In my new book, The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I write about a global anti-free speech movement that is now sweeping over the United States. While not the first, it is in my view the most dangerous movement in our history due to an unprecedented alliance of government, corporate, academic, and media forces. That fear was amplified this week with polling showing that years of attacking free speech as harmful has begun to change the views of citizens.
As discussed in the book, our own anti-free speech movement began in higher education where it continues to rage. It then metastasized throughout our politics and media. It is, therefore, not surprising to see the new Knight Foundation-Ipsos study revealing a further a decline in students’ views concerning the state of free speech on college campuses.
The study shows that 70 percent of students “believe that speech can be as damaging as physical violence.” It also shows the impact of speech codes and regulations with two out of three students reporting that they “self-censor” during classroom discussions.
Not surprisingly, Republican students are the most likely to self-censor given the purging of conservative faculty and the viewpoint intolerance shown on most campuses.
Some 49 percent of Republican students report self-censoring on three or more topics. Independents are the second most likely at 40 percent. Some 38 percent of Democrats admit to self-censuring.
Sixty percent of college students strongly or somewhat agree that “[t]he climate at my school or on my campus prevents some people from saying things they believe, because others might find it offensive.”
The most alarming finding may be that only 54 percent of students believe that colleges should “allow students to be exposed to all types of speech even if they may find it offensive or biased.” That figure stood at 78 percent in 2016.
The poll follows similar results in a new poll by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) of the population as a whole. It found that 53% of Americans believe that the First Amendment goes too far in protecting rights. So there is now a majority who believe that the First Amendment, including their own rights, should be curtailed.
The most supportive of limiting free speech are Democrats at a shocking 61%. However, a majority (52%) of Republicans also agreed.
Roughly 40% now trust the government to censor speech, agreeing that they trust the government “somewhat,” “very much,” or “completely” to make fair decisions about what speech should be disallowed.
It is no small feat to convince a free people to give up their freedoms. They have to be afraid or angry. These polls suggest that they appear both very afraid and very angry.
It is the result of years of indoctrinating students and citizens that free speech is harmful and dangerous. We have created a generation of speech phobics who are willing to turn their backs on centuries of struggle against censorship and speech codes.
Anti-free speech books have been heralded in the media. University of Michigan Law Professor and MSNBC legal analyst Barbara McQuade has written how dangerous free speech is for the nation. Her book, “Attack from Within,” describes how free speech is what she calls the “Achilles Heel” of America, portraying this right not as the value that defines this nation but the threat that lurks within it.
McQuade and many on the left are working to convince people that “disinformation” is a threat to them and that free speech is the vehicle that makes them vulnerable.
This view has been pushed by President Joe Biden who claims that companies refusing to censor citizens are “killing people.” The Biden administration has sought to use disinformation to justify an unprecedented system of censorship.
Recently, the New York Times ran a column by former Biden official and Columbia University law professor Tim Wu describing how the First Amendment was “out of control” in protecting too much speech.
Wu insists that the First Amendment is now “beginning to threaten many of the essential jobs of the state, such as protecting national security and the safety and privacy of its citizens.” He claims that the First Amendment “now mostly protects corporate interests.”
There is even a movement afoot to rewrite the First Amendment through an amendment. George Washington University Law School Professor Mary Anne Franks believes that the First Amendment is “aggressively individualistic” and needs to be rewritten to “redo” the work of the Framers.
Her new amendment suggestion replaces the clear statement in favor of a convoluted, ambiguous statement of free speech that will be “subject to responsibility for abuses.” It then adds that “all conflicts of such rights shall be resolved in accordance with the principle of equality and dignity of all persons.”
Franks has also dismissed objections to the censorship on social media and insisted that “the Internet model of free speech is little more than cacophony, where the loudest, most provocative, or most unlikeable voice dominates . . . If we want to protect free speech, we should not only resist the attempt to remake college campuses in the image of the Internet but consider the benefits of remaking the Internet in the image of the university.”
Franks is certainly correct that those “unlikeable voices” are less likely to be heard in academia today. As discussed in my book, faculties have largely cleansed with the ranks of conservative, Republican, libertarian, and dissenting professors through hiring bias and attrition. In self-identifying surveys, some faculties show no or just a handful of conservative or Republican members.
