U.S.-A coalition of groups and organizations has come together to officially redefine hate speech as "speech we don't like."
The coalition included several dictionaries, the SPLC, the majority of
colleges and universities in the nation, several Big Tech companies like
Google, Apple, Facebook, and Twitter, and the Democratic Party.
Representatives from each of these groups came together at Harvard
University to vote on and ratify the proposal officially changing the
definition of "hate speech" to "speech we don't like."
"A lot of people are getting the wrong idea about hate speech," a
representative from Instagram said. "They believe hate speech actually
has to be hateful to qualify. So I think we need to clarify terms here.
For instance, we just deleted a post that a lot of progressives did not
like. It wasn't hateful or anything, but they did not like it."
The Instagram rep then displayed this slide of the post they had deleted:
"See, we said it was hate speech, but this confused people because it
wasn't actually hateful. So I move that we immediately change the
definition of hate speech to 'speech you do not like.'"
After the motion passed, dictionaries quickly updated their definitions to read:
Hate speech - (noun) - speech you do not like or speech that offends you in any way // That guy said he disagrees with me. What awful hate speech!
At publishing time, the coalition had clarified that this definition does not apply to conservatives.
Read more
Over the last couple of years major social media, news and video platforms have been actively engaged in the censorship of what they believe to be fake news and information. Often spearheaded by third-party review organizations known to have biased views, there have been countless examples of unpopular speech and commentary that has seen its distribution suppressed or outright banned.
While there is most certainly a human element involved in the review
and flagging of information, mega Silicon Valley conglomerates have also
implemented automated systems to identify potentially hateful and
repulsive content.
To give you an idea of the kind of automation in play and what words
and ideas are being identified as running contrary to the principles of
media aggregators and distributors, consider that Facebook recently
banned America’s founding document from being posted.
Whitney Webb Mint Press News The state of South Carolina will become the first state in the nation to legislate a definition of anti-Semitism that considers certain criticisms of the Israeli government to be hate speech. The language, which was inserted into the state’s recently passed $8 billion budget, offers a much more vague definition of anti-Semitism that some suggest specifically targets the presence of the global boycott, divestment and sanctions, or BDS, movement on state college campuses. The law requires that all state institutions, including state universities, apply the revised definition when deciding whether an act violates anti-discrimination policies. Once it isreconciled with an appropriations bill previously passed by the state House, the measure will become law and take effect this July. However, the law will last only until the next budget is passed, meaning that the new legal definition of anti-Semitism must be renewed on a yearly basis unless new legislation making the language permanent is passed in the future.
The new definition uses the State Department’s current definition of anti-Semitism as its template — defining speech that “demonizes” or applies “double standards” to Israel “by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation” as anti-Semitic
However, the State Department’s definition was never intended to be used as an enforcement tool, and concern has subsequently been raised that South Carolina colleges may now move to criminalize conventional and factual criticism of Israel under the new, vague definition of anti-Semitism. Read more
The rulers of what many are now calling "Cuck Island" want to throw Brits in prison for sharing or commented on so-called "hate posts" on social media.
Social media users who share or comment on racist or anti-gay postings will face jail under rules proposed yesterday.
Advice for judges and magistrates recommends harsh punishments for those found guilty of stirring up hatred against racial, religious or sexual minority groups.
Among those jailed should be people who post comments or share online hate speech because they have been reckless as to whether they stir up hatred, say the proposals from the Sentencing Council.
Those found guilty of hate trolling by commenting or sharing social media should typically receive a sentence of six months in jail.
"Hate trolling" means sharing politically incorrect facts. The lunatic leftists controlling Britain want to throw right-wingers in prison for 6 months not just for posting such "hate," but for merely commenting on it or sharing it.
Anyone who is convicted of orginating hate speech that threatens anyone’s life or which is widely distributed should expect three years. Even someone whose words or material were judged as hateful, but were not considered to have threatened life or reached a big audience, is likely to be punished with a year in jail. [...]The council’s proposals say the most serious hate offences include speeches given by public figures with the aim of stirring up hatred, online content inciting violence towards racial or religious groups, and websites that publish abusive and insulting material to a worldwide audience over a long period. Aggravating factors include activity ‘in a particularly sensitive social climate’ or delivered to an impressionable audience. Using multiple social media platforms also makes an offence more grave.
George Orwell would have been laughed at had he put ideas like this in 1984 -- yet here we are. Read more
"See, we said it was hate speech, but this confused people because it
wasn't actually hateful. So I move that we immediately change the
definition of hate speech to 'speech you do not like.'"
