There is No Such Thing as Hate Speech: A Case for Absolute Freedom of Expression

by Ravi Shanker Kapoor

'There Is No Such Thing As Hate A Case for Absolute Freedom of Expression' is the boldest take on the subject of freedom of expression. Championing the cause of limitless liberty, Ravi Shanker Kapoor builds his case on the platform of philosophy. He offers convincing arguments and presents relevant instances to prove his point. He trashes the hurting-the-sentiments and offending-the-sensibilities notions as tricks to enslave humankind. He also slams fashionable liberals and others who peddle the myth of ‘Islamophobia.’ His is position ‘extremism in the defense of liberty.’ According to Kapoor, “the enemies of liberty in our time are sophisticated people. Multiculturalism is their armor, political correctness is their weapon, and postmodern jargon is their camouflage.”

184 pages, Paperback

Published August 2, 2017

Reviews

[murek · Rating 1 out of 5]

It doesn't matter if you agree with the author that freedom of speech should be absolute or if you rather think it should be somehow restrained or even forbidden. I strongly do not reccomend this book. As a person mainly interested in philosophical aspect of freedom of speech I must say that if you are looking for any constructive thoughts of philosophical value on the matter you will not find them here. The author has clearly no idea about critical philosophical thinking. He lacks necessary philosophical sensivity to notice some key distincions what makes his case weaker and weaker with every chapter. What he does instead is putting in some quotes of famous philosophers that I really doubt he has read (most likely they are taken from something like "Introduction to philosophy", "Famous philosophical quotes" or "Philosophy for begginers"). There are obvious contradictions that even untrained mind will spot immidietly and without any difficulty (this makes me wonder if the author has even read what he has written). Many of the author's statements are therefore against his case! On top of that there are too many assumptions treated as obvious ones despite the fact that anyone even slightly sceptical is forced to question them. Such things need proper basis to build upon them esspecially when you try to write a book! Another issue is that the author lacks basic historical knowledge (the case he makes based on Galileo example). There are many more bad things to write about this book but I hope this is enough to make you stay away from it. To sum up: the author has no idea about philosophy yet he writes some quasi-philosophical something. The author lacks historical knowledge yet he uses misguided historical examples to make his case. Also the author is truly lost in western politics so he talks some serious nonsense about it.
Just one more thing to mention: There are some good remarks (mostly concerning Obama administration or multiculti ideas) but they are almost unnoticible in the sea of nonsense the author produces. It is not that I do or do not agree with the author's main thesis. It's just that I can't stand this type of lazy and naive “argumentation”.

[N · Rating 1 out of 5]

Started off as a great book. But as I kept reading it, thoroughly disappointing. Sounded more like a rant than a well structured argument.