My understanding (as a non-German citizen who lived there for a year, in the '00s) is that while the line between hate speech and regular speech might be open to debate in Germany, no one debates that there is a line.
In other words, the existence of the distinction is recognized even though it is irredeemably vague. This is important: there is a recognized, valid ontological category for vague distinctions!
To non-American ears, the U.S. debate around free speech sounds a lot like one person shouting 'squares and circles are different and can be treated differently,' and another pointing out that, because squircles exist, the slope is too slippery to acknowledge the reality of squares and circles.
This pattern is employed on both sides of the aisle -- my fellow leftists do it to, particularly around issues of gender. (And I say that as a trans woman.)
The only thing worse than a pink-is-for-girls transphobe coming at me and telling me that gender isn't real is a nonbinary polyamorous anarchist telling me that gender isn't real, and those are basically my options in 2022.
The next protest I attend, I'm bringing a sign saying 'clastic, ad-hoc, and vague ontological distinctions are still real distinctions' but this is why I'm not really invited to protests
Which isn't to say that hate speech is solved problem in Germany -- but this ontological handwringing about separating it from regular speech is disingenuous. See https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/germanys-laws-ant... for example.
My understanding (as a non-German citizen who lived there for a year, in the '00s) is that while the line between hate speech and regular speech might be open to debate in Germany, no one debates that there is a line.
In other words, the existence of the distinction is recognized even though it is irredeemably vague. This is important: there is a recognized, valid ontological category for vague distinctions!
To non-American ears, the U.S. debate around free speech sounds a lot like one person shouting 'squares and circles are different and can be treated differently,' and another pointing out that, because squircles exist, the slope is too slippery to acknowledge the reality of squares and circles.
But you know what? You can still make one of these pretty good: https://www.etsy.com/nz/listing/867606078/fisher-price-shape...
This pattern is employed on both sides of the aisle -- my fellow leftists do it to, particularly around issues of gender. (And I say that as a trans woman.)
The only thing worse than a pink-is-for-girls transphobe coming at me and telling me that gender isn't real is a nonbinary polyamorous anarchist telling me that gender isn't real, and those are basically my options in 2022.
The next protest I attend, I'm bringing a sign saying 'clastic, ad-hoc, and vague ontological distinctions are still real distinctions' but this is why I'm not really invited to protests