Full disclosure: I am something of a freedom of speech purist/absolutist. That’s my personal disposition, so I have strong opinions on this topic. In Canada, I feel that freedom of speech has taken a major backseat to political correctness. To the point of actually seriously concerning people like me.
In the US I see college guest speakers being chased out, people get really riled up over speech they don’t like. But do you think this sentiment is secondary to the support of freedom of speech? Has this support waned over time, or does it just seem that way because of media selection bias?
33 comments
There’s an uncomfortable amount of young Americans that are willing to curtail free speech in the pursuit of stopping “hate speech.” The problem is who defines what “hate speech” is
Not sure about Canada but here in the U.S. 97% of the time “freedom of speech” applies to the actions of a government or legal authority.
A bunch of college kids causing a controversial speaker to turn-tail doesn’t have anything to do with the First Amendment.
People not wanting paid speakers at their college isn’t anti-free speech.
The speaker getting arrested for the speech would be anti-free speech.
[deleted]
Older people where I’m from aren’t really fans free speech compare to me, so I would say yes, I can’t speak for 300 million other people
>does it just seem that way because of media selection bias?
Look up Youtube algorithm
I dunno man, in the past people got thrown in jail for handing out socialist pamphlets or got blacklisted for being a member, past or present, of certain parties. The idea that the modern era is some kind of nadir of First Amendment rights is pretty ahistorical.
The first amendment means the government can’t stop or arrest you for what you say, but that doesn’t stop your job from firing you for dropping a bunch of n-bombs nor does it stop some regular person from punching you for talking Nazi rhetoric. That’s ok with me.
There are a lot more articles about speakers being chased out than speakers being chased out. It’s a right wing media darling that doesn’t seem to exist in real life, but helps them paint themselves as defenders of free speech by solving a problem that doesn’t actually exist.
I don’t really see those as free speech issues. Who you spend resources to platform and what you get upset about are part of free expression.
Freedom of speech means the government can’t jail you for it. It doesn’t afford you a platform if no one wants to give you one.
Freedom of speech also means that people don’t have to listen to you if they don’t want to, and that they can also voice their disagreement. And they’re not obligated to help you voice your opinions.
The system is working as intended. Some people are voicing opinions and others are disagreeing and refusing to spread those opinions.
>In the US I see college guest speakers being chased out, people get really riled up over speech they don’t like.
I’m skeptical that this was ever really not the case. I imagine communists would have faced similar reactions during the Red Scare, or abolitionists in the Antebellum South.
I don’t bring that up to compare the validity of those positions, more that it’s always been the case that unpopular speech has caused backlash. Freedom of Speech is primarily about the government.
College students have always been expressive. Everything is just recorded and posted to Twitter now.
I honestly can’t care about this issue. These speakers getting “chased out” know they’re controversial and purposely put themselves in situations they know will go viral.
I think people value freedom of speech to the extent that it benefits them. Freedom of speech purist/absolutist is rare because not even the first amendment is absolutist. For example, threats or calling harm to others or property is not protected under freedom of speech.
I don’t want America to be like Germany, even if I don’t agree with people being assholes to others.
The people screaming the loudest about protecting free speech are the ones trying the hardest to suffocate it
US here. People are pretty much free to say whatever they want. But that doesn’t mean they are free from the consequences of what they say. I mean, they won’t be jailed or criminally punished for it, which was the true purpose of it being in the constitution. But that doesn’t mean people are going to be nice to them if they say something inflammatory.
There are some laws restricting speech. You can’t use speech that could potentially cause someone actual harm. You can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater, for example. You can’t threaten people’s lives. Libel and slander exist.
Now that the government has been shown to have colluded with our techlords to have censored certain political speech, I’d say the freedom of speech is on life support. The next offense will be more egregious. The one after worse still.
Freedom of speech doesn’t protect you from being labeled an A-Hole
No
Articles are spun up to stir anger – it happening is not a common occurrence and if it does, it’s because a university is dumb enough to bring in someone with views that most there would not align with. It doesn’t help people love to screech about freedom of speech when being accosted by their fellow citizens even though the 1st Amendment only protects you from the government clamping down on it.
I do support it myself. A good look to why is what happened with Macron recently – using laws that clamp down on speech against protesters insulting him. *Insulting him*. I can only imagine the incredible fuss that would kick up if the government tried it here (aside the police but they’re a different beast to speak of).
> In the US I see college guest speakers being chased out, people get really riled up over speech they don’t like.
Sounds to me like the riled up people are just exercising their right to free speech.
