This edited collection provides a timely review of the current state of hate speech research in Asia and Europe, through the comparative examples of Korea, Japan and France. Extending the study of hate speech studies beyond the largely western emphasis on European and US contexts dominant in the field, this book’s comparative framework aims to examine hate speech as a global phenomenon spanning Asian and European contexts. An innovative range of nuanced empirical case studies explore hate speech by analyzing gendered hate speech and nationality, French cartoon humour, official counter radicalization narratives and the use of international law to inform domestic legislation in the Philippines and Japan. A fresh perspective on Asian and European hate speech, this book’s evaluation of current of hate speech research also identifies future directions for the development of theory and method. Filling a critical gap in the literature, Hate Speech in Asia and Europe will appeal to students and scholars of law, politics, religion, history, social policy and social science more broadly, as well as Asian Studies.

The contributors to this volume consider whether it is possible to establish carefully tailored hate speech policies that are cognizant of the varying traditions, histories and values of different countries. Throughout, there is a strong comparative emphasis, with examples (and authors) drawn from around the world. All the authors explore whether or when different cultural and historical settings justify different substantive rules given that such cultural relativism can be used to justify content-based restrictions and so endanger freedom of expression. Essays address the following questions, among others: is hate speech in fact so dangerous or harmful to vulnerable minorities or communities as to justify a lower standard of constitutional protection? What harms and benefits accrue from laws that criminalize hate speech in particular contexts? Are there circumstances in which everyone would agree that hate speech should be criminally punished? What lessons can be learned from international case law?

The opportunities afforded by the Internet greatly overshadow the challenges. While not forgetting this, we can nevertheless still address some of the problems that arise. Hate speech online is one such problem. But what exactly is hate speech online, and how can we deal with it effectively? As with freedom of expression, on- or offline, UNESCO defends the position that the free flow of information should always be the norm. Counter-speech is generally preferable to suppression of speech. And any response that limits speech needs to be very carefully weighed to ensure that this remains wholly exceptional, and that legitimate robust debate is not curtailed.

For many observers, the European Union is mired in a deep crisis. Between sluggish growth; political turmoil following a decade of austerity politics; Brexit; and the rise of Asian influence, the EU is seen as a declining power on the world stage. Columbia Law professor Anu Bradford argues the opposite in her important new book The Brussels Effect: the EU remains an influential superpower that shapes the world in its image. By promulgating regulations that shape the international business environment, elevating standards worldwide, and leading to a notable Europeanization of many important aspects of global commerce, the EU has managed to shape policy in areas such as data privacy, consumer health and safety, environmental protection, antitrust, and online hate speech. And in contrast to how superpowers wield their global influence, the Brussels Effect - a phrase first coined by Bradford in 2012- absolves the EU from playing a direct role in imposing standards, as market forces alone are often sufficient as multinational companies voluntarily extend the EU rule to govern their global operations. The Brussels Effect shows how the EU has acquired such power, why multinational companies use EU standards as global standards, and why the EU's role as the world's regulator is likely to outlive its gradual economic decline, extending the EU's influence long into the future.

Most modern democracies punish hate speech. Less freedom for some, they claim, guarantees greater freedom for others. Heinze rejects that approach, arguing that democracies have better ways of combatting violence and discrimination against vulnerable groups without having to censor speakers. Critiquing dominant free speech theories, Heinze explains that free expression must be safeguarded not just as an individual right, but as an essential attribute of democratic citizenship. The book challenges contemporary state regulation of public discourse by promoting a stronger theory of what democracy is and what it demands. Examining US, European, and international approaches, Heinze offers a new vision of free speech within Western democracies.

This edited collection provides a timely review of the current state of hate speech research in Asia and Europe, through the comparative examples of Korea, Japan and France. Extending the study of hate speech studies beyond the largely western emphasis on European and US contexts dominant in the field, this book's comparative framework aims to examine hate speech as a global phenomenon spanning Asian and European contexts. An innovative range of nuanced empirical case studies explore hate speech by analyzing gendered hate speech and nationality, French cartoon humour, official counter radicalization narratives and the use of international law to inform domestic legislation in the Philippines and Japan. A fresh perspective on Asian and European hate speech, this book's evaluation of current of hate speech research also identifies future directions for the development of theory and method. Filling a critical gap in the literature, Hate Speech in Asia and Europe will appeal to students and scholars of law, politics, religion, history, social policy and social science more broadly, as well as Asian Studies.

A comprehensive analysis into the background of legal responses to, and wider implications of, hate speech in Japan.