Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 9, Page 1335-1337, November 2022.

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 9, Page 1199-1225, November 2022. In political science, the theme of critical citizenship is often interpreted negatively and understood to express distrust. However, criticism can be motivated by positive aspirations towards democracy and how to improve it. In order to test this idea, we asked respondents to the Democracy and citizenship survey to rank how the features of different types of democratic legitimacy appealed to them. The module adopted an innovative methodology by bringing (...) together philosophy and political science. This approach led to a series of results that tempered and questioned the more prevalent pessimistic understandings of critical citizenship. Furthermore, this article looks closely at controversy surrounding the meaning ascribed to criticism and discusses the presuppositions made by many political sociology studies and their differing hypotheses on critical citizenship. It shows that the very definition of criticism remains unclear and proposes a ‘critical understanding of criticism’ adopting a meta-critical stance to better identify four possible types of criticism: reactive criticism, evaluative, propositional and pluralist political criticism. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 619-630, May 2022. This article deals with the question of how academic freedom can be conceptualized and justified. First, I analyze two conceptions of academic freedom: institutional autonomy and intellectual and professional autonomy. I claim that institutional autonomy is a limited way to conceptualize academic freedom because there is no guarantee that institutions always favor freedom of intellectuals. In line with this, I argue that academic freedom as intellectual and professional autonomy (...) should be the prior, if not the only, conception of academic freedom. Second, I examine critically different justifications of academic freedom that provide us with reasons to attach high protection to academic freedom as a particular right. I contend that the justification of the university as a realm of discovery of truth and independent knowledge production has to be complemented with the justifications of the university as a realm of democratic free debate and the autonomy of academics to speak freely. This is because, the discovery of truth argument alone does not require us to accept any moral principle other than skepticism about our own beliefs, which is not a strong ground for free speech on its own. Third, I argue that equal autonomy provides a good reason for academic freedom by emphasizing the rights of academics to speak in line with what they believe is true and only in this way can they contribute to the democratic debate in academia. This line of reasoning endorses the value of the search for truth and knowledge too since it is only possible for academics to perform the profession of search for truth when they are able to speak, write and research freely. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 544-555, May 2022. Despite growing evidence that production of cartoons and caricatures of Muhammad causes deep hurt to Muslims across the world, European leaders are refusing to restrict their publication in the name of free speech. This article questions this position on three counts: one, the hurt these cartoons cause to the Muslims and the resulting frictions between Europe and leaders of the Muslim countries; two, the harm they cause to European (...) societies by increasing the tension between Muslims and ordinary citizens and the state at a time when Islamophobia and anti-immigrant feelings are already high; and, three, the need to question the intent of those publishing the cartoons given the overwhelming evidence on the first two counts. The article also questions the legitimacy and usefulness of labelling attacks triggered in response to these publications as ‘Islamic terrorism’ when the profiles of those perpetuating these attacks show criminal and deviant behaviour than evidence of religious devotion. The usefulness of using labels that make actions of a few taint whole of Islam, and Muslims as a collective, needs to be debated. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 544-555, May 2022. Despite growing evidence that production of cartoons and caricatures of Muhammad causes deep hurt to Muslims across the world, European leaders are refusing to restrict their publication in the name of free speech. This article questions this position on three counts: one, the hurt these cartoons cause to the Muslims and the resulting frictions between Europe and leaders of the Muslim countries; two, the harm they cause to European (...) societies by increasing the tension between Muslims and ordinary citizens and the state at a time when Islamophobia and anti-immigrant feelings are already high; and, three, the need to question the intent of those publishing the cartoons given the overwhelming evidence on the first two counts. The article also questions the legitimacy and usefulness of labelling attacks triggered in response to these publications as ‘Islamic terrorism’ when the profiles of those perpetuating these attacks show criminal and deviant behaviour than evidence of religious devotion. The usefulness of using labels that make actions of a few taint whole of Islam, and Muslims as a collective, needs to be debated. