Magister Artium - MA / The controversial singing of the Shoot the Boer song by Julius Malema was a focus of media attention during the period of March 3, 2010 to September 12, 2011.This study aims to analyse the discourses participants draw on in the expression of their positions of race and identity in selected online texts, as well as the different meanings and interpretations the Shoot the Boer song has acquired over time. Using the data drawn from three court rulings, namely the South Gauteng High Court, North Gauteng High Court and the Equality Court and commentaries from various online websites, this project focuses on the various ways in which issues of race are realised through language by focusing on the construction and interpretation of Julius Malema and the Shoot the Boer song within different contextual spaces. This study uses a critical discourse analysis framework, as well as theories of intertextuality, resemiotization, contextand chronotope to analyse the texts which were generated in response to the song. Key findings include the ways in which participants who consider themselves as part of a minority group, construct themselves as 'victims‘ in relation to Malema and the singing of the song. Similarly, another key finding is that the broader discourse of fear exhibited in the various commentaries links to a general fear of 'black power‘ where Malema is a signifier of this 'black power.‘ Overall, the thesis argues that the meanings of the song are multiple and shift with the changing chronotopia of its performance. It therefore support Blommaert‘s (2005) emphasis on the importance of 'text trajectories‘ in establishing the meaning of texts, and argues that the historical meanings associated with the Shoot the Boer song form a complex set of frames on which different participants draw when interpreting the song in 2010.

The purpose of this paper is to explore whether there is an absolute right to freedom of expression with regard to hate speech, and more specifically, whether tolerance should be exercised toward speech even in circumstances where this speech presents a clear and present danger to the public. The author will use legal research methods to analyze this question. The paper will delve into four major Supreme Court cases in the case of hate speech, as well as the decision by the Virginia Court that allowed the rally in Charlottesville which ended with the death of 32-year old woman. The aim is to determine how the Supreme Court has looked at hateful expression over the years and the status of hate speech in America today. The four major cases are Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977), R.A.V v. City of St. Paul (1992), and Virginia v. Black (2003). Although the case of Kessler v. Charlottesville (2017) is not a Supreme Court case, its significance in relation to the right to freedom of expression is no less than those precedent four cases. This incident and related legal cases bring the concerns about hate speech and the constitutional right to freedom of expression directly into the public discourse.

1 Abstract Thesis title: Hate speech throughout the continents The aim of this thesis is to shed light on standings and rulings of the United States Supreme Court and the European Court of Human rights in hate speech cases. It defines the term "hate speech" and presents grounds used for its restrictions when it comes to freedom of expression. Through introducing established principles that govern the decision-making of both courts and analysing them in key judgments on both continents, the author is trying to determine possible alterations that may lead to enhancing the protection given by hate speech case-law. The author also analyses historical and social impact on the case-law of both the Supreme Court and the ECHR and finds that this influence has led to establishment of crucial principles without which the hate speech cases could hardly be decided today. Both historical and social factors lead the author to the conclusion that the protection against hate speech could still use a tune-up. In author's point of view, the Supreme Court should ease the grip on the First Amendment and give the "true threats" principle, established in Virginia v. Black, leave to prohibit not only intimidating expressions but harmful expressions as well - both physical and mental. The Supreme Court should also strengthen the...

Freedom of Expression in the Czech Republic This master thesis deals with freedom of expression in the Czech Republic while focusing on the issues of hate speech. It is not only Czech legal code this thesis takes into consideration, because there is an inspiration coming from foreign decisions as well. The thesis is divided into five chapters. The first chapter explains the term "freedom of expression": it deals with the terminology of "right" and "freedom", categorizes it into the hierarchy of other rights and elaborates the aspects in which freedom of expression is included. This chapter also deals with the arguments supporting freedom of expression. The second chapter describes how freedom of expression is regulated in the Czech legal code. It briefly summarises the evolution, then it deals with individual legal acts: Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms and the international conventions (The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms). An idea is also put forward: Does restricting freedom of expression imply the restriction of freedom of thought? The third chapter deals with the restrictions, with the relation between Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms and the...

The aim of this master thesis is to compare the activities of nongovernmental organisations working with the topic of hate speech in the Czech Republic and in Hungary in relation to the target group. In the thesis, three questions have been answered according to the results of the analysis done in the master thesis: Are the nongovernmental organisations in the Czech Republic and in Hungary working with the same kinds of hate speech in their project activities? Are the nongovernmental organisations in the Czech Republic and in Hungary focused on the same target group in their activities? Are the nongovernmental organisations in the Czech Republic and in Hungary active in the same environments during the project realisation? The methods that have been used in the thesis are description and comparative analysis.

Hate crime laws in both Canada and the United States purport to promote equality using the language of antidiscrimination law. National criminal codes in both countries authorize enhanced punishment for crimes motivated by “sexual orientation” but not “gender identity” or “gender expression.” Cities and states in the United States have also adopted hate crime laws, some of which denounce both homophobic and trans-phobic crimes. Hate crime penalty enhancement laws have been applied by courts in both Canada and the United States to establish a growing jurisprudence. In both countries, moreover, other hate crime laws contribute to official legal knowledge by regulating hate speech, hate crime statistics, and conduct equivalent to hate crimes in schools, workplaces, and elsewhere. Yet, despite the proliferation of hate crime laws and jurisprudence, governmental officials do not control all legal knowledge about hate crimes. Sociological “others” attend criminal sentencing proceedings and provide support to hate crime victims during prosecutions, but they also frame their own unofficial inquiries and announce their own classification decisions for hate-related events. In both Canada and the United States, nongovernmental groups contend both inside and outside official governmental channels to establish legal knowledge about homophobic and trans-phobic hate crimes. In two comparable Canadian and American cities, similar groups monitor and classify homophobic and trans-phobic attacks using a variety of information practices. Interviews with representatives of these groups reveal a relationship between the practices of each group and hate crime laws at each site. The results support one principal conclusion. The availability of local legislative power and a local mechanism for public review are key determinants of the sites and styles of nongovernmental contention about hate crimes. Where police gather and publish official hate crime statistics, the official classification system serves as both a site for mobilization, and a constraint on the styles of contention used by nongovernmental groups. Where police do not gather or publish hate crime statistics, nongovernmental groups are deprived of the resource represented by a local site for social contention, but their styles of contention are liberated from the subtle influences of an official hate crime classification system. / Law, Faculty of / Graduate

