Book contents
- Giving the Devil His Due
- Giving the Devil His Due
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction Who Is the Devil and What Is He Due?
- Part I The Advocatus Diaboli: Reflections on Free Thought and Free Speech
- Chapter 1 Giving the Devil His Due
- Chapter 2 Banning Evil
- Chapter 3 Free Speech Even If It Hurts
- Chapter 4 Free to Inquire
- Chapter 5 Ben Stein’s Blunder
- Chapter 6 What Went Wrong?
- Part II Homo Religiosus: Reflections on God and Religion
- Part III Deferred Dreams: Reflections on Politics and Society
- Part IV Scientia Humanitatis: Reflections on Scientific Humanism
- Part V Transcendent Thinkers: Reflections on Controversial Intellectuals
- Notes
- Index
Chapter 3 - Free Speech Even If It Hurts
Defending Holocaust Denier David Irving
from Part I - The Advocatus Diaboli: Reflections on Free Thought and Free Speech
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 February 2020
- Giving the Devil His Due
- Giving the Devil His Due
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction Who Is the Devil and What Is He Due?
- Part I The Advocatus Diaboli: Reflections on Free Thought and Free Speech
- Chapter 1 Giving the Devil His Due
- Chapter 2 Banning Evil
- Chapter 3 Free Speech Even If It Hurts
- Chapter 4 Free to Inquire
- Chapter 5 Ben Stein’s Blunder
- Chapter 6 What Went Wrong?
- Part II Homo Religiosus: Reflections on God and Religion
- Part III Deferred Dreams: Reflections on Politics and Society
- Part IV Scientia Humanitatis: Reflections on Scientific Humanism
- Part V Transcendent Thinkers: Reflections on Controversial Intellectuals
- Notes
- Index
Summary
This essay was originally published as an Opinion Editorial in the <italic>Los Angeles Times</italic> as “Free Speech, Even if it Hurts” on February 22, 2006. It was in response to the news that Holocaust denier David Irving, whom I wrote about in my co-authored 2000 book (with Alex Grobman) <italic>Denying History</italic> (2nd edition 2009), had been sentenced to three years’ imprisonment in Austria for violating one of their “hate crime” laws, a misguided, impractical and, in my opinion, immoral attempt to combat hate speech with censorship (and punishment) rather than with free speech. Unbidden and unbeknownst to him, before Irving’s sentencing, I wrote a letter to the judge along the lines of what I argue here, asking not just for leniency in his sentencing but for Irving’s freedom. I have no idea if the judge ever read my letter, and unfortunately I no longer seem to have a copy of it in my archives. That Irving was arrested at the airport in Austria well before he was scheduled to deliver his speech means that this was worse than an assault on free speech; it was an assault on free thought – literally a thought crime. How Orwellian.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Giving the Devil his DueReflections of a Scientific Humanist, pp. 38 - 43Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020