Over the past decade, the rise of political extremism and its associated linguistic expression resulted in communication companies’ decisions to restrict hate speech and, in many cases, ban speech emanating from specific users. Before we attempt to regulate expression per se—whether through “cancelling” expression, “deplatforming” speakers through suspensions or platform restrictions, rewriting social media terms of service, or criminalizing harmful speech—we should seek a clearer understanding of how hate appeals are used to accomplish particular communication purposes. In this analysis, we analyze hate speech as a stratagem—an artifice or trick of war—used with great effect during the 2020 election. Our concern is how this tactic is used to harm the body politic, reducing citizen ability to engage with divergent publics and points of view, and threatening democratic rule. Critically, we must understand how communication on social media platforms is being used to destabilize the communication environment and prevent the robust discussion of ideas in a public forum, a prerequisite for democratic governance.

在过去的十年中，政治极端主义的兴起及其相关的语言表达导致通信公司决定限制仇恨言论，并在许多情况下禁止特定用户的言论。在尝试调节表达本身之前，无论是通过“取消”表达，通过暂停或平台限制来“降低平台”演讲者，重写社交媒体服务条款或将有害言论定为犯罪，我们都应寻求对使用仇恨申诉的方式有更清晰的了解达到特定的沟通目的。在此分析中，我们将仇恨言论作为一种战略手段进行分析，这是一种技巧或战争手段，在2020年大选期间起到了很大作用。我们担心的是，如何使用这种策略来伤害政治机构，降低公民与不同公众互动的能力和观点，并威胁民主统治。至关重要的是，我们必须了解如何使用社交媒体平台上的交流来破坏交流环境的稳定性，并防止在公共论坛上进行激烈的讨论，这是民主治理的前提。