Speech act theory, maledictive force and vilification in Australia

Traditional Millian theory posits that free speech is the most important mechanism to achieve a greater tolerance of difference and thus create a dynamic marketplace for truth to flourish. In responding to maledictive hate, theorists such as Gelber and Butler recommend that marginalised speech actors engage with a process of speaking back; of returning the gaze in order to make perpetrators’ contributions to the marketplace of ideas marginal and aberrant. However, as will be demonstrated by an analysis of maledictive force and effects, the ideal speech situations of communicative action theory and the recasting of terms of abuse by ‘speaking back’ require either rational speech actors-something clearly absent in many acts of maledictive hate-or a validation of the authenticity and probity of performative speech acts of marginalised subjects.