4 ms·

I generally agree with the argument, but haven't we just swapped the institutional preference? A library curating its inventory is effectively a ban to everyon

I generally agree with the argument, but haven't we just swapped the institutional preference? A library curating its inventory is effectively a ban to everyone downstream of that curation who no longer has the book available. The government, by imposing its own list of criteria, is engaging in a form of curation (at least to themselves) In neither case are the books unavailable for purchase to those who want them, and are freely available on the public market.

kstrauser 3y ago
I don't think that's true. In any case, intent has a lot to do with it. If a library wants to update what they can store on their finite shelves, cool. If a library removes things that people want to read because it thinks people shouldn't be allowed to read them, it's censorship.
- constantcrying 3y ago
  >If a library removes things that people want to read because it thinks people shouldn't be allowed to read them, it's censorship. Would you say the same if that material as glorifying national socialism? Should library carry such books as long as people want to read them?
  - kstrauser 3y ago
    > Would you say the same if that material as glorifying national socialism? Should library carry such books as long as people want to read them? You keep repeating this. "If we ban Nazi content, why can't we ban books about Rosa Parks[0]?" You do see why that's not convincing, don't you? [0] https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/
    - constantcrying 3y ago
      >You keep repeating this. "If we ban Nazi content, why can't we ban books about Rosa Parks[0]?" I don't. I just want you to admit that you also believe in ideological control of libraries. >[0] https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ I remember when I was twelve or so reading such a list, which included downloads of these books. I was actually quite interested, which twelve year old wouldn't be interested in reading banned books? As it turned out it was obvious fetish material and I felt quite disgusted reading it. Something of a formative experience I guess.
- bmelton 3y ago
  > intent has a lot to do with it I don't really see how we can expect that to scale from policies inherited by adversaries. We quietly do this kind of censorship all the time -- the government sends fines to public broadcasting channels that use curse words, and limit their stories to those that are generally G or PG rated content. I am a free speech absolutist, and again, I agree with your position, but I can't find any reason why (ignoring whose list you prefer) a list of preferences that included "family friendliness" would not be just as utile or effective at assisting the surely difficult job of curation as literary value or whatever libraries are using themselves now (which I assume they can still use to exclude books not currently covered by this policy.) It would be easy to say that the government should have no control over the libraries, but they're public libraries, ergo are functionally just little tendrils off the arms of government already.

kstrauser 3y ago

I don't think that's true. In any case, intent has a lot to do with it. If a library wants to update what they can store on their finite shelves, cool. If a library removes things that people want to read because it thinks people shouldn't be allowed to read them, it's censorship.

constantcrying 3y ago
>If a library removes things that people want to read because it thinks people shouldn't be allowed to read them, it's censorship. Would you say the same if that material as glorifying national socialism? Should library carry such books as long as people want to read them?
- kstrauser 3y ago
  > Would you say the same if that material as glorifying national socialism? Should library carry such books as long as people want to read them? You keep repeating this. "If we ban Nazi content, why can't we ban books about Rosa Parks[0]?" You do see why that's not convincing, don't you? [0] https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/
  - constantcrying 3y ago
    >You keep repeating this. "If we ban Nazi content, why can't we ban books about Rosa Parks[0]?" I don't. I just want you to admit that you also believe in ideological control of libraries. >[0] https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ https://pen.org/banned-books-florida/ I remember when I was twelve or so reading such a list, which included downloads of these books. I was actually quite interested, which twelve year old wouldn't be interested in reading banned books? As it turned out it was obvious fetish material and I felt quite disgusted reading it. Something of a formative experience I guess.
bmelton 3y ago
> intent has a lot to do with it I don't really see how we can expect that to scale from policies inherited by adversaries. We quietly do this kind of censorship all the time -- the government sends fines to public broadcasting channels that use curse words, and limit their stories to those that are generally G or PG rated content. I am a free speech absolutist, and again, I agree with your position, but I can't find any reason why (ignoring whose list you prefer) a list of preferences that included "family friendliness" would not be just as utile or effective at assisting the surely difficult job of curation as literary value or whatever libraries are using themselves now (which I assume they can still use to exclude books not currently covered by this policy.) It would be easy to say that the government should have no control over the libraries, but they're public libraries, ergo are functionally just little tendrils off the arms of government already.