Freedom of Speech and Its LimitsSpringer Science & Business Media, 28. feb. 1999 - 240 strani In authoritarian states, the discourse on freedom of speech, conducted by those opposed to non-democratic governments, focuses on the core aspects of this freedom: on a right to criticize the government, a right to advocate theories arid ideologies contrary to government-imposed orthodoxy, a right to demand institutional reforms, changes in politics, resignation of the incompetent and the corrupt from positions of authority. The claims for freedom of speech focus on those exercises of freedom that are most fundamental and most beneficial to citizens - and which are denied to them by the government. But in a by-and large democratic polity, where these fundamental benefits of freedom of speech are generally enjoyed by the citizens, the public and scholarly discourse on freedom of speech hovers about the peripheries of that freedom; the focus is on its outer boundaries rather than at the central territory of freedom of speech. Those borderline cases, in which people who are otherwise genuinely committed to the core aspects of freedom of speech may sincerely disagree, include pornography, racist hate speech and religious bigoted expressions, defamation of politicians and of private persons, contempt of court, incitement to violence, disclosure of military or commercial secrets, advertising of merchandise such as alcohol or cigarettes or of services and entertainment such as gambling and prostitution. |
Vsebina
JUSTIFICATIONS OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH | 7 |
1 Search for Truth | 8 |
2 Individual Autonomy | 16 |
3 Democracy and SelfGovernment | 20 |
4 Tolerance | 31 |
SPEECH AND HARM | 37 |
2 Low and High Value Speech | 41 |
3 SpeechPlus and Symbolic Action | 43 |
VIEWPOINT NEUTRALITY AND ITS RATIONALES | 135 |
2 What Is A Viewpoint? A Case Study of Rosenberger | 140 |
A Case Study of Lambs Chapel | 148 |
4 Rationales for Viewpoint Neutrality and SubjectMatter Neutrality | 156 |
5 The ContentViewpoint Distinction and the Level of Generality | 162 |
6 Indirect Viewpoint Discrimination | 167 |
7 Paternalism and Intolerance | 173 |
RACIAL VILIFICATION AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH | 179 |
A Case Study of RAV | 58 |
SPEECH AND EQUALITY | 73 |
2 Silencing | 98 |
3 Asymmetry of Fighting Words | 111 |
DISCRIMINATION AND ILLOCUTIONARY ACTS | 119 |
2 Authority in Discriminatory Illocutions | 123 |
2 The Contours of Racial Vilification | 187 |
3 The Harms of Hate Speech | 195 |
4 Liberalism and Prohibitions of Hate Speech | 217 |
225 | |
Druge izdaje - Prikaži vse
Pogosti izrazi in povedi
action Amendment argument audience categories of speech Catharine MacKinnon chapter characterized claim communication conduct consider constitutional content-based decision defamation discussion dissenting distinction effect equal opportunity Establishment Clause example fact fighting words footnote omitted Frederick Schauer free speech freedom of expression freedom of speech governmental group vilification harm Harvard Law Review hate speech hearers hostility ideas illocutionary illocutionary acts illocutions incitement individual insults issue Joel Feinberg judgment justified Law Review Lee Bollinger legislators level of scrutiny liberal listeners MacKinnon moral motivated offensive one's ordinance particular paternalistic picketing political pornography principle of freedom prohibition proposition protection purpose racial vilification racist speech rationale reason religion religious restrictions result Rosenberger rules sexual social society speakers speech acts statements strict scrutiny subject matter subject-matter suggests suppression Supreme Court target theory tolerance victims viewpoint discrimination viewpoint neutrality viewpoint regulation viewpoint-based views violence