The debate over hate speech, and over political correctness, is to be placed in the context of the discussion over multiculturalism. This debate is here reconstructed, considering the position in favor of restrictions of hate speech and the contrary position in favor of the precedence of free speech over any restriction. A relevant part of the discussion revolves around the notion of harm and of its interpretations, and around the notion of categories of speech. Are offenses to be considered harm? In that case, the category of harm is expanded to include symbolic harm. Or do offenses cause harm as their direct consequence, inducing attacks and harassment? Coming to speech, is the notion of content-neutrality reliable as a guideline for justified restrictions of speech? This article shows that hate speech is a problem for the inclusion of marginalized groups, but also that no easy solution is available. The three following essays shows that this long standing debate can yet be analyzed from new and unconventional perspectives.