The discussion on most campuses now runs from the left to far left without that pesky “cacophony” of opposing viewpoints.
One of the most dangerous and successful groups in this anti-free speech movement has been Antifa. I testified in the Senate on Antifa and the growing anti-free speech movement in the United States. I specifically disagreed with the statement of House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler that Antifa (and its involvement in violent protests) is a “myth.”
In the meantime, Antifa continues to attack those with opposing views and anti-free speech allies continue to “deplatform” speakers on campuses and public forums. “Your speech is violence” is now a common mantra heard around the country.
Faculty continue to lead students in attacking pro-life and other demonstrators.
Antifa is now so popular in some quarters that it recently saw two members elected to the French and European parliaments.
Antifa is at its base a movement at war with free speech, defining the right itself as a tool of oppression. It is laid out in Rutgers Professor Mark Bray’s “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook” in which he emphasizes the struggle of the movement against free speech: “At the heart of the anti-fascist outlook is a rejection of the classical liberal phrase that says, ‘I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’”
Bray quotes one Antifa member as summing up their approach to free speech as a “nonargument . . . you have the right to speak but you also have the right to be shut up.”
However, the most chilling statement may have come from arrested Antifa member Jason Charter after an attack on historic statues in Washington, D.C. After his arrest, Charter declared “The Movement is winning.” As these polls show, he is right.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage” (Simon & Schuster, June 18, 2024).
See below as Dennis the Draft Dodger lies his ass off again.
The spastic idiot claims that Harris had a campaign in May.
Why isn’t the truth good enough for Dennis the Draft Dodger?
Jonathan: It’s now official. This afternoon DJT announced he refuses to debate Kamala Harris on September 10 on ABC. By the way, the date both campaigns agreed to back in May–two months BFORE DJT filed his defamation suit against ABC. Lame excuses exposed to the light of day!
What will voters take away from DJT’s refusal to debate Harris? The same thing any 5th grader will tell you: “Donald Trump is a big fat coward!”
“. . . the date both campaigns agreed to back in May . . .”
That would be a neat trick, since Harris did *not* have a campaign “back in May.” (Or did she?)
“. . . DJT’s refusal to debate Harris”
Yet another Leftist lie, followed of course by a smear.
He has agreed to debate her on September 4 — on Fox. CNN hosted the first debate. Why isn’t it fair for Fox to host the second one?
“Both campaigns” did NOT agree to any debate between Trump and Harris. The 10 Sept debate that was agreed to was between BIDEN and Trump. But Biden dropped out which means that any previous agreement with HIS campaign and Trump’s is now null and void.
Trump already agreed to a debate on the left leaning, Trump hating, network, CNN with Biden AND Trump kept that agreement and appeared as promised where he wiped the floor with Biden.
Trump has said that he IS willing to debate Harris, but he now wants that debate to be held on FOX. Harris and HER campaign, however, appears to lack the courage of Trump as she and her campaign have, at least so far, refused to accept this agreement. Why is that, I wonder? Trump has showed he has the courage to walk into the lions den, so to speak, by going on CNN which has proven, time and again ever since 2016, that it’s about as anti Trump as a network can get.
So, I think it’s only reasonable that Harris now show that SHE has that same courage by going on FOX for a debate with Trump as he’s requesting. If she can’t do that, then how does she expect to show the American public that she has the courage and conviction to be our next President and be able to take on, face to face, our toughest adversaries such as Putin, XI, Iran’s Ayatollah or N. Korea’s “little rocket man” Kim Jung Un (if I’m spelling his name wrong, my apologies)?
Excellent and true! You’re exactly right. Thank you 😊
LOL. This is the crap you have been reduced to. Pathetic, but keep talking, you are doing great things for Trump.
What will voters say? That Harris is hiding in the basement just like Biden did because she has the IQ of an antifa member.