As far as the 1st amendment goes, it is on a purely legal level. Sadly, though, people are becoming less and less excepting of different opinions and view points. A good example of this is Reddit, where you can get banned for saying something not liberal. You can say something neutral and still get banned. It is honestly a more cultural problem than a federal at the moment, but that is still just in this moment.
If you averaged the entire population? Probably not. A lot, maybe a majority, are still strongly pro-free speech. A growing minority pretends to be, but doesn’t believe that speech which is “hurtful,” “hate speech,” or which qualifies as some other vague but bad-sounding thing should be allowed. Another second growing minority is openly against it.
Technically Freedom of Speech was meant to apply to what the government can do. Remember the original Constitution was written for a dueling society.
That said shouting down speakers not only goes against the principles of college, it goes against hospitality code. Not to mention basic good order. If the college feels someone’s views are that odious they should just be not invited. A yeshiva hardly has to invite George Lincoln Rockwell (say) and maybe it shouldn’t, but it is not compatible with honor and dignity to invite him and not give him the speech he was promised.
In any case very few views are of that nature and people only imagine them so because emotion makes them create strawmen. A college exists to teach people not give two minute hates.
Probably more so. We have definitely gone further towards free speech absolutism since the founding.
Our predecessors would never have willing carried around their own personal wiretaps, So I’d say we’re, as a whole, less concerned with rights in general.
I tend to feel that they value it for themselves and for those they agree with, but not for those they oppose. At least that’s my feeling. Also, I guess I’m for pro responsible speech.
I think they value it about as much as they always did. A lot of people have always paid lip service to free speech but have supported social censure against people they disagree with.
I mean, at least we don’t have people beating each other on the floor of Congress for speaking out against slavery or widespread lynching of civil rights activists or blackballing of suspected communists anymore.
Yeah there is definitely less appreciation for free speech the last couple of years than before. You see it even in the comments, all the dumb “if the government doesn’t directly shoot you in the head its not anti-free speech” garbage. People threatening you, deplatforming you, and assaulting is against the spirit of free speech, and the fact its getting more common shows America as a whole values free speech less, even if the government isn’t (officially) enforcing it.
I’m in support of free speech being protected from the government. I think people absolutely have a right to not listen to people they disagree with.
People during the colonial times used to tar and feather people, so…
They’re free to speak, and we’re free to tell them to shut the hell up and gtfo. The government won’t do anything against you, but that doesn’t mean freedom from societal acceptability.
I think my (non-twitter using) generation (millennial) and the two after value free speech MORE than the previous generations. People complain about “wokeness” and cancel culture, but I see very few people in these groups banning books, promising legislative action against free speech, policing education and private morality, and kicking elected officials out of office for speaking on behalf of their constituents.
Food for thought.
(Y’all that down vote, you’re just salty about the truth)
I think it’s obvious that Americans don’t value free speech like they used to, and it’s very concerning for the future of both our counties. While the right does it too, this is a much bigger problem from the left.
Even in this thread look how many people defend chasing speakers of college campuses. While generally not illegal, it shows the students and anyone defending them don’t value the idea of free speech. Look at the effort over the last few years to discredit or censure “misinformation”, even when it was true. Just this week AOC said Tucker shouldn’t be allowed on the air.
I’ve always thought that if you don’t believe in free speech for people or ideas you detest, then you don’t actually belive in free speech, you believe in freedom to conform. That generally does not describe today’s left, in America or Canada.
No.
Our ancestors knew, intrinsically, that the ability for people to speak freely was something worth dying over. The reason for this was because the ability to speak freely is a necessity when seeking to pursue the truth in open dialogue, whether that conversation be about criticizing the government or debating about the weather.
Something that many people do not realize is that, more often than not, the truth is wholly unpopular amongst individuals who wish to conceal it, especially among the government. And so they will try to censor it, either by unduly influencing the court of public opinion or threatening contrary voices with threats of physical imprisonment.
Modern Americans do not understand why the truth is important, let alone want the truth. They simply want to be “right”. Even if that means lying to get there.
Many seem to believe that being “right” is being politically correct, and that political correctness is a necessary component of a civil society. Others believe that being “right” is a matter of demographics, and that the truth purely depends upon a democratic vote. Neither of these things are true, but that does not stop Americans from attempting to distort the truth in a bid to achieve these goals.
This why we are not allowed to talk about vaccine side effects or America’s missteps in the Russian-Ukraine war. This is also why so many things get labeled as “conspiracy theories” only to be realized as the truth down the road, or why somebody like Matt Taibbi is completely shunned by more than half of American citizens on the advent of the Twitter Files.
Modern Americans actively hate free speech which runs contrary to their worldview. If they valued it as much as the Founders did, they would have started a war by now.