What New Laws Criminalizing “Hate Speech” Really Mean

What New Laws Criminalizing “Hate Speech” Really Mean

Yesterday we investigated the I Have Ascended Beyond Fallacy, which is invoked when academic Experts, baffled their theories are not as loved by others as by themselves, try to explain this disbelief.

That they do this by invoking new theories is just what we would expect from academic Experts. Inventing theories is, after all, their day job. But what do non-academic Experts do when doubted?

Pass laws and make it illegal to question them.

Non-academic Experts therefore understand power better than academic Experts.

The objects of interest to academic Experts are not quite the same as non-academic Experts. Academics care most about their theories, which can be (as you know) esoteric and are not always of broad interest. Non-academic Experts love most the rules they have invented, where rules can be defined as political theories.

There is overlap in theories supported by academic and non-academic Experts, because, as I often explain, non-academic Experts call on academics to provide them “scientific support” for their political theories. Many rules are officially called “The Science”, and “The Science” is just academic theory.

Let’s look at an example of non-academic Experts quashing dissent, here from Ireland.

That country has a proposed new law (“Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences“) which bans “hate speech”, and even makes it illegal to possess written forms of “hate speech” on electronic platforms. This is similar to how the American Regime convicted comedian Douglas Mackey for tweeting memes, memes which the Regime called “disinformation.”

What may surprise you is that Official “disinformation” is no different than “hate speech”. Most think the “hate” in “hate speech” is that which expresses disdain or loathing in a thing or person. That element may indeed be present in examples, but true hate or loathing is not what is being made illegal. “Hate speech” are words that call into question, or openly express doubt, albeit indirectly, in Expert political theory. This is not well understood.

For instance, it is not in the USA “hate speech” to call a white man a “cracker”, but it is “hate” to call a black man a forbidden-word-redacted. “Cracker” does not imply the theories of control and Equality are false, while forbidden-word-redacted does.

Equality you know is obviously false. Control is the “theory”, or rule, that recognizes, in this country, that whites are still the majority, and cannot be allowed to think of themselves as “white”, and so form a coalition against the Regime. The asymmetry in criminalizing insults is explained because of how the Regime wants to manipulate political forces. There’s more to this, of course, and these examples don’t apply in Ireland, but you have the idea.

Ireland has progressed further into the Expertocracy than America. Which is easy, since there are only five million souls there, with a large percent not of Irish descent. Ireland is still worth paying attention to, though, since Expert calls to Expert: when new rules which grow the Expertocracy are implemented, Experts everywhere look at them admiringly.

Here’s what is fascinating. The law in Ireland reads that, if a person is caught with Official Disinformation (“hate speech”) on their phones or computers, “the person shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, to have been in possession of the material in contravention of [the section which criminalizes “hate speech”]”.

There, in one blow, is destroyed the ancient custom of presumed innocence. You are presumed guilty. The Irish Regime now demands you prove your innocence. Which is not possible.

“I’m sorry, my lord. I do not know how the meme got on my phone. I may have been surfing Twitter and didn’t really notice it.”

You’re guilty unless, for whatever reason, the judge takes a liking to you.

Even stronger, an Expert can always—this is why they are Experts—posit a theory why any piece of information is hateful to an Official Victim group. As the good Cardinal Richelieu said, “If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.”

There is an amusing article about the Irish law, which laments that the Experts who wrote the law announced that they were willing to listen to complaints and criticisms about the proposed law. But, it turns out, the Experts are not listening.

Oh, they might have listened to the odd objection, but they would never question their own wisdom, not when objections come from non-Experts. The Irish Experts behaved in just the same way as, say, Experts at our CDC when they open up policies for public comment. Which is to say, they laughed and did what they wanted to do in the first place.

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card click here. Cash App: $WilliamMBriggs. For Zelle, use my email: matt@wmbriggs.com, and please include yours so I know who to thank.


  1. Robin

    Judges? Hahaha.

    In 2020, the UK Supreme Court overturned about 800 years of Coronial and related Criminal law – by a 3-2 decision – in the process throwing the enforcement agencies into a complete state of chaos and creating a space for untold murderous mischief.

    Why? One would think that this would be based upon sound legal precedent or maybe a strict constitutional interpretation.

    Nah. In the written opinion, Lady “So and So” wrote that “Society’s attitudes are changing …”

    Hahaha. There’s no hope.

  2. Incitadus

    ‘Expressing disdain or loathing in a thing or person’ is the core tenant of free

  3. Dr. Weezil

    The Enemy won big when he conquered Ireland.

  4. Vermont Crank

    Dear Dr Weezil.

    One could almost say that a Non-Christian Shattered Ireland


    It would be easy to observe that nothing similar would have ever happened in Israel and it is easy to say that cos Israel has self respect, racial solidarity, particular national objectives, an appreciation of the history and heritage of their people whereas all of that has been lost in the west because Whites, and not just Catholic whites but protestant whites too, are evil

  5. John B()

    There, in one blow, is destroyed the ancient custom of presumed innocence. You are presumed guilty. The Irish Regime now demands you prove your innocence. Which is not possible.

    In looking for what Nancy said, I came across this wretched piece by the reprehensible “The Hill”

    It was written on EIGHT/EIGHT of 2019


    “Trump is correct that the public ought to maintain the presumption of innocence.”


    Politicians who come under fire for abusing their office do not get a legal presumption of innocence. People only get the presumption of innocence if they are indicted and facing trial for crimes. The presumption of innocence is for criminal defendants, not presidents.

    I’m wondering what “The Hill” is thinking about Joe’s presumption of innocence?

  6. Cary D Cotterman

    “…but they would never question their own wisdom, not when objections come from non-Experts.”

    Or even from credentialed, respected Experts who had not joined the cults of climate change, Chinese flu, transgenderism, you-name-it, who dared question the official narrative of The Science.

  7. Johnno

    Start referring to forbidden-word-redacted as “Cracker” from now on.

    Visit the approved words against you back upon them… for equality. They are entitled to everything the crackers are, so le’ts give it to them.

    Crackers are crackers.

    forbidden-word-redacted are crackers.

    And Expurts are “Cracker-Jacks,” because the letters after their names mean “jack-all” “jack-off” “jack-shit” or “jack-ass” and like those letters, we’ve abbreviated the terms designating their learning.

  8. Johnno

    Someday, I hope what happens to the ATF agent in this video, happens to Expurts.

    “Stop! You can’t do this to me! Don’t you know I’m an Expurt??? Check my pockets, I’m carrying my pHd!!!”

  9. Jim H.

    Y’all northerners really don’t understand the term “cracker”. In Florida, some older people will proudly self-refer as “crackers”. It harkens back to the cattle drive days and cracking bull whips. Florida had and has a decent amount of cattle (Jacksonville’s original name was Cowford, for instance). In Deland, Fl there is even a “Cracker Days” Rodeo. I have never heard of an n-word Days Rodeo. Cracker is not really offensive to actual crackers.

  10. Vermont Crank

    Dear Jim I have met some crackers from whom I learn the correct pronunciation of the bad storms we face- Harricaines on that part of America memorably described by the great Shelby Foote:

    Civil War, Fort Sumter to Perryville. (Page 113) This (anaconda) 300 mile coastal portion, belly and crotch of the continent, bisected by the phallic drop of the Florida peninsula…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *