Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T03:41:07.001Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Kant and Rawls on Free Speech in Autocracies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 November 2018

Peter Niesen
Peter Niesen*
Affiliation:
University of Hamburg
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the works of Kant and Rawls, we find an acute sensibility to the pre-eminent importance of freedom of speech. Both authors defend free speech in democratic societies as a private and as a public entitlement, but their conceptions markedly differ when applied to non-liberal and non-democratic societies. The difference is that freedom of speech, for Kant, is a universal claim that can serve as a test of legitimacy of all legal orders, while for Rawls, some legal orders are owed full recognition even if they do not in principle guarantee freedom of speech. I explain Kant’s account of free political speech and argue that the defence of individual rights should be seen as its core feature, both in republican and in autocratic states. I then argue that a much-overlooked shift in Rawls’s development to Political Liberalism likewise ties his account of free speech in democratic societies to issues concerning rights and justice. In a next step, I discuss Rawls’s perspective on some non-democratic regimes in his Law of Peoples, regimes that he understands as well-ordered but which do not guarantee freedom of speech. I criticize Rawls’s account from Kant’s perspective and suggest to introduce a ‘module’ from Kant’s pre-republican thought into Rawls’s conception, aiming to secure a core area of rights- and justice-related speech. My claim is that under Kant’s view of autocratic legitimacy, an important extension of speech rights is called for even in non-liberal, non-democratic states, and that a Rawlsian account should and can adopt it.

Keywords

KantRawlsfree speechfreedom of speechdecent hierarchical societiespolitical liberalismthe law of peoples
Type
Articles
Information
Kantian Review , Volume 23 , Special Issue 4: Special Issue on Kant & Rawls , December 2018 , pp. 615 - 640
Copyright
© Kantian Review 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achenwall, Gottfried, and Johann Stephan, Pütter (1750) Elementa Iuris Naturae. Göttingen: Schmidt.Google Scholar
Baynes, Kenneth (2009) ‘Toward a Political Conception of Human Rights’. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 35, 371–390.Google Scholar
Bonotti, Matteo (2015) ‘Political Liberalism, Free Speech and Public Reason’. European Journal of Political Theory, 14, 180–202.Google Scholar
Brandt, Reinhard (1996) ‘Gerechtigkeit und Strafgerechtigkeit bei Kant’. In Gerhard Schönrich and Yasushi Kato (eds), Kant in der Diskussion der Moderne (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp), pp. 425–463.Google Scholar
Brock, Gillian (2015) ‘The Original Position in The Law of Peoples’. In T. Hinton (ed.), The Original Position (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 247–265.Google Scholar
Flikschuh, Katrin (2017) What is Orientation in Global Thinking? A Kantian Inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Forst, Rainer (2010) ‘The Justification of Human Rights and the Basic Right to Justification: A Reflexive Approach’. Ethics, 120, 711–740.Google Scholar
Förster, Annette (2014) Peace, Justice and International Order: Decent Peace in John Rawls’s The Law of Peoples. Houndmills: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Freeman, Samuel (2007) Rawls. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Grimm, Dieter (1990) ‘Verfassung (II), Konstitution, Grundgesetze‘. In O. Brunner, W. Conze and R. Koselleck (eds), Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe, vol. 6 (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta), pp. 863–899.Google Scholar
Haworth, Alan (1998) Free Speech. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Honneth, Axel (2014) Freedom’s Right: The Social Foundations of Democratic Life. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1996a) Practical Philosophy. Tr. and ed. Mary J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1996b) Religion and Rational Theology. Tr. Allen W. Wood and George di Giovanni. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Meiklejohn, Alexander (1948) Free Speech and its Relation to Self-Government. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Nickel, James (2008) ‘Are Human Rights Mainly Implemented by Intervention?’. In R. Martin and D. A. Reidy (eds), Rawls’s Law of Peoples: A Realistic Utopia (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell), pp. 263–277.Google Scholar
Niesen, Peter (2008) Kants Theorie der Redefreiheit. 2nd edn. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Rawls, John (1972) A Theory of Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John (1996) Political Liberalism: With a New Introduction and the ‘Reply to Habermas’. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John (1999a) A Theory of Justice. Rev. edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John (1999b) Collected Papers. Ed. Samuel Freeman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John (1999c) The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John (2001) Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Ed. Erin Kelly. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John (2007) Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy. Ed. Samuel Freeman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Reidy, David A. (2008) ‘Political Authority and Human Rights’. In R. Martin and D. A. Reidy (eds), Rawls’s Law of Peoples: A Realistic Utopia (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell), pp. 169–188.Google Scholar
Ripstein, Arthur (2007) Force and Freedom: Kant’s Legal and Political Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Simmons, A. John (2010) ‘Ideal and Nonideal Theory’. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 38(1), 5–36.Google Scholar
Smend, Rudolf (1928) ‘Das Recht der freien Meinungsäußerung’. Veröffentlichungen der Vereinigung der deutschen Staatsrechtslehrer, 4, 44–74.Google Scholar
Teson, Fernando (1995) ‘The Rawlsian Theory of International Law’. Ethics and International Affairs, 9, 79–99.Google Scholar
Unruh, Peter (2016) Die Herrschaft der Vernunft. 2nd edn. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Varden, Helga (2010) ‘A Kantian Conception of Free Speech’. In D. Golash (ed.), Freedom of Expression in a Diverse World (Berlin: Springer), pp. 39–55.Google Scholar
Williams, Huw (2011) On Rawls, Development and Global Justice: The Freedom of Peoples. Houndmills: Palgrave.Google Scholar