JD Vance was right to slam Europe for no free speech, the Economist
When J.D. Vance slammed Europe for censoring speech at the Munich Security Conference, critics called him a hypocrite.
But The Economist says he’s right: European laws now punish speech the state dislikes. 1/
In Germany, calling a politician an “idiot” can get you charged. Ex–Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel has filed hundreds of complaints.
In April, a newspaper editor got a €12,000 fine and a 7-month suspended sentence - for a meme mocking the interior minister. 2/
In April, a newspaper editor got a €12,000 fine and a 7-month suspended sentence - for a meme mocking the interior minister. 2/
Britain criminalizes “grossly offensive” online posts.
Police now make about 30 arrests a day related to speech, including people who criticize immigration or insult school officials.
Reviewing tweets is easier than solving thefts - so that’s where enforcement goes. 3/
Police now make about 30 arrests a day related to speech, including people who criticize immigration or insult school officials.
Reviewing tweets is easier than solving thefts - so that’s where enforcement goes. 3/
In Spain, insulting the king is illegal. In Finland, quoting the Bible can get you prosecuted for “hate speech.”
In 2023, France fined CNews €100,000 for saying abortion is the world’s leading cause of death. 4/
In 2023, France fined CNews €100,000 for saying abortion is the world’s leading cause of death. 4/
Europe’s hate speech laws are designed to protect harmony.
But in practice, they criminalize unpopular opinions and suppress legitimate debate.
Over 40% of people in Germany and the UK now say they feel unable to express what they truly think. 5/
But in practice, they criminalize unpopular opinions and suppress legitimate debate.
Over 40% of people in Germany and the UK now say they feel unable to express what they truly think. 5/
The danger is structural. Laws are so vaguely written that they allow selective enforcement.
People have incentives to claim they are offended to silence critics.
And over time, new taboos emerge — expanding the list of topics you cannot speak about. 6/
People have incentives to claim they are offended to silence critics.
And over time, new taboos emerge — expanding the list of topics you cannot speak about. 6/
This stifles discussion on core democratic issues like migration, religion, and gender.
It breeds distrust in institutions and gives populists a narrative: the establishment doesn’t just disagree with you - it punishes you. 7/
It breeds distrust in institutions and gives populists a narrative: the establishment doesn’t just disagree with you - it punishes you. 7/
European liberals often hesitate to defend free speech, fearing they’ll be aligned with the far right.
But if democracies don’t defend even offensive speech, they erode the very values they claim to protect — to the benefit of authoritarian regimes. 8/
But if democracies don’t defend even offensive speech, they erode the very values they claim to protect — to the benefit of authoritarian regimes. 8/
Solution, from The Economist:
– Scrap hate speech laws.
– Treat online speech like offline speech.
– Keep criminal penalties for real threats, not opinions.
– Make libel civil, not criminal.
Democracy needs disagreement, not handcuffs. 9X
– Scrap hate speech laws.
– Treat online speech like offline speech.
– Keep criminal penalties for real threats, not opinions.
– Make libel civil, not criminal.
Democracy needs disagreement, not handcuffs. 9X
Source: economist.com/leaders/2025/0…
Generated by Thread Navigator
Press ⌘ + S to quick-export