dec 18 2023 - 06:00
It is ironic that a law designed to combat hate speech has attracted so much vitriol. The Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill was back in the news recently as Elon Musk, Fox News and other “anti-woke” champions renewed hostilities against it.
It is worth remembering the Bill is now four years in gestation. Its genesis was a public consultation launched in 2019 by then minister for justice Charlie Flanagan on upgrading the Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act 1989.
Minister for Justice Helen McEntee “intends progressing” the Bill “early in the new year”, which doesn’t exactly inspire confidence. However, there is no shame in doing a sanity check on the proposed law even at this late stage.
[ Hate crime seen as ‘growing problem’ both sides of Border, research finds ]
One big change that has occurred since 2019 is the introduction of the Digital Services Act, an EU-wide regulation that holds online platforms accountable for illegal content, including hate speech, on those forums. The EU law, which came into force in November 2022 and takes full effect next February, provides a means of policing harmful speech that arguably lessens the need for the new Bill.
READ MORE
Some criticism of the hate offences Bill has been hysterical - but that doesn’t mean it is a good Bill
For a fresh take on the matter, The Irish Times turned to Dr Jeff Howard, a political scientist at University College London, who has researched hate speech laws globally.
“What I try to do is thread the needle between two positions that have dominated debate,” he says. There is an “absolutist view that, barring rare emergencies, speech that incites hatred has to be protected even if it leads to harm; even if it endangers people … It doesn’t seem to me that that view is especially plausible,” he says. “But I think sometimes people go too far in the other direction and say ‘Oh, this speech is harmful and so we should ban it’.”
Howard advocates what he calls a “strategic” compromise.
Political philosophers have linked hate speech to various harms. Some people describe it as a kind of violence. Would you go that far?
“I don’t think it’s helpful to describe speech as a form of violence … but I think a lot of philosophers have drawn attention to the harms hate speech can cause, and these different theories help us see why there is a very basic moral duty not to engage in hate speech.
“Because there are a lot of different harms caused by hate speech, there is no one single kind of harm. So a question I would ask is: are there tools within the law through which we can deal with these different harms?
“One harm is where hate speech can incite violence. Well, we have existing provisions in the law against inciting violence so we might think about making more muscular use of those. Hate speech can function as a form of bullying or harassment. Well, we have provisions against harassment in the law.
“So a thought I have is: are jurisdictions making suitable use of the tools already available to them rather than having to create a new criminal offence?”
The Irish law would create specific offences for targeting people with ‘protected characteristics’ such race, religion or gender. Is that a sensible thing to include in the law?
“There is a debate to be had on whether the motivations or intentions behind particular crimes can make those crimes worse than they would otherwise be – and I can see the argument for the answer yes … but I think it’s quite unhelpful that that issue is lumped together with the free speech issue in this legislation.”
Are there any examples of countries that have legislated well on hate speech?
“What has largely happened in most western liberal democracies is that, with the exception of the United States, legislators have passed statutes criminalising hate speech on some specification. The statutes aren’t crazy. They are perfectly sensible, even if I doubt they do much good.
“The police in my estimation then radically underenforces them, perhaps out of a tacit acknowledgment that arresting people is not necessarily a sensible way of dealing with intolerant views in a community. I think there’s a stronger case for compelling platforms to remove hate speech than there is for incarcerating individuals for engaging in hate speech … and that’s why we should be broadly supportive of regulation such as the Digital Services Act. It’s fully appropriate to insist platforms live up to their responsibilities as curators of public discourse.”
On the question of strategy, the Irish legislation has galvanised a range of reactionary campaigners. Is there a case for quietly dropping the Bill or would that be seen as surrender?
“I’m sympathetic to the thought that they [the Government] should not back down in the face of these kinds of criticisms because I think the criticisms are coming from a somewhat hysterical place …
“My own take is that I doubt legislation like this does much good and may actually be counterproductive, depending on how it is enforced, but it comes from a laudable place. I think the Irish legislature has the legitimate authority to think through this issue and decide what to enact; what kind of policy to take. As a participant in that policy debate, I’d raise some sceptical questions as to whether this was necessarily the most sensible way. But I think the hysterical criticism of the legislation as evil and illiberal is completely misguided
My understanding is that EU directives have to be transposed to local law… So i presume that will apply with the above?
So we’ll now have laws that deal with inciting hate and violence and now a digital version… But also will have new Irish laws on top of all that.
The EU law is taking on X it already…
https://twitter.com/roy_kinsella/status/1736742182206267764?t=4AS2hJsKBtpYynT6WYfzOQ&s=19
The police in my estimation then radically underenforces them, perhaps out of a tacit acknowledgment that arresting people is not necessarily a sensible way of dealing with intolerant views in a community
Making the companies that platform the hate speech enforce reasonable standards is a far more efficient way of dealing with it than having gobshites running down to the station every time they see something that hurts their feelings
6 Likes
100% … The guards are already undermanned and under funded for what they already have on their plate.
Elon should just hire an army of Karen’s or Boards.ie moderators to police his platform.
1 Like
The Marxist agitators only like experts who agree with their already made up position. They don’t have the mental dexterity to change their mind.
4 Likes
Some EU laws (and this is one) are directly effective and don’t need to be transposed into national law