Now, Calv theologians are typically very well aware of this principle. It fits in quite well enough with their notions of the elect, the non-elect, and God’s relation to both groups, especially through the activity of the Holy Spirit. Without the operation of the Holy Spirit in the life of the person leading them to repentance, there can be no repentance; and without repentance (in whatever way that may be truly and correctly understood) there can be no forgiveness and thus no salvation from sin. Indeed, without the operation of the Holy Spirit, a person cannot even have the ability to repent of sin, completely aside from when or how this ability is ever exercised.
Universalists across the board agree with Calvs (and with Arms, for that matter–moreso even in that case, as will be seen) that the Holy Spirit acts to convict all people concerning sin, concerning righteousness and concerning judgment. (Calvs, just like Kaths and Arms, believe the 3rd Person does more than this, of course.) There may be a few Calvs who deny this, but typically they don’t, since aside from outright denying John 16:8-11 they would leave their theology with nothing even approaching a fair ground for condemnation. They might try to deny that God convicts the non-elect concerning righteousness (and maybe split the conviction of “the world” or {ho kosmos}, all creation, in some other way so that the elect are not convicted of judgment and sin); but doing so will leave them no position for sensibly talking about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit–especially in the context of Mark 3:22-27, Matt 12:24-29, and Luke 11:15-20.
Jesus complains not that His Pharisaical opponents are making a mistake, or even that they are only blaspheming against Himself. His complaint is that they are willfully contradicting what they themselves believe and profess to be true, in order to oppose Him. This is no mere mistake of wrong belief; this is blatant cheating in order to hate Jesus without a cause. (John 15:22-25, where the Holy Spirit is also called the Spirit of Truth.) They are not judging fairly; they are acting directly against as much of the light as they can truly see (cf John 3:19-21, which has more than a little connection to the operation of the Spirit in prior context, including back at the prologue of John); they have no concern with, and are acting against, fair-togetherness: the compound word in Greek {dikaiosune} that we translate into English as “righteousness”.
It should be clear enough that their blasphemy against (or in the face of, as GosMark implies) the Holy Spirit is also against the conviction of righteousness in their hearts by the light of the Holy Spirit. If they actually were blind, they would have no sin; the light that enlightens every man, is what and Who they are sinning against. They are willingly and impenitently cheating in order to avoid having to be fair to Jesus in their judgment of Him.
And the vast majority of Kaths would agree, with the vast majority (or even all?) Calvs, that unless they repent of that sin there can be no forgiveness for them, neither now nor in the age to come.
So much for agreements; at this point the disagreements between Calvs and Kaths more broadly speaking begin. And just as there can be differences among Calvs about whether one of the elect (like St. Paul or St. Peter) can sin against the Holy Spirit and yet be forgiven, universalists have disagreements among ourselves as to how best interpret this connotations of this passage in context of the rest of scripture. (Not even counting Arm theological disagreements on this passage, including among themselves!)