Those folks that espouse a philosophy that recognizes ethnic diversity within a society and that encourages others to be enlightened by worthwhile contributions to society by those of diverse ethnic backgrounds. They take this laudable principle and bastardize it by supporting the suppression of unpopular and what they would consider "biased" and "hateful" speech on the part of Wilders. It is the muliticulturalist liberal who, although most likely for reasons he or she thinks are benevolent and good, is in favor of state "protection" of "disfavored groups" (e.g. Muslims) as against "hate speech" from favored or privileged folks, like Wilders.The Mad Hatter wrote:Define 'liberals'.
I read an article not too long ago which described the argument that Wilders' free speech is being squelched as "absurd" because the purpose of free speech, in this liberal multiculturalist's mind (i'd have to search for the article again) is to help groups that traditionally disfavored or talked over/down to by either the government or favored groups, and that since Wilders represents the establishment he can't possibly assert that his free speech rights are being invaded. This school of thought basically de-individualizes the idea of rights. These folks would generally describe themselves as "liberal" and would be described as liberal by most folks because they also support other liberal/left/progressive ideas.