Critical sociologists have been conspicuous by their absence in theoretical debates about free speech in everyday life. The aim of this article is to address this missing gap in critical sociology by making some tentative suggestions about how such a theory might advance. Drawing mainly from the ideas of Pierre Bourdieu and Judith Butler, the article suggests that free speech occurs when coalitions come together in venues to discuss the possession and dispossession of certain resources; resources that coalitional members enjoy or are denied from enjoying in social fields. If a coalition engages in dialogue and other types of expression that pushes for an equal distribution of different resources so as to make lives more liveable, then the coalition will most likely also be constructing subversive ‘heretical discourse’. Furthermore, the coalition will also most likely be challenging dominant and hegemonic symbolic constructions of ‘linguistic competence’ in a social field. The article develops these points by analysing two prominent liberal schools of thought on free speech: the marketplace of ideas school and the deliberative school. The article argues that these liberal schools cannot satisfactorily account for power relations and complexity of identity formation in relation to free speech.

中文翻译：

---

日常生活中言论自由的批判社会学概述：超越自由主义方法

批判社会学家因其缺席有关日常生活中言论自由的理论辩论而引人注目。本文的目的是通过对这种理论如何发展提出一些尝试性的建议，来弥补批判社会学中缺失的这一空白。这篇文章主要借鉴了皮埃尔·布迪厄和朱迪思·巴特勒的思想，认为当联盟聚集在一起讨论某些资源的占有和剥夺时，言论自由就发生了；联盟成员在社会领域享有或无法享有的资源。如果一个联盟通过对话和其他形式的表达来推动不同资源的平等分配，以使生活更加宜居，那么该联盟很可能也在构建颠覆性的“异端话语”。此外，该联盟也很可能会挑战社会领域“语言能力”的主导和霸权符号结构。本文通过分析关于言论自由的两个著名的自由主义思想流派：思想市场学派和协商学派，阐述了这些观点。文章认为，这些自由派学派无法令人满意地解释与言论自由相关的权力关系和身份形成的复杂性。