One political party is removing access to books. They're doing it in the easiest place they can. They will never come for you because you have money and are an adult.
But this is fascism and the people in the thread who are defending it are cool with fascism. They like it because it hurts people they don't like. They will defend fascism with their lives, and many of the people you work with are these people.
At the very least, it seems like a punching bag or soap-box for those pushing their own agendas.
At the end of the day, those who fight for "free speech" are really fighting to control which speech is free and which isn't.
Author John Green said it best in a reaction regarding his first novel, Looking for Alaska being targeted for a ban[0]:
> There's this surreality of the organization in question being called "Moms for Liberty" when what they're trying to do is restrict the liberty of other people's kids to read what librarians and teachers deem appropriate for those other people's kids to read
0: https://www.tiktok.com/@literallyjohngreen/video/71418040147...
Children's libraries are curated by librarians and teachers. There's never been a point in history where "anything goes" in a children's library.
And the internet is not for children? That's my point, social media is targeted at kids. Why is it that people scream "free speech" when hateful content is banned online while at the same calling for the banning of books? They're mad that they can't say whatever they want while simultaneously feeling that other people shouldn't.
But they're making a say in my child's education also. Let parents opt their children out of checking books out. Don't ban my kid from reading them too.
> So what makes this different?
You're seriously comparing the banning of books from libraries to kidnapping and brainwashing kids? Nobody is trying to "genocide a culture" here, people just want to have their own views represented and are being denied. That is an absurd comparison to make.
For instance, Gone with the Wind was banned in ~~Alameda~~ Anaheim[0], but California is listed as having no banned books.
Students should have access to any books they are likely to have heard of or are of educational value.
[0] https://bbark.deepforestproductions.com/column/2013/04/07/ba...
Slightly different, but more recently in Burbank several other books were banned from being included in curricula amid parent outcry:
https://abc7news.com/to-kill-a-mockingbird-ban-book-bank-bur...
To dang et al part of moderation/admin - Does this post really not meet HN guidelines? Also as a suggestion, whenever a person might choose to flag a post, it would help if there were a drop down menu that listed some options like "Flag it for...<insert frequent reason>", that might indicate to the OP on what the perceived transgression might be; without revealing the name of the flagger, of course. At the time of writing there is just "flag" or "unflag", which lacks nuance. It's been ~24 hours, the flagged status hasn't been lifted, and I'm none the wiser on why.
That is when they're not accusing free speech of being a white supremacist value.
[1] https://truthout.org/articles/after-activist-pressure-amazon...
I don't know what part of the "movement" is growing - is it that more books are being filtered than before, there are more books to sort through but the same ratio is being ratio, or there is just more outside attention on the process?
> It is important to recognize that books available in schools, whether in a school or classroom library, or as part of a curriculum, were selected by librarians and educators as part of the educational offerings to students. Book bans occur when those choices are overridden by school boards, administrators, teachers, or even politicians, on the basis of a particular book’s content.
I see the words "trauma" "weird" "wrong" "disgusting" "sexually" and others in the many replies below, at the same time as multiple downvotes for saying this directly..