It’s a bit like self incarceration now . Btw/ When we see trans women knocking out biological women at the Olympics and hear NOT A PEEP from the famous women on the left from the past generation (Steinem, M Thomas, even Carole King) we know they were shallow opportunists with just a leftist agenda, a mile wide and an inch deep. Even Martin Luther King finds no acceptance there. I doubt 75 million Americans will just take it on the chin and fall in line.
Even if you are a person that doesn’t participate in social media, don’t support any protests and even if you don’t vote – we all benefit from others that do exercise their First Amendment rights. Others took risks so all of us can benefit from it.
Free speech by individuals, press organizations and public interest groups is the reason most of us drink safe water, drive safe cars, have safe workplaces and why we have middle class incomes. Citizens and journalists can report waste, fraud and abuse.
Hollywood solved this so-called “crisis” many decades ago with its ratings label system (PG, R, Mature Audiences, Violence, Nudity labels).
Since government officials have no censorship authority under the First Amendment, Hollywood gave that authority to parents and adults [private censors] instead of government officials. The same system could easily be enacted for online speech and social media.
Even if you don’t participate in free speech yourself, all of us benefit from it.
I think most people are so fixated on the problems and the reactions to them from others and themselves that they miss the sources and origins of the problems themselves.
The two main issues steamrolling this loss of free speech is twofold. The first one most people notice, but the second one not so much.
The one most people see;
1. Controlling powers behind the scenes and corrupt leaders in govt want free speech stifled so they can control people.
and the one most people seem to miss;
2. We live in a youthcentric culture now, where young people are routinely and almost exclusively being put in positions of power and authority everywhere, both in govt and in the corporate world, and these young people don’t have the substance or character to understand why free speech an essential core founding principle of the United States.
They don’t understand once speech is controlled then there is no freedom for anyone, they don’t see it. They don’t respect or revere it or those who went before to whom it was so important. And they don’t care.
The number 1 characteristic of todays young people, speaking of those 35 and under, is APATHY.
They don’t care about free speech, and they don’t want to hear speech they don’t like. They like the Nanny state mentality, they’ve been raised on a diet of commercials where helpless hapless overweight soft pudgy idiots drop their phones and stand their with their arms up asking what they should do next…. until some corporate goon comes along to give them a new phone.
This is who they are. They never had to work hard for anything. They never really suffered or were bored growing up. They’ve been entertained, pampered, patronized and catered to their entire lives. They’ve had easy access to information, all information, and they’ve never known a long hard lonely day where they had to go outside and find something in the back yard to entertain themselves with.
When Alito pushed to make corporations “people” when it comes to voting and donating to political candidates, he along with the rest who voted for it destroyed any chance or hope for free elections in this country. This is why I don’t vote. Not even for RFK. Because it doesn’t matter. Whoever you vote for your vote will not be counted, they’ll tally the votes “electronically” to total whomever the corporations decide needs to be in their frontman (or woman) for the next 4 years and that’s it.
We live in a corporate controlled police state now. We have few rights, we have few protections, and the corporations run by snotnosed punks who don’t understand the importance of hearing words you don’t agree with make the law.
And the rest of us, the old working class codgers from the 60s and 70s, do the actual work and wait to die so these stooges can have it.
.Bleak but true.
Until we can get the corporations out of the elections and until people wake up and realize they’re being played regardless of which “side” they vote for, then nothing will ever change except the rhetoric.
You actually can’t see the difference between Trump and Biden on policy? How about the difference between a secure border and no border?
Jonathan: The “Movement” is definitely winning! And the DJT campaign doesn’t know what to to do about the Harris “Movement” that is surging in the polls. And it’s not just the polls. The Harris campaign shattered fundraising expectations. It raised a whopping $310 million in July–more than double of DJT’s $137 million. Not a good sign.
And what is the latest about whether DJT will actually debate Harris? Yesterday, DJT said on Truth Social: ” I have agreed with FoxNews to debate Kamala Harris on Wednesday, September 4th”. DJT added: “I am in litigation against ABC Networks and George Slopadopoulos (sic), thereby creating a conflict of interest”. DJT forgets his campaign agreed to the Sept. 10 ABC debate before Biden dropped out and when his litigation against ABC had already been filed. All those excuses are just a cop out.
