40% of millennials favor government censorship

Now, now. The real healdine here is 40% of Millennials OK with limiting speech offensive to minorities.

Speech offensive to minorities is pretty different than free speech altogether.

We already and as gen-Xers and boomers allow laws with penalties about swearing in public and defining crime as "hate" crime, so how is this different again?

That being said, I don't think we need laws or government censorship on any of those...we need to be raising our kids right and self-censoring any hateful or hurtful words we feel like spewing or suffer the societal consequences...like ridicule and shaming and disagreement or worse.

Say it if you need to and feel entitled to but be ready for the blowback. And there will be blowback.

originally posted by: Lysergic

In my experience its colleges thats be pushing this harder than ever.

Undoubtedly. But who controls the cirricula of most colleges and universities in this country (and most countries)?

The state.

originally posted by: Lysergic
What happened to all the Young-Go-Hards?

They got offended by someone exercising their constitutional right to free expression and are now living in their moms basement making 15/ hour flipping burgers and being angry at people.

a reply to: Shamrock6

The Pew Research Center just released a poll where 40% of people identified as Millennials said they are in favor of government censorship on speech that is offensive towards minorities

Was that a deliberate omission on your part or were you just restating the headline?



Wasn't just minorities. I'd like to see the exact questions asked because "offensive" is pretty vague. There's always been municipal ordinances (and even state laws) against things like profanity and displays of vulgarity in public. Not everything is considered publicly acceptable in every venue. I don't think anyone would for instance support a guy standing on the sidewalk, exposing himself, and saying, "fa--ot ni--er Christians can suck on this!"

Are you mad that people might be offended by the sight of a guy's junk in public? If not, then you likely believe in some form of regulation of public decency.

Certainly nothing the federal government needs to have any involvement in whatsoever though.

a reply to: havok

Read the rest of the report.

In Europe, where long-simmering racial tensions are of a different nature, compounded by the recent flow of migrants from North Africa and the Middle East, people are more willing than Americans to accept government controls on speech against minorities. A median of 49% across the six EU nations surveyed say this compared with 28% of Americans

Wow, the long arm of the US Department of Education extends all the way into Europe apparently.

a reply to: theantediluvian

The line you bolded is taken from the very first table in the article linked in the OP. According to the article in the OP, and the table therein, the question was whether the government should or should not be able to control speech that is offensive to minorities.

Did you read the article? Everything you brought up is answered in the first two paragraphs and first graph. The question was about speech offensive to minorities so, yes, it was "just" about minorities.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Ahh but this is where we get into the idea that one has the "right" to not be offended.

a reply to: Shamrock6

That's rubbish- eleventy percent of studies use a small focus group.

I'm an '84 model and I'll be damned if I let a small group of people speak for my entire generation. A shampoo company can claim that 9 out of 10 people prefer their products-does that mean 6+ billion people prefer Pantene? of course not.

We've got to stop underestimating the upcoming generation. Sure we think their taste in music sucks or their jeans are too skinny for our liking but they are more savvy and clued on than we give them credit for.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

But, the juvenoia is all we got!

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
A shampoo company can claim that 9 out of 10 people prefer their products-does that mean 6+ billion people prefer Pantene? of course not.

Are you hating me because I'm beautiful?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
A shampoo company can claim that 9 out of 10 people prefer their products-does that mean 6+ billion people prefer Pantene? of course not.

Are you hating me because I'm beautiful?

Maybe you are born with it, or maybe it's Mabelline.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Guess you skipped the part where 58% don't?

The entire point of the OP was to illustrate the difference in opinion on the matter between Millennials and other generations. At no point did I contend that the article was representative of 100% of Millennials favoring censorship.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Now, now. The real healdine here is 40% of Millennials OK with limiting speech offensive to minorities.

Speech offensive to minorities is pretty different than free speech altogether.

It's really not. The government should play no role in controlling speech regardless of who it offends. The public is free to have their backlash of opinions, but when free speech fails to protect people from government persecution it stops being free speech.

Who would decide what is and isn't offensive anyway? I just read an article about college students being outraged over remembering 9/11 because it's offensive to Muslims. In ottowa outrage lead a yoga studio to be shut down for cultural appropriation.

Minorities covers a lot of people and with the ever growing list of microagressions who would decide? what would the punishment be?

a reply to: Shamrock6

Yep.

Let's just get all the laws off the books regarding this kind of thing, god damnit.

a reply to: havok

Additionally, they're selfish little narcissists who think they're the center of the universe and only what they want matters. They are also steeped in a culture that promotes indulgence in every kind of vice as "liberty" and "freedom." Don't bother to try to tell than that indulgence can sometimes come with unpleasant consequences because they've been taught that "freedom" comes without having to own those. Those are all someone else's fault, not theirs.

to go with my point above. A man named gregory alan elliot has been involved in a 3 year court case, and has been banned from the internet or any devise that can access the internet because he criticized feminists online. Gregory is a graphics designer so this has pretty much halted his career, and the massive court costs have crippled him. On top of everything he still faces legal punishment from his government. This is a very slippery slope.

www.breitbart.com...

Speech offensive to minorities is pretty different than free speech altogether.

So, we are constantly told in gleeful tones by the left how all you white people are gonna be the minority soon ... HAR, HAR, HAR! As if we are going to be subject to revenge or something.

So my question is, what happens to all this offensive censorship and hate speech stuff when whites and Christians and other such groups are the minority?

Intellectual honesty says you will self-censor. Reality says that you will go on with life and there will be nothing to see here, folks.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I am a baby boomer and I oppose censorship,political correctness and those easily offended.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Yes, I did read it and then I followed the link from within the first paragraph to the article published two days prior — by PRC, about the same survey — which in my opinion, gives a more complete picture of the responses. It was a survey with multiple questions and the article you linked was about only about responses to one of those.

Global Support for Principle of Free Expression, but Opposition to Some Forms of Speech
Americans Especially Likely to Embrace Individual Liberties

I was inserting into the thread some much needed context I felt was lacking in your OP (and the PRC article for that matter). In this case, selectively choosing to discuss one among many similar questions while omitting the rest is cherry picking (IMO).

EDIT:

Just look at some of the responses. The whole broader issue has been narrowly framed as one of race.

a reply to: Shamrock6

The entire point of the OP was to illustrate the difference in opinion on the matter between Millennials and other generations. At no point did I contend that the article was representative of 100% of Millennials favoring censorship.

I never suggested you did. However opinion polls and surveys cannot be extrapolated and apply to everyone as the questions posed are often end in absolutes.

For example, if you ask a small group of people if they like chocolate or not, you will get a definitive value. However if you ask a small group of people what their favorite color or TV show is, you will get variables. A poll doesn't work when you have too many variables which is why the press asks yes or no questions and limit the amount of people surveyed because the results can be twisted to their designs.

You know what you can do with your opinion polls....