The laws on hate speech, discrimination, libel and harassment were introduced for good reason. Would the so-called libertarians who defend Nick Griffin's right to call Islam a "wicked, vicious faith" also have defended Hitler's right to say of the Jews: "the personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew"? When faced with the reality of the Holocaust, and with the Rwandan genocide, which was encouraged and fuelled by radio propaganda, would these same libertarians be quite so keen to maintain that words alone have no power to corrupt? Do they honestly believe that no one needs protecting from vile and pernicious racist, misogynistic, or homophobic hate speech?In answer I would defend Nick Griffin's position and Hitler's, but not now. So, instead, I will point to Deborah Lipstadt, known for winning the court case against Holocaust Denier David Irving, who says in SpikedOnline
"When an editor at the Washington Post heard that I oppose laws criminalising Holocaust and, by extension, genocide denial, he observed: ‘Now that’s a “man bites dog” story.’All in all, the latter is a better article.