“Hate speech” is not a thing, Constitutionally speaking.
There is no First Amendment exception for “hate speech,” and the government can’t specially target racist or religiously bigoted speech — but some Connecticut prosecutors seem not to know that.
Eugene Volokh, Reason.com, August 6, 2018
Spot on. And relatedly, neither is “hate crime” a real thing. If you murder someone with malice aforethought, that’s the hate crime. It doesn’t matter what was going through your head to justify your action. The homicide is evidence of the hate.
So why aren’t more defense attorneys attacking the fallacious and inherently anti-1A “hate speech” premise? VDare:
At one point in his piece Volokh asks why defense attorneys aren’t kicking up more of a fuss, and I have a thought.
As with, say, many defenses that would be available for firearms offenses, your average criminal defense attorney is a flaming liberal who abhors guns in any event and thinks nobody should have them. So, in defending a client with gun charges, the creative muse doesn’t pay a visit.
Maybe the same lack of inspiration affects them when their client is facing a “racial incitement” charge in Connecticut.
There are a lot of sclerotic institutions in America that need a mass culling of lunatic shitlibs within their ranks.
This subject is eminently important. The whole malicious rhetorical foundation of “hate speech” needs to be discredited. It was a concept invented by YKW and their shitlib suckup lackeys with the eventual goal of silencing their critics, as we can see happening today.
Tragically, the goyium have underestimated the lethality of a foe with a mean verbal IQ higher than any other group in the world. The tide is only now starting to turn against the Word Corruptors, and their hysterical lashing out in response has been all too predictable.
When they are crying out indignantly is the best time to INCREASE THE VOLTAGE.