The Tolerant Society: Freedom of Speech and Extremist Speech in AmericaOxford University Press, 1986 - 295 páginas The First Amendment provides Americans with a far broader protection of free speech than that available in any other Western democracy, Lee Bollinger notes, and yet other democracies are not seen as significantly less open or more restrictive that the United States. Why do Americans guarantee people the right to advocate the overthrow of the government or advance racist or genocidal ideas? Why, for example, protect the right of neo-Nazis to march in predominantly Jewish Skokie, Illinois? In The Tolerant Society, Bollinger offers a masterful critique of the major theories of freedom of expression, and offers an alternative explanation. Traditional justifications for protecting extremist speech have turned largely on the inherent value of self-expression, maintaining that the benefits of the free interchange of ideas include the greater likelihood of serving truth and of promoting wise decisions in a democracy. Bollinger finds these theories persuasive but inadequate. Buttrressing his argument with references to the Skokie case and many other examples, as well as a careful analysis of the primary literature on free speech, he contends that the real value of toloeration of extremist speech lies in the extraordinary self-control toward antisocial behavior that it elicits: society is stengthened by the exercise of tolerance, he maintains. The problem of finding an appropriate response--especially when emotions make measured response difficult--is common to all social interaction, Bollinger points out, and there are useful lesons to be learned from withholding punishment even for what is conceded to be bad behavior. About the Author: Lee C. Bollinger is Professor of Law at the University of Michigan Law School. |
Dentro del libro
Resultados 1-3 de 35
Página 30
... deciding the case on a clean slate , but that such a resolution was foreclosed by standing precedents of a higher ... decide whether the First Amendment protects the activity in which appellees wish to en- gage , not to render moral ...
... deciding the case on a clean slate , but that such a resolution was foreclosed by standing precedents of a higher ... decide whether the First Amendment protects the activity in which appellees wish to en- gage , not to render moral ...
Página 67
... decide ourselves what to hear and what not to hear , we might very well choose not to listen to the very same speech the earlier censorship of which we so vigorously objected to ; we might decide to forbid it for precisely the same ...
... decide ourselves what to hear and what not to hear , we might very well choose not to listen to the very same speech the earlier censorship of which we so vigorously objected to ; we might decide to forbid it for precisely the same ...
Página 117
... deciding on the nature of the commitment to one's belief is one of exquisite complexity . Those who possess the ... decide whether to accede to the will and power of the majority or in what ways to continue the fight , perhaps by se ...
... deciding on the nature of the commitment to one's belief is one of exquisite complexity . Those who possess the ... decide whether to accede to the will and power of the majority or in what ways to continue the fight , perhaps by se ...
Contenido
Introduction | 3 |
Enslaved to Freedom? | 12 |
The Classical Model and Its Limits | 43 |
Derechos de autor | |
Otras 6 secciones no mostradas
Otras ediciones - Ver todas
The Tolerant Society Lee C. Bollinger Dean University of Michigan Law School Vista previa limitada - 1986 |
Términos y frases comunes
actually Amendment appear argument attitudes basic become behavior beliefs benefits capacity chapter citizens claim clear commitment concern considered constitutional context course Court danger decide decision defendants desire developed discussion doubt effect example excessive expression extreme fact fear feelings free speech principle freedom function give hand harm Holmes human idea important impulse individual injury intellectual interest intolerance involved issues Jews judges judgment judicial kind least less liberty limits majority matter meaning Meiklejohn mind moral nature Nazi noted offered opinion particular perhaps political position possible potential present Press problem prohibit protection provides question reason regarded regulation response result risk role rule seeking seems sense significance simply Skokie social society speak speech activity statement theory thought tolerance true truth understanding United University values York