A shocking new survey reveals a deep generational divide on the use of violence to silence speech, with a large minority of Gen Z saying it can be acceptable.
While partisan finger-pointing often dominates the conversation about political violence, a new analysis reveals a far more alarming trend: a collapse in the norm against violence among America’s youngest generation.
Data from a recent national survey conducted by Cal State Long Beach professor Kevin Wallsten shows that young Americans are dramatically more likely than their older counterparts to believe that using violence to stop speech they find offensive is acceptable. This generational split presents a profound challenge to the core tenets of a free and democratic society.
The findings are stark. It was reported in the Wall Street Journal that when asked if it was acceptable to use violence to stop a speech advocating an idea they found personally offensive, only 58% of Generation Z (ages 18 to 26) said it was "never" acceptable.
Image by DALL-E
This stands in sharp contrast to the 93% of baby boomers and 86% of Gen Xers who hold that line. The data indicate a rapid erosion of a fundamental democratic norm within a single generation.
It is tempting to blame higher education for this shift. Data from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s (FIRE) 2026 College Free Speech Rankings shows that over a third of college students believe violence can be justified to stop campus speech. For years, critics have argued that university environments, with a focus on concepts like "speech as violence," are "teaching intolerance."
Screenshot excerpt of the 2026 College Free Speech Ranking questionnaire
However, Wallsten's research reveals this is not just a campus phenomenon. He found no significant difference between the views of 18 to 26-year-olds, whether they were enrolled in college or not, suggesting the trend has much deeper roots.
Image by DALL-E
The survey also punctures the comfortable narrative that only the "other side" is to blame. While both the left and right are quick to point fingers after any act of political violence, the data shows that large majorities of Democrats (77%), independents (80%), and Republicans (82%) all personally reject the use of violence to silence speech. The crisis is not one of partisanship, but of generation.
The article suggests several converging forces are leading young people to justify violence. These include a youth moral culture that has an "impossibly expansive definition of 'harm'" and prioritizes emotional safety above all else.
This is compounded by social media dynamics that amplify outrage and a political climate that encourages neutralizing opponents rather than persuading them. Young people, with the lowest attachment to older rules of restraint and tolerance, are where these norms have eroded most quickly.
There is some hope that this is a temporary phase. This generation came of age during a period of intense polarization, economic uncertainty, a global pandemic, and widespread social unrest. It is possible that as these experiences fade, their views will moderate.
In the immediate future, the willingness of a significant portion of the youngest generation of voters to endorse violence is a threat to the basic functions of a free society. The ability to speak, assemble, and participate in public life without fear is not a partisan issue. It is a prerequisite for a functioning democracy. The findings are a clear warning sign for the 2026 midterms and beyond.
The responsibility falls on leaders across all sectors, in government, on campus, and in the media, to unequivocally condemn violence as a response to speech. This is not a time for retreating from controversial speech, but for reinforcing the norm of persuasion over coercion. If the country is to have a freer future, it must start by teaching the generation most willing to abandon it why it matters.