ABSTRACT
Chapter 2 connects fundamental principles of hate speech regulation in a democracy through the recognition of legitimate aims or legal goods that democracy chooses to protect. It is argued that fundamental rights such as liberty, equality, and human dignity serve as communicating vessels in a democratic regime. However, in regards to hate speech they can easily enter into conflict. Depending on the adoption of a more liberal or more militant model of democracy, responses to that conflict will differ. In the absence of a universal definition of hate speech, a new theory of three interdependent, mutually inclusive and equally important models of hate speech is proposed. It combines Mill’s harm principle with the permitted limits of free speech from international treaties. Therefore hate speech could be defined as incitement to violence, incitement to discrimination, and incitement to hatred. The element of instigation is key in acknowledging what the perpetrator of hate speech desires to achieve. It is argued that in understanding the harm hate speech produces, democracy may better identify goods worth protecting and, thus, prevent causing such harm.
