4 ms·
> We're neutral and carry both sides Very often, they are not neutral. Go to your local library's website, and check out the new arrivals section. Most likely
by cato_the_elder 4y ago
> We're neutral and carry both sides
Very often, they are not neutral.
Go to your local library's website, and check out the new arrivals section. Most likely, the political bias will be very evident.
Then go to the page where the list the board members, and Google their political affiliation.
Finally, if you are still not convinced, send them an FOIA request to see what books they are discarding from the catalogue.
- carrotcarrot 4y agoThen request the books. Or open a discussion about neutrality. Of course, the political hysteria around this topic doesn't allow for something constructive like that.
- foepys 4y agoCan you support your allegations with evidence like a few FOIA requests and answers?
- cato_the_elder 4y agoUnfortunately, I can't do that here due to privacy reasons, and I only have done that once. But here's NYPL's new arrivals page: https://www.nypl.org/books-music-movies/new-arrivals https://www.nypl.org/books-music-movies/new-arrivals One quick check you can do is to look at the gender of the authors. Here's the list of the board members: https://www.nypl.org/help/about-nypl/leadership/board-trustees https://www.nypl.org/help/about-nypl/leadership/board-truste... If I can, I will do a rough headcount of their political affiliation and then update this comment with it.
- origin_path 4y ago
- bryanlarsen 4y agoBooks like that comprise a fair fraction of new books being published. Books like that should appear on any fair new arrivals list.
- mrtesthah 4y agoHow about the boards of gun rights organizations? Militia members? Southern evangelical church leaders? Where’s political bipartisanship here? Could it be that different political affiliations are based on different value systems, where one side happens to value education and knowledge more than the other?
- josephcsible 4y agoNone of the organizations you listed are funded by my tax dollars.
- nindalf 4y agoSort of. Those evangelical churches are getting an implicit subsidy by not having to pay taxes. Why do they deserve such special treatment?
- xyzzyz 4y agoNot having to pay a tax is not an "implicit subsidy". This is a completely absurd way of thinking. Taxes is not some sort of fundamental law of nature, and tax exemption are not government being helpful by using its own resources to help the entity out. It's more like a bully who tells you he won't steal your lunch today (but will tomorrow). It's a nice bully, though, who'll protect you from other school bullies, and he needs to eat too. Doesn't he deserve your lunch? Imagine a scenario where everyone is taxed, say, 10%. Then, the government introduces an extra tax of 10%, for a total of 20%, and then gives everyone a tax exemption, so that everyone pays 10% after all, just like before. Is the new tax exemption an "implicit subsidy"? Do people feel subsidized by not having to pay extra 10% on top of 10% they already pay? No, at best they are grateful that they are losing less money to a bully. Now, imagine we start from 0%, and again introduce a new tax of 10%, and a new exemption, so that nobody actually pays any tax after all. Again, in this no tax world, is the government "subsidizing" everyone? No, that's not what the word "subsidize" mean.
- imustbeevil 4y ago
- joshka 4y ago[flagged]