Free speech
justification falls back into the illocutionary category, where the speech was already itself an incitement that is punishable, still able to prevent harm.
Pastor Ilesanmi was expressing a belief; the state treated the effect of his speech, that some listeners felt disturbed, as though it were a harmful act. Austin’s framework makes clear the shortfall in the law, muddling a locution for a harmful perlocution. Without this distinction, the state is left either silencing ideas it dislikes or standing by while language does real damage. Both are failures. The work of a just state is to tell the difference.
147
Made with FlippingBook - PDF hosting