Free speech and Europe

Eugene Volokh writes about "censorship envy, speech that's offensive to Muslims, and European law."

One recurring argument that I've seen from Muslims who want the cartoons legally suppressed is that European laws prohibit other kinds of speech offensive to other groups — for instance, Holocaust denial, which is often restricted chiefly because it's seen as implicitly or explicitly anti-Semitic — and that Muslims should get the same treatment. In practice, those laws don't get used that often, and European speech is actually more free than the laws would suggest. Nonetheless, the laws' presence does make possible the argument I describe; and I suspect it does make many Muslims feel even more aggrieved than they would be by the cartoons themselves, since they are also now aggrieved by what they see as discriminatorily enforced laws.

He has a point, as, for example, French law prohibits any symbolism or speech connected with Naziism.  Europeans in general are far more ready to pass laws prohibiting certain forms of speech which are offensive to many mainly, in my view, because Europe is still ruled "from the top down" as opposed to the US, which (ostensibly) is ruled by the people, "from the bottom up."  The average European has no concept of this idea.  To him, certain people (or classes of people) were born to rule, and certain people were born to obey the rules made by the others.  This aristocratic concept was at the root of why the US was established in the first place, so while to us this is obvious, it's not so obvious to them.

I'm just glad we don't have to worry about "selective" enforcement" of discrimination laws.  Sure, there certainly is selective enforcement in this country, but it's unofficial and hardly enshrined in law, and as such is occasionally subject to being overturned by the courts.

Any form of constitution that the European Union eventually passes will most likely not contain a European "first amendment."

There are a couple of posts that have gone up in the last few days that I would have linked to already were it not for a bit of NSFW content in the comments sections, such as Rand Simberg's Mohammed emoticons and Fark.com's proposed Mohammed sitcoms (well, that plus the fact that Glenn Reynolds already linked to them).  I don't view this sort of thing as "piling on" but as celebration of the fact that we don't have to be so careful what we say around here.  Sure, we can (and often do) make people angry, but we don't have to fear a midnight knock on the door.

If the material at either of the above links appeared in Europe in print of any kind, I'm certain some folks would spontaneously combust.

This, by the way, is why I oppose most "hate crimes" laws, even though I vehemently oppose the very forms of discrimination these laws are meant to oppose.  Sure, hate is usually a Bad Thing, but it's no worse than any other motivating factor to which people succumb when they commit a crime.