In the United States, hate speech is often spewed forth by people with a great deal of influence, thus making it even more dangerous. Freedom of speech always comes with responsibility, and people in powerful positions need to have extra responsibilities. In Europe since WW2, they have very specific laws concerning hate speech and what is allowed that are based on international law. They are written in a way that doesn't interfere with their freedom of expression and right to free speech. Could these laws have reduced the death toll caused by the unfettered demonizing of the Jewish people by Hitler and the Nazis?
In the US, however, no such laws exist. Right-wing hatemongers like Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin (to name just a few) are allowed to inflame and encourage hatred and violence, oppose human rights and vilify any and all who oppose it. When these people are backed by a "supposed" news network such as Fox News and many of the wealthiest people in the world, it has only magnified the negative impact on our country and how we are viewed around the world.
Many of the hate groups in the U.S are tracked and monitored by non profit organizations such as the Southern Poverty Law Center along with local and federal law enforcement agencies. These hate groups have grown by 30% since 2000 with the largest increase occurring after the election of President Obama in 2008 in the low 300's to between 784 - 939 active hate groups. The membership in these groups are terrifying at estimates of near 200,000 people. It also has to be understood that virtually every member of these groups are armed to the teeth. Thus the need to keep track and monitor them. The SPLC website has a map that has where and how many of them are in the U.S.
http://www.splcenter.org/...
There are many websites and untold numbers of memes that are dedicated to exposing the dedication that all too many of the talking heads exhibit when spouting their vile hatred. We do have freedom of speech guaranteed to us by the 1st ammendment. But it's illegal to yell fire in a crowded movie theater for fun because of endangering the people inside. It would be very hard to point to the recent flash points of unrest that has occurred recently because of the perception of police brutality and excessive use of force. Then you add a constant barrage of blaming the victims and excuses for the system that has too many times gotten away with murder in the minds of the public in general. The flash point is reached when those same people lose hope that there is nobody that will be held accountable. The unanswered question to this is, just how much destruction in lives and property will there be allowed to take place as a direct result of hate speech in the media.
[[CIVIL_RIGHTS,LAW,CULTURE,HUMAN_RIGHTS]]
Wed May 06, 2015 at 2:27 AM PT: What is happening in the comments here is basically the same as what happens with every other conversation when it comes to free speech. Many people want to insinuate that the 1st ammendment would be violated. The different groups out there that are recognized as hate groups have in no way been stopped from publishing what they want to. If you want to disagree with somebody and their views, then you should be able to do so. But you shouldn't be able to portray your opinions as facts or the facts as being an opinion, or frame it in such a way to incite hatred while emotions are high. This is a favored tactic that foxnews uses.
I have no idea about how we in the U.S would be able to censor any group of people and stay true to the first ammendment. My purpose in writing this is meant to start a conversation about self censoring that could benefit all of us, no matter where you stand on a subject. When the fairness doctrine was tossed on the trash heap of protections for the American people, truth became interchangeable with opinions and facts with possibilities. In our fast paced 24 hour news cycles there will always remain errors in judgment and those willing to exploit them in the most negative way possible. This article is basically an exercise in hyperbole, but it's also an indictment of us as Americans. All too often groups want to demonize the other. It's done based on politics, socioeconomics and standings and myriad of ways to make it us versus them. Will we ever evolve to a point where the biggest concern will be for us all? I hope I'm wrong, but I really don't think that will ever happen.