4 ms·

At no time in human history have the people who banned books been on the good side.

by DudeOpotomus 1y ago

tgv 1y ago
Banning Mein Kampf was not on the bad side of history. It's rarely black and white.
- asadotzler 1y ago
  Which books on the list covered in this article are equivalents of Mein Kampf in mid-century Germany? I'll save you the effort. The answer is "none of them." That makes it pretty black and white for me. There's not some massive overlap here that makes it all shades of gray. The two situations and the works of literature are entirely different and the Germany case is an abberation, an exception, and hardly a good basis for drawing global conclusions. It is black and white. Either you're for or against the wholesale banning of books or you're for it. Countering with "but this one time in this one place" is hardly convincing.
- fabian2k 1y ago
  It's not actually banned in Germany. Though I think the only edition you can buy here is annotated, which does seem like a good idea.
  - hulium 1y ago
    It was essentially banned via copyright for a long time. The only reason that it is available now is that 70 years have passed since the authors death.
  - tgv 1y ago
    It actually was forbidden in other countries. But that's not the point. I do not consider banning this particular book bad, nor on the wrong side of history. Do you?
- Barrin92 1y ago
  Being German I think it's important to point out that possession of Mein Kampf or reading it was never banned, the idea wasn't to hide some evil esoteric secret knowledge from the German people, to a large extent it was a pragmatic decision because the state did not want Neo-Nazis to benefit financially from the sales of Hitlers legacy, so they just held on to the copyright and didn't print it. There are now since 2016 annotated academic versions of it. Also you have to have a very cartoonish view of people think we're like the Hulk and turn green the moment you come across a copy of Mein Kampf, denazification was a broad cultural project, not a binary thing about one text. The primary struggle with that book is actually reading it because it's simply horrid. If you wanted to prevent Germans from turning to nationalism you'd probably have taken Thomas Mann's political writings off the shelves.
Levitz 1y ago
You might want to look up how denazification efforts worked post ww2.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
guywithahat 1y ago
Although I hate to get political on HN, barely 20 years ago Democrats were the ones banning books in school for being too "culturally insensitive", while republicans were the ones who opposed book banning in schools. One would argue at least banning (often recently written) books with adult content/porn makes sense, saying a classic is "culturally insensitive" and banning it is just another word for political indoctrination
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- prox 1y ago
  Banning should be an extreme measure only applied in some extremely limited form for the shortest duration possible, if ever. For instance when the book is directly being used to institute violence or hate. While porn should be restricted, it should be in the hands of parents, not the state. Same with abortion, a deeply personal matter, not in the hands of the state or whatever some church things, just because they think they are right. Justice should be blind, not carry a bible or creed. It should appear evident, and a pretty apolitical stance, but here we are.
- amanaplanacanal 1y ago
  Political parties seem irrelevant here. Let educators rather than politicians decide which books should be in a school library. Which laws did Democrats pass calling for books to be removed from schools? I admit I'm not always paying attention, but I don't remember any.
  - guywithahat 1y ago
    > Let educators rather than politicians decide which books should be in a school library We already don't do this though, between state laws, federal laws, and the department of education. I am fine getting rid of the department of education though since it seems you're opposed to it too. And it was 20 years ago, you'd have to look up the specific policies. The point is acting like this is the first time people have tried banning books from young children in school is ignorant of all recent history
zeroonetwothree 1y ago
It seems like every side wants to ban content nowadays. It’s really quite sad. One side wants to ban books with two men kissing and the other books that use the wrong pronouns. Although if that’s what you meant then I agree.
- ModernMech 1y ago
  > One side wants to ban books with two men kissing and the other books that use the wrong pronouns. One of these things is happening and the other is not (no one is banning or endeavors to ban anyone from using the wrong pronouns).
- tomrod 1y ago
  "Wrong" pronouns -- what does this even mean? I feel like there are a lot of conservatives who are unaware about what sex and gender actually are, and rather than looking for understanding they prefer to mock because they are lazy and chose the easy route rather than understanding other people. Real rough to have a society when one side just wants to openly mock the other.
  - UmGuys 1y ago
    You're making the same sort of mistake I make in situations like this. You assume they're good people because you're a decent person. You project that onto them. You don't consider they actually are bigots, and lacking curiosity :)
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- const_cast 1y ago
  With these "both sides" arguments why is it always "heres thing one, which is definitely happening and has been for decades. And here's thing two, which could hypothetically happen but never has and almost certainly never will" I mean, it's absurd. It feels like a psyop. Is this a targeted propaganda campaign?
- UmGuys 1y ago
gameman144 1y ago
I mean, if there really was a book that was too harmful to allow at all and it was successfully banned, we likely wouldn't know about it at this point. I am extremely against book banning, but the possibility of some time in history where they really needed to disallow access to a book seems at least _possible_.

