The fight against the speech of hatred is a concept invented by liberal elites, and is not intended to alleviate customs, but to introduce censorship of part of the right-wing speech.

— said Bronisław Wildstein on the radio

The writer and columnist admitted that the conversation about the fight against hate speech makes him seriously concerned.

Above all, I can hear various censorship measures. In France, in the fight against hate speech, but not only there, you can convict someone for anti-abortion speeches. You can convict a person - and this has been done - for saying that a broad opening up to Muslim immigration will lead to cultural change in France. These were purely theoretical statements.

— pointed out Wildstein.

He emphasized that „there are various disturbing things hidden behind the nice names”.

Indeed, at the moment, not only in Poland, the temperature of the political dispute is quite high, and it would be good if the dispute could be toned down and become more substantive. But this will not be solved by actions called the fight against the speech of hatred. Censorship will not solve any problems.

— judged the writer.

I don’t see anyone willing to do that either. The opposition accuses the government of what has happened in Gdańsk. At the same time, they are crying out to put an end to the speech of hatred. So I ask who is actually spreading this hate speech?

— said Bronisław Wildstein.

He added that „those who have lips full of platitudes about the fight against hate speech, very often call normal criticism hatred. And they often strive to disown and eliminate their opponents from public life.

In Poland, the example with Law and Justice (PiS) is very obvious. The fight of the opposition against Law and Justice involves delegitimising. Is it about dissolving the Law and Justice party? No, it is about the fact that Law and Justice proposed other political solutions. This, together with the criticism of the Third Republic of Poland, was called a speech of hatred.

— said the writer.

When asked if something could be done about it, Wildstein admitted that „not too much”.

You can call for and try to set an example, try to behave in a substantive way, refer to criticism, but do not use epithets. The problem is that social media, on the one hand, have opened up opportunities, because they have given everyone the right to participate in public life, because everyone can speak out. Contrary to original hopes, however, this has not created a public agora, where everyone is debating the common interest.

— noted Wildstein.

This has led to the division into tribes, clash of different groups. There is no room for explanation or argumentation. If you have a few hundred characters, you can kick some ass. Something that was supposed to bring only wonderful consequences, brought a lot of good, but also a lot of bad. Is it possible to do something about it? No. All the ideas to do something about it - which is already present in the EU - are attempts to censor the Internet in favour of dominant forces.

— added Bronisław Wildstein.

Tłum. K.J.