Menschen, die der freien Meinungsäußerung Priorität einräumen, sind rassistisch toleranter, nicht weniger. Befragte mit hohem Bildungsniveau weisen höhere Toleranzraten auf als diejenigen mit dem niedrigsten Bildungsniveau. Menschen, die Wert auf freie Meinungsäußerung legen, sind gegenüber fast jeder getesteten Gruppe toleranter, gegenüber Rechtsextremisten jedoch weniger tolerant.
People who prioritize free speech tend to be more accepting of marginalized groups
43 Kommentare
**People who prioritize free speech tend to be more accepting of marginalized groups**
A new study published in the journal [*Kyklos*](https://doi.org/10.1111/kykl.70059)* *suggests that individuals who place a high value on free speech also tend to exhibit greater racial and ethnic tolerance. These findings provide evidence that the societal benefits of protecting free expression extend beyond legal rights to foster broader norms of open-mindedness and acceptance.
The results show that prioritizing free speech is positively associated with racial tolerance. “People who prioritize free speech are more racially tolerant, not less,” Kramer said. “In the data, individuals who rank protecting free speech as their top national priority are 2.3 percentage points more likely to accept a neighbor of a different race.”
This pattern remained stable even after the author adjusted the statistical models to account for a wide range of individual characteristics. These specific controls included the respondent’s age, gender, marital status, education level, employment status, income, urban or rural residence, religious habits, and political ideology. Education level proved to be a particularly strong predictor of tolerance, with highly educated respondents exhibiting tolerance rates roughly 6.4 percentage points higher than those with the lowest education levels. Yet, even when factoring in this strong educational effect, the mathematical link between valuing free speech and holding tolerant views remained significant.
Kramer also looked at other forms of social acceptance within the survey data. She found that respondents who prioritized free speech were significantly more tolerant toward several other marginalized groups. “The same pattern holds for tolerance toward immigrants, religious minorities, Muslims, and Jews,” Kramer noted. “Valuing open expression and accepting people unlike yourself tend to travel together. That should make us cautious about the assumption that restricting speech protects minorities. It may erode the very disposition that supports tolerance.”
Interestingly, the author found a negative association between free speech values and tolerance toward right-wing political extremists. “The most striking result was where the pattern broke,” Kramer said. “People who value free speech are more tolerant of almost every group I tested, but they are significantly less tolerant of right-wing extremists.”
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/kykl.70059
The only thing intolerable is intolerance
seems accurate.. the paradox of Education is the more you learn, the more you understand how little we actually know
.. i think this leads to Empathy
I hold the view – as do most governments – that ‚free speech‘ must have limitations, such as it cannot include libel, and cannot include incitement to violence. With those provisos I am all in favour of free speech.
Incitement to violence against immigrants, notably by figures on the far right of politics and their social media followers, does not lead to „broader norms of open-mindedness and acceptance.“
The caveat here is that a segment of the population who professes to prioritizing free speech only extends that to their ideological peers.
I think people get confused about this because those right wing extremists mentioned are very intolerant but loudly claim to be pro free speech, but they’re not.
Right wing ideology tends to not lead itself to tolerance of others but self interest.
Yup sounds about right, wonder what it says about those pushing for hate speech laws.
The paradox of tolerance is a pseudointellectual babble.
We are in a treaty with each other who have different values and priorities and cannot have an absolute law that all humans abide by. If a human intrudes on another person’s autonomy that hinders that person’s existence then they broke that treaty and we declare war.
So reddit mods aren’t highly educated, makes sense. The amount of mods that ban/silence people they don’t agree with is astounding.
This feels a lot more nuanced and rooted in time.
The study let them prioritize:
– free speech
– law and order
– controlling inflation
So with that in mind is not surprising that a more educated and tolerant group would choose free speech. They’re not as affected by higher prices but at the same time understand that free expression can fix the other problems.
Law and order folks tend to use law and order as a dog whistle for intolerance.
People that want the government to control inflation tend to be pretty ignorant about how things work and tend to setting to the non incumbent party election to election depending on how they feel about „the economy“ during election season.
These are also broad generalizations, but I wanted to make it clear that these aren’t the „free speech absolutists“ that are not actually in favor of free speech and as usual, these psychological studies tend to overstated particular results in order to get clicks.
If you define free speech as political viewpoints, but it does not allow knowing lies and outright fraud, you’ll find this quite quickly.