There is a reason DJT only wants to debate Harris on Fox. FoxNews is fully in the Trump camp. It spends 24/7 attacking Harris–morning to night. On her Fox show Laura Ingraham displays a photo of Harris with the caption “Despicable She”. Ingraham says Harris is the “hugger-in-chief” and then falsely claims Harris “hasn’t been vetted and she has no experience”. Really? Harris was a criminal prosecutor in SF, the AG of California and its sitting Senator. No experience?
Virtually all of Fox’s hosts have attacked Harris. No wonder DJT will only debate her on Fox. In the above referenced post DJT gave the reason he has chosen Fox for a debate. It will be “A FULL ARENA AUDIENCE” of his shouting supporters. So it appears DJT is unwilling to debate Harris as scheduled on Sept. 10. He only wants a debate on his terms and his venue of choice. He is not only a con artist and fraud but also a coward!
Well, maybe harris will start doing more press conferences and town halls with non-prescribed journalists and crowds – -lolol. She is a moron, cannot think on her feet, and is unlikable to her staff and everyone that knows her. She cannot suck-off the entire swing voter base, so she’s in a world of trouble.
Harris is a born and bred communist who is trying to destroy America.
Jonathan: After DJT’s disastrous racist performance at the NABJ conference he went on Fox where he was interviewed by host Maria Bartiromo. She asked DJT whether he will agree to debate Kamala Harris. DJT bobbed and weaved but clearly expressed his fear of debating Harris: “‘Oh, Trump’s not doing the debate’. It’s the same thing they’ll say now. I mean right now I say, why should I do a debate? I’m leading in the polls, and, everybody knows her, everybody knows me”. Harris had an immediate response to DJT’s equivocation: “Well Donald, I do hope you’ll reconsider to meet me on the debate stage., because as the saying goes, if you got something to say, say it to my face”.
DJT is backed into a corner. He knows that to refuse to debate Harris will appear as weakness. And DJT definitely doesn’t want to come across as “weak”. So DJT has no choice. He has to debate Harris. And what will the debate look like? To use a boxing metaphor it will be a TKO for Harris in the first or second round. That’s because Harris is an experienced debater. As a former criminal prosecutor she dealt with many “convicted felons” all the time. She knows DJT’s type.
So DJT will have to resort to personal attacks on Harris, the same ones he tried to use at the NABL conference–claiming Harris is a “DEI hire” and questioning her ethnicity–even resorting to his failed “birther” conspiracy theory. DJT’s misogyny and racism will be on full display for millions of viewers.
Voters know Harris was born in Oakland, CA on 10/20/64. Harris’s mother, Shymala Gopalan, was a biologist whose work on the progesterone receptor gene stimulated advances in breast cancer research. But neither of Harris’s parents were citizens when their daughter was born in Oakland. So the MAGA crowd, even some on this blog, claim that makes Harris ineligible to be President or VP. This crackpot theory is debunked by the simple fact that Article I of the Constitution clearly states that anyone born in the US is a “natural born citizen”, regardless of parental citizenship. So if DJT tries to use the “birther” conspiracy to attack Harris at the debate he will probably be knocked out of the ring! Don’t you love boxing metaphors!
Please update yourself with the news, or are you just purposely misinforming people for partisan purposes?
Right after Harris “secured enough delegates” to become the Democratic nominee, Trump agreed to debate here in Pennsylvania on September 4.
Today, PDJT, has asked MSNBC and ABC to schedule debates for Sept. 10th (NBC) and Sept. 25th (ABC) with Candidate Harris. Sept. 10th had been scheduled for the second debate between himself and Biden, NOT Harris, and she has not yet agreed to that debate with him, tho’ it is the one in which she’s likely to participate. She has not yet assented to the Sept. 4th debate on FoxNews that he’s already put forth to her, which I believe is only fair that he be able to have on a channel more friendly to him and more amenable to his policies than the other two channels are.
LOL. I’m sure he’s terrified of debating harris. she’s an unlikable, low information, tepid IQ, ideologue. She will be ripped to shreds even if Trump says nothing, but he will destroy her, too.