Support NeoGAF

[Dunki]

It looks like not all is lost and these loud minorities people who try to prevent speeches in the University losing their battle of censorship in the public.

And yes this also includes speeches some call hate speech

For most of its surveys between 1972 and 2016, the General Social Survey asked a U.S. sample to consider the following types of potential public speakers. (They asked about a few others but the following are the ones they asked most consistently.)

• “…a person who believes that Blacks are genetically inferior.” (Henceforth “racist.”)
• “Somebody who is against all churches and religion…” (Henceforth “antitheist.”)
• “…a man who admits he is a Communist.” (Henceforth “communist.”)
• “…a person who advocates doing away with elections and letting the military run the country.” (Henceforth “militarist.”)
• “…a man who admits that he is a homosexual?” (Henceforth, “homosexual.”)

Also Interesting If I read this right it is not the extreme left but the light left who wants to prevent most speeches.

Over all this article is really interesting and it gives me hope for the future.

http://jmrphy.net/blog/2018/02/16/who-is-afraid-of-free-speech/

 

[PhendranaMama]

It looks like not all is lost and these loud minorities people who try to prevent speeches in the University losing their battle of censorship in the public.
http://jmrphy.net/blog/2018/02/16/who-is-afraid-of-free-speech/

Loud minorities?

Also, this blog you've linked to is a garbage source.

 

[infinitys_7th]

Loud minorities?

Also, this blog you've linked to is a garbage source.

He obviously means "minorities of".

I know your social justice spidey-sense was tingling, but sometimes a typo is just a typo.

 

[Kotzen Ducha]

This is a great case of statistics being able to tell whatever story you want them to tell.

Their definition of free speech is all speech minus hate speech minus separate speech which isn't what most people in the US would consider free speech at all.
To me it's clear that the most limiting force to speech are radical progressives who label first and silence second. The labels don't even have to be accurate.
Is Jordan Peterson a nazi? He's not. Is Ben Shapiro an anti-semite? Well, he's Jewish.

Vox is biased and this study is flawed. There was a time when I would have accused the conservative fundamentalist Christians the biggest threat to free speech, but they've been more accommodating to an open exchange of ideas in the last 10 years than the authoritarian left have been.

 

[Nintendo Switch]

Good to see.

Expected in a way. The most authoritarian/radical people in the left and right are always the most focused on by media. their message is always so repulsive that it drives more people to watch the media and reinforces tribalism.

That’s why I think it’s silly to group libertarians with racists/Nazis.

And that’s also why it’s silly to group the left with the actions of a small subset of authoritarians that don’t represent the preponderance of liberals. Most left people are liberals and believe in free speech. Fox News and Talk Radio just focuses on the authoritarians in order to reinforce tribalism. Some other media venues does the same thing with the right.

 

[pramod]

How are they measuring how "left" someone is? What's the difference between a "slight" and "radical" leftist?

 

[Dunki]

This is a great case of statistics being able to tell whatever story you want them to tell.

Their definition of free speech is all speech minus hate speech minus separate speech which isn't what most people in the US would consider free speech at all.
To me it's clear that the most limiting force to speech are radical progressives who label first and silence second. The labels don't even have to be accurate.
Is Jordan Peterson a nazi? He's not. Is Ben Shapiro an anti-semite? Well, he's Jewish.

Vox is biased and this study is flawed. There was a time when I would have accused the conservative fundamentalist Christians the biggest threat to free speech, but they've been more accommodating to an open exchange of ideas in the last 10 years than the authoritarian left have been.

I did not use vox because i knew this. However if I understand this correctly people were asked if these would be ok

• “…a person who believes that Blacks are genetically inferior.” (Henceforth “racist.”)
  [*]“Somebody who is against all churches and religion…” (Henceforth “antitheist.”)
  [*]“…a man who admits he is a Communist.” (Henceforth “communist.”)
  [*]“…a person who advocates doing away with elections and letting the military run the country.” (Henceforth “militarist.”)
  [*]“…a man who admits that he is a homosexual?” (Henceforth, “homosexual.”)

So I do not think that it is flawed in this sense.

 

[strange headache]

Hmm, it would be nice, but I'm not convinced. The data is quite old (up to 2014) and doesn't really take into account recent developments. Most of the societal and ideological shift has only manifested itself these past few years.

It also contradicts the statistics from PEW, which i find a little bit more reliable:

Even though a larger share of Millennials favor allowing offensive speech against minorities, the 40% who oppose it is striking given that only around a quarter of Gen Xers (27%) and Boomers (24%) and roughly one-in-ten Silents (12%) say the government should be able to prevent such speech.

 

[Barsinister]

I wish you all would look at this from a different angle, please. The Government does not allow speech. The Government protects your right to speech. Your right to speech is inherent from within you. Nobody grants it to you. Saying you support free speech is like saying you support the right to breathe.

 

[Hoya Destroyer]

With the Canadian gender neutral pronoun laws (the one Jordan Peterson hates) and that English guy going to jail for teaching his dog to react to Nazi salutes, I hope some common sense can prevail.

 

[Scopa]

How are they measuring how "left" someone is? What's the difference between a "slight" and "radical" leftist?

Sanity.

 

[manfestival]

I wonder how they draw these conclusions. Its nice to see graphs and statistics but this makes me wonder the validity of everything. Cause. this is deep yo

 

[ickythingz]

I love these "studies". What's sad is how many people buy into this stuff.

 

[Scopa]

I love these "studies". What's sad is how many people buy into this stuff.

Kinda like election polls, hey?

 

[way more]

I love Gen Z. Between them and Gen X they can save this country from the Millenials.

 

[Fnord]

Um... am I the only one that noticed the glaring problem with this ending in 2010? The political and social climate has changed significantly in the last eight years.

 

[Red Crayon Aristocrat]

Um... am I the only one that noticed the glaring problem with this ending in 2010? The political and social climate has changed significantly in the last eight years.

Yeah, that alone means you can disregard this, The political and social climate has changed 100% since 2010.

It's very strange to think free speech would have since become something "liberals" would be against but a lot of strange stuff has happened over the last 8 years?

 

[ReadingRambo]

This really seems aimed to discredit the idea that the far-left is becoming anti-free speech. Using data from 2010 doesn't help considering how much has changed.

 

[Blackie]

This makes sense. Liberals/progressives/leftists champion diversity and inclusivity for all types of people (who want to play nice, not bigots/etc.).