| dc.description.abstract | Liberal democracies are put in a difficult position by laws criminalizing hate speech. It is a core value of a liberal democracy that all citizens have equal rights. Speech can be used to perpetuate ideas that have historically resulted in unequal treatment for marginalized groups; therefore, when searching for true equality, speech must be taken into account. In recent decades, the solution to this issue has been the enactment of hate speech legislation. On the other hand, laws that restrict speech pose a danger to the right to free expression in liberal democracies. Which is also one of the core values of a liberal democracy.
This literature review seeks to determine whether there are alternative measures for combating hate speech and its potential consequences. By analyzing social trends, comparing hate speech policies, and analyzing various psychological, sociological, and political theories. This paper argues that hate speech laws are merely symbolic and that supplementary measures are necessary. Such as the counterspeech doctrine, which embodies any speech that contradicts speech with which the listener disagrees.
Due to the social science nature of this paper, there is no definitive conclusion to be drawn, other than the observation that hate speech is a complicated subject, and that laws against hate speech are a simple alternative to a complicated issue. The purpose of this paper is to provide a deeper understanding of the complex issues surrounding hate speech. | |