Free Speech for Me, but Not For Thee

[Binger]

Don't assume all hippies back then were democrats.

What the hell are you doing, K?

Seriously. What in the hell is going on?

Can you possibly have a conversation without it being a tribal war between democrats and Trump? Can you do it?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

https://www.jns.org/opinion/the-only-on ... theorists/

tl;dr - Leftists ban books in school districts all the time

After spending the last few years banning Dr. Seuss, burning copies of Harry Potter novels in bonfires and denouncing classic children’s literature like “Little House on the Prairie” and “Mary Poppins” as racist, leftists are now accusing conservatives of “banning books.”

When a Minnesota school district removed “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” and “To Kill A Mockingbird” from its curriculum because they made students “uncomfortable,” the NAACP, which has been trying to ban Huck since at least the ’50s, cheered. So did the media, which celebrated the effort to remove “racist language” that “triggered students of color” from the classroom.

It’s not just “Huck Finn,” there’s hardly a single classic book that hasn’t been denounced for thoughtcrimes. “The Wind in the Willows?” Racist. “Narnia?” Islamophobic. “The Lord of the Rings”? Also racist. Any book written by a white man? Systemically racist.

Recently, a university added a trigger warning to “1984” by George Orwell.

The worst offenders are the proponents of critical race theory now suddenly crying about censorship when they had been urging schools, publishers and readers to stop buying, publishing and displaying books by white men in the name of racial and gender equity.

A few years ago they were touting a proposal that every racist illiterate stop reading books by white men for a year. You can still find headlines like, “I Read Books by Only Minority Authors for a Year” from the Washington Post, and more explicit posts at book sites like, “Why I’m No Longer Reading Books by White Men,” “A Year of No White Men,” “The Year I Stopped Reading White People.” The crybullies at Goodreads, which is to young adult books what TikTok is to videos of crying teens changing gender on camera, bullied publishers into canceling books and forced writers to unpublish their own books, to the wild applause of the media.

Just to be clear, unless it’s something like porno that minors can access, I’m not a fan of banning, censoring, or removing access to any books. I get school districts can only teach so many books in a school year to students, so hard choices have to be made, but straight up banning or burning books, or denying curriculum based on the criteria of race, ethnicity, or creed is wrong, in my opinion.

- Doc

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Yes, I could see Democrats believing free speech doesn't extend to hate speech. Because it doesn't. It is why Clayton Bigsby's book "N***er Stain" would. Never be published.

Two things.

1) You want to cede over morality to a political party?

2) The fact you even know that books exists is something.

- Doc

[K Graham]

Yes, I could see Democrats believing free speech doesn't extend to hate speech. Because it doesn't. It is why Clayton Bigsby's book "N***er Stain" would. Never be published.

Two things.

1) You want to cede over morality to a political party?

2) The fact you even know that books exists is something.

- Doc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLNDqxrUUwQ

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Two things.

1) You want to cede over morality to a political party?

2) The fact you even know that books exists is something.

- Doc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLNDqxrUUwQ

Dude. I was trying to be meta.

- Doc

[Res Ipsa]

In the interest of balance - from The Hill:

The ACLU and Mr. Strangio’s discontent involves a book by Abigail Shrier called “Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters.” In it, she makes the case that while adults should have the freedom to undergo medical transition, teenagers are a different matter.

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, she wrote: “Social contagions exist, and teen girls are particularly susceptible to them. The book takes a hard look at whether the sudden spike in transgender identification among teen girls is yet another social contagion to befall girls who, in another era, might have fallen prey to anorexia or bulimia.”

You’d think that liberals — at the ACLU, of all places — would defend an author’s right to make her case, whether it agreed with that case or not. But not Chase Strangio, who serves as the ACLU’s deputy director for transgender justice. “Abigail Shrier’s book is a dangerous polemic with a goal of making people not trans,” he tweeted. “I think of all the times & ways I was told my transness wasn’t real & the daily toll it takes. We have to fight these ideas which are leading to the criminalization of trans life again.”

Then, just to make sure we understand what Mr. Strangio means when he says “we have to fight these ideas,” he goes on to say: “Stopping the circulation of this book and these ideas is 100% a hill I will die on.”

“You read that right,” Ms. Shrier wrote in her op-ed. “Some in today’s ACLU favor book banning.”

She goes on to tell us about a woman named Grace Lavery, a professor of English at the University of California, Berkeley, who tweeted: “I DO encourage followers to steal Abigail Shrier’s book and burn it on a pyre.”

I’m sure I could find more examples of Leftists teying to stymie free speech and banning books. Also, let’s not forget colleges and universities across America allow students to shut down speeches and debates by Conservatives with regularity. This isn’t even an open secret; it’s encouraged by faculty and some administrators.

- Doc

So, I point out actual burnings of books today, and you equate that with two tweets, one of which the author took down? As if people don't engage in rhetorical excess on Twitter? Did either individual organize a book burning? Were any books burned at all?

I think there is a world of difference between a couple of individuals on the left posting on Twitter and nationally organized efforts to remove books from libraries and organizing burning of the books in protest.

I do agree with you about shouting down speakers at events. If nothing else, it's rude and disrespectful, even if the speaker already has a national platform that they can use at will to speak.

