Disobedient Discourse: Mill, ContraPoints, and the Limits of Free Speech Norms

Abstract

In this paper, I explore contemporary disagreement regarding protests against speakers deemed regressive or bigoted by progressive activists. I do so by examining the rationale, scope, and operation of free speech norms (i.e. non-legal standards that require people to respond to speech with tolerance). I specifically focus on the free speech norms defended by John Stuart Mill in his essay ‘On Liberty’. I contend that Mill’s free speech norms are well-justified and extend to protect the speech of regressive bigots in almost all circumstances. However, I also draw upon two arguments from Natalie Wynn’s video essay ‘The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling’ to contend that Millian free speech norms present serious problems for marginalised people. I attempt to resolve this tension between Mill’s well-justified norms and their problematic implications for marginalised people by developing a concept of ‘disobedient discourse’ that is modelled after John Rawls’ account of civil disobedience and allows for free speech norms to be violated in circumstances of longstanding injustice.