system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Hate speech shouldn't be illegal.

For context, I am trans and very much a leftist. I do not believe that "social justice has gone too far" or any such thing. However, here is why I think hate speech should be legal. (By the way, I live in America and am talking about it.)

I believe that hate speech should be punished socially rather than legally as I think people should be able to say what they want without fear of legal repercussions. I do not believe policing a social issue should be the job of the state. 

However, there is another, and much more important point.

**Banning hate speech creates a framework in which people can be arrested for whatever the current government's definition of dangerous speech is.**

Unless someone is unable to escape harassment safely and easily (for example, if they are being followed, stalked, or cornered, if it is happening at work or school, or if it is coming from a parent), it may be a form of abuse, but the government should not be able to control what sentiments people can express.

Were a law to be passed that banned hate speech, a quick alteration of the law, possibly only changing a list of terms, would lead to things like the forbidden words list sent to the CDC by the Trump administration on a national scale. 

Activists could be arrested far more easily for campaigning for the rights of minority groups. Propaganda would become much easier to spread with opposition to it being punishable under the law. 

Political opponents could be slapped with a criminal record and have their rights stripped as a result. The punishment could also easily be increased, leading to unprecedented levels of government control over public discourse.

In addition, these laws would be heavily influenced by the rich few, potentially leading to a ban on discussing wealth redistribution.

I do not trust the state to control public discourse, and therefore I believe hate speech should be legal.

Does anyone want to CMV?
gpt
In the United States there is no hate speech laws though. Certain private places have hate rules that can get you fired or kicked out of school, but their not laws, their private places making decisions on who they want as part of their organization. The number of people across the country who are in favor of hate speech laws in the United States is incredibly low, and the people who are in favor of it have no idea how to accomplish it. It violates the first amendment, congress shall make no law and all of that. Nothing can change that but another constitutional amendment, which is essentially impossible considering the near complete lack of support on both sides of the political aisle for it and amongst the electorate for it. 

And that is outside of the difficulties in practice with a new constitutional amendment, which is remarkably unlikely in the current political climate. The last amendment was the 27'th, which delays laws affecting Congressional salary from taking effect until after the next election of representatives, and that quite procedural amendment happened in a much more cohesive time for the government. The 26'th amendment was in 1971, and reduced the voting age from 21 to 18 across the country, that is the last time an amendment was passed that actually affected the people. 

I simply would not worry it too much, a hate speech law is wildly unconstitutional in a way no court has ever implied can change, and there is nothing remotely like the political will to change the constitution and fundamentally change the nature of the first amendment. To do it would require either a two thirds majority in the congress and senate both, and a President willing to sign it, or a national convention that can only be called by a two thirds majority of the states insisting on one through their own state legislatures. There is a case to be made for hate speech laws in principle. 

Check Canada's hate speech legislation wikipedia page, in 40 years there have been 9 criminal trials for hate speech ever, all of the most severe and egregious cases imaginable, and only 7 were convicted. It can be done in a way that takes civil liberties seriously, in a way that simply does not affect normal peoples rights to engage in even shocking or cruel speech really at all. But it hardly matters for the United States, its not constitutional at all, no court has ever said anything like it, the people do not support it at all as a group, and it really is nearly impossible for such hate speech legislation to happen in the foreseeable future, or really almost at all considering the sheer number of difficulties with the idea.