inciting

简明释义

英[ɪnˈsaɪtɪŋ]美[ɪnˈsaɪtɪŋ]

adj. 煽动的；刺激的

v. 煽动（incite 的 ing 形式）；刺激，激励

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.It is believed to be responsible for inciting deceit.

它被认为是负责煽动欺诈。

2.The captain was accused of inciting other officers to mutiny.

该上尉被控煽动军官叛变。

3.Any act inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in sub-paragraph (a) or (b).

教唆或故意便利(a)或(b)项所述行为的任何行为。

4.Jim was fired for inciting other workers to rise against their boss.

吉姆因鼓动其他工人反对老板而被解雇了。

5.He was charged with inciting racial hatred (against the ethnic Turks) and, later, of embezzling state funds.

他被控有煽动民族仇恨罪(对土耳其族人民)，以及后来的滥用公款罪。

6.The baggage carousel mix-up could've been slapstick or the inciting incident of a romantic comedy had the reality not sent her bolting back to j.f..

行李传送带出错就像滑稽闹剧或浪漫喜剧里激动人心的突发事件，只是现实并没有把她送回肯尼迪国际机场。

7.In her later years she became an animal rights activist and has even been fined for inciting racial hatred.

晚年的芭铎成了一名激进的动物权益保护者，还曾经因煽动种族仇恨而被处罚。

8.Tax increases do not have a significant effect on the likelihood of unrest, however, which suggests that distributional issues play a role in inciting public ire.

然而，税的增加对动乱的可能性没有很大影响，分配问题在煽动民众愤怒中起关键作用。

9.The government took action against the leader for inciting 煽动 unrest.

政府对该领导人采取行动，因其煽动动乱。

10.The speech was criticized for inciting 煽动 violence among the crowd.

这次演讲因煽动人群暴力而受到批评。

11.The film was banned for inciting 煽动 violence and civil disobedience.

这部电影因煽动暴力和公民不服从而被禁播。

12.His words were seen as inciting 煽动 hatred against minority groups.

他的话被视为对少数群体的煽动仇恨。

13.The activist was arrested for inciting 煽动 a riot during the protest.

该活动家因在抗议期间煽动骚乱而被捕。

作文

In recent years, the issue of free speech has sparked intense debates across various platforms. While many advocate for the right to express oneself freely, others raise concerns about the potential consequences of such freedom, particularly when it comes to speech that may be considered inciting violence or hatred. This raises an important question: where do we draw the line between free expression and harmful rhetoric? To explore this topic, it is essential to understand what it means to be inciting. The term generally refers to actions or words that provoke or stir up a particular reaction, often leading to unrest or conflict. For instance, political leaders or public figures who use inflammatory language can inadvertently encourage their followers to engage in aggressive behavior. This phenomenon has been observed in numerous instances throughout history, where speeches filled with passionate rhetoric have led to riots or even wars. One prominent example is the rise of extremist groups that often utilize social media platforms to disseminate messages that are inciting violence against certain communities. These groups exploit the vulnerabilities of individuals, manipulating their emotions and beliefs to foster a sense of unity based on hatred towards others. Such actions not only threaten the safety of marginalized populations but also undermine the very fabric of society, leading to divisions and conflicts that can last for generations. On the other hand, it is crucial to differentiate between legitimate calls for action and those that are inciting harm. Activism and protests are vital components of a democratic society, allowing individuals to voice their grievances and demand change. However, when these movements resort to violent tactics or encourage others to do so, they cross a line that can have devastating consequences. It is a delicate balance to maintain, as the intention behind the words can often be misinterpreted. Moreover, the role of the media cannot be overlooked in this discussion. News outlets have a responsibility to report on events without sensationalizing them or using language that could be seen as inciting. Responsible journalism should aim to inform the public while avoiding the glorification of violence or hatred. Unfortunately, there are times when media coverage can exacerbate tensions rather than alleviate them, leading to a cycle of anger and retaliation. In conclusion, the concept of inciting violence or hatred is a complex issue that requires careful consideration. As we navigate the challenges of free speech in our society, it is essential to recognize the impact of our words and actions. While everyone has the right to express their opinions, we must remain vigilant about the potential repercussions of our rhetoric. Striking a balance between advocating for change and ensuring the safety of all individuals is paramount. Ultimately, fostering a culture of understanding and respect may be the most effective way to prevent the dangerous effects of inciting behavior in our communities.

近年来，言论自由的问题在各个平台引发了激烈的辩论。虽然许多人倡导自由表达的权利，但其他人则对这种自由可能带来的后果表示担忧，特别是当涉及到被认为是煽动暴力或仇恨的言论时。这提出了一个重要的问题：我们该如何划定自由表达与有害言论之间的界限？为了探讨这个主题，理解煽动的含义至关重要。这个词通常指的是某些行为或言语挑起或激发特定反应的情况，往往导致骚乱或冲突。例如，使用煽动性语言的政治领袖或公众人物可能会无意间鼓励他们的追随者采取激进的行为。这种现象在历史的多个实例中都有观察到，充满激情的演讲常常导致骚乱甚至战争。一个显著的例子是极端主义团体的崛起，这些团体常常利用社交媒体平台传播被认为是煽动针对特定社区的暴力的信息。这些团体利用个人的脆弱性，操纵他们的情感和信仰，以培养基于仇恨的团结感。这种行为不仅威胁到边缘化群体的安全，还破坏了社会的基本结构，导致代际之间的分裂和冲突。另一方面，区分合法的行动呼吁和那些煽动伤害的言论至关重要。激进主义和抗议是民主社会的重要组成部分，使个人能够表达不满并要求改变。然而，当这些运动诉诸暴力手段或鼓励他人这样做时，它们就越过了一条界限，这可能导致毁灭性的后果。保持这种微妙的平衡是一项挑战，因为言辞背后的意图常常可能被误解。此外，媒体的角色在这个讨论中也不可忽视。新闻机构有责任在报道事件时不进行夸大或使用可能被视为煽动的语言。负责任的新闻报道应旨在告知公众，同时避免美化暴力或仇恨。不幸的是，有时媒体的报道可能加剧紧张局势，而不是缓解它，导致愤怒和报复的循环。总之，煽动暴力或仇恨的概念是一个复杂的问题，需要仔细考虑。在我们应对社会中言论自由的挑战时，认识到我们言辞和行为的影响至关重要。尽管每个人都有权表达自己的意见，但我们必须对言辞可能产生的后果保持警惕。在倡导变革与确保所有人安全之间找到平衡至关重要。最终，培养理解和尊重的文化可能是防止我们社区中煽动行为危险影响的最有效方式。