Abstract

Embedded in the theories of epistemic fairness and militant democracy and based on the qualitative document analysis, the case study deals with the research question: What is the epistemic fairness of threats’ definitions included in the restrictions on the freedom of speech on the Internet in the Inner Six states? The article delivers initial evidence to support the theorygrounded assumption that epistemic fairness in legally defining threats to liberal democracy is a component of militant democracies that makes democracy last and not erode. Slight deviations from the principle of epistemic fairness in defining threats to democracy in France and Italy coincided with an incidental reduction in the quality of democracy. This is the first case study on militant democracies using the theoretical category of epistemic fairness. Preliminary conclusions incentivize more extensive comparative research, including other restrictions to democratic freedoms.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call