The Settler Coloniality of Free Speech

IF 3.5 2区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS International Political Sociology Pub Date : 2022-07-04 DOI:10.1093/ips/olac004
Darcy Leigh
{"title":"The Settler Coloniality of Free Speech","authors":"Darcy Leigh","doi":"10.1093/ips/olac004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Public and scholarly debates surrounding free speech often assume free speech is a public good and/or should be approached as a problem of “drawing the line” between free and regulated or benign and harmful speech. In contrast, this article provides a genealogy of free speech in which liberal freedom of expression has, since its inception, been integral to white supremacist settler colonialism in the United Kingdom and its former settler colonies, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The article argues that, far from a noble struggle against regulation, liberal politics around free speech establish oppositions between white “civilized” speech and its Indigenized racially darkened “others” as well as controlling or silencing Indigenous, Black and/or otherwise racially othered speech across the Anglosphere. The article first traces free speech through two significant moments in its emergence: early European Enlightenment colonial expansion (embodied in John Locke's “toleration”) and 1800s British colonial industrialization (embodied in John Stuart Mill's “marketplace of ideas”). The article then examines how this genealogy informs the contemporary case study of contestation over free speech in universities, showing that engagements with free speech across the political spectrum extend its settler colonial rationality.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Political Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olac004","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Public and scholarly debates surrounding free speech often assume free speech is a public good and/or should be approached as a problem of “drawing the line” between free and regulated or benign and harmful speech. In contrast, this article provides a genealogy of free speech in which liberal freedom of expression has, since its inception, been integral to white supremacist settler colonialism in the United Kingdom and its former settler colonies, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The article argues that, far from a noble struggle against regulation, liberal politics around free speech establish oppositions between white “civilized” speech and its Indigenized racially darkened “others” as well as controlling or silencing Indigenous, Black and/or otherwise racially othered speech across the Anglosphere. The article first traces free speech through two significant moments in its emergence: early European Enlightenment colonial expansion (embodied in John Locke's “toleration”) and 1800s British colonial industrialization (embodied in John Stuart Mill's “marketplace of ideas”). The article then examines how this genealogy informs the contemporary case study of contestation over free speech in universities, showing that engagements with free speech across the political spectrum extend its settler colonial rationality.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
言论自由的殖民主义
围绕言论自由的公众和学术辩论通常认为言论自由是一种公共利益,和/或应该将其视为在自由与规范或良性与有害言论之间“划清界限”的问题。相比之下,本文提供了一个言论自由谱系,其中自由言论自由自成立以来,一直是英国及其前定居者殖民地美国、加拿大、澳大利亚和新西兰白人至上主义定居者殖民主义的组成部分。文章认为,与反对监管的崇高斗争相去甚远,围绕言论自由的自由主义政治在白人“文明”言论与其本土化的种族黑暗“他人”之间建立了对立,并控制或压制了整个英语圈的土著、黑人和/或其他种族另类言论。文章首先追溯了言论自由出现的两个重要时刻:早期欧洲启蒙运动的殖民扩张(体现在约翰·洛克的“宽容”中)和19世纪英国的殖民工业化(体现在约翰·斯图尔特·密尔的“思想市场”中)。然后,文章考察了这一谱系如何为当代大学言论自由之争的案例研究提供信息,表明跨政治光谱的言论自由活动扩展了其定居者的殖民理性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: International Political Sociology (IPS), responds to the need for more productive collaboration among political sociologists, international relations specialists and sociopolitical theorists. It is especially concerned with challenges arising from contemporary transformations of social, political, and global orders given the statist forms of traditional sociologies and the marginalization of social processes in many approaches to international relations. IPS is committed to theoretical innovation, new modes of empirical research and the geographical and cultural diversification of research beyond the usual circuits of European and North-American scholarship.
期刊最新文献
Bio/Necropolitical Capture and Evasion on Africa–Europe Migrant Journeys Justice “to Come”? Decolonial Deconstruction, from Postmodern Policymaking to the Black Horizon “I Flip, Therefore I Am”: Smartphone Detoxing as a Practice of Sovereignty Nomads’ Land: Exploring the Social and Political Life of the Nomad Category Thinking through 1492: IR's Historiographic Operation(s) and the Politics of Benchmark Dates
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1