Hate speech in South Africa creates a tension between the right to freedom of expression and the rights to human dignity and equality. The challenge is to achieve a balance between these competing rights in the context of the divisive past and the transformative constitutional ideal, in which reconciliation and respect for group difference are promoted. Freedom of expression, an individual right, must be construed in light of its underlying values, but regard must also be given to communitarian interests. The constitutional standard draws the initial line. The advocacy of hatred on four grounds and which constitutes incitement to cause harm is not constitutionally protected speech. Such speech undermines nation building, causes acrimony, and is not tolerated in the egalitarian society envisaged by the Constitution. The thesis formulates a principled legislative hate speech framework for South Africa at both human rights and criminal levels within the parameters of the constitutional mandate, as guided by the standard for hate speech restrictions in international law, and the Canadian regulatory model. An essential premise is that regulation requires a multi-faceted balancing enquiry. A holistic approach is proposed where factors such as respect for the dignity of the victims, autonomy for speakers, listeners and the wider community; the causal link between hate speech and hatred in a community; and the desire to achieve a diverse and harmonious society; amongst others, are considered. Failure to regulate hate speech constructively endorses hatemongers and promotes damaging speech at the expense of vulnerable groups. Regulation ensures that law sets the normative benchmark, affirms the protection of vulnerable groups within the social fabric and upholds social cohesion, inclusiveness and the equal citizenship of all individuals in society. The thesis contains a proposal for the enactment of legislation creating a self-standing hate speech crime for the advocacy of extreme hatred, shaped in accordance with international requirements and comparative foreign law, and structured in light of the distinction between hate crime and hate speech. The existing legal framework is unable to provide consistent and fitting redress for the severe harm caused by such speech, namely the fostering of an environment in which the stigmatisation of groups is promoted, their exclusion from society justified and intervention is needed to remedy the escalated levels of hatred and violence between different groups in society. PEPUDA, a remedial statute aimed at promoting transformation and substantive equality, is valuable, but its speech prohibitions are broad and imprecise. Consequently, their effectiveness is compromised and their constitutionality questioned. The thesis proposes recommendations for amendments to sections 7(a), 10(1) and 12 of PEPUDA. The aim is to ensure compliance with the international standard and to foster the optimal regulation of hate speech and other forms of damaging speech, including derogatory racial epithets, which undermine human dignity and equality and threaten national unity. It is intended for the two systems to complement one another and to create a legal framework aimed at addressing hate speech constructively and in context, promoting tolerance, respect for difference, reconciliation and transformation.

This dissertation is a critical discourse analysis of how anti-Islamic rhetoric in prominent online forums is articulated within the context of popular discourses of multiculturalism and tolerance. According to Melanie McAlister, perceptions of Muslims within the United States are unique in comparison to other minority groups in that they are almost entirely mediated, whether it is the Iranian Revolution of 1979, the terrorist attacks of September 11th, or the various Muhammad cartoon controversies. While much work has been done analyzing how Islam and Muslims are mediated in popular film and television, very little attention has been given to how these perspectives are mediated through the Internet. Using Erving Goffman's theory of performativity and Kristine Fitch's notion of persuadables, I examine how both prominent bloggers and pseudonymous commentators work in a "back stage" context to bring Islamophobic norms and premises within the sphere of acceptable opinions for the "front stage" of mainstream media discourses. In particular, I examine how these discourses have evolved over the past few years on three prominent weblogs: the anti-jihadist Little Green Footballs, the liberal-atheist advocacy blog One Good Move, and the popular news aggregate Fark. In light of increasing evidence that weblogs exert a high level of influence over popular media discourses disproportionate to their readership, these websites offer a glimpse "back stage" into how contemporary American discourses on Islam and Muslims are articulated across a broad array of political perspectives, particularly in relation to norms and premises regarding multiculturalism, tolerance, and freedom of expression. While Islamophobic rhetoric has become firmly embedded within discourses of the American Right, each of the three sites examined show a steady integration of anti-Islamic perspectives within the American Left. Leftist anti-Islamic discourses are frequently articulated within the context of general anti-religious sentiment, misanthropy, and a belief that the values of "the Islamic world" are inherently incompatible with the liberal, democratic, and multicultural values of "the West." While by no means universal, these perspectives have become sufficiently common, recognizable, and sensible to be granted the status of persuadables within these particular web forums, which in turn helps to move them into the realm of popular American cultural persuadables.

The topic of the work is "Power Transformation". In my thesis, I transform physical strength. I work with both the functional and the exterior design of the entertainment boxing gaming machine, which measures the power of the strike, which it then transforms into financial amounts sent to various non-profit organizations or projects. It is an interactive object requiring the physical participation of the viewer to achieve full functionality of the work

No description available.