Freedom of Speech, Hate Speech and Democratic Formation

: - on the double function of hate speech legislation and its relation to freedom of political speech

Abstract

The Ph.d.-thesis consists of an introduction and three scientific articles:
1) The Individual Consequences of Hate Speech – A Comparison of Defamation and Hate Speech/Group Libel
2) Universities and Other Institutions – not Hate Speech Laws – are a Threat to Political Speech
3) Democratic Formation as the Response to a Growing Cancel Culture
The overall question of the thesis is: Should there be laws against hate speech?
The conclusion in all three articles – and hence overall in the thesis – is that there should.
The first article compares laws against defamation with laws against hate speech. First, the main reason for passing laws against defamation is considered, and second, this reason is analysed and evaluated in connection with the passing of laws against hate speech.
The main reason for passing laws against defamation is that defamation leads to personal harm for victims of defamatory speech. This harm takes form of, i.a, a damaged reputation, being shut out of social and work related connections, depression and anxiety.
In the article, it is argued that victims of hate speech to a large extent experience the same consequences as the victims of defamation. Hence, the conclusion is that if the main argument for passing laws against defamation is the personal harm that it causes, then one should also argue in favour of passing laws against hate speech.
The second article evaluates the growing demands for censorship at universities and other (private) institutions in the US. The US is the only Western country, which has not passed laws against hate speech; and in this article, it is argued that the lack of hate speech legislation might have played a significant part as to why the demands for censorship have gained a foothold. Further, it is argued that because minorities in the US have not had a law to protect them against hate speech, they have more or less been forced to set demands for protection against hate speech at their educational institutions, work places etc. However, this seems to have led to the unfortunate consequence of ever-growing demands which have gone too far as to limiting freedom of speech in a liberal democracy. In this article, it is argued that hate speech laws, in reality, can protect minorities against hate speech while at the same time, they can also protect democracy against unreasonable demands for censoring certain political opinions – something that we have witnessed at universities and other (private) institutions in the US. The argument that hate speech legislation can also protect democracy against the demands for censorship presents the case that if one has hate speech laws to refer to, one can dismiss the demands for censorship more easily.
The third article builds directly on the second article and introduces a new argument in the freedom of speech debate, namely The Argument from Democratic Formation. This argument is founded on basic democratic principles such as freedom of speech, equality and tolerance – although first and foremost on the democratic premise of critical thinking. The argument
from democratic formation hence reflects foundational democratic premises and principles – stressing that if one is formed by these, one will naturally be led to combine arguments which are usually found on opposite sides of the freedom of speech/hate speech debate.
The argument from democratic formation thus highlights that if one follows basic democratic principles, it must follow that one has hate speech laws in place to protect the foundational democratic rights of members of minorities, while at the same time, it must also follow that one does not accept demands for censorship of certain political opinions at universities and other institutions.

Date of Award	6 May 2024
Original language	English
Awarding Institution	Roskilde University
Sponsors	University of the Faroe Islands
Supervisor	Sune Lægaard (Supervisor) & Hans Andrias Sølvará (Supervisor)