[Res Ipsa]

https://www.jns.org/opinion/the-only-on ... theorists/

tl;dr - Leftists ban books in school districts all the time

After spending the last few years banning Dr. Seuss, burning copies of Harry Potter novels in bonfires and denouncing classic children’s literature like “Little House on the Prairie” and “Mary Poppins” as racist, leftists are now accusing conservatives of “banning books.”

When a Minnesota school district removed “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” and “To Kill A Mockingbird” from its curriculum because they made students “uncomfortable,” the NAACP, which has been trying to ban Huck since at least the ’50s, cheered. So did the media, which celebrated the effort to remove “racist language” that “triggered students of color” from the classroom.

It’s not just “Huck Finn,” there’s hardly a single classic book that hasn’t been denounced for thoughtcrimes. “The Wind in the Willows?” Racist. “Narnia?” Islamophobic. “The Lord of the Rings”? Also racist. Any book written by a white man? Systemically racist.

Recently, a university added a trigger warning to “1984” by George Orwell.

The worst offenders are the proponents of critical race theory now suddenly crying about censorship when they had been urging schools, publishers and readers to stop buying, publishing and displaying books by white men in the name of racial and gender equity.

A few years ago they were touting a proposal that every racist illiterate stop reading books by white men for a year. You can still find headlines like, “I Read Books by Only Minority Authors for a Year” from the Washington Post, and more explicit posts at book sites like, “Why I’m No Longer Reading Books by White Men,” “A Year of No White Men,” “The Year I Stopped Reading White People.” The crybullies at Goodreads, which is to young adult books what TikTok is to videos of crying teens changing gender on camera, bullied publishers into canceling books and forced writers to unpublish their own books, to the wild applause of the media.

Just to be clear, unless it’s something like porno that minors can access, I’m not a fan of banning, censoring, or removing access to any books. I get school districts can only teach so many books in a school year to students, so hard choices have to be made, but straight up banning or burning books, or denying curriculum based on the criteria of race, ethnicity, or creed is wrong, in my opinion.

- Doc

We're 100% in agreement. But various individuals or groups criticizing books is not the same as "banning" them. I'll agree that both "sides" denounce books from time to time. That's just us exercising our free speech. Actually banning books or removing them from libraries is a whole different thing.

Arguments over curriculum are a different sort of issue. Making a book inaccessible is entirely different from deciding which books should be taught in a curriculum. And "trigger warnings" in no way are equivalent to censorship or banning a book. The quoted piece is dripping with false equivalency.

[K Graham]

https://www.jns.org/opinion/the-only-on ... theorists/

tl;dr - Leftists ban books in school districts all the time





Just to be clear, unless it’s something like porno that minors can access, I’m not a fan of banning, censoring, or removing access to any books. I get school districts can only teach so many books in a school year to students, so hard choices have to be made, but straight up banning or burning books, or denying curriculum based on the criteria of race, ethnicity, or creed is wrong, in my opinion.

- Doc

We're 100% in agreement. But various individuals or groups criticizing books is not the same as "banning" them. I'll agree that both "sides" denounce books from time to time. That's just us exercising our free speech. Actually banning books or removing them from libraries is a whole different thing.

Arguments over curriculum are a different sort of issue. Making a book inaccessible is entirely different from deciding which books should be taught in a curriculum. And "trigger warnings" in no way are equivalent to censorship or banning a book. The quoted piece is dripping with false equivalency.

I remember when I was taking Lit as a junior in High School there was some controversy over Animal Farm and Tom Sawyer (not Rush). But from what I remember the teacher telling us, it had more to do with those books being kind of outdated in terms of how the English language was currently written. I guess that makes sense. I mean, aren't there other, more recent books we could be reading? They weren't "banned" so much as replaced.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

So, I point out actual burnings of books today, and you equate that with two tweets, one of which the author took down?

In your OP you brought up the point of culture wars pushing various agendas. My point, which I’m sure you noticed, is that people have their particular sacred cows they’re willing to promote while stymie’ing anything that’d offend said sacred cows. In other words, the mindset that leads group A to burning or banning books is the same mindset that leads group B to do the same. We see in all sorts of countries and all sorts of organizations the banning of dangerous and heretical thought crimes. I consider this a problem with authoritarianism more than anything else.*

- Doc

* I noticed on various partisan subreddits and forums that dissent is dealt with quickly. This is just as egregious on Leftist subreddits and forums as it is on the Right.

[Res Ipsa]

So, I point out actual burnings of books today, and you equate that with two tweets, one of which the author took down?

In your OP you brought up the point of culture wars pushing various agendas. My point, which I’m sure you noticed, is that people have their particular sacred cows they’re willing to promote while stymie’ing anything that’d offend said sacred cows. In other words, the mindset that leads group A to burning or banning books is the same mindset that leads group B to do the same. We see in all sorts of countries and all sorts of organizations the banning of dangerous and heretical thought crimes. I consider this a problem with authoritarianism more than anything else.*

- Doc

* I noticed on various partisan subreddits and forums that dissent is dealt with quickly. This is just as egregious on Leftist subreddits and forums as it is on the Right.

I think authoritarianism is a good way to look at the entire situation. I find myself reading this essay from 1964 from time to time to help put current events into context. This essay by Hofstadter and his book "The True Believer" are excellent, I think, in showing how a democracy can be driven into authoritarianism. https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the ... -politics/