Self-doubt is not the custom in public debate. In adversarial speech performance, the voice of certainty carries weight. Probing, intersubjective, self-reflective conversation is odd. Yet if speech is a cornerstone of democracy, if developing better ways to live on this planet without destroying it is a prerequisite to our survival, we need to bring all the necessary ideas to the table. The First Amendment can save your life; the wrong idea can kill you. This is why I am concerned about the mechanisms by which speech is suppressed in daily life, and am searching to understand the ways in which Hate Studies tells us something about conversation ending.
How to Cite:
Matsuda, M.J., 2013. Is Peacemaking Unpatriotic?: The Function of Homophobia in the Discursive World. Journal of Hate Studies, 11(1), pp.9–28. DOI: http://doi.org/10.33972/jhs.89