7 When is free speech not about freedom?
-
Omar Khan
Abstract
There are two commonly made claims about free speech and racism. The first, ultra-libertarian claim is that all racist speech, and indeed all speech, however awful, must be allowed. This position has some, though relatively few, real-world defenders, as few would countenance certain kinds of cartoons or arguments being published, for example in terms of racism or, say, child pornography. Instead, most of those who purport to be defending free speech as a matter of principle are instead defending a second, different assertion: that a particular speech act is not in fact racist. This is, or should be, viewed as an empirical dispute. It is true that sometimes opponents of a particular speech act focus on principled claims about free speech per se, arguing that not all speech should be allowed, and that free speech is not an unassailable principle that can never be trumped by other considerations (such as decency or harm). That is a fairly standard and arguably correct argument, but it sometimes mistakes the relevant terrain of dispute: defenders of a particular speech act should instead be viewed as denying that the speech act in question is in fact racist. This chapter explores these two positions. It also argues that there is no easy distinction between racist speech acts and racist actions in the world. This is not because there is no distinction between speech and action but because of the meaning of racism, which is fundamentally an argument for action.
Abstract
There are two commonly made claims about free speech and racism. The first, ultra-libertarian claim is that all racist speech, and indeed all speech, however awful, must be allowed. This position has some, though relatively few, real-world defenders, as few would countenance certain kinds of cartoons or arguments being published, for example in terms of racism or, say, child pornography. Instead, most of those who purport to be defending free speech as a matter of principle are instead defending a second, different assertion: that a particular speech act is not in fact racist. This is, or should be, viewed as an empirical dispute. It is true that sometimes opponents of a particular speech act focus on principled claims about free speech per se, arguing that not all speech should be allowed, and that free speech is not an unassailable principle that can never be trumped by other considerations (such as decency or harm). That is a fairly standard and arguably correct argument, but it sometimes mistakes the relevant terrain of dispute: defenders of a particular speech act should instead be viewed as denying that the speech act in question is in fact racist. This chapter explores these two positions. It also argues that there is no easy distinction between racist speech acts and racist actions in the world. This is not because there is no distinction between speech and action but because of the meaning of racism, which is fundamentally an argument for action.
Chapters in this book
- Front matter i
- Contents v
- List of contributors viii
- Introduction 1
-
Protecting freedom of speech
- 1 Protecting the freedom of speech 23
- 2 Open-air free speech 30
- 3 The problem of neutrality and intellectual freedom 43
- 4 In a diverse society, is freedom of speech realisable? 53
- 5 Training readers as censors in Nazi Germany 63
- 6 Is boycotting for or against free speech? 74
-
Free speech as a weapon
- 7 When is free speech not about freedom? 87
- 8 Drinking the hemlock 95
- 9 Secularism, Islamophobia and free speech in France 103
- 10 The logic of nonsense 115
- 11 Weaponised Swissness 131
- 12 Free speech and the British press 143
-
Free speech on campus
- 13 Free speech and preventing radicalisation in higher education 157
- 14 Anatomy of a ‘trigger warning’ scandal 168
- 15 Grad school as conversion therapy 180
- 16 Teaching ‘freedom of speech’ freely 192
- 17 The politicisation of campus free speech in Portugal 200
- 18 Do we need safe spaces? 211
-
The internet: the Wild West of free speech
- 19 A postmodern neo-Marxist’s guide to free speech 227
- 20 Free speech and online masculinity movements 239
- 21 Choose your fighter 251
- 22 Free speech in the online ‘marketplace of ideas’ 261
- Index 271
Chapters in this book
- Front matter i
- Contents v
- List of contributors viii
- Introduction 1
-
Protecting freedom of speech
- 1 Protecting the freedom of speech 23
- 2 Open-air free speech 30
- 3 The problem of neutrality and intellectual freedom 43
- 4 In a diverse society, is freedom of speech realisable? 53
- 5 Training readers as censors in Nazi Germany 63
- 6 Is boycotting for or against free speech? 74
-
Free speech as a weapon
- 7 When is free speech not about freedom? 87
- 8 Drinking the hemlock 95
- 9 Secularism, Islamophobia and free speech in France 103
- 10 The logic of nonsense 115
- 11 Weaponised Swissness 131
- 12 Free speech and the British press 143
-
Free speech on campus
- 13 Free speech and preventing radicalisation in higher education 157
- 14 Anatomy of a ‘trigger warning’ scandal 168
- 15 Grad school as conversion therapy 180
- 16 Teaching ‘freedom of speech’ freely 192
- 17 The politicisation of campus free speech in Portugal 200
- 18 Do we need safe spaces? 211
-
The internet: the Wild West of free speech
- 19 A postmodern neo-Marxist’s guide to free speech 227
- 20 Free speech and online masculinity movements 239
- 21 Choose your fighter 251
- 22 Free speech in the online ‘marketplace of ideas’ 261
- Index 271
