Editing Fighting words (section)

==Versus incitement==
[[Incitement]] is a related doctrine, allowing the government to prohibit advocacy of unlawful actions if the advocacy is both intended to and likely to cause immediate breach of the peace. In the United States, the modern standard was defined in ''[[Brandenburg v. Ohio]]'' (1969), where the Supreme Court reversed the conviction of a [[Ku Klux Klan]] leader accused of advocating violence against racial minorities and the national government. The Ohio statute under which the conviction occurred was overturned as unconstitutional because "the mere abstract teaching of the moral propriety or even moral necessity for a resort to force and violence is not the same as preparing a group for violent action and steeling it to such action."<ref>Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444, 448 (1969).</ref>

The difference between incitement and fighting words is subtle, focusing on the intent of the speaker. Inciting speech is characterized by the speaker's intent to make someone else the instrument of his or her unlawful will. Fighting words, by contrast, are intended to cause the hearer to react to the speaker.<ref>Guiora, Amos. ''Tolerating Intolerance: The Price of Protecting Extremism''. New York: Oxford University Press. 2013.</ref>