Do you support the fascist conservative book banning movement?

[holdem4884]

Just following the Nazi's...

"U.S. schools pull more than 1,000 book titles in 'unparalleled' censorship bid, report finds.

Under massive pressure from free speech hating and idea loathing conservatives, "86 school districts had removed 1,145 titles from their shelves over the last nine months, some permanently and others while an investigation was under way."

Book banning is a reprehensible practice that has no place in a free and democratic society.

Conservative groups have been known to target books that they perceive as being offensive or inappropriate, often citing religious or moral objections as their rationale for censorship. Some recent examples include the banning of "To Kill a Mockingbird" and "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" in schools and libraries.

These efforts are often based on a narrow, ideological agenda and ignore the value of free expression and the importance of diverse viewpoints in our society.

The fact that banning is happening at all is deeply troubling. Banning books based on ideological or political beliefs is a form of censorship that goes completely against the principles of a free and open society. We must remain vigilant against such efforts and defend the right to read and express diverse perspectives.

Updates

1 y

For the uniformed:

Banning refers to the act of prohibiting or restricting access to something or someone.

[lightbulb27]

No don't agree in general, but agree school boards or principals can prune book collections. If it's a space issue and there's other or more favored books, ok. They are books and ideas and opinions... students can get them elsewhere and they should. They should be required to read two books from countering viewpoints in HS. Aren't they always updating collections?

Our kid had to read some of these, and we questions what she was reading at the age she was, we didn't like what we heard. As long as there is parents there for support, it's ok. Kids that don't have support to broaden view, to discuss, may get lost in a different mentality. Kids are impressionable.

P. S. Why in the he!! isn't Mein Kampf in there? Satanic verses? Why not the satanic Bible? The kama sutra? 50 shades of grey, not to mention the Holy Bible and the Koran? Oh yea... sepration of church and state. I just don't understand schools, do you? Maybe they are limited in what they can influence, and tell kids to read outside of school. Maybe parents just don't like some topics they feel influences their kids.

[loveslongnails]

I support burning fascist conservative books! LOL Not really, it made a good joke. I don't support burning books, even the bad ones. I think it's a good thing for people to read fucked up ideas too, so they recognize seeing them in all their different forms and call people out when they show them - - - people like DeSantis, and all those right wing nuts banning things like "A Handmaid's Tale" or Michele Obama's book.

This is all part of the right-wing agenda to "keep people as stupid as possible" and distract them with strawman "culture wars".

[Razp_Sorbet]

The anger I had when perks of being a wallflower was banned from my school while I was half way through it 😤

Book banning is stupid, they don't even ban the books that should be banned they ban the informative progressive books

[Sixgunsound]

What books should be banned and why?

[Razp_Sorbet]

@Sixgunsound I'm sure there's many but To Train Up a Child is an example. Essentially a self help book that encourages abusing children so they obey your needs.

[CALIGVLA]

Oh, I don't think @Razp_Sorbet liked my idea! 😕

[Sixgunsound]

I'll look it up. This is a title I have not heard of before.

[Razp_Sorbet]

@CALIGVLA your idea was an obvious ploy for attention or an argument and I'm not interested in entertaining you.

[Sixgunsound]

What else? If you are tolerant of book bans what makes you any better than your opponents? The only difference is ideological. Or do you agree that objective truth exists?

[Razp_Sorbet]

@Sixgunsound except I'm not tolerant of book bans... I literally said I think it's stupid.

[Sixgunsound]

But right afterwards you listed a book to ban. Which is it?

[Razp_Sorbet]

@Sixgunsound I meant that there are books that more worthy of banning than the ones that they actually do ban, not that I agree with banning books. The example I gave was just one that actually would make sense to ban.

[Sixgunsound]

So you don't think banning is the right answer even if it should be?

[Razp_Sorbet]

@Sixgunsound correct. while the book I suggested is outright horrible it has potential to be learned from as a what not to do. Perhaps they should just have warnings to do with inaccuracies

[Sixgunsound]

Fair enough. As a librarian I am interested 'hard no to any censorship' camp.

[Sixgunsound]

As such I will be buying Trump's and Rush Limbaugh and Williams and Sowell and Elder's books and put in them in my classroom and watching the lefties squirm and crap themselves🤣

[Sixgunsound]

Is a left wing echo chamber in public schools sufficiently diverse of thought to meet even it's own standards?

[holdem4884]

@Sixgunsound You're a librarian who has a classroom?

Why do you insist on equating genuine thinkers like Sowell and Elder with blowhards like Trump and Limbaugh? You do your ideology a tremendous disservice.

[Sixgunsound]

I already answered that.

[Sixgunsound]

Will be as in future tense. I had another teacher's classroom while student teaching and will soon have one in my own name.

[holdem4884]

@Sixgunsound That's unfortunate. I have since read an explanation you gave for a different context.

I'd have my classroom bookshelves mirror those at my home. Lined with authors from across the ideological spectrum - presenting widely divergent perspectives in an intelligent, coherent manner, without incessant appeal to logical fallacies.

If you think they're being subjected to garbage, subjecting them to other garbage isn't going to improve anything.

If you're principled, you'll teach them to be skeptics and focus on critical thinking and analytical skills. That's by far the greatest shield to indoctrination.

[Sixgunsound]

My apologies I failed to note that it was not you I was replying to, my bad. I chose polarizing figures as a test of principles. Actual diversity of opinion, not protection from competing viewpoints, is what I consider most valuable for instructional purposes.

[holdem4884]

@Sixgunsound Now that's quite sensible.

[Qdbrown]

It's not book banning. It's local school districts parsing what the community wants and does not want available to their children. Bottom line.

Not all local communties care about black authors or celebrities. Most really want to remove all sexual books that either discus gay and gueer issues, or worse show how to perform sexual acts, as in the book Gender Queer that shows illustrations of boys learning how to give BJ's to each other. Most parents are not going to want their kids consuming that at their elementary, junior high and even high schools.

And as for Rosa Parks, and Nelson Mandela, some communties do not care about these people. And in America, families in local communities should be able to choose what they feel is appropriate, and for some of these critics, they want kids to see and feel the violence in the civil rights era of the 1960's. Some families do not want to teach their kids about this until they are much older, and even into University.

These critics also don't see that these parents are likely keeping their kids away from the media, public broadcasting, and most movies unless they have a wholesome message and do not show any progressive ideas. It's not just books, and as an Anerican they have that right. And they also have that right as parents. They also have that right as local taxpayers for their schools.

Deal.

If you don't like this, relocate to a community of like-minded people. The United States is a diverse country of different states, where apart of that diversity is not to be a part of the national conversation.

[goaded]

"It's local school districts parsing what the community wants"
No it's not. The "local school districts" are reacting to a state law that is removing the educators' ability to make educational decisions.

School boards could always make decisions for their local school district. Now they have to comply with a new law instead.

[holdem4884]

This comment is a prime example of the insular, vapid stupidity that is all too common in our society. Rosa Parks and Nelson Mandela are two of the most important figures in modern history, and their contributions to the struggle for civil rights and equality should be celebrated and taught in every community.

The idea that parents should be able to choose what their children learn is certainly valid, but it should not be used as an excuse to perpetuate ignorance and racism. Shielding children from the realities of the civil rights era is not only irresponsible, it's also dangerous. We cannot hope to create a more just and equitable society if we refuse to acknowledge the past.

