This point in particular makes me wonder about how it can get applied...
> In addition, the hate speech would need to be communicated in a context where it is likely to foment detestation or vilification of an individual or group on any of these prohibited grounds.
Any communication that is negative about a certain group, or even overly positive about one with the implication that it's considerably better than another's could end up contributing to this effect... Who gets to decide it's "likely"?
The right and the left really can't agree on the balance between equality/equity for who's actually vulnerable enough to need these laws to protect their human rights. This will be applied unevenly, maybe even arbitrarily.
When the government collects 16,000 dollars from every person it can fine for this, would social media even be worth the risk, for a poor person? Some rich kid with the right connections could pull some strings, and financially gut a person they disagree with who said something "likely to foment detestation" on their worst day, putting them 5 figures deeper in debt and driving them off social media. And then the ensuing storm foments hate between both groups. Maybe the poor kid gets a gofundme that won't get shut down so he doesn't have to pay it back over the course of many years, if he's lucky.
> In addition, the hate speech would need to be communicated in a context where it is likely to foment detestation or vilification of an individual or group on any of these prohibited grounds.
Any communication that is negative about a certain group, or even overly positive about one with the implication that it's considerably better than another's could end up contributing to this effect... Who gets to decide it's "likely"?
The right and the left really can't agree on the balance between equality/equity for who's actually vulnerable enough to need these laws to protect their human rights. This will be applied unevenly, maybe even arbitrarily.
When the government collects 16,000 dollars from every person it can fine for this, would social media even be worth the risk, for a poor person? Some rich kid with the right connections could pull some strings, and financially gut a person they disagree with who said something "likely to foment detestation" on their worst day, putting them 5 figures deeper in debt and driving them off social media. And then the ensuing storm foments hate between both groups. Maybe the poor kid gets a gofundme that won't get shut down so he doesn't have to pay it back over the course of many years, if he's lucky.