At no time in human history have the people who banned books been on the good side.

tgv 1y ago

Banning Mein Kampf was not on the bad side of history. It's rarely black and white.

asadotzler 1y ago
Which books on the list covered in this article are equivalents of Mein Kampf in mid-century Germany? I'll save you the effort. The answer is "none of them." That makes it pretty black and white for me. There's not some massive overlap here that makes it all shades of gray. The two situations and the works of literature are entirely different and the Germany case is an abberation, an exception, and hardly a good basis for drawing global conclusions. It is black and white. Either you're for or against the wholesale banning of books or you're for it. Countering with "but this one time in this one place" is hardly convincing.
fabian2k 1y ago
It's not actually banned in Germany. Though I think the only edition you can buy here is annotated, which does seem like a good idea.
- hulium 1y ago
  It was essentially banned via copyright for a long time. The only reason that it is available now is that 70 years have passed since the authors death.
- tgv 1y ago
  It actually was forbidden in other countries. But that's not the point. I do not consider banning this particular book bad, nor on the wrong side of history. Do you?
Barrin92 1y ago
Being German I think it's important to point out that possession of Mein Kampf or reading it was never banned, the idea wasn't to hide some evil esoteric secret knowledge from the German people, to a large extent it was a pragmatic decision because the state did not want Neo-Nazis to benefit financially from the sales of Hitlers legacy, so they just held on to the copyright and didn't print it. There are now since 2016 annotated academic versions of it. Also you have to have a very cartoonish view of people think we're like the Hulk and turn green the moment you come across a copy of Mein Kampf, denazification was a broad cultural project, not a binary thing about one text. The primary struggle with that book is actually reading it because it's simply horrid. If you wanted to prevent Germans from turning to nationalism you'd probably have taken Thomas Mann's political writings off the shelves.

Levitz 1y ago

You might want to look up how denazification efforts worked post ww2.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

guywithahat 1y ago

Although I hate to get political on HN, barely 20 years ago Democrats were the ones banning books in school for being too "culturally insensitive", while republicans were the ones who opposed book banning in schools. One would argue at least banning (often recently written) books with adult content/porn makes sense, saying a classic is "culturally insensitive" and banning it is just another word for political indoctrination

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
prox 1y ago
Banning should be an extreme measure only applied in some extremely limited form for the shortest duration possible, if ever. For instance when the book is directly being used to institute violence or hate. While porn should be restricted, it should be in the hands of parents, not the state. Same with abortion, a deeply personal matter, not in the hands of the state or whatever some church things, just because they think they are right. Justice should be blind, not carry a bible or creed. It should appear evident, and a pretty apolitical stance, but here we are.
amanaplanacanal 1y ago
Political parties seem irrelevant here. Let educators rather than politicians decide which books should be in a school library. Which laws did Democrats pass calling for books to be removed from schools? I admit I'm not always paying attention, but I don't remember any.
- guywithahat 1y ago
  > Let educators rather than politicians decide which books should be in a school library We already don't do this though, between state laws, federal laws, and the department of education. I am fine getting rid of the department of education though since it seems you're opposed to it too. And it was 20 years ago, you'd have to look up the specific policies. The point is acting like this is the first time people have tried banning books from young children in school is ignorant of all recent history

zeroonetwothree 1y ago

It seems like every side wants to ban content nowadays. It’s really quite sad. One side wants to ban books with two men kissing and the other books that use the wrong pronouns. Although if that’s what you meant then I agree.

ModernMech 1y ago
> One side wants to ban books with two men kissing and the other books that use the wrong pronouns. One of these things is happening and the other is not (no one is banning or endeavors to ban anyone from using the wrong pronouns).
tomrod 1y ago
"Wrong" pronouns -- what does this even mean? I feel like there are a lot of conservatives who are unaware about what sex and gender actually are, and rather than looking for understanding they prefer to mock because they are lazy and chose the easy route rather than understanding other people. Real rough to have a society when one side just wants to openly mock the other.
- UmGuys 1y ago
  You're making the same sort of mistake I make in situations like this. You assume they're good people because you're a decent person. You project that onto them. You don't consider they actually are bigots, and lacking curiosity :)
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
const_cast 1y ago
With these "both sides" arguments why is it always "heres thing one, which is definitely happening and has been for decades. And here's thing two, which could hypothetically happen but never has and almost certainly never will" I mean, it's absurd. It feels like a psyop. Is this a targeted propaganda campaign?
UmGuys 1y ago

gameman144 1y ago

I mean, if there really was a book that was too harmful to allow at all and it was successfully banned, we likely wouldn't know about it at this point. I am extremely against book banning, but the possibility of some time in history where they really needed to disallow access to a book seems at least _possible_.