Furthermore, the notion that these parents are keeping their children away from media, public broadcasting, and movies unless they have a "wholesome message" is deeply troubling. It suggests a desire to maintain a narrow, exclusionary view of the world, and to prevent children from being exposed to ideas and experiences that challenge that view.

Ultimately, this comment is a defense of ignorance, bigotry, and intolerance, and it should be rejected outright. Every child has the right to an education that is broad, inclusive, and reflective of the diverse world in which we live, and every parent has a responsibility to ensure that their children are prepared to navigate that world with empathy, intelligence, and compassion.

[Lliam]

I agree that banning books is reprehensible. But it cracks me up that you are blaming conservatives (which I am not one).
Yes, fascist corporatists want to ban books like Grapes of Wrath because they think it sends a communist message.
But woke liberals want to ban books like Huckleberry Finn because it contains racism and bad words, even though it's overall message is anti-racist.

I recently read an article that said someone is proposing that classic literature should be revised to remove content that might be deemed offensive.

I think the woke left is more responsible for this than is the far right. The left has zero respect for free speech. They are on a social engineering crusade. But I'm not saying that some right-wingnuts don't want certain literature removed, especially the tsunami of LGBTQ trash.

[holdem4884]

My point was specifically to the organized effort tied to the MAGA movement, which there is, by conservatives. These are the people who are overwhelmingly the ones targeting books on race. That said, your point stands that there are liberals doing this to a more limited degree as well. This should be alarming to people.

[NewsReader]

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-florida-schools-to-kill-a-mockingbird-201081596097

I am 50/50 on this. Any book that indoctrinates or contains inappropriate content such as pornography should be banned. It's damaging to a child's development. Other stuff that is simply informative can be left alone. So I support the movement, but it should a bit less strict.

[holdem4884]

To be clear, the link you posted is about Florida which is not discussed in the article I mentioned.

I certainly agree that children shouldn't be subjected to pornography but that's not what this movement is about.

It's about censoring ideas that are inconvenient which is why they ban "non-fiction titles including biographies for children of Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr, Duke Ellington and Nelson Mandela".

That's not stopping hate speech or misinformation, it's limiting knowledge about uncomfortable truths which lies at the heart of fascism.

[Exterminatore]

See. Right there. “Stopping hate speech.”

You only like free speech when you agree with it. You also would say telling a gay person they will go to hell if they don’t repent is hate speech. You love to twist words to fit your agenda.

[CALIGVLA]

My only disagreement with it is that it was an incomplete action.

America is a dysfunctional society since day one. It was a country which was built by Christian fanatics, African slaves and serfs of every skin color. Of course people who were raised in such sick social environment couldn't write anything really memorable or relevant to humanity.

So we're not missing out anything valuable if they burned all the progressive books wrote by American authors, but so would do us if they burned conservative books either.

[holdem4884]

"Of course people who were raised in such sick social environment couldn't write anything really memorable or relevant to humanity."

So you're unfamiliar with Nathaniel Hawthorne, Mark Twain, Edgar Allen Poe, and Herman Melville?

"So we're not missing out anything valuable if they burned all the progressive books wrote by American authors"

At least you cleary admit to your fascism.

Anyone who hasn't read and doesn't appreciate Upton Sinclair, Jane Austin, W. E. B. Du Bois, or Jack London is intellectually dull.

[CALIGVLA]

They were mediocre authors revered by an absolutely mediocre and seemingly paranoid schizophrenic person like you. Why should I waste my time listening to your suggestions if you're not even fully rational?

[CALIGVLA]

With the exception of Mark Twain and Edgar Allen Poe, all the authors you mentioned are unknown outside of the US.

Guess why, Jane Doe?

It's because what they wrote is absolutely trivial and irrelevant to humanity. They can only impress dim-witted, semi-sentient sh*t stains like you.

[holdem4884]

First of all, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Herman Melville, and Upton Sinclair have been studied and revered not just in the US, but in academic circles worldwide.

They're only unknown to the illiterate or intellectually challenged. Your claim that they are unknown outside of the US is simply false. In fact, their works have been translated into multiple languages and are taught in universities and schools across the globe. They have influenced countless writers and thinkers in other countries, and their impact on literature cannot be denied.

[CALIGVLA]

Here are 50 authors who are known all around the world for the relevance of their works.

Sun Tzu. Confucius. Lao Tzu. Karl Marx. Chomsky. Hegels. Plato. Aesop. Aristotle. Homer. Virgil. Sophocles. Cicero. Thomas Achinas. Machiavelli. Nietzsche. Thomas Mann. Dostoevsky. Tolstoy. Pushkin. Chekhov. Nabokov. Maxim Gorky. Boris Pasternak. Dante. Luis de Camoes. Machado de Assis. Jose Saramago. Miguel de Cervantes. Gabriel Garcia Marquez. Aldous Huxley. William Shakespeare. Oscar Wilde. J. R. R. Tolkien. Hobbes. Lord Byron. Locke. Alexandre Dumas. Victor Hugo. Albert Camus. Gustabe Flaubert. Jules Verne. Rabelais. Moliere. La Fontaine. Saint-Exupery. Descartes. Pascal. Kafka. Pablo Neruda.

[CALIGVLA]

I doubt you've read any of them because you're an ignorant little sh*t who cosplays as an intellectual. All hat and no cattle.

[holdem4884]

I see you've become quite adept at the art of copy and paste.

I'm glad your so unfamiliar with them that you allowed an American author, Chomsky, to slip through at the top of your list. He's been extremely influential on my own thinking.

So now you're comparing 200 years of US literature to over 2000 years of world literature? That's comparable, what intellectual honesty you portray.

I've read 35 of the 42 authors you listed.

What about Augustine, Aquinas, Chaucer, Bacon, Milton, Descartes, Pascal, Rousseau, Voltaire, Goethe, Kant, Emerson, Thoreau, Wilde, Joyce, Camus, Sartre, Hobbes, Locke, and Foucault?

[CALIGVLA]

Copy and paste your ass, white girl. I've read those authors (I even forgot that Chomsky is American, taking into account the relevance of his works, which is something extremely uncommon among Americans).

Unlike you, white girl, I can read those authors and understand what they wrote and the idea they were transmitting. That's because (unlike you, white girl) I'm not "all hat and no cattle."

Stop trying to show off knowledge you don't have, Karen.

[holdem4884]

Chomsky is an intellectual giant, one of the brightest minds of the 20th century.

You're tribalistic, racist, and misogynistic thoughts betrays the depth of your intellect. Whatever you've read, you haven't managed to absorb and synthesize. What a waste.

[CALIGVLA]

You read for entertainment, Karen. You read books like you read the biography of Kim Kardashian.

Stop pretending you're a serious person. You're not one.

[holdem4884]

Kardashians? Your incessant use of logical fallacies is evidence of a weak mind.

I don't find trash entertaining. Kurt Vonnegut was entertaining. My primary interests are moral, political, and economic philosophy.

A few names that have I haven't already mentioned are Bertrand Russell, Max Weber, John Stuart Mill, Thomas Hobbes, John Maynard Keynes, Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, Friedrich Hayek, Alexis de Tocqueville, Michel Foucault, Hannah Arendt, Immanuel Kant, David Hume, Confucius, John Rawls, Jeremy Bentham, Søren Kierkegaard, and Hegel.

You're thoughtless dismissal says nothing about me, it's merely a reflection of your own limitations.

[CALIGVLA]

Lol, Karen. The only things you're good at are calling the manager and reading "Selfish" by Kim Kardashian while you sip your starbucks.

[Sixgunsound]

If you had tolook at who is behind the majority of censorship right now, would it be global tech companies or a small handful of school districts. Give me a break. At least have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge the whole sawmill 's worth in your own eye before worrying about the speck of sawdust in your neighbor's.

[Sixgunsound]

How many schools that you agree with have any of Trump's books in them? Or Rush Limbaugh's? Walter Williams? Thomas Sowell? Larry Elder? Where is your high horse diversity of conservative ideas in schools?

[holdem4884]

The censorship of Big Tech companies is problematic but hey, own YOUR OWN PHILOSOPHY.

They are responding to market forces, just as conservatives have demanded for decades.
Without effective regulation this is what you get. Sucks when your philosophy is undermined by being implemented.

They've often gone way too far. That said, censoring demonstrable falsehood is not equivalent to banning ideas.

Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell were/are academics with real credentials. They aren't mere propagandists who deny reality, and it's shameful to lump them in with Trump and Limbaugh. While they may have different perspectives, they are worth considering.

Thomas Sowell's books are in every library I've ever visited and I'm a bookworm.

[Sixgunsound]

I'm happy to see that there are still some honest librarians out there who honor their commitment to resist censorship. I named polarizing figures because I wanted to see if your principles held up in that situation. Do you get any news outside of mainstream echo chambers? The Twitter expose of government ordered and paid censorship demo strates at least one big tech censorship under your guy, so own your own reality. It sucks when facts get in the way of your propaganda or feelings but is what it is.

[Sixgunsound]

You must understand that having principles period a little on principles that can withstand scrutiny, is not something I frequently encounter among people on your side of politics, thus the necessity of a test.

[Sixgunsound]

*let alone principles that can withstand scrutiny

[holdem4884]

@Sixgunsound My experience is the exact opposite. I live in a semi-rural suburban community of 45,000 which is 97% caucasian and I'm surrounded by unprincipled dogmatic conservatives. They're almost all total hypocrites. Are these conspiratorial rationality adverse people a vocal minority or the new majority on the right? From my experience, they have become the overwhelming majority.

I could name a handful of conservative media figures and intellectuals who've remained sane, but they're almost an extinct species.

[holdem4884]

40 years ago the conservative movement had serious intellectuals at it's core like Milton Friedman and people like William F. Buckley guiding it.

The MAGA movement has NO intellectual foundation at all, it's driven by nonesense and conspiracy theories towted by charlatans.
The party of Trump is absurdly embarrassing.

[Sixgunsound]

The touting of these dogmatic absolutes reveals the charlatan. The problem is you think the clown show on TV is the real conservative movement. It is not. What you see on TV is controlled opposition manufactured for consumption of the smug superior leftist who receives their opinions from legacy media to point at and mock. The real conservative movement is followers of Goldwater and Rand and Sowell and Williams and Molyneux and Peterson and also people too busy working and raising families to read all that but realize that prices are going up and their wages aren't keeping pace. Concerned parents speaking truth to power. Hunters and nature lovers who view wildlife and wilderness conservation as long term strategic imperatives so they can pass their joy of the great outdoors onto future generations. The real conservative movement stands up for the rights of women as equal partners and wants to empower women to do more important things with their lives than corporate wage slave. The real conservative is not a YouTube tact-tool but a safety conscious and responsible gun owner who takes that heavy burden very seriously. The real conservative movement advocates personal responsibility and earning what you get. The real conservative movement is the most generous non governmental agency on earth to actual causes instead of their own foundations. The clown show you see on TV gas nothing to do with any of that.

[holdem4884]

@Sixgunsound Yeah, that sounds great. I wish that actually described the conservative movement today. The reality is, the people you describe are now an incredibly insignificant fragmented minority banished to obscurity by your idiotic brethren.

I'm not talking about television, I have MAGA morons in my HOUSE who call anyone who doesn't spout nonsensical conspiratorial garbage RINO's who are actually liberals. You good sir, are a liberal to these tryglodytes. That's the modern conservative movement, brainless. The evidence for such is everywhere.

[Sixgunsound]

Anybody can call themselves anything they wish, but definitions don't change. The people your TV or social media echo chamber tells you to make fun are not 'my' anything. Owning people is more of a Democrat thing, as is fighting to protect that system or create new similar ones. It might interest you to know that I'm not a republican, butI doubt anything less than total falling over myself surrender to hard leftist causes would matter to you because you are still stuck on the absolutist stage of sociopolitical development, i. e. orange man bad so red party bad. A viable third party would be a political earthquake to the current uniparty system, why do you think they work so hard to suppress libertarianism? As a word of advice, you might get farther into political discussions with people in real life, possibly even to the point of a well reasoned case to change someone's mind, by *not* being so condescending or insulting. I'm happy to go tit for tat with you because there's nothing you can say to me that is worse than having to be you, but if you want to get anywhere with real people face to face calling them 'MAGA morons' is just going to reinforce their decision that wasting their valuable time on you is a non-starter.

[AngryCarl2]

Well to be clear the books aren't banned, they're just being removed from school libraries. And it's not only conservatives who favour censorship. There are liberals who want to ban free speech altogether.

[AngryCarl2]

Oh right, the question. No I don't support it, kids should have access to as many books as possible, it's hard enough to get kids to read anything. No wonder their spelling is so atrocious, most of them have never seen wurds ritten down.

[holdem4884]

We do need to be fair in our criticism, don't we? There is a frightening strain of censorship among some who purport to be "liberals".

That said, human culture has never encountered anyting like social media and big tech algorithms before, were deceit, misinformation, and hate grows exponentially. Where our tribalistic natural is exploited in echo chambers of confirmation bias.

The answers in this realm are not straightforward. It isn't comparable to restricting access to books.

[Exterminatore]

Well…I’m a fascist. A neo clerical fascist to be precise.


I don’t know what books got burnt, but I’d probably agree with the list.


You’re funny. Using the term fascist like it’s a bad thing. I suppose it is for liberal commie woke degenerates.


Books on tranny love - burn them.


Books on CRT - burn them.


Books praising communism - burn them.


Books about homosexuality- burn them.


Books that endorse feminism - burn them.


Books that promote these themes but not on those specific subjects - burn them.


I don’t think these are ideas to endorse, promote, and most especially indoctrinate children with, let alone adults.


And as for the tranny reading stories to children in school - escort him out.

[CateM]

*Plays You need to calm down on my fascist killing machine* You need to calm down, you're being too loud proud boy

[Exterminatore]

No one said anything about killing. I am against political murder, or murder of any type of that matter.

We’re talking about burning books.

[Exterminatore]

And I ain’t no proud boy either.

[holdem4884]

What exactly do you think happens AFTER the vicious "thought control" you advocate for is allowed?

Apart from LGBTQ books, conservatives are banning "1984" by George Orwell and "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley. Why? Due to their anti-authoritarian themes. How incredibly ironic. They're being banned because they pose the threat of freedom of thought to people like you

Please keep revealing the asinine absurdity of your thinking. Your words make my effort to help others reject and discard fascists like you so much easier.

You'd burn Mark Twain? How about:
"To Kill a Mockingbird" by J. D. Salinger and
"The Catcher in the Rye" by Harper Collins?

These are all amongst the most banned books by conservatives. None cause any harm, they encourage thinking and that's something conservatives will not allow.

Again, "non-fiction titles including biographies for children of Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr, Duke Ellington and Nelson Mandela were also among those removed from shelves and school curricula."

Give me one fascist regime that didn't commit atrocities... murder follows fascism everywhere.

[Exterminatore]

I see. So burning books must always be followed by murder? We can remove bad influence without killing.

If thought control is so vicious, why are you liberals always trying to engage in it.

Works like this: someone tells you they’re against homosexuality on grounds of religion and you tell they they are a hatemongor…in an attempt to guilt and shame them into submission. Then you tell them they are intolerant. Do the gays not have tolerance. Are we burning them all at the steak now? So you people play sociopathic word games. Like with gender. Which always meant sex, but now you claim it is the amount of masculinity or femininity a person displays, and have changed the meanings of the word and insist they obey, or you’ll call them a tranniophobe. Is this not thought control?

What about the constant indoctrination attempts we find at school, in the news, on TV, in movies, on the radio, in books. Constantly repeating the same message. Men - bad, women - good. White people bad - every other race - good. Christianity - bad, every other religion - good. So on and so forth with every liberal doctrine. Are you going to tell me this is not the vicious thought control you speak of. Bringing a grown pervert into schools to read books to children in an attempt to influence them?

Catcher in the Rye can go. Far too much foul language in it. I see no problem with the others.

All of those nonfiction titles should be mandatory reading, except for Duke Ellington. Though he was a ground breaking musician and one of my personal favorites, I think much more would be learned about anti racism and bravery from them. Rather than filling children’s heads with garbage CRT stuff.

I’d say Fransisco Franco’s regime didn’t include much political murder, though he did allow the Nazis to test their Stuka dive bombers on the Basques. I find that deplorable, certainly his worst decision.

This is what I am a neo fascist dear. I’ll take what is good and throw away the rest.

[Exterminatore]

So whatever you do, please don’t act like you have a monopoly on morality and virtue. You promote the exact opposite.

You like free speech so far as it’s speech you agree with.

I would also consider the current prime minister of Italy to be a neo fascist. I haven’t heard of anyone being herded into boxcars there.

Not like with communism. How many have been murdered in China to date? 48-68 million. How many in Russia under Stalin alone? Roughly 25 million. But fascism is the bad boy on the block.

My problem with democracy is it allows the stupid, the degenerate, and the weak all to have a voice.

[goaded]

"I would also consider the current prime minister of Italy to be a neo fascist. I haven’t heard of anyone being herded into boxcars there."
It took Hitler a decade from becoming dictator and stopping elections until he started the final solution. And it wasn't common knowledge until after the war.

[holdem4884]

@Exterminatore

You're trying to fight a straw man. I'm anti-totalitarian, that means anti fascist and anti communist.

Turn your argument around. It can be used by liberals to justify totally silencing you. You're ideas are bad influence, we'll just eradicate them without killing. Don't you see the problem?

[Guardian45]

No, I do NOT support the fascist conservative book banning movement. This the "thin edge of the wedge". Today it's books; tomorrow its ALL left-handed people, or someone else! The silent majority has a duty to speak up against fascists, no matter their stripes, EVERYWHERE, ANYTIME!

Failure to do so, is the first step towards the collapse of free and open society and self-destruction.

[Dargil]

I am unaware of a Fascist book banning movement except for the free speech censorship bu the FBI on collusion with social and mainstream news media. Is that what you mean? And Fascists are Leftist not conservative.

[holdem4884]

You live in an Orwellian delusion fantasy world. There is NO actual evidence of FBI collision with ANY media. The innuendo of the Twitter files doesn't prove anything.

While elements of the left are overly concerned with political correctness and at times censorship, asserting that fascists are leftist and not conservative is a baseless and absurd claim. Fascism is a far-right ideology associated with authoritarianism, nationalism, and xenophobia.

The fascist regimes of the 20th century, such as Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, were notorious for their suppression of left-wing political movements and their brutal persecution of socialists, communists, and other leftist groups. To claim that fascism is a leftist ideology is to demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding of political history and ideology. It is a testament to the intellectual bankruptcy of those who seek to defend or promote fascist beliefs, and it is a dangerous and false narrative that should be rejected outright.

[Dargil]

That's ok. I know what they are regulating and why. I support it, not your ignorant allegation.

[Randalama]

Most of the recent book banning I've seen has come from the left. Roald or Ronald Dahl would be a recent example. Apparently Dr. Suess is problematic as well. In Palestine they have textbooks for young children which glorify suicide bombings. Martyrdom. In the western world we have textbooks which depict adult sexual material but it is being presented to the kinders as inclusivity. If you want to blow your homie I have no objection. Just don't tell my children about it.

[jshm2]

They haven't banned the books - you can still buy them yourself if you're that bothered.

The Nazi's burned the books, dumbass. Most of those books were rare or not published elsewhere.

[slatyb]

No, it's the marching morons who have no better argument to make so instead they use force to silence people who disagree with them.

[genericname85]

That's exactly how fascism works. By banning books and information that would enable people to see through the bullshit.

[holdem4884]

Threse are the same people "Free Speech" loving conservatives who go apoplectic over neo-nazis getting banned from Twitter. The hypocrisy would be stupifying if they had any intelligence.

[genericname85]

Ok. That was way too much confusing stuff going on. I don't know what to say. Free speech is obviously something everyone should want. If you can't have free speech, you can't have a democracy and a peaceful life in society.

[LadiesFavoriteToy]

You have no idea what you are talking about. Going to have me shot because I disagree with you.

[genericname85]

@LadiesFavoriteToy i know what i'm talking about xD but i don't know what you're talking about.

[holdem4884]

@LadiesFavoriteToy I'm not a fascist, you're free to disagree but an opinion is useless without an argument backing it up.

[Exterminatore]

Yessssss. That’s how fascism works. By cleansing the filth from society.

[holdem4884]

@Exterminatore 10 years ago I would have cast you aside as a troll but MAGA Republicans have made the threat of people like you all too real.

Advocating for fascism is despicable and reprehensible. It's a repugnant ideology that has caused immense suffering and death throughout history. Anyone who claims to be an advocate of fascism is not only a morally bankrupt individual but also a huge danger to society.

Furthermore, anyone who supports or enables fascism in any way, whether it's through propaganda, censorship, or violence, is complicit in the atrocities committed by fascist regimes. It's no different than those who aided and abetted the Nazis during World War II.

To be clear, fascists are nothing but delusional, pathetic cowards who lack the courage and intelligence to confront the complexities of the world we live in. Your ideology is a cancer on society, a festering boil on the backside of humanity, and the only way to eradicate it is to expose it for the vile and destructive force that it is.

[genericname85]

Maga is actually the exact opposite to fascism. You know what fascism is?

[holdem4884]

MAGA Republicans are characterized by a tenacity for misinformation, a stark lack of critical thinking skills, and an unyielding loyalty to a failed regime. These individuals often possess a fundamental misunderstanding of basic political and social concepts, wrapped in a shroud of xenophobic nationalism. They tout an "America First" mantra, yet seem to have a perversely distorted vision of what that truly means.

