@ISIDEWITHPreguntasAsuntos socialesComenzó Hace 4 añosActivo Hace 3mos

¿Debería protegerse el discurso de odio por las leyes de libertad de expresión?

El discurso de odio se define como un discurso público que expresa odio o fomenta la violencia hacia una persona o grupo basándose en algo como la raza, la religión, el sexo o la orientación sexual.

37%
Si
63%
No
20%
Si
53%
No
10%
Sí, siempre que no amenace con violencia
8%
No, y aumentar las penas por incitación al odio
6%
Sí, porque no confío en que el gobierno defina los límites del discurso de odio.
1%
No, las leyes de libertad de expresión solo deberían protegerlo de criticar al gobierno

Resultados Históricos

Vea cómo el apoyo a cada posición sobre "El discurso del odio” ha cambiado con el tiempo para 1.7k votantes Chile .

Cargando datos...

Cargando gráfico... 

Importancia Histórica

Vea cómo la importancia del "El discurso del odio” ha cambiado con el tiempo para 1.7k votantes Chile .

Cargando datos...

Cargando gráfico... 

Otras Respuestas Populares

Respuestas únicas de usuarios Chile cuyas opiniones iban más allá de las opciones proporcionadas.

 @9FJVKMPcontestada…10mos10MO

Debemos tranzar límites entre la libertad de expresión y el libertinaje del que abusan algunos para ser fulminantes y abusadores de un vacío legal.

 @97P6RYTcontestada…2 años2Y

No, pero definir mejor discurso de odio.

 @8V85VL4contestada…3 años3Y

Sí, salvo que hayan amenazas explícitas que prueben un atentado potencial contra la vida de un individuo o grupo.

 @8V7L9L6contestada…3 años3Y

No debería sensurarse ninguna idea postura opinion o pensamiento

 @8V7KM6Xcontestada…3 años3Y

¿qué es discurso de odio?

 @8V2JHYQcontestada…3 años3Y

No debería existir leyes de libertad de expresión

Últimas Noticias

Manténgase actualizado sobre los artículos de noticias "El discurso del odio” más recientes, actualizados con frecuencia.

 @ISIDEWITH presentado…4mos4MO

Brasil amenaza con regular las redes sociales tras enfrentamiento con Elon Musk

Brazil’s attorney-general has demanded “urgent regulation” of social media sites after Elon Musk threatened to disobey a court order banning certain profiles on his X platform and then called for a Supreme Court justice to “resign or be impeached”.“It is urgent to regulate social networks,” said Jorge Messias.“We cannot live in a society in which billionaires domiciled abroad have control of social networks and put themselves in a position to violate the rule of law, failing to comply with court orders and threatening our authorities.”The comments came after X’s global government affairs team posted that it “has been forced by court decisions to block certain popular accounts in Brazil”. “We do not know the reasons these blocking orders have been issued [and] We are prohibited from saying which court or judge issued the order, or on what grounds.”The profiles are probably linked to far-right movements, which have found fertile ground on X and other social media platforms, including Telegram.Musk suggested the court orders came from Alexandre De Moraes, a Supreme Court justice who has been a vocal advocate of cracking down on anti-democratic content online, particularly following riots on January 8 last year when thousands of far-right demonstrators stormed government buildings in Brasília.Musk, the billionaire owner of X, vowed on Sunday to “publish everything demanded by [De Moraes] and how those requests violate Brazilian law”.He called for Moraes to “resign or be impeached” and said the judge had “brazenly and repeatedly betrayed the constitution and people of Brazil”.Musk, a self-declared free speech absolutist, bought X in late 2022 and quickly relaxed its moderation policies and reinstated several previously banned accounts. The moves have been welcomed by some on the right, but critics including civil rights groups have argued the platform is failing to adequately police hate speech and extremist content.Musk’s latest comments echo talking points of Brazil’s far-right, which has long accused De Moraes and the Supreme Court of censorship and running a “judicial dictatorship”.De Moraes is widely considered to have played a role in protecting Brazilian democracy during the 2022 presidential election, when the president at the time Jair Bolsonaro was spreading unsubstantiated claims about the integrity of the electoral system.De Moraes also took a hard line in the aftermath of the Brasília riots, handing down lengthy sentences and accusing the demonstrators of trying to launch a coup.Orlando Silva, a lawmaker aligned with the government, said Musk had disrespected the judiciary and that in response he would propose legislation setting out a “responsibilities regime for these digital platforms”.“We have reached a limit. It is a response in defence of Brazil,” he said.The extent of the threat to Brazilian democracy in 2022 was highlighted by a police investigation in February, which has alleged that Bolsonaro, in conjunction with several military officers, considered an armed intervention to prevent President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva from taking office. Bolsonaro denies the claims.As part of the alleged plot, Bolsonaro had De Moraes put under constant surveillance for weeks following the polls in October 2022, according to federal police.Social media platforms have faced increasing pressure to comply with new laws in countries such as India and Turkey, which can require them to take down content or face bans, fines or the imprisonment of staffers.Critics argue such rules are oppressive and can be abused by country leaders to silence dissidents and activists.Despite regularly espousing free speech ideals, Musk has previously come under fire from critics for appeasing censorship demands from various governments. More recently, however, X has taken to posting publicly about the requests they receive.