Epoch Times - Nobody Agrees on the Definition of Hate Speech Andrew Doyle Says
Aired: 2025-12-29
Duration: 01:21


=== The Case for Free Speech (01:21) ===

[00:00:00]  These are arguments that have been reiterated by much smarter people than me throughout history.
[00:00:04]  But I wanted to reiterate them in a short, succinct, accessible way because I think we have an obligation to do so.
[00:00:11]  I think every successive generation has to make the case for free speech because it's not something that's won and then it is in our grasp evermore.
[00:00:19]  it's always at risk.
[00:00:21]  Every day, you know, you read an article about people trying to eliminate free speech or draw their own exceptions or carve out exceptions.
[00:00:30]  That's why the First Amendment, even though it's a great protection, it's not invulnerable to attack or modification or misinterpretation.
[00:00:40]  You know, all of that can still happen.
[00:00:43]  That's what a lot of campaigners and activists want.
[00:00:46]  But you look at the danger of that.
[00:00:47]  I mean, they want hate speech to be, you know, exceptions to be carved out for hate speech.
[00:00:53]  No one can define hate speech.
[00:00:55]  No one knows what it means.
[00:00:57]  And human beings hate.
[00:01:00]  That's an emotion that has developed in us over many, many years.
[00:01:04]  You can't wish away a human emotion with the stroke of a pen.
[00:01:08]  You may as well try and legislate against envy.
[00:01:11]  It doesn't make sense.
[00:01:12]  So, you know, when you try, I mean, if you look at all the various definitions of hate speech across European statute books, none of them agree.