Tthey are a paradoxical mass of people who subscribe to an ideology that is fundamentally at odds with the principles of democracy, equality, and the pursuit of knowledge. They are, in a word, intellectually challenged simpletons who have been led astray by a charismatic charlatan and his horde of enablers.

Their politics are not just fascist, they're crypto-fascist, using dog-whistle racism, xenophobia, and misogyny to get their way. They're the kind of people who would have been perfectly at home in 1930s Germany, except they're too cowardly to wear brown shirts and goose step in public. They've completely sold out their own dignity and morality for the sake of a delusional strongman who makes them feel like they're tough guys.

They share a lot of the same ideals and tactics as the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP), better known as the Nazi Party. The idolization of a charismatic leader, the demonization of minority groups, the glorification of violence and aggression, the suppression of free speech and free thought, the rejection of facts and reality in favor of propaganda and misinformation, these are all hallmark traits of both the Nazi party and the MAGA crowd. It's not a stretch to say that the MAGA crowd are, at the very least, the American equivalent of the Nazi party.

[genericname85]

i'm asking again, cause you want on a confused blathering rant again. what exactly does fascism mean? you need to understand the labels before you slap them onto something.

[genericname85]

fuck it i'll tell you. you can watch this video to learn what fascism actually is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6bSsaVL6gA

tl dr: fascism is the subordination of the individual needs under the needs of the state. left wing ideology subordinates the individual needs under the needs of the state. so left wing ideology is inherently fascist. just like the nazis were left (national SOCIALISTS) and stalin and mussolini as well as the KKK were all left wing phenomenons not right.

the idea that the NSDAP was "right" comes from a time when the understanding of the political spectrum was rudimentary. it used to be, that the party representing the middleclass used to sit on the right and the party representing the nobility and rich people was on the left. later then it developed into "left" meaning common good above individual good and "right" meaning individual good over common good. and then authoritartian vs libertarian was added, so left and right could mean 3 different things.

MAGA is the polar opposite to what fascism is. maga is AGAINST the subordination of individual needs. MAGA is on the extreme end of individualism and therefore the exact opposite of fascism is, cause fascism is the subordination of the individual to the state.

[genericname85]

hitler was extremely left and extremely authoritarian. that's why hitler was a fascist. he wasn't right. MAGA is a right wing political movement hence not possibly fascist in nature.

[genericname85]

the left wing lgbtq social justice blm and such movements are fascist in nature. cause they subordinate the individual good under the common good. they are thinking as a mass. that's what fascism is. the opposite of MAGA

[Exterminatore]

@holdem

Did you learn all that on Wikipedia.

I love watching people like you come unhinged at the mention of fascism.

Fascism, FASCISM!!!

Get Antifa and let’s go destroy some stuff to get justice for somebody.

You’re so terrified of fascists and get so worked up while you’re own people tried to set fire to the Mayor of Portlands condo building. With other people than him in the building.

[genericname85]

@Exterminatore when i use the word fascism, i know what i'm talking about. i'm not one of these people who use fascism as a label for everything they disagree with. of course i'm terrified of fascism cause as a german, i have grandparents who sufferend from it... also i happen to have a masters in social science. i'm not claiming to be an expert on the matter but i'm not an amateur either... and if you're not scared of fascism, you're straight up an idiot. it starts with knowing exactly what fascims is.

[genericname85]

@Exterminatore also i'm not saying that MAGA is "good". i'm saying it's not fascist. there's other ways to being bad than being fascist.

[genericname85]

just like saying hitler wasn't a "right winger" doesn't mean that i think hitler was good. obviously he was bad. but calling "socialism" right-wing is idiotic.

[Exterminatore]

@Generic

I believe you. There also seems to be great confusion with fascism and Nazism. While the Nazis were fascist…unfortunately, they were also Nazis. Nazi doctrine and standard fascist doctrine are not even close to the same.

I am not scared of fascism. I am a fascist myself. But I am a neo fascist. Here is what I believe in:

1. Social conservatism
2. Nationalism
3. Tightly controlled markets as opposed to the free enterprise system. Also a marriage of state and cooperate interests. 3rd position economy.
4. Militarism without expansion.
5. I like the idea of a hierarchical form of government but this can be dangerous.
I am AGAINST totalitarianism. I don’t know if you can divorce that from fascism and still be a fascist. It’s very dangerous. That’s how we end up with Hitler’s and Stalin’s. I actually prefer bicameral as we have now.
6. Patriarchal society
7. Law and order

I do not support political murder, or any type of murder, nor political incarceration for disagreement. I classify myself as a neo clerical fascist. I can see the problems with pure, unadulterated fascism.

However I also see the problems with the moral and economic free fall America is currently in. I do not have a problem with personal liberties when used correctly. I don’t not agree with absolute free speech. For example. Should we be encouraging transgenderism? What happens when someone inverts the decision and later regrets it? Don’t we have a responsibility to look out for the best good of others rather than encouraging what they want if it’s potential harmful? So I don’t think people should have the right to say that. I do think they should be able to criticize the government. Or shall we allow communism to be praised? The system is diametrically opposed to what we have in America and they are mutually exclusive. Why allow free speech to undermine the government and system you have? What good is it?

We need more authoritarianism. I see no way to stop the madness.

[Exterminatore]

So I think we need a new, hybrid form of fascism. Can you remove totalitarianism from fascism and it still be fascism? I don't know. Can we have a system where there are checks and balances and it still be Fascism? I don't know. Can we have a system called fascism, but slightly refine the freedoms we have so that those freedoms aren’t being used to undermine the country? I don't know.

What I see with democracy is it allows the ignorant to have a voice and the foolish to be heard.

For example, we are worried about the trees and the birds while we economically implode. We send money everywhere while we have reached out debt ceiling and have run away inflation. No one sees the problem?

We have transvestites and specifically them reading to children. Why must it be a transvestite? Can’t just anyone read them a story? Why are we exposing young children to these things?

We say trust the science with the Covid vaccine, but don’t trust the science with chromosomes and there only being 2 genders.

I hear the words “gun culture.” Guns are evil. Yeah it’s the guns, despite the fact firearms even of modern nature have been widely available to the public, but it wasn’t until about 15 years ago mass shootings were an issue. Now the media encourages copy cat crimes in the effort to get rid of guns. Should you be allowed to encourage murder to further your political agenda. Charles Wittman was really the only major mass killer we had in over 200 years until 15 years ago. But it’s the guns that are the problem right? Not the degeneration of society.

And what about open boarders. Really. If I don’t want to compete against foreign nationals who are here illegally I’m a nativist and a racist? It’s all about skin color. And why do we let cost to cost rioting occur without suppressing it with force? Is that not a threat to public safety? Burning down cities?

More authoritarianism is needed. Something has to change. I think we need a new system because this one is not working anymore.

