The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Free Speech and the Coalition of the Fringes
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The following graph shows free speech index scores by selected demographic characteristics.

The index is a simple average of the percentage of respondents who said that five different categories of controversial advocates should be allowed to speak publicly. The higher the score, the more supportive of free speech the group is. The five categories are pretty well balanced politically with three on the ‘far left’ (atheists, homosexuals, and communists) and two on the ‘far right’ (racists and militarists). For contemporary relevance, all responses are from 2000 onward (N = 11,930):

Moderate and conservative whites are grouped together because their scores are so similar (73.6 and 74.8, respectively) that separating them out unnecessarily cluttered up the graph.

The first amendment is the Coalition of the Fringes’ thermal exhaust port. That’s where it will be blown up.

Blacks shouting down the ACLU with chants of “liberalism is white supremacy”; Bernie Sanders being shut down by a couple of sassy land whales in Seattle; BEANERs DREAMERs humiliating Nancy Pelosi at a televised speaking event; countless numbers of liberal academics being swarmed and interrogated by miscreant mobs of blacks and browns–these incidents and others like them should be mentioned whenever the opportunity presents itself.

GSS variables used: SPKRAC, SPKHOMO, SPKCOM, SPKATH, SPKMIL, RACECEN1(1)(2)(4-10), HISPANIC(1)(2-50), RELIG(3)(9), POLVIEWS(1-3)(4)(5-7)

(Republished from The Audacious Epigone by permission of author or representative)
Hide 12 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. What was the sample size on this poll? The demographics?

  2. Lol anon, read the OP. N = 11930. Demographics: look at the picture.


    SJWs and BLMs will continue to eagerly shut down white/Jew politicians at Democratic conventions. They have to keep rolling over, but that will only increase the disgust among white Dems and Dem-leaning white moderates.

    It's Okay
    To Have
    Free Speech

    BTW–can you do a break down of registered Independent leaners and true Independents by race?

  3. Please, Anepigone, please don't do this to graphs. Yes, the numbers are there, but visual impressions count, and your graph, with the bottom at 40%, gives the misleading impression that the Mohammedans' support is only half of even blacks' (never mind that all this is self-reported and not revealed-preference) when really the ratio of the largest to the smallest bar is less than two. It's bad enough that everyone else does this with the small print, but Carlylean veracity is the only way for us.

  4. This should give lie to the idea that the nature of the country will not change if it becomes majority non-white.

  5. I have to wonder if the Jewish and liberal White respondents have a different idea of what "free speech" means, compared to conservative and moderate Whites. After all, I have heard many a peer insist, without the slightest hint of irony, "Hate speech is NOT free speech!"

  6. It's the whole rights vs responsibilities thing. Liberals feel that paying lip service (and taxes) to the Great Progressive Society ought to enable you to sleep around, do drugs, move from one place to another, and bloviate in whatever manner you see fit (as long as doesn't offend a liberal pet group). And that's why so many liberals have a lackadaisical attitude towards crime, terrorism, immigration, drugs, stds, etc. but then act so butthurt about muh racism or whatever.

    Conservatives are more likely to feel a sense of responsibility about maintaining order, and thus are approving of restrictions intended to keep the peace. E.g. it's not ok to shout fire in a crowded theater, to tell a cop to go fuck himself, to shout down a public speaker, and so forth. Conservatives are less accepting of threatening, rude, and chaotic behavior, whereas progs wax nostalgic about protests and riots.

    Here is where Boomers come up short, as usual, since they're so fundamentally hedonistic and the idea of restraining oneself still seems so alien to them. Remember that they came of age in the 60's and 70's, when doing what you wanted and breaking the rules was "in".

  7. Please, Anepigone, please don't do this to graphs. Yes, the numbers are there, but visual impressions count

    Muh concern. Git gud.

  8. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the "question"…

    Liberal whites – *cough cough* – SUPPORT "free speech"
    MORE than moderates/conservatives?!?!?

    If my understanding is correct, I CALL BULL.
    WHO has been shutting down conservative/alt right speeches?!?

  9. Dissident Right,

    BTW–can you do a break down of registered Independent leaners and true Independents by race?

    Not sure exactly what you're after here. Just the percentages who identify as independent by race? Or something more?

    Candide III,

    I'm going to do a subsequent post that addresses this at a philosophical level. There are ways I could've made the gap look a lot wider–for example by subtracting "not allowed" from "allowed", which would give us a Muslim bar at 2 and a white liberal bar at 35x that (70).


    The percentages who say "racists" should be allowed to speak has actually declined over the 40 years of the survey, while the percentages for the other four have all increased. We are probably especially attuned to 'racist' speech (not unjustifiably!) so that could be what's causing the seeming dissonance.

    On the other hand, given how little non-whites attend rallies in general, they seem to show up to shout down professors, Trump supporters, etc in large numbers. It's hard to find a non-white in the "March for Science" pictures, for example.

  10. Yes. Three charts.

    Chart 1 – Independents (lean Rep) by race
    Chart 2 – Independents (lean Dem) by race
    Chart 3 – Independents (remaining) by race

    I guess restrict to likely voters? I imagine Independents are more likely to stay home than partisans.

    There are ways I could've made the gap look a lot wider–for example by subtracting "not allowed" from "allowed", which would give us a Muslim bar at 2 and a white liberal bar at 35x that (70). 


  11. Anonymous [AKA "Leszek Rotor"] says:

    Here's someone who isn't a fan of free speech:

    Now make it illegal to hold racist views

    The Model Law states that there is no place for "tolerance of the intolerant" in modern society. It seeks to introduce for the first time into British law novel provisions including stronger safeguards against hate speech, the introduction of group libel, specific mention of antisemitism, outlawing of Holocaust denial, and educational initiatives from primary school upwards promoting tolerance, diversity and respect.

    Dr Moshe Kantor is President of the European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation and President of the World Jewish Forum Foundation (WJF)

    Dr Kantor is a billionaire too and has lots of high-up friends in European politics. See the list here:

    Fortunately, Dr Kantor and the ADL are only a tiny minority of white liberals and are far out-numbered by white liberals who support free speech.

  12. Leszek,

    My takeaway from this is that most SWPLs and Jews like to think, at least at an abstract level, that they are tolerant of viewpoints they disagree with. It's something to appeal to rhetorically.

    Dissident Right,

    Sure that'll be easy to put together. Having hard drive issues now so may not be posting for a bit but it's in the queue.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS