Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS:
Title: Liberalism, feminism and republicanism on freedom of speech : the cases of pornography and racist hate speech
Author: Power Febres, C.
ISNI:       0000 0004 2731 013X
Awarding Body: University College London (University of London)
Current Institution: University College London (University of London)
Date of Award: 2011
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
The central issue tackled in this thesis is whether there is room for legitimate restrictions upon pornography and extreme right political organisations' racist hate speech; whether such restrictions can be made without breaching generally accepted liberal rights and within a democratic context. Both these forms of speech, identified as 'hard cases' in the literature, are presented as problems that political theorists should be concerned with. This concern stems from the increase in these forms of speech but also due to their mainstreaming in society. In this thesis the republican conception of freedom as non-domination is explored as a more suitable account than the liberal one of freedom as non-interference, when dealing with these two forms of speech. In addition, the neo-Roman republican view is aligned with anti-pornography radical feminism. This alignment aids in releasing the feminist position from a liberal framework; thereby reducing the burden of proof relating to harms derived from pornography that this position has been subjected to. Liberalism's view of freedom of speech as a pre-political right leaves very limited room for restrictions to be made upon speech. The republican view of freedom as non-domination, meanwhile, means that restrictions need not be viewed as a breach of the right of freedom of speech. In addition, liberals argue that the most these forms of speech can cause is offence. By taking republican ideas of equality and respect for the democratic citizen, and anti-pornography radical feminist accounts of performative speech acts and grievances to individuals as part of a group, it is shown that not only can these forms of speech do more than offend, they can, in fact, dominate, in instances of individuals feeling subordinate. The theoretical work is illustrated through looking at two real world cases, Spain. a liberal state, and Finland, a republican state.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID:  DOI: Not available