[genericname85]

@Exterminatore well fundamentally, the subordination of the individual to the state is the big aspect that hitlers national socialism shares with Gentiles fascism that is mostly attributed to Moussolini these days for some reason. Loyalty and compliancy were the most important aspects to hitler, as they would have been for a fascist.
Of course that entire racist bullshit ideology of Eugenics is not fascist in nature. that was just his delusional pseudo-science that he utilized to legitimate the mass murder of the jews with.

i can respect when someone calls themself a fascist based on what that term actually means, because i think fundamentally, you're striving to have "the best possible future society to live in", which most people actually want. though i disagree that fascism is a "good solution" for a society to live in. and i base my opinion mostly in the countless examples of that shit going wrong. and neo fascists just like neo socialists will always come up witht he argument that it just didn't work, cause it wasn't "real" socialism or "real" fascism. to which i'll just say: "show me proof that it works".

as to your bullit points, i'd like to make some comments:

1. Socioal conversativism: mostly agree with that.
2. Nationalism: mostly agree cause nationality can be an expression of regional cultoral cohesion.
3. this is in my opinion a direct contradiction to your point 1.
4. well or in other words strong protection of the national borders without offensive war.
5. Fascism can't work without totalitarianism i think. because how else would you make sure that everyone is aligned with the fascist ideology that this state would work with?
6. i don't see how that's necessary for fascism.
7. well sure. but who makes the laws? and who is in charge of taking care of enforcing order?

[Exterminatore]

@holdeem

Ok since you want to run your mouth so much about how fascism is bad, bad, bad - and how I’m dumb, dumb, dumb - tell me what’s bad about it? You don’t know a frigging thing about it. It’s just a word you throw around. Someone in school or college told you it’s bad so you just copy and paste. You even mention Nazism. I bet you don’t even know what Nazi ideology is and that it is completely separate from fascism.

People like you are why I think it’s the answer. In democracy and often in a republic, people like you get a voice and to be heard, but I want to silence that voice. Lest it influence others.

Tolerance. Tolerance says the liberal, which now means approve and accept, not simply live along side, but be separate from. Gender now means the degree of masculinity and femininity a person displays. We have cute new vocabulary like binary. You don’t think changing words meanings is thought control. Or is it you just don’t like overt thought control and prefer to change thoughts subtly.

Are you going to tell me with a straight face women are oppressed in any western county? All while allowing them to be disenfranchised and forced to compete in their own sports against biological men?

Are you going to tell me how Independence Day and memorial
Day are imperialist holidays. Bitch, I been to war twice for this country. I got friends that died fighting for it and were injured fighting for it. What have you ever done for it besides run your mouth while your types of people say my friends died for imperialism?

Are you going to be more concerned with the mating habits of pelicans than having a strong economy?

Go listen to CA governor Gavin Newsome explain how he hates the federal judges reversal of assault weapons and magazines bans…and how when the constitution was written the population was smaller…. so we just don’t need that amendment. Yeah, that fool actually compared population amount to why we should or should not have a particular amendment.

[Exterminatore]

@holdem

But you get on your soap and talk about thought control while you’re people do the same thing and try to carve some amendments out of the constitution they don’t like…. then fear fascism and and talk about book burning while the same people you support politically do the same thing.

Hypocrite!

[Exterminatore]

@Generic

You make some good points. I would hope anyone who chooses any political system is doing so for what they think is the best possible future system.

I’m not so much interested in the control and subordination of people as I am in removing influences that are harmful. For example when have free speech, but what if I use that free speech to intentionally undermine the country and spread ideas that go against it and will aid to its destruction. What good is that? All that is is using the granted freedoms against the country. I take no exception with being able to criticize or petition government. I do take exception to explicitly promoting communism as some of the far leftists do in this country. The term communist is just as abused as fascist, but when what you’re promoting is directly contrary to the countries founding principals…. this seems silly to me.

With #3 we are taking about economic system. I hear criticism of capitalism often. The problem isn’t capitalism it’s coopeeratism. Corporations drive America, which are made up of numerous investors all looking to make a profit. The profits must be spread across many investors encouraging they to make 1 person do the work of 2, pay low wages and crap benefits, and often do illegal and immoral things in order to maximize prophets. If we marry the cooperation to the state we can make it where the industrialist makes a tidy sone, workers are paid fairly and all of society benefits other than the cooperation. So I think take the best of capitalism and best of socialism and mix them into one system, so there is adequate incentive for personal gain, but also fairness and everyone benefits. Social conservatism is quite compatible with this as economics are mostly separate from social policy.

4. Yes. No offensive wars, but wrong defense. I’ll take it a step farther and inject warrior culture. Let’s have a physically fit nation. I’d promote programs like the Boy Scouts and then inject a small amount of military

[Exterminatore]

@Generic

4. Type training into it. Having a nation of warriors is good for national defense, yet also this type of training promotes self discipline, courage, national pride, the building of character through facing challenges.. which is all good for the individual person.

5. I think you are probably right. I don’t think you can have fascism without totalitarianism. So I suppose I am coming up with a hybrid system. A one party system is potentially dangerous, however I also do agree with having alternative parties that are against these principles. So I’d prefer to see a multiparty, all with very similar ideology, but perhaps different ideas to achieve them. Not to mention, fresh leaders often are helpful than the stale old sacred cows who do nothing but enjoy their position. So I want a system in where everyone is leaning in the same general direction. It need not be exactly the same. I want a system that allows for individual expression, but not individuals to exploit. I want a system that allows for most of the individual freedoms we currently have without those freedoms being a fundamental threat to the nation itself.

6. I strongly believe in individual gender rolls. I also do not believe in women being leaders, politicians or voting. We are taking about beings who reason primarily emotionally. And where going to let them be judges, and senators and vice presidents and run the county or influence it via voting. I think this is not good.

7. By law and order, I mean…you riot from coast to coast and steal and assault and commit arson to “get justice” for someone, then we respond by asking you to cease and desist. If you do not, we send out squads and open fire on you and burn your rotting corpses. If you murder, you get hangged…not rehabilitated. If you steal, you don’t go to jail, you get publicly flogged and make restitution for your theft. Harsh justice for the self centered and malicious that don’t mind stealing and harming others.

[Exterminatore]

@Generic

And although I am against murder in any form, I am not against rounding up those who are so demented and think men can become women and putting them in a dormitory for life, where their perverted and foolish ideas can die with them. These people must not and cannot be allowed to influence society through any mode of communication or by word of mouth. They can go there along with the feminists, and SJW’s and BLM people and all the other radical leftists, and most especially communist and ANTIFA. I’d also put the neo Nazis, KKK people and anyone else that holds degenerate and warped views into dormitories. They will have a private room, climate control, showers, medical care, food, and every need of life provided for them and live relatively comfortably, if I had my way. But their ideas can die with them while we fix this mess.

I’d allow a chance at reeducation. The facts about such things and REAL history would be provided. Anyone that can’t figure out truth from fantasy can go away and be cut off from the outside world so they can no longer influence others with their warped fantasies. Most especially the Woke crowd will go with them.

Now all of these ideas of mine, do the fit the fascist mold? Not perfectly by a stretch but it’s the closest name for a political ideology I have to go by.

I want true fairness and true justice for everyone, without a society of degenerates controlling virtually every mode of communication to pervert the weak minded to their views.

[Exterminatore]

I have to correct myself. I hate auto spelling correction. I said earlier I don’t support political incarceration. I meant I do for those on the extreme left.

I find fascism by the way to be a right wing ideology. I think their economic systems tend to fall in between capitalism and socialism, but lean much more towards socialism.

I hold neither is ideal but a blending of the best of both into a hybrid system.

[holdem4884]

@Exterminatore You are a dangerous and demented individual. You've either astonishing uninformed or willfully ignorant of history.

Can you remove totalitarianism from fascism and it still be fascism? No. Can we have a system where there are checks and balances and it still be Fascism? No. Can we have a system called fascism, but slightly refine the freedoms we have so that those freedoms aren’t being used to undermine the country? No.

Firstly, You "want true fairness and true justice for everyone". A utopian, eh? The 20th century shows us how well utopian visions work out.

Secondly, fascism is a political ideology that has been shown to be harmful and oppressive to individuals and society as a whole. Fascism promotes extreme nationalism, authoritarianism, and the suppression of individual rights and freedoms. Its implementation has led to horrific events such as the Holocaust during World War II, which resulted in the genocide of millions of Jews, Romani, LGBTQ+ individuals, people with disabilities, and others who were deemed undesirable by the Nazi regime. Fascism is not a viable option for a modern society that values democracy, freedom, and human rights.

Thirdly, promoting the silencing of individuals or groups with opposing views goes against the fundamental principles of democracy and free speech. It is important to engage in open and honest discourse and to listen to differing opinions, even if they do not align with one's own beliefs. Silencing dissenting voices only serves to limit progress and stifle change.

Fourthly, women still face significant societal and systemic barriers to equality in many Western countries, including pay disparities, gender-based violence, and underrepresentation in positions of power.

[holdem4884]

@Exterminatore

Fifthly, Memorial Day and Independence Day are not imperialist holidays, but rather occasions to honor and remember the sacrifices of those who fought to protect and uphold the values of democracy, freedom, and human rights. However, it is important to acknowledge the complex and often problematic history of the United States and to work towards a more just and equitable society.

Sixthly, the right to bear arms is a constitutional amendment, and its validity is not dependent on population size. However, it is important to have reasonable and responsible gun control measures in place to prevent gun violence and protect public safety.

Seventhly, while it is important to address harmful influences and ideas, it is not the role of the government to dictate individual beliefs and thoughts. A free and open society requires the protection of individual rights and freedoms, including the right to free speech and expression.

Eighthly, a system that prioritizes personal gain over the well-being and fairness of society as a whole is not sustainable or just. The capitalist system, as it currently exists, perpetuates inequality, exploitation, and environmental degradation. A just and equitable economic system would prioritize the well-being of all individuals and the planet.

Ninthly, promoting a "warrior culture" and promoting violence as a solution to problems is not productive or effective. Violence only perpetuates harm and suffering and goes against the values of a just and equitable society.

"A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring."

[Exterminatore]

@holdem

Fascism is oppressive to individuals. Yes. Exactly what I’m interested in. Silencing the left. I don’t want you people having free speech. I don’t want you people telling the rest of society that men and become women, the women and blacks are oppressed. They are not. I don’t want you to be able to say “white people are the oppressors of all other races” that “men are the oppressors of women.” These things and more are outright lies and I don’t want the sociopaths who invented these fanciful tales to be able to influence the thought of the profoundly dumb who hear and believe. I’m not interested in fairness for those that believe and teach this stuff. Those people and their ideas are the problem. “We’re so not racist” in one breath and in the next “white people are the oppressors of all races by their very existence” - so much for following MLK and judging by content of character and not skin color.

Fascism and Nazism are different. No debating this. Nazism was behind the Holocaust not fascism.

Modern society - I’m against modernism/post modernism. I don’t like democracy. It allows fools to have a say. Just like now.

Promoting the silencing of the individual when they say the things I have and have influenced roughly half the country to sign on is exactly what’s necessary. Again, the radical leftists make fascists. With your cancel culture. Gina Carano - conservative. Not on our show she isn’t. You don’t see this as silencing the individual do you? Limiting progress - exactly what I want. To halt the progress to communism.

Women still face significant challenges. This is why women need not vote. You’re all more privileged then men…and cry about oppression. No reason to let all you have a voice since you can’t use it properly.

Right to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Not interested in your sensible gun control. What to discourage violence, start hanging murders and whipping thugs publicly. Watch the crime rate drop.

[holdem4884]

@genericname85 Look at German parliamentary elections and subsequent party representation in 1928, 1930, & 1932. Seats for the parties on the left, Communists and Social Democrats hardly changed. It was the conservative parties of the Weimar Republic that were decimated as their voters elected Nazis.

Socialism was in vogue and the Nazis adopted the slogan. Nevertheless, Nazism is absolutely a far right ideology, among other loathsome illiberal characteristics they promote intense nationalism, xenophobia, and corporatism. That's NOT from the left.

[Exterminatore]

Nobody is more obsessed with race than leftists these days.

Xenophobia - is anyone really afraid of those outside their boarders today? That’s a term that is constant thrown around in respects to illegal immigration. Are those who are against it really all that worried about them being outsiders and their skin color? Or is this a simple matter of economics and security?

Sure the Nazis were xenophobes. No surprise there. Their entire ideology was based on racism.

Intense nationalism - better that than globalism. Not necessarily desirable but still better than hating your own country…for no good reason I might add. I don’t see people fleeing the horrors of America…crossing shark infested oceans on rafts made of plywood and duct tape to get away from here. Yet America is a horribly irredeemable racist nation. W h a t e v e r.

You say loathsome liberal characteristics…. but you voted for Biden didn’t you. I’m not saying Trump was a great guy. I’m saying he was better than us being worried about who uses what bathroom…. meanwhile we’re about to hit the debt ceiling. We’re more concerned about how many genders there are than the out of control inflation.

You just side stepped everting I just said. Doesn’t seem like you want to acknowledge the hypocrisy on the left. Doesn’t seem like you want to acknowledge their racism against whites, their sexism against men, their hatred of traditionalism and traditional Judeo-Christian morality. While they say one thing, then contradict it with the exact opposite.

You don’t seem to think it’s a problem these people have control of all that’s on TV, that they keep repeating the same messages on sit come and tv programs, the news, movie, on the internet, on social media, in songs, on talk radio…. over and over at infinitum.

Then talk about their love for democracy while they label dissenters with cute terms like xenophobe. Anyone who doesn’t accept their doctrines…they will go after these people and try to destroy their lives.

[Exterminatore]

It’s not live and let live with these types, it’s…accept and approve or I beat you up or try to get you fired.

Leftists: I love democracy

Also leftists: let’s go beat that guy up in the MAGA hat

Also leftists: I didn’t like what he said on Facebook, I’m gonna try to get him fired.

Leftists: social justice is important.

Also leftists: I’m gonna steal that guys stuff and burn his business to the ground to get justice for George Floyd. I think stealing is a way to get justice.

Leftists: Kyle Rittenhouse is a Nazi

Also leftists: I don’t like the idea someone might kill me when I try to kill them. Guns are evil. I don’t want someone stopping me from looting and arson.

Leftists: we believe in freedom of speech

Also leftists: let’s go after Ben Stiller for the movie Tropic Thunder

Leftists: racism is wrong

Also leftists: white people are oppressors of every other race by simply existing

Leftists: Religion is antiquated and hateful

Also leftist: I love Muslims

Leftists: I like freedom of speech

Also leftists: I’ll label every dissenting opinion as hate speech

I guess Goebles must have survived the war. Apparently he’s writing all this horse crap for the Democrat party and all these fools are too blind to see the gaslighting.

[exitseven]

These books are not banned. You can find them at Barnes and Noble or the local library. They are not kept in school libraries because the content is deemed inappropriate for kids. This has been done in school districts since the dawn of time.

[msc545]

Deemed inappropriate by who? A politician?

