评论
打印
The classical liberal idea of free expression actually overlaps very extensively
表达自由的古典自由主义思想其实和很多法律法规都有着广泛的重合，
with the rules that the United State Supreme Court has enforced under the First Amendment
比如美国最高法院根据《第一修正案》实施的规则；
and interestingly enough also overlaps with the rules that have been enforced under International Human Rights law.
有趣的是，它和根据《国际人权法》实施的规则也有重合。
So, it really is a universally accepted standard that reduces the power of any external authority,
所以表达自由其实是一个全球采用的标准，以减少任何外部权威，
in particular, government, to deprive individuals of the right to make our own decision
尤其是政府，剥夺个人做出自己决定的权利，
about what we will say, what we will not say, what we will listen to, what we will not listen to.
包括我们要说什么、不说什么、听什么和不听什么的权利。
Most people falsely assume one of two things, which are opposite from each other and yet they are equally wrong:
大部分人都持有两种认识之一，这两种认识是相对且都是错误的：
On the one hand many people assume that freedom of speech is absolute that there can be no restrictions or limitations whatsoever.
一方面，很多人认为言论自由是绝对的、没有限制的。
On the other hand, too many people think that there's no protection for certain kinds of unpopular speech
另一方面，很多人认为某些不受欢迎的言论是不受保护的，
such as so-called hate speech or pornography or terrorism speech to name a few that are constantly attacked.
比如所谓的仇恨言论或色情图文或恐怖主义言论等等一些经常受攻击的言论。
The First Amendment freedom of expression rests upon two fundamental principles:
《第一修正案》的表达自由基于两个基本原则：
one prescribes when government may not suppress speech,
一个是规定政府在什么情况下不能压制言论，
and the other explains when government may restrict speech in appropriately limited circumstances.
另一个是解释政府在什么时候能够在适当的限制条件下限制言论。
So first, the non-censorship principle is often called or the content neutrality or viewpoint neutrality principle.
所以首先，不审查原则通常被称为内容中立或观点中立原则。
Government may never suppress speech solely because of its content, its message, its viewpoint or ideas
政府或许不能仅仅因为言论的内容、传递的信息、观点或想法而压制该言论
no matter how feared or despised or hated or hateful that idea, that content may be perceived as.
不论这些言论被认为有多么令人恐惧、鄙视、憎恨或可恨。
Even by the vast majority of the community that is never enough to justify censoring it.
即便社会上绝大多数人都这么认为，也绝不足以证明审查它是正确的。
If we disagree with an idea, if we despise it we should answer it back not suppress it.
如果我们不同意这个观点，如果我们鄙视这种观点，那么我们应该回应而不是压制它。
If however you get beyond the content of the speech, its message, and look at its overall context
但如果你的回应超越了言论的内容、其所传达的信息和整体背景，
then government may restrict that speech consistent with what is usually called the emergency principal.
那么政府可能会根据通常所说的紧急原则限制那种言论。
If in a particular context that speech directly causes certain serious, eminent, specific harm
如果在特定的语境中，该言论直接导致了某种严重的、显著的、具体的伤害，
and the only way to avert the harm is by suppressing the speech.
那么避免这种伤害的唯一方法就是压制该言论。
Now, the United States Supreme Court has created or recognized several categories of speech that satisfy that emergency principle.
现在美国最高法院已经建立或承认了满足紧急情况原则的几类言论。
For example, intentional incitement of eminent violence where the violence is likely to actually happen eminently
例如，故意煽动引人注目的暴力行为，这种暴力行为很有可能真的发生，
or targeted bullying or harassment that is directly targeted at a particular individual
或有针对性的欺负或骚扰，如直接针对特定的个人
or small group of individuals and directly interferes with their freedom of movement.
或一小群人，并直接干扰他们的行动自由。
Another example that satisfies the emergency principle is what lawyers call a genuine threat or a true threat.
符合紧急原则的另一个例子是律师们所说的真正的威胁。
And we use that adjective to distinguish it from the loose way that people tend to use the word threat in every day speech,
我们用这个形容词来区别于人们在日常讲话中对‘威胁’一词的随意使用，
I feel threatened that Milo Yiannopoulous is going to be speaking on my campus.
如，Milo Yiannopoulous要在我们学校演讲，我觉得受到了威胁。
No. That is not a justification for censorship.
这种不行。这不能作为审查的理由。
But if the speaker is directly targeting a small specific audience
但如果演讲者直接针对一小部分特定的听众，
and intends to instill a reasonable fear on the part of that audience
并打算在那部分听众中灌输一种合理的恐惧——
that they are going to be subject to some kind of violence then the speech can and should be punished.
他们将会受到某种形式的暴力，那么这个演讲可以且应该受到惩罚。
One of the really important concepts that helps to enforce these big principles that
有助于执行这些大原则的重要概念之一是
government may not suppress speech because of disagreement with its idea,
政府不能因为不同意该言论的观点而对该言论进行压制，
it may suppress speech if the speech poses an eminent danger of violence.
但如果该言论造成了明显的暴力危险，那么政府或许要压制该言论。
It's really important to add into that the notion of hecklers veto,
质问者否决概念中要加入重要的一点——
the fact that people who object to the speaker's ideas are threatening violence
反对演讲者想法的人以暴力相威胁，
can never be a justification for the government to stop the speaker from proceeding with the talk.
这绝不是政府阻止演讲者继续演讲的理由。
The government has to protect the speaker and the audience members
政府需要保护演讲者和那些选择去听演讲的观众
who choose to hear that speaker against the violence by the protesters.
免受抗议者的暴力侵害。
