Special Issue "Democracy, Free Speech and Minorities"

A special issue of Social Sciences (ISSN 2076-0760). This special issue belongs to the section "Contemporary Politics and Society".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 July 2019).

Special Issue Editor

Prof. Osca Pérez de la Fuente
Website
Guest Editor
University Carlos III

Special Issue Information

Dear colleagues,

Free speech laws are special in that they are dependent on different legal cultures. The American negative liberty approach and the German positive liberty approach to free speech are not the same. This is especially important from a minorities’ perspective, because members of minorities are victims in free speech issues such as hate speech, religious insult, limits of humor, and right to protest.
On the other hand, limits on free speech and fears of censorship are the cornerstone of liberal arguments. Restrictions on free speech, especially political speech, must be especially justified in a democracy. Therefore, the right to protest should be interpreted by the courts in board terms, not in a formalistic way.
An important issue on democratic legitimacy is how to treat people who think differently or who are simply different, because democracy involves both the rule of the majority and respect for minorities. Such issues relating to minorities and free speech are good subjects to test the quality of democracy in a society

Prof. Osca Pérez de la Fuente
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Social Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1000 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • free speech
  • minorities

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Open AccessArticle
Information Disorder and Self-Regulation in Europe: A Broader Non-Economistic Conception of Self-Regulation
Soc. Sci. 2019, 8(10), 280; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8100280 - 07 Oct 2019
Abstract
Over the past decade, the problems arising from social communication have yet again become burning issues on social and political agendas. Information disorder, hate speeches, information manipulation, social networking sites, etc., have obliged the most important European institutions to reflect on how to [...] Read more.
Over the past decade, the problems arising from social communication have yet again become burning issues on social and political agendas. Information disorder, hate speeches, information manipulation, social networking sites, etc., have obliged the most important European institutions to reflect on how to meet the collective challenges that social communication currently poses in the new millennium. These European Institutions have made a clear commitment to self-regulation. The article reviews some recent European initiatives to deal with information disorder that has given a fundamental role to self-regulation. To then carry out a theoretical review of the normative notion of self-regulation that distinguishes it from the neo-liberal economicist conception. To this end, (1) a distinction is drawn between the (purportedly) self-regulating market and (2) a broader conception of self-regulation inherent not to media companies or corporations, but to the social subsystem of social communication, is proposed. This involves increasing the number of self-regulatory mechanisms that may contribute to improve social communication, and reinforcing the commitment of those who should exercise such self-regulation, including not only media companies but also the professionals working at them and the public at large. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Democracy, Free Speech and Minorities)
Open AccessCommunication
On Political Correctness
Soc. Sci. 2019, 8(10), 277; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8100277 - 01 Oct 2019
Abstract
This paper aims to analyse the arguments in favour and against applying Political Correctness policies on campus, especially on the curricula. The arguments in favour that will be studied are the criticism of the canon and the fair representation of minorities. The [...] Read more.
This paper aims to analyse the arguments in favour and against applying Political Correctness policies on campus, especially on the curricula. The arguments in favour that will be studied are the criticism of the canon and the fair representation of minorities. The arguments against are that Political Correctness is a threat to freedom of expression, academic freedom and its methodology is problematic. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Democracy, Free Speech and Minorities)
Open AccessArticle
Freedom of Expression, Secularism and Defamation of Religion: The Case of Charlie Hebdo
Soc. Sci. 2019, 8(10), 276; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8100276 - 01 Oct 2019
Abstract
I argue that under normal circumstances a state that is liberal and secular should not use its legal apparatus to suppress the publication of cartoons like those that triggered the deadly terrorist attack on the premises of Charlie Hebdo in 2015, if it [...] Read more.
I argue that under normal circumstances a state that is liberal and secular should not use its legal apparatus to suppress the publication of cartoons like those that triggered the deadly terrorist attack on the premises of Charlie Hebdo in 2015, if it is determined to abide by its core values. These values, which include religious neutrality, religious freedom, and unhindered freedom of criticism, imply that individual citizens are prima facie legally free to express their disapproval of particular religions or religious faith in general, through any non-violent means they consider appropriate, including parody and ridicule. This idea is open to various objections. Those focusing on the protection of religion as such can be easily dismissed, but the charge that defamation of religion causes offence to believers has to be taken seriously. Nevertheless, I defend the view that we need something stronger than taking offense to justifiably ban harsh religious criticism. In particular, I argue that, if the above sort of criticism prevents its recipients from exercising their basic rights or it incites third parties to engage in criminal activities against the above individuals, it should be subject to legal sanctions. However, this is not the case with the cartoons that appeared in Charlie Hebdo, since, as far as I can tell, no basic rights of French Muslims were violated, and no violent actions were committed against them as a result of their publication. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Democracy, Free Speech and Minorities)
Back to TopTop