Speech acts and hate speech: a view from the contemporary law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14198/hexis.30512Keywords:
speech act, illocutionary act, perlocutionary act, hate speech, normative framework, subordination, liberal tradition, libertarian tradition, neo-republican traditionAbstract
This paper aims to show how speech act theory provides analytical categories that allow for an understanding of different traditions concerning the need to regulate or not hate speech. To this end, an analytical methodology is adopted that articulates the theoretical review of philosophical and linguistic sources with the examination of normative instruments and jurisprudence. Libertarian rhetoric holds that discriminatory and offensive expressions should not be regulated, or should be regulated in extreme cases, such as when they pose a danger of imminent unlawful action. This position is based on a series of linguistic assumptions about communication, which have been criticized by various proponents of speech act theory. Classical liberalism admits certain forms of regulation, focusing on aspects related to the perlocutionary facet of utterances, that is, the consequences produced by discriminatory expressions, such as undermining human dignity, understood as a fundamental good. The neo-republican perspective, on the other hand, based on Rae Langton’s theory of subordination, which also draws from speech act theory, offers an innovative view by considering that the harm of hate speech must be explained in terms of its illocutionary dimension, that is, the concrete actions performed through such speech, such as legitimizing structural relations of subordination by reinforcing asymmetries and historical injustices. The different perspectives are illustrated by appealing to various normative instruments and judicial decisions at both international and national levels (declarations, treaties, laws, and court rulings). The analysis concludes by reaffirming the performative power of language, showing that hate speeches are not merely offensive expressions, but acts that, in themselves, subordinate and legitimize inequality, thus dismantling the fallacious distinction between speaking and doing.
References
Aristóteles (1999): Retórica. Introducción, traducción y notas por Quintín Racionero. Madrid: Gredos.
Austin, John L. (1962): How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Congreso de la Nación Argentina (1988): Ley 23.592. Penalización de actos discriminatorios. Promulgada el 23 de agosto de 1988 [URL: https://www.argentina.gob.ar/normativa/nacional/ley-23592-20465/actualizacion (consulta: 18/07/2025)].
Corte Suprema de los Estados Unidos (1969): Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 [URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/444/#top (consulta: 20/07/2025)].
Di Rosa, Alessandro (2019): «Performative Hate Speech Acts. Perlocutionary and Illocutionary Understandings in International Human Rights Law». The Age of Human Rights Journal, 12: 105-132. https://doi.org/10.17561/tahrj.n12.6
Grice, H. Paul (1957): «Meaning». The Philosophical Review, 66(3): 377-388. https://doi.org/10.2307/2182440
Hornsby, Jennifer (2000): «Feminism in philosophy of language. Communicative speech acts». En: Fricker, Miranda; Jennifer Hornsby [eds.]: The Cambridge Companion to Feminism in Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 87-103. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521624517.006
Ibarra, Esteban (2016): «Semiótica de la intolerancia y discurso de odio». En: Movimiento contra la Intolerancia: Contra el Discurso de Odio y la Intolerancia. Materiales Didácticos, 12. Intolerancia y Discurso de Odio: Amenazas para la Democracia: 5-8 [URL: https://www.educatolerancia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/material-didactico12.-Discurso-de-Odio.pdf (consulta: 18/07/2025)].
Langton, Rae (1993): «Speech Acts and Unspeakable Acts». Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22(4): 293-330.
Langton, Rae (2018): «The Authority of Hate Speech». En: Gardner, John; Leslie Green; Brian Leiter [eds.]: Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Law. Volume 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 123-152. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198828174.003.0004
MacKinnon, Catharine A. (1984): «Francis Biddle's Sister: Pornography, Civil Rights, and Speech». En: MacKinnon, Catharine A.: Feminism Unmodified. Discourses on Life and Law, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987, pp. 163-197.
MacKinnon, Catharine A. (1993): Only Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Naciones Unidas (1948): Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos. Buenos Aires: Secretaría de Derechos Humanos, Ministerio de Justicia y Derechos Humanos de la Nación, 2020 [URL: https://www.argentina.gob.ar/sites/default/files/derechoshumanos_publicaciones_colecciondebolsillo_03_declaracion_universal_ddhh.pdf (consulta: 18/07/2025)].
Naciones Unidas (1965): Convención Internacional sobre la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación Racial. Resolución 2106 (XX) de la Asamblea General, adoptada el 21 de diciembre de 1965 [URL: https://docs.un.org/es/A/RES/2106(XX) (consulta: 18/07/2025)].
Naciones Unidas (1966): Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos. Buenos Aires: Secretaría de Derechos Humanos, Ministerio de Justicia y Derechos Humanos de la Nación, 2020 [URL: https://www.argentina.gob.ar/sites/default/files/derechoshumanos_publicaciones_colecciondebolsillo_06_derechos_civiles_politicos.pdf (consulta: 18/07/2025)].
Organización de los Estados Americanos (1978): Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos («Pacto de San José de Costa Rica») [URL: https://www.oas.org/dil/esp/1969_Convenci%C3%B3n_Americana_sobre_Derechos_Humanos.pdf (consulta: 18/07/2025)].
Pettit, Philip (1999): Republicanism. A Theory of Freedom and Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198296428.001.0001
Platform of Libertarian Party (s.f.): The following principles form the bedrock of a free and prosperous nation [URL: https://lp.org/platform-page/ (consulta: 18/07/2025)].
Post, Robert (2012): «Interview with Robert Post». En: Herz, Michael; Peter Molnar [eds.]: The Content and Context of Hate Speech. Rethinking Regulation and Responses. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 11-36. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139042871.005
Quintiliano, Marco F. (1887): Instituciones oratorias. Traducción de Ignacio Rodríguez y Pedro Sandier, 2 tomos. Madrid: Librería de la Viuda de Hernando y Cía. [URL: https://www.cervantesvirtual.com/obra-visor/instituciones-oratorias--0/html/ (consulta: 18/07/2025)].
Searle, John R. (1971): «What is a Speech Act?». En: Searle, John R. [ed.]: The Philosophy of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 39-43.
Waldron, Jeremy (2012): The Harm in Hate Speech. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674065086
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Andrés Fernando Stisman
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