Unfortunately the easiest way to sow discord is to find an issue where a complicated issue has found a non obvious solution or one where the outcome is imperfect and then claim that some easy answer works fantastically and you just need People to pay for you for it. Or that we simply need to opress some group and all problems will go away. In almost all these cases it’s not just wrong, it’s an outright lie. It’s fraud. And most countries do enforce some actions against fraud.
In practice genocides and what not are based on speech which propagates in peace time since the authorities regard the proponents as isolated extremists. By the time they have convinced a significant number, trying to undo that would take as many years of effort but it’s too late. You cannot turn an ocean liner like you can a speedboat.
Free speech has to do with criticism of absolutist governments. It has no answers for multicultural societies. Every serious such society imposes limits on speech to PREVENT it from getting to a point where it is impossible to reverse short term and has political power. Because the consequences are so disproportionately devastating and inhumane.
The only people seriously arguing otherwise on this entire planet are White Americans which obviously don’t feel threatened by such dynamics (they are deep in the process of perpetration if anything). It’s incredibly easy to rationalize what doesn’t threaten you isn’t actually a threat. There are incredibly quick witted people who can argue anything based on their emotions but I promise you if White Americans were on the other side of this dynamic at any point, they would articulate it better than I ever could.
Makes sense with historic literacy rates and what not…we are at a really bad percentage of people who read at higher grade levels.
So the meme about everyone has a voice, except for the people I disagree with is true?
Tolerant people are only intolerant to intolerance.
Makes sense to me. Because tolerating intolerance makes the whole society intolerant. The only thing tolerance cannot accept is intolerance.
If you really believe in free speech, you’re open to hearing all kinds of new ideas, not just ones you already agree with or ones you entirely approve of.
A lot of people talk about free speech and instead they mean, “Unpleasant speech that they agree with.” Which isn’t the same thing at all, and obviously that tracks with intolerance.
„You can’t say anything nowadays!“ =/= „I support freedom of speech“
Not surprised the most anti free speech extremist left are very racist as well
I’m not that smart but this all seems like basic human decency.
I find it interesting that people have even decided these two things are related in the first place, really shows the outright polarization and the ridiculous extremes it’s going to doesn’t it?
Is OP a bot? I notice my feed has nothing but these political psychology studies and literally no other science.
So, people who value free speech are less tolerant of right-wing extremists but they tolerate left-wing extremists? How does that make sense?
Makes sense, since most everyone on reddit is against free speech.
IMO the people who are the most pro-free speech are usually the least loud about how they are pro-free speech
No surprise. People on reddit are less racially tolerant.
Prioritize is the working word here. That means someone who takes advantage of something, not necessarily respects it. Plenty of people talking and screaming free speech and then seeking to stop speech they don’t like from being heard…
Free speech was originally a Liberal idea, it seems. (Not that liberal means what it used to in the USA, specifically, but per the actual meaning of protecting liberties like speech).
Yes, people who value actual free speech vs people who just want to call you a slur free speech.
Prioritizing free speech is an interesting way to put it.
You can prioritize your own freedom of speech, but I think every human wants to be able to say the things… that they want to be able to say.
It’s a much different thing when you’re defending someone else’s right to say things you don’t like.
Wonder how many people who claim to support free speech here would support the very principled stance of the ACLU, for example. Not many, judging by the comments.
Sounds like a study in feeling secure
If you feel secure in yourself what other people do bother you less
Smart people are tolerant of everyone with the one exception of morons.
Well that tracks.
Intolerant of intolerance, the only way to be.
The paradox of tolerance.
You don’t need to be tolerant of intolerant people.
it’s partially a function of wealth though as well, educated people tend to be better off financially.
you can afford to be empathetic if your lifes not so stressful.
I’ve said this before many many times. Right? Wingers are not pro Free speech. They have never been. They’re pro free their speech but not yours.
Reddit mods ban everything in sight to “promote diversity” hmmmmmm makes you wonder
There’s a reason for the Paradox of Tolerance. Never tolerate intolerance.
It’s because intelligent people are still somehow able to see the importance of the principle, and the importance of protecting it, even when someone else says something deeply offensive to them. They have the brains to understand that whatever ‘hate speech’ laws are enacted against this or that speech or opinion, can and will be used against *them* when the shoe’s on the other foot. ‘Hate speech’ legal advocates are not thinking about the larger picture or the consequences.
I’ve never been good at tolerating people who are intentionally intolerant of & insensitive to me. Just my observations as someone who prioritizes freedom of speech and diversity.
`#DJT-RFK’d-US`
Except in the eyes of the left, anyone who is not unwaveringly on their side is a right wing extremist
Every right winger i know is pro free speech. The left has a higher track record of censorship.