Pulitzer Prize Winning Maus Censored By Tennessee School District 6 6

[valiantman]

On 2/1/2022 at 11:31 AM, William-James88 said:

Eeeesh, thanks for that. Though I'm sure the Bible isn't banned and that book is filled with sex, like this awesome passage where God kills a guy for coming on the floor:

Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother's wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother's wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also

A book where a guy is killed isn't a problem for most people.  All kinds of people-killing in books are acceptable to many school boards. If you want the Bible banned, you need to focus on how many big-eyed puppies and kittens drowned in the flood.

Edited February 1, 2022 by valiantman

[namisgr]

On 2/1/2022 at 11:23 AM, october said:

but what really disappoints me is the outsized media attention they get. Plays right into their hands and it's why deplatforming scum like this is so important. 

This.  Deplatforming, because there's a distinction between censorship and limiting attention.  Freedom of speech is not freedom of reach.

 

Edited February 1, 2022 by namisgr

[William-James88]

On 2/1/2022 at 12:40 PM, valiantman said:

Killing a guy isn't a problem for most people.  All kinds of people-killing is acceptable to many school boards. If you want the Bible banned, you need to focus on how many puppies and kittens died in the flood.

HAHAHA

Joking aside, I was focusing more about the sex and description of ejaculate than I was the killing. The bible has lots of juicy fun stuff. I also like this bit (which is just fun, nothing people would ban) about how Low Blows are not cool bro!

 If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts,  you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity. - Deuteronomy 25:11-12

[sfcityduck]

On 1/31/2022 at 6:03 PM, valiantman said:

This isn't for graphic novels or historical fiction... this is the current ranking for ALL BOOKS on Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/ref=pd_zg_ts_books

(#1 is a new release from the past week)

The best revenge:

 

 

[october]

On 2/1/2022 at 10:59 AM, JJ-4 said:

Totally agree that there are a bunch of crazy/nutcases in all walks of society.  I think we should push back with facts and expose people but in my opinion de-platforming people is never the answer.  First they will say that their crazy idea is some how real and dark forces are aligned against them and people will believe them since they have been driven underground.  Best way to expose bad ideas are to shine a light on them and discuss, are we really scared that flat earth folks will somehow prevail when they debate on the facts?  Second, the problem is that there is no way to operationalize and give someone the ability to shut down others.  It's too important to free speech, I don't trust anyone with that much power.  Even with the best intentions eventually every bad actor wouldn't want the power to silence the other side regardless of who, one political party, another government, the military, the media.  Because they would all want that power and we should never trust it to someone.  People would be afraid to talk about important things for fear of being silenced, it would be a huge mistake. 

I was specifically talking about social media, which is the primary recruiting engine for people like this. Free speech isn't implicated, since Facebook et al are private companies and not government entities. Constitutional protection applies to infringement by the latter, not the former.

The people who join causes like this aren't going to be swayed by rational argument. Do you really think balanced, factual debate can sway someone advocating for a race war? Or a pogrom? There's a limit to what ideas merit discourse, and as much as I want a free exchange of ideas, literal Nazism is well beyond the pale (ironic use of that idiom notwithstanding).

[MetalPSI]

On 2/1/2022 at 10:49 AM, sfcityduck said:

The best revenge:

 

 

Next step should be to give a copy to every student in the school

[sfcityduck]

On 1/31/2022 at 6:03 PM, valiantman said:

This isn't for graphic novels or historical fiction... this is the current ranking for ALL BOOKS on Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/ref=pd_zg_ts_books

(#1 is a new release from the past week)

One personal aside, the author of that No. 1 book is one of my old college debate opponent's Peter Schweizer (at the time he was at Pacific Lutheran University).  One of the funniest book reviews I ever saw was of one of his books in the journal Foreign Policy.  It stated, in full:

 

Quote

 

Peter Schweizer, author of a previous book on industrial espionage, assigns credit for victory in the Cold War to CIA Director William Casey, Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Reagan himself. In Schweizer's opinion these three rejected the view of every president from Truman to Carter (that sooner or later the Soviet Union would implode if it were contained) and acted on the assumption that the system was vulnerable to military, economic and covert pressure in its satellite nations and its heart.

The activist policy of the Reagan administration worked brilliantly, according to Schweizer, and helped cause the demise of the Soviet Union. Actually, there is a great deal more to the Soviet collapse than Schweizer recognizes, and in any case it is difficult to take seriously a book as badly written as this one. Schweizer puts words into peoples' mouths and thoughts into their minds; he makes up quotes (and attempts to get away with it by using personal pronouns and present tense but without quotation marks; it is really quite shocking that his editor let such usages stand). He has singular verbs with plural nouns, and vice versa. There are three cliches per