Monday, November 30, 2015

Donald Trump in Germany


A friend asks whether Donald Trump would be to blame if harm came to people he targets, e.g., Muslims, Mexicans, the disabled, and women. It's a great question. For now, consider how Germany limits certain forms of speech. Section 130 of the German Criminal Code outlaws "incitement of popular hatred." This crime consist of inciting hatred against parts of the population. For example, it is unlawful to refer publicly to ethnic groups as "maggots" or "freeloaders." This does sound like something Donald Trump would say. New Zealand has a Racial Disharmony law. It sounds Orwellian, yes; and it makes it unlawful to publish or distribute "threatening, abusive, or insulting...matter or words likely to excite hostility against or bring into contempt any group of persons...on the ground of the colour, race, or ethnic or national or ethnic origins of that group of persons." These laws seem to deprive people of the right to be stupid-- even, if there is such a thing, a right to hate others. On other hand, what nation has done more than Germany to accommodate Syrian refugees? Do laws that criminalize hate speech lead to a more tolerant society? Donald Trump might be arrested in Germany under Section 130; in the U.S., he might be the next President. If speech laws slow or prevent the spread of hatred, should we consider how to adapt them to the American context-- or is this too PC? Personally, I favor some attempt to emulate the German model. 

No comments: