I had a guy once argue to me that "Brave New World" showed how that we were all being controlled by "globalist" elites via drugs and television.

So yeah, that was the last time I talked to him.

All you get from arguing with a paranoid schizophrenic is an unnecessary headache.

I mean he was a Nazi but same diff.

When I was "growing up", (and, yes, that process is ongoing), the "banned book", was always pointed out in reference to the religious (mostly), cultural and political deficiencies of whoever was perceived to be the "aggressor", book banner. Weather it was young Nazis throwing books onto bonfires, or young kids throwing Beatles albums onto bonfires, the explanation was always justifiable, or convenient to some special interest or another, The conversation has to by why and by whom the books were banned as much as what is in the books. Remember, it took years for banned copies of Dr, Zhivago to be smuggled out of the Soviet Union and we no longer have the historical context to understand why. All we can hope for now is that, somehow, in some form or another, the reasons anyone banns a book, or any other form of communication, will be examined in the context it was banned and translated to whatever we consider "current understanding".

So the "current understanding" of why the state of Florida banned And Tango Makes Three from school libraries, or why the state of Tennessee banned Calvin and Hobbes and Shel Silverstein's A Light in the Attic, or why The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit are banned in Texas's Frisco County, or why Department of Defense Education Activities has banned Lumberjanes, Heartstopper, Stamped From the Beginning: the Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America, and It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, Gender and Sexual Health (along with 592 other titles) from schools on military bases...we have to take that into account? I see.

This is the correct attitude.

I agree with Stephen King. If they ban a book, run to the nearest library
and sign it out, so you can find out what they don't want you to know.

Good stuff

"The Bell Jar"?? Really?? Holy mother of fock... .___.

Banned in Indiana for discussing its characters' sexuality, mentioning a birth control device, criticizing traditional marriage and motherhood, and the use of "profanity."

Ok, if that's the "valid" reason for prohibiting such an amazing book I DO want to know the other reasons for the rest of the books, I mean, Doctor Zhivago? Come on... X3

Don't forget "Catcher in the Rye" was frequently banned because...it encouraged young people to challenge authority and stand up for themselves. Ooh. Scary.

Flatrat had a point. While we can judge a legal jurisdiction for banning a book, (or movie, TV show, other kind of presentation), we can also judge them for why they banned it. Hamakei's example of Catcher In The Rye for instance, tells us that wherever it was banned can't reasonably justify their actions, they know that what they're doing is wrong and don't want their youth to think of calling them out on it. I haven't read All Quiet On The Western Front, but a brief review shows that it doesn't exactly glorify war or the experience of soldiering; can't have that particular bit of truth being spread during a recruitment drive! Soldiers are supposed to be heroes, not victims! Everything a soldier (sailor, air officer, marine, national guard) is ordered to do is supposed to be Justified and Right! (Even if... No, especially if it's a war crime.)

(I should add that this is my point. I'm not trying to speak for Flatrat.)

I have to hand it to the conservatives for hijacking "Woke" to mean any demonstratable argument that refutes their prejudices. It's such an easy, handy excuse for dismissing, shaming or even banning anything from a theme park to a concept. Not that I approve mind you, but it was clever.

It's been my experience that conservatives are (generally) thinkers. Reactionaries are (generally) not thinkers at all.

If we could just get them to think beyond their prejudices...