Does Regulating Hate Speech Undermine Democratic Legitimacy? A Cautious ‘No’
Res Publica 26 (2):181-199 (2020)
Abstract
This paper critiques the version of the argument that the regulation of hateful speech by the state undermines its democratic legitimacy made by Ronald Dworkin and James Weinstein. It argues that in some cases the harmful effects of hateful speech on the democratic process outweigh those of restriction. It does not challenge the central premise of the Legitimacy Argument, that a wide-ranging right to freedom of expression is an essential political right in a liberal democracy. Instead, it uses ideal and nonideal theory as a framework for judgements about the regulation of hate speech. The mistake underpinning the Legitimacy Argument is that it assumes that other conditions pervade that make an ideal democratic procedure possible when they do not. In reality the state can be put in a position where, whatever course of action it takes with regard to the regulation or non-regulation of hate speech, some citizens will not be able to participate fully in political deliberation. Under such conditions there remain strong pro tanto reasons not to regulate hate speech on democratic grounds, but they are not all-things-considered reasons, and there are also pro tanto reasons to regulate hate speech that might outweigh them in some cases. This leads to the cautious conclusion that while there might be a normative justification for the regulation of hate speech in individual instances, the debate is best understood as one between competing pro tanto reasons, and must be approached on a case-by-case basis.Author's Profile
My notes
Similar books and articles
Is the ‘hate’ in hate speech the ‘hate’ in hate crime? Waldron and Dworkin on political legitimacy.Rebecca Ruth Gould - 2019 - Jurisprudence 10 (2):171-187.
Tolerating Hate in the Name of Democracy.Amanda Greene & Robert Mark Simpson - 2017 - Modern Law Review 80 (4):746-65.
Freedom of political speech, hate speech and the argument from democracy: The transformative contribution of capabilities theory.Katharine Gelber - 2010 - Contemporary Political Theory 9 (3):304-324.
Hate Speech, Dignity and Self-Respect.Jonathan Seglow - 2016 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (5):1103-1116.
On the (in)tolerance of hate speech: does it have legitimacy in a democracy?Nuraan Davids - 2018 - Ethics and Education 13 (3):296-308.
Hate Speech and Distorted Communication: Rethinking the Limits of Incitement.Sarah Sorial - 2015 - Law and Philosophy 34 (3):299-324.
‘Won’t Somebody Please Think of the Children?’ Hate Speech, Harm, and Childhood.Robert Mark Simpson - 2019 - Law and Philosophy 38 (1):79-108.
Millian principles, freedom of expression, and hate speech.David O. Brink - 2001 - Legal Theory 7 (2):119-157.
Woman‐Hating: On Misogyny, Sexism, and Hate Speech.Louise Richardson-Self - 2018 - Hypatia 33 (2):256-272.
State Speech vs. Hate Speech: What to Do About Words that Wound?Michael Weinman - 2006 - Essays in Philosophy 7 (1):18.
Hate Speech and the Problems of Agency: A Critique of Butler.Kory Schaff - 2000 - Social Philosophy Today 16:185-201.
Hate Speech and the Problems of Agency: A Critique of Butler.Kory Schaff - 2000 - Social Philosophy Today 16:185-201.
What is hate speech? Part 1: The Myth of Hate.Alexander Brown - 2017 - Law and Philosophy 36 (4):419-468.
Analytics
Added to PP
2019-05-06
Downloads
33 (#356,109)
6 months
4 (#183,948)
2019-05-06
Downloads
33 (#356,109)
6 months
4 (#183,948)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
(When) Are Authors Culpable for Causing Harm?Marcus Arvan - forthcoming - Journal of Moral Philosophy:1-32.
Freedom of speech: A relational defence.Matteo Bonotti & Jonathan Seglow - 2022 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 48 (4):515-529.
Freedom of speech: A relational defence.Matteo Bonotti & Jonathan Seglow - 2022 - Sage Publications Ltd: Philosophy and Social Criticism 48 (4):515-529.
References found in this work
Political Liberalism by John Rawls. [REVIEW]Philip Pettit - 1994 - Journal of Philosophy 91 (4):215-220.