Pew poll on global support for free expression

[Mr. Morden]

Some interesting nuggets here:

http://www.pewglobal.org/2015/11/18/global-support-for-principle-of-free-expression-but-opposition-to-some-forms-of-speech/





And then they make a map of support for free expression:



Also, the breakdown of support for censoring offensive comments about minorities within the US, by demographic group:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/20/40-of-millennials-ok-with-limiting-speech-offensive-to-minorities/

[dead0man]

Another one of those things America is actually the best at.  Suck it everybody else.

other thoughts

The Middle East is more open to practicing different religions that Europe (but don't you dare make fun of it).  The Poles hate women almost as much as Asians and Africans do.  Germany has the highest in the "can say what I want without censorship"? odd 

Spain is the only country (other than the US) that thinks people should be able to say what they want, even if it's offensive in some stupid way or another.  And Millennials suck, especially, female, minority, Dem voters that didn't graduate High School.  But we all knew that already.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Interesting how bad the results from Senegal are, considering that country is one of the better democracies in the area.

[Marokai Backbeat]

The number from Millennials does worry me, but I can't say it surprises me.

[Blue3]

Lebanon seems more liberal than Israel in many aspects.

[RI]

Lebanon seems more liberal than Israel in many aspects.

Lebanon has generally been the most Westernized Middle Eastern country.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

In certain countries there will be 'issues' when it comes to getting genuinely representative samples. And even where not there are always problems with asking questions about anything remotely subjective. But hey, NUMBERS so everything is fine.

[Hnv1]

Lebanon seems more liberal than Israel in many aspects.

I suspect a small glitch in the poll. not sure if they polled outside of Beirut or some of the coastal cities, and likewise in Israel

[Sumner 1868]

Why so much sexism in France?

[Comrade Funk]

I'm ashamed to be a "Millennial"

[ElectionsGuy]

The young left is at war with free speech. Very happy to see the US at large is a leader of free expression in the world though.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I'm ashamed to be a "Millennial"

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

I've recently changed my views on censorship but I'm baffled by the suggestion that I ought to spend my time defending the free speech rights of racist cretins. As a reasonable person, I don't care about their rights, nor do I need to care about their rights.  

For the record, calls for "censorship" at various institutions are not infringements upon anyone's liberties.  In this country, there's a pesky "freedom of association" that allows private organizations to expel speakers or members, as is their wont. It's not censorship if a university refuses to allow a speaker to give a commencement speech; that's well within the confines of the law and it's sensible because it reflects commitments to those who are associated with universities as students or faculty. So no, there's no systematic assault on free speech or whatever, there's isolated incidents of student groups overstepping their boundaries and a widespread movement towards making universities more selective in terms of their on-campus speakers, which is fair and reflects cultural trends away from lax expressions of racism or sexism, whether through humor or pseudo-intellectual production. This is not oppression, stop acting like a bunch of coddled babies!

Stop conflating censorship with being censured. The latter is a hallmark of liberal ideas about "civil society"; students who march against the "politically incorrect" are giving various officials their censure, they're not seeking to use official institutions to systematically ban speech rights, they're using their speech to create a PR problem; a strategy that's perfectly commensurate with the freedom of expression. Whether or not this is praiseworthy or worthwhile is another question but it's clearly not fascism or authoritarian or illiberal or whatever, there's liberality in terms of one's tastes and there's political liberalism. The latter has no issue with wielding speech in order to censure others!

[Famous Mortimer]

I don't have a problem in theory with banning hate speech, the problem is who defines what is and isn't hate speech. Denying the Holocaust, obviously hate speech. Saying slavery was good, also hate speech. Is being pro-life hate speech against women though? I've heard that said many times recently. I've heard people on this forum say that opposing affirmative action is hate speech. Is questioning the economic impact of immigration hate speech? It's hard enough to draw a line in the first place, but it's especially hard in the current culture where people are trying to outdo each other in terms of being the most "privilege conscious" person in the room. It basically becomes a competition to see who can label the most speech as hateful.

[RI]

I don't have a problem in theory with banning hate speech, the problem is who defines what is and isn't hate speech. Denying the Holocaust, obviously hate speech. Saying slavery was good, also hate speech. Is being pro-life hate speech against women though? I've heard that said many times recently. I've heard people on this forum say that opposing affirmative action is hate speech. Is questioning the economic impact of immigration hate speech? It's hard enough to draw a line in the first place, but it's especially hard in the current culture where people are trying to outdo each other in terms of being the most "privilege conscious" person in the room. It basically becomes a competition to see who can label the most speech as hateful.

I wouldn't consider denying the Holocaust hate speech. Just stupidity that may come from a hateful place but isn't inherently hateful. To me, hate speech might be saying the Holocaust was a good thing/didn't go far enough/something the Jews deserved/etc. that can't be construed as anything but hateful. Same with slavery, which is hardly something only blacks/Africans have endured historically. Saying slavery is good, eh, not inherently hateful; saying blacks should be enslaved, etc., then yeah.

[Lief 🗽]

Great to see that younger Americans are finally coming around and joining the rest of the world on some of these issues. Let's hope it continues as the racist olds die off!

[bagelman]

I don't have a problem in theory with banning hate speech, the problem is who defines what is and isn't hate speech. Denying the Holocaust, obviously hate speech. Saying slavery was good, also hate speech. Is being pro-life hate speech against women though? I've heard that said many times recently. I've heard people on this forum say that opposing affirmative action is hate speech. Is questioning the economic impact of immigration hate speech? It's hard enough to draw a line in the first place, but it's especially hard in the current culture where people are trying to outdo each other in terms of being the most "privilege conscious" person in the room. It basically becomes a competition to see who can label the most speech as hateful.

This is the root of the problem with censoring "hate speech". I used to like the idea that we could punish people who make hateful comments, but if a hateful comment includes opposing viewpoints to relevant political viewpoints and anything having to do with "privilege", especially when "privilege" involves aspects about yourself that you have no control over, than this sort of thing really rears its ugly head as a war on free speech. Freedom of speech includes unpopular opinions.

[Beezer]

Can anybody explain Japan? Just a general belief and trust in authority?

[Hnv1]

I don't have a problem in theory with banning hate speech, the problem is who defines what is and isn't hate speech. Denying the Holocaust, obviously hate speech. Saying slavery was good, also hate speech. Is being pro-life hate speech against women though? I've heard that said many times recently. I've heard people on this forum say that opposing affirmative action is hate speech. Is questioning the economic impact of immigration hate speech? It's hard enough to draw a line in the first place, but it's especially hard in the current culture where people are trying to outdo each other in terms of being the most "privilege conscious" person in the room. It basically becomes a competition to see who can label the most speech as hateful.

Is holocaust denying so severe that it much be considered a criminal offence? I would think it's where moral stands as contrary to where the law should stand. I think speech and speech acts should be a criminal offence where they pose a likely threat of causing physical violence