I ask the question the other way around: Why is it socially acceptable and even legal in the US to talk shit about other people in public, without them present to defend themselves.

Obviously can't speak for all Americans, but from where I stand free speech is an absolute right and there shouldn't be anything legally wrong with talking shit.

In my opinion laws shouldn't exist unless it can be clear to a person that they would be breaking the law beforehand. In the case of speech, laws limiting speech are full of gray areas and imprecise definitions that leave too much ambiguity. A person can very easily say something that to them doesn't feel offensive at all only to be charged later with breaking a law because someone decided after the fact that it was in fact offensive. This level gray area rarely exists for other laws, for example its clear what it means to assault someone or steal.

Out of curiosity from the other angle, why in some places is it illegal to say something bad about a person unless they can defend themselves? And who has the power to decide what is or is not legally considered talking shit?

But the result of near-absolute free speech also includes how people were riled up in the Rittenhouse case or the hit pieces that show up in the NYT every other month. Societal discourse should be better than that. Edit: Alternatively, find ways to have people not rile up like that

You are right that its impossible to determine if your speech will offend others. But you can use other criteria, like your statements being intentionally untrue and causing damage to the victim, like lost contracts or unemployment.

I'm somewhat fine with the current situation in Germany where the court decides what is off-limit. Maybe it could even be stricter like in JP.

I don't personally see anything wrong with people getting riled up. Obviously that changes if one moves past words and assaults someone, destroys property, etc but there's nothing wrong with discourse. Again, this is just my opinion having grown up in the US and I wouldn't begin to say other cultures should agree!

Living in Germany, do you find yourself being hesitant to speak out either online or publicly? Do you have a clear enough expectation of what would a judge would rule with regards to speech? And do you ever worry about how those existing laws could be misused in the future by people with more strict opinions of what speech is off limits?

I lived in a European country with similar laws to Germany for two years. As it turned out I was really only there for two years of pandemic response unfortunately, but I didn't feel particularly comfortable speaking in public about anything related to the pandemic response or leadership. Without having a clear line on what would be deemed offensive by a court I found myself censoring my own speech to avoid running afoul of laws I didn't even know I broke.

> Living in Germany, do you find yourself being hesitant to speak out either online or publicly?

No.

> Do you have a clear enough expectation of what would a judge would rule with regards to speech? And do you ever worry about how those existing laws could be misused in the future by people with more strict opinions of what speech is off limits?

You are quite safe both from the law and criticism if you stay factual and keep fact statements and your subjective judgements identifable as such.

It’s legal because of the first Amendment of the US Constitution, which is held in higher regard than any religious text even.

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.