[exitseven]

@msc545 If you can call school boards politicians, yes. This has been going on forever. When I was in grade school no way would there be any gay literature in the library.

[msc545]

What qualifications does one need to be on a school board?

[holdem4884]

"The content is deemed inappropriate for kids"

How about the anti-authoritarinian themes and messages of freedom in "1984" by George Orwell and "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley? Now that shouldn't be known to anyone, especially if they're not an adult.

If you want to raise little racist biogets, you certainly don't want them reading a biography written for children about Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr, or Nelson Mandela. They might get ideas that people who are different from them are okay.

Everyone knows you need to condition obedience from a young age.

[exitseven]

@msc545 Where I live you just need to be over 18 and get enough people to vote for you.

[msc545]

Anyone who thinks they ae qualified to ban books better have a LOT more qualifications than that.

[exitseven]

@msc545 In most cases it is more a function of common sense and decency instead of a bunch of college degrees

[msc545]

Amorphous things like common sense and decency are not going to lead to good decisions in these situations because it seems to me that the people that are deciding to ban books can't even read

[msc545]

The only thing I can think of that is worse than Banning books is actually burning them and I imagine these people will be engaged in that activity very soon

[exitseven]

@msc545 Electing a school committee to decide these matters has been going on for a hundred years If people do not like the job they are doing they can vote them out in the next election. That's how America does it.

[msc545]

Just because something has been done for a long time does not make it proper or desirable or correct.

I don't want uneducated people doing important educational tasks any more than I want them to be teachers. Selecting and evaluating books for school needs to be done by qualified teachers.

[exitseven]

@msc545 So you don;t think parents should have the final word. ?

[msc545]

I do not think so. Being a parent does not make one automatically qualified to review books or to be a teacher or anything else.

[exitseven]

@msc545 Parents are the ones paying the bills so they are the ones who get the final say over what is being taught to their kids. What we really need is school choice. If we had that you would see things change pretty damn quick.

[msc545]

All they pay are taxes if we are talking about public schools, which I assume we are in that I've not read anything about book banning in private schools.

Paying taxes does not entitle a person to become a teacher or librarian or take over those functions without the requisite education and licenses. I pay car registration which is a tax, and that does not allow me to make or enforce traffic laws.

[msc545]

I have no problem with school choice if religious schools are not part of that mix. I do not want any more public funds going to religious institutions than are already now in place.

[exitseven]

@msc545 "All they pay are taxes" They are the taxpayers which means they are the employers. They are the boss of the school system. The town employees and politicians work for them , not the other way around. They ultimately call the shots.

[msc545]

It might be that way but it shouldn't be. Unqualified people have no business telling professionals how to do their jobs, even if they pay them. I have left two contract jobs when people tried to tell me how to practice.

[exitseven]

@msc545 I worked as a K-12 Technology director for a while. My boss, the Superintendent was not a technical person but he often directed me to perform my duties in a way that he felt would better suit the school system and the citizens of the town. I never took it as a sign of disrespect. He always made his reasons very clear and I understood my role in the town.

[msc545]

That's good.

[AviatorTom]

No, "Fahrenheit 451" ... read the book.

[LadiesFavoriteToy]

You mean grooming books that turn boys into women?

[holdem4884]

Nice try: "non-fiction titles including biographies for children of Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr, Duke Ellington and Nelson Mandela were also among those removed from shelves and school curricula."

[LadiesFavoriteToy]

Yeah dont include books that endorse pedophilia by your progressive leftists.

[holdem4884]

@LadiesFavoriteToy An intellectually honest person doesn't include things that don't exist. They aren't "my" progressive leftists. I'm a mixture of conservative and liberal. I think much of the LGBTQ movement is lunacy but I don't react to it irrationally.

You need to employ critical thinking skills to the things people say and investigate. Just because some right wing blowhard trumpets asinine nonesense about a book doesn't make it true.

Please do share with us exactly which of these books that conservatives have banned literally "endorse pedophilia"? What titles? They don't exist. I'm sorry but you're being lied to.

I chose to mention those books intentionally because there is absolutely no justification for removing any of them from ANY library.

It's only being done because conservatives don't want their kids hear what a non-white perspective is like. It raises uncomfortable questions about race. (I'm caucasian but happen to a Christian who isn't a bigot)

[bamesjond0069]

Not having a book in a school library isn't "banning" so basically this is presented by someone who is either very uninformed with no care for facts or is purposely misleading. Those are the only two options. Each negates any reason to take this seriously.

[holdem4884]

Banning refers to the act of prohibiting or restricting access to something or someone.

It's exactly what this is. It's rudimentary logic. You can get banned from a bar but that doesn't imply you're banned from all bars.

[bamesjond0069]

Yes. But it's more an argument that taxpayers should not spend money on these books, nor should they take up space in the library. It's not a "fascist banning" as hinting at things in the past, maybe if teachers went through the kids belongings and burned the books and went to their homes and searched for the books and burned them and through the parents in jail.

So this is not that. To pretend it is, is hysterical.

[holdem4884]

@bamesjond0069 REMOVING books from libraries isn't at all "more an argument that taxpayers should not spend money on these books". That's logically absurd.

[bamesjond0069]

You missed the next sentence... how convenient.

[gorydetails]

I couldn't post some of the books that are banned on this website.

[holdem4884]

I've yet to see references to a book removed here. Let's test your theory. Give me three books you can't mention and let's see if the post gets removed. If it does, I'll let everyone know.

[gorydetails]

I didn’t say references. You’re saying references.. I’m saying you couldn’t post uncensored images of the pages in the book “Gender Queer” (one of the books banned) on this site. And not because this website is suddenly concerned about copyrights.

[holdem4884]

I can't imagine anyone thought that was the intent of your original statement. In what way is "Gender Queer" banned from this site? It cannot be discussed like we're doing now?

When you say you can't post "uncensored images" I can only assume you're referring to nudity. The site is pretty clear on this, try posting a porn link and watch it get removed. That's not a policy specific to this book.

Site rules state you cannot post:

Explicit – These are posts that contain depictions of... sexually explicit details (text, images, videos or links) that are considered poor quality content. Full nudes... are removed as explicit.

[gorydetails]

Yeah, that’s exactly what I meant, you know it and thanks for proving my point. Books are being removed from school libraries that are pornography.

[holdem4884]

I don't know as I haven't read the book, I'd bet you haven't either. At any rate, look at that, we agree explicit sexual imagery isn't appropriate for kids.

However, that's just a smokescreen conservatives are using to maintain a narrow, exclusionary view of the world, and to prevent children from being exposed to ideas and experiences that challenge that view.

[gorydetails]

Lmao, sure. Just like you were upset about the “don’t say gay” bill which turned out to be nothing but more lefties lying.

[holdem4884]

That's a brilliant piece of legislation. Particularly since there is no way to delineate what can and cannot be said. We should use it as a model, eh? But with some tweaks. How about we ban kids from learning anything about caucasions or conservatives, because hey, THAT shit can cause harm. Great f***ing fascist idea

[gorydetails]

If stopping the never ending propaganda that’s influencing countless young girls and boys to mutilate their bodies is fascist, I’ll absolutely be called a fascist.

[Anonymous]

That is one of the ways they attract voters - by keeping them as uneducated as possible.

[holdem4884]

"I love the uneducated" Trump - 2016 Campaign

[Anonymous]

Liberals are re-writing “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.”

🖕