It’s true that the Antifa doesn’t represent all college students, a generation’s reaction to hate speech. But then, even if most students know better than to resort to violence to silence speakers who espouse ideas they deem reprehensible, it doesn’t mean they don’t agree that hate speech isn’t free speech. This, according to a white paper put out by Newseum President and CEO Jeffrey Herbst, is their “alternate understanding of the First Amendment.”

Systematic public opinion polling and anecdotal evidence suggests, however, that the real problem of free expression on college campuses is much deeper than episodic moments of censorship: With little comment, an alternate understanding of the First Amendment has emerged among young people that can be called “the right to non-offensive speech.”

This perspective essentially carves out an exception to the right of free speech by trying to prevent expression that is seen as particularly offensive to an identifiable group, especially if that collective is defined in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, or sexual identity. The crisis is not one of the very occasional speaker thrown off campus, however regrettable that is; rather, it is a generation that increasingly censors itself and others, largely silently but sometimes through active protest.

Of course, high-level observations about an entire age cohort are by definition difficult and care must be taken in making generalizations. However, to ignore the different view that many of today’s students have on free speech would be to doom any effort to promote intellectual exchange on campus.*

Calling it “the right to non-offensive speech” isn’t exactly catchy. Nor are long, prolix paragraphs particularly readable. Nor is there much humility in referring to one’s own observations as being “high-level,” especially when employed as part of Gertruding. But failings aside, his point is pounded home constantly.

Hate speech is not free speech. Howard Dean says so. Scholars say so. Professors say so. The ACLU says so. The media says so. Well, most of the media, anyway.

Now, when the younger generations make up the largest age demographic in America (Millennials now outnumber Boomers), it is more critical than ever to educate students on the First Amendment and the full rights it affords. The danger in not doing so, writes Herbst, would lead to nothing less than restrictions on our core freedoms.

Who would have thought? Herbst not only observes the obvious, but offers solutions.

• Elementary and secondary schools must educate students on the First Amendment, how far the right of free expression extends, and the opportunities it affords to those who want to change society. Students carry attitudes with them to college so we must address young people when their views on free speech are first being formed.
• Colleges and universities must make an absolutist case for speech to a generation of students who have more complicated views.
• Critically, we must continually make the case that free speech particularly helps minorities and those who are alienated. The failure to understand the precise challenge to free speech has caused, to some degree, the debate over expression to become politically polarized.
• Colleges and universities will have to become much more deliberate about encouraging advocates of free expression.
• In particular, we must find ways for students to become the advocates for free speech for their generation.

We must find ways. Good point, there, Jeff. And the cure for cancer is we must find ways to cure cancer.

*I’ve broken up a single paragraph into three for readability.