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 515-529, May 2022. Much of the recent literature on freedom of speech has focused on the arguments for and against the regulation of certain kinds of speech. Discussions of hate speech and offensive speech, for example, abound in this literature, as do debates concerning the permissibility of pornography. Less attention has been paid, however, at least recently, to the normative foundations of freedom of speech where three classic justifications still prevail, based (...) on the values of truth, autonomy and democracy. In this paper we argue, first, that none of these justifications meet all four intuitive desiderata for an adequate theory of free speech. We go on to sketch an original relational view of free speech, one which grounds its value in the recognition that speakers grant each other when engaging in speech practices, and its limits in the republican ideal of non-dominated co-exercisable liberty. We briefly illustrate the relational approach’s implications for the debate on hate speech regulation and for the response to fake news. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 568-579, May 2022. At present, there is a wide divergence in attitudes toward free speech in countries strongly influenced by Confucianism. Japan, Korea, and Taiwan have fairly robust rights of free expression. Mainland China does not, strongly restricting speech that the government judges threatens State interests. I argue that although traditional Confucian scholars supported many restrictions on expression, Confucian philosophers actually have good reason to want to protect expression about values. Subsequently, (...) I consider how to address the problem of disinformation while preserving this Confucian right to free expression. I focus on the case of Taiwan, as the Confucian state facing the most serious disinformation campaigns from China. The goal of government and civil society actors has been to focus on correcting disinformation while preserving free access to information, though laws do provide for civil and even criminal penalties for intentional spread of false information. As many democratic societies are facing the problem of concerted disinformation campaigns that aim to sow confusion and increase discord among the populace, Taiwan’s successes here are worth studying. Yet the Confucian cultural background means people accept more government involvement in defining what is true and false than may be the case elsewhere, and the right to free speech is less absolute. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 530-543, May 2022. Since their publication, the Muhammad cartoons featured in Jyllands Posten and Charlie Hebdo have become a symbol of free speech and Western values. These cartoons used provocation as a tool to discuss the limits of free speech and the scope of social self-censorship. In a just society, should the possibility of laughter be distributed equally? Should cartoonists and editors only publish jokes that are universally laughable? What is the (...) proper reaction to these kinds of provocative jokes once the possibility of censorship is ruled out in a liberal context? Is counterspeech or even cancellation a legitimate response? (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 580-589, May 2022. Women and girls in contemporary Arab societies suffer from various and intersecting forms of discrimination that deny them their enjoyment of fundamental human rights. The right to freedom of expression is one of the essential areas that may expose this gender-based discrimination and patriarchal attitudes. In many contexts, freedom of expression has enabled women to speak out and organize in civil, political, social, economic and cultural spheres and contexts; (...) participate in their own emancipation and improve their status. Women’s exercise of freedom of expression has also provided them with new rights such as the right to vote, the right to control their own bodies, the right to join unions and the right to equality before the law and to participate in decision-making and hold governments to account. In the last decade, we have witnessed different attacks on women’s rights particularly their right to the freedom of expression, as scholars, journalists, social media users, human rights defenders, politicians and activists. The aim of this article is to explore emerging challenges and to highlight the struggle of Arab women for freedom of expression. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 460-472, May 2022. The article presents different theories and comparative analyses of freedom of speech in both liberal and non-liberal traditions. Whereas freedom of speech is not an absolute right, the question is if this right should depend wholly on the truth of the respective opinion or statement. Theories that justify free speech on the grounds of autonomy, tend to make truth a moral requirement of speech. Theories based on civility and (...) public reason do restrict freedom of speech even further, often making a form of recognition a precondition of free speech. This reveals to be particularly relevant in multicultural contexts and discussions about blasphemy. From this overview of contemporary, global comparative debates on free speech, the article draws some conclusions. First, there should be the absolute primacy of free speech regarding governments and the powerful: Speak truth to power. Second, free speech should underlie no constraints where important individual rights are at stake. Third, academic freedom has a special status and should not be subject to the same limits as freedom of expression more generally. Forth, in civil society and the public sphere a more moderate approach to free speech should be adopted based on civility, public reason and recognition. Yet, any limits should be of moral and not legal nature. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 473-483, May 2022. In my recent book Freedom of Expression as Self-Restraint, I expound and defend the moral principle of freedom of expression. This article recounts a few of the main strands of the exposition in that book, and it touches upon the justification for the principle of freedom of expression. Supplementing the abstract ideas broached in the article are several illustrative examples that render the abstractions more accessible.

