6 ms·

Well "from their university library" is a pretty important qualifier. Certainly, curating which books are placed in the university library is detrimental to di

• pmorici 5y ago
  Many if not most universities are publicly funded quasi governmental institutions.
  • JadeNB 5y ago
    > Many if not most universities are publicly funded quasi governmental institutions. That sounds very much like someone whose only experience is with large public universities. I don't really know what "quasi-governmental" means, but any reasonable meaning I can assign it is far beyond my small university--and there are way more small universities than big ones.
  • ummonk 5y ago
    Yes, and? Are you arguing taxpayers should be forced to fund the dissemination of extreme views?
    • pmorici 5y ago
      You said it is different than a government banning books but universities/colleges being publicly funded are effectively the government. I fail to see the difference. Libraries in general to the extent they are publicly funded should be neutral and not pick what materials they put in their collection based on political considerations, or subjective opinions of what material is too extreme.
      • ummonk 5y ago
        Banning a book entails prohibiting private citizens / businesses from distributing it. Just because a government isn't funding the distribution of certain material doesn't mean it's banning that material.
        • pmorici 5y ago
          Letting the library keep a single copy is hardly funding distribution. Historically books were expensive so unless you were wealthy the only place you would have access to books is the library. Saying you think it’s ok to ban a book from the library so long as it isn’t totally banned is basically arguing to keep ideas that are too dangerous away from the unwashed masses.
          • ummonk 5y ago
            It’s not even banned from the library though - libraries provide internet access via which you can read the book if the author chose to make it available to the public in the internet.
    • MomoXenosaga 5y ago
      Yesterday's extreme view is today's mainstream. Historically universities have been the birthplace of various revolutionary movements. It is arguably one of their roles in society.
• vidarh 5y ago
  It's also worth looking at the context - the students were given four specific scenarios: 1. Someone who believes that Islam is incompatible with the Western way of life. 2. Someone who thought there are biological differences in talents between men and women. 3. Someone who is against all forms of immigration to this country. 4. Someone who thinks that homosexuality is immoral and dangerous. Only for #4 were as low as 66% against removing their works from the university library. For 1, 78% were against, for 2, 81% were against, for 3, 74% were against. While that may still be troubling, it's clear peoples willingness to have them removed from the library depends significantly on the specific statement, and another way of presenting this is that the more clearly a statement was flat out expressing bigotry, the more willing people were to remove works by that person.
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
• BuyMyBitcoins 5y ago
  Universities are supposed to be the place where you are introduced and exposed to controversial ideas. At least, that’s what I was told when I enrolled. But maybe that sentiment has outlived its purpose now that higher education is so ideologically tilted towards one side.
  • kwinten 5y ago
    About 75% of students who were polled were against banning books pretty much across the board. Does that fit within the ideological narrative you've constructed here for yourself though?
    • BuyMyBitcoins 5y ago
      It does, believe it or not. In fact, 75% of students being against banning books implies the other 25% is either accepting or endorsing censorship. One in four is pretty significant. It doesn’t take a majority of a population to get changes made, just a persistent and vocal minority. But please, do go on about my narrative. Especially when you come to this thread with narratives like “The "extreme left" is not even a fraction as represented as even far right within popular consciousness and, more significantly, political representation.” Which is farcical when you look at how mainstream and accepted ideas from the left are in the culture of the west. Unless you shift the definitions of what far-left and far-right are.
      • orwin 5y ago
        > Which is farcical when you look at how mainstream and accepted ideas from the left are in the culture of the west. Unless you shift the definitions of what far-left and far-right are OK. Far right idea are built on a simple idea. We (our group, nationalist, cultural, religious) are inherently better than the others. This can be proven by Y[0]. But right now, we are feeling inferior to (our neighbours, elites, educated people, [1]). The only rationnal explanation is that (the liberals/the communists/the jew/the illuminati/the deep state) are plotting against us from within. Once those are purged, we will get our rightfull place in the world. Far left: A class war exist. this can be proven because X[2]. The non-essential properties should be communal. The mean of production should be owned and paid for by the men and women who work them. The undemocratic republic is a tool for the bourgeoisie to keep people content with an illusion of choice and power. Police and armed forces are the other tools of the bourgeoisie to protect their property more than to protect lives[3]. The bourgeoisie must be purged for the working class to thrive again. I think both are pretty prevalent, one we talk much more about the former than about the later. Do you think i misrepresented one part? If so, don't hesitate to correct me. [0] often a racist sentence, hence its often left to the auditor understanding [1] French, Jews, Africans, mediterranean (including italian for the Nazi). The list was not the same for Fascist Italy/Spain/France, but close enough. [2] Warren buffet said so/worker are manipulated into de-unionizing/ transversal fights are a diversion by the bourgeoisie