Free-speech zealotry among conservatives dissipates when they encounter folks who aren't afraid to utilize their own voices as vigorously.
Article:
Americans' views on free speech have shifted from time to time, as demonstrated by demonstrations at United States universities during the Israel-Hamas conflict. Scholars of free speech and public opinion sought to understand this shift.
The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 1989 decision, upheld that the First Amendment's "bedrock principle" forbids the government from barring speech because it finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.
For years, conservative critics have argued that college campuses fail to sufficiently protect free speech. However, during the protests, these same critics claimed the demonstrations were filled with antisemitic hate speech, advocating for their suppression.
In contrast, liberals typically advocate for increased regulation of hate speech against minority groups. Yet, during the campus unrest, they cautioned against crackdowns by university administrators, state officials, and the police, asserting such actions would violate protesters' free speech rights.
At Vanderbilt University, two research teams—the Project on Unity and American Democracy and The Future of Free Speech—aimed to uncover Americans' stance on the issue. They drew inspiration from a 1939 poll in which thousands of Americans expressed opinions on free speech. In June 2024, the researchers repeated the identical questions to 1,000 Americans.
The findings reveal a widespread belief among Americans that democracy necessitates freedom of speech, however, support dissipates when the concepts become more specific. Approximately half of the respondents in the 1939 and 2024 polls supported the notion that anyone in America should be entitled to speak on any subject at any time. The rest believed that certain speech or speakers should be restricted.
A 2021 survey by The Future of Free Speech in 33 countries found high levels of support for free speech in the abstract but lower backing for specific offensive speech to minority groups or religious beliefs.
When asked whether seven individuals with diverse viewpoints should be allowed to speak, the number of those who responded affirmatively increased for each individual between March and June 2024. Although some differences were within the surveys' margins of error, it is still noteworthy that all shifts were in the same direction.
This trend indicates a slightly increased appetite for free speech, but the polls still reflect the underlying contradiction: vast majorities of Americans passionately uphold free speech as a cornerstone of democracy, but fewer support it when confronted with specific controversial speakers or subjects.
Vanderbilt University's surveys suggest that the public has a nuanced view of free speech. For example, in the June 2024 survey, respondents were more comfortable with a pro-Palestinian speaker than with a leader of Hamas and with a race-IQ scientist rather than an outright white supremacist.
This pattern suggests that the public distinguishes between extreme and less extreme positions, showing less tolerance for the rights of those with more radical viewpoints. This approach contradicts the purpose of the First Amendment, which was intended to protect unpopular speech, not restrict it to certain speakers or perspectives.
Other surveys have shown that many people struggle to fully grasp the logic and principles behind free speech. A 2020 Knight Foundation poll found that members of both political parties oppose speech that goes against their values or beliefs. Subsequent polls found that Democrats were more likely to support censorship of racist hate speech or vaccine misinformation, while Republicans opposed drag shows and kneeling during the national anthem.
In a February 2022 national poll, 30% of Americans believed that sometimes, speech that is anti-democratic, bigoted, or false should be shut down.
As the 2024 election approaches and polarization increases, there may be calls for only those sharing similar viewpoints to be permitted to speak. However, a genuine commitment to the fundamental principles of free speech necessitates allowing space for controversial and even offensive viewpoints to be expressed in the public sphere. History demonstrates that suppressing hateful ideas can deepen social divides.
Originally published by The Conversation, 08.14.2024, under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution/No derivatives license.
- The debate over free speech in education and self-development environments, like college campuses, has often intersected with political discourse, as seen in the contrasting positions of conservatives and liberals during the campus unrest related to the Israel-Hamas conflict.
- The findings from surveys on free speech, such as Vanderbilt University's, reveal that while a majority of Americans support the principle of free speech, their stance becomes more nuanced when specific controversial speakers or subjects are involved, raising questions about general news and public opinion on the issue.