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 556-567, May 2022. The presence of Muslims in the European public spheres has raised a hoist of debates concerning issues of neutrality, tolerance, and secularism. All over Europe, Muslims are the target of specific forms of hostility, a phenomenon rising substantial questions about the real inclusivity of European democratic spaces. The category of ‘Islamophobia’ has emerged as a valid heuristic tool to identify specific processes of racialization of religion. However, its validity (...) has been fiercely questioned, and the use of this term has been defined as a pretext to bar the way to any form of criticism and objection to Islam. This paper will use the case of Islamophobia to reflect on the new set of conflicts between freedom of religion and freedom of speech, in the perspective of constructing post secularist, pluralistic public spheres. This paper adopts gender as a privileged lens to identify the mechanisms of essentialization and reification at work in the case of Islam. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 556-567, May 2022. The presence of Muslims in the European public spheres has raised a hoist of debates concerning issues of neutrality, tolerance, and secularism. All over Europe, Muslims are the target of specific forms of hostility, a phenomenon rising substantial questions about the real inclusivity of European democratic spaces. The category of ‘Islamophobia’ has emerged as a valid heuristic tool to identify specific processes of racialization of religion. However, its validity (...) has been fiercely questioned, and the use of this term has been defined as a pretext to bar the way to any form of criticism and objection to Islam. This paper will use the case of Islamophobia to reflect on the new set of conflicts between freedom of religion and freedom of speech, in the perspective of constructing post secularist, pluralistic public spheres. This paper adopts gender as a privileged lens to identify the mechanisms of essentialization and reification at work in the case of Islam. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 603-618, May 2022. The article examines the status of free speech in Vietnam in light of some of the explosive debates that have flared up in both the US and Europe. It argues that unlike in the West the Vietnamese case requires a critical defense to augment the space for free speech as such. To lead up to this conclusion, the essay looks at two case studies of literary censorship in Vietnam (...) to demonstrate that, since the middle of the twentieth-century, literary speech has been synonymous with political speech. Given the limited space for political speech itself, the essay concludes by advancing a version of the autonomy defense of free speech as one viable critical resource in the Vietnamese context. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 603-618, May 2022. The article examines the status of free speech in Vietnam in light of some of the explosive debates that have flared up in both the US and Europe. It argues that unlike in the West the Vietnamese case requires a critical defense to augment the space for free speech as such. To lead up to this conclusion, the essay looks at two case studies of literary censorship in Vietnam (...) to demonstrate that, since the middle of the twentieth-century, literary speech has been synonymous with political speech. Given the limited space for political speech itself, the essay concludes by advancing a version of the autonomy defense of free speech as one viable critical resource in the Vietnamese context. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 590-602, May 2022.

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 590-602, May 2022.

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 631-641, May 2022. Academic freedom is currently threatened not only in dictatorial or authoritarian regimes but in democracies as well. Thus, this analysis of the contemporary French experience, in which we observe a destructive climate maintained by intellectuals and political actors on both the right and the left. The extremization, intolerance, and radicalization of debates have increased since the election of Emmanuel Macron in 2017. At the same time, university institutions often (...) appear overwhelmed or powerless in the face of both internal and external dangers. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 631-641, May 2022. Academic freedom is currently threatened not only in dictatorial or authoritarian regimes but in democracies as well. Thus, this analysis of the contemporary French experience, in which we observe a destructive climate maintained by intellectuals and political actors on both the right and the left. The extremization, intolerance, and radicalization of debates have increased since the election of Emmanuel Macron in 2017. At the same time, university institutions often (...) appear overwhelmed or powerless in the face of both internal and external dangers. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 4, Page 642-651, May 2022. Academic freedom in China is unquestionably under threat from various quarters. Yet the assumption that only the logics of authoritarian Communist Party power shape the terrain in which scholars operate provides us with a limited perspective on these threats. The Chinese academy has become deeply entangled with transnational forces, and is increasingly driven by similar business logics to those in play in universities around the world. We argue that (...) these forces too contribute to the context for the exercise of academic freedom and its restriction. As is the case elsewhere, discourses around developing the national ‘knowledge economy’ and related logics of securitisation around knowledge production create conditions in which some forms of academic research are prioritised over others. Echoing the ‘culture wars’ plaguing the academy in many other countries, the research agendas most under threat in China are ones that connect to transnational movements and struggles, especially those focussed on labour and class, gender and feminism, race and ethnicity and human rights. In this article, we outline what we see as the key forces shaping the landscape for academic freedom in China, with a concentration on areas of research and teaching in the social sciences and humanities that are most at risk in the current conjuncture. (shrink)