Want to Really Combat Hate Speech? Here's How

Pope Francis has called for more civility in social media. A helpful, if not an urgent, reminder.

Steve Crowder has been “demonetized” by YouTube for supposedly “harassing” another commentator, Carlos Maza, in responding critically to videos the latter posted. Crowder used the terms “lispy queer” and “Mexican.” He also sells a t-shirt that reads “Socialism is for f-gs.” With a picture of a fig where the letter is missing.

But is this harassment? All the terms quoted above were said in a humorous tone. Crowder is a comedian. He refers to members of his crew, with apparent affection, as “half-Asian X” and “not-gay Y.” Maza is indeed a “queer,” a term preferred by homosexuals themselves, and publicly bills himself as “gay.” He does have a lisp. Is it, therefore, harassment to say so? Is it insulting to call someone a Mexican?

Nothing Crowder said is actually pejorative. They were statements of fact. To make them pejorative, you have to impute motive. This is not legitimate. Allow it, and there are no boundaries.

By contrast, how about these phrases, commonly allowed on YouTube and throughout the media:

“toxic masculinity”

“too much testosterone”

“testosterone-fueled”

“mansplain”

“male privilege”

“white privilege”

“If you are not a woman, you have no right to an opinion on…”

“too male”

“too white”

These are seen everywhere daily. These are, in contrast to anything Crowder said, clearly intended to insult, to demean, to exclude, and/or to promote hate.

And notice how easy it would be for YouTube to set up one of Google’s vaunted algorithms to catch them.

Censorship is wrongheaded. It is a fundamental error, and a fundamental violation of human rights, to try to enforce manners by law. But if we are to censor “harassment,” at a minimum, it must be actual harassment, and not just an alibi for censoring opinions with which we disagree—and cannot rationally counter.

Which is clearly the case with Crowder.