If a book isn't taken out of the shelves for two-three years, I would be very surprised it stays there. Where I worked, it would have been sent to the reserve,

If a book isn't taken out of the shelves for two-three years, I would be very surprised it stays there. Where I worked, it would have been sent to the reserve, and only be out for some events (for our 'burned books' week we had 'all is quiet on the western front' in multiple languages, including German, and other book burned by Fascisti and nazis, and that's how I discovered this masterpiece). I highly doubt school libraries function any differently. Every year you receive a magazine with books who received prizes/recommendations, you move older books that aren't read to the reserve and command new ones. In my country, you especially have the 'highschooler prize' (not sure how to translate it), which is voted upon by students from 50 different highschool accross the country, and the winners are always recommended by the magazine. My advice would be, rather than preventing librarians to do their job, maybe write better books? Prevent new commands rather than remove already existing books? Because putting 'Go Tell It on the Mountain' on the shelves isn't ideology, just good taste. Removing it is. What really grind my gear is that I would bet censors don't read or review books. Book reviewing was a staple of my curriculum from 11 to 16, so I imagine it isn't hard. Censors should have to write at least a book review a year, graded (not to prevent them to censor, just publish the grade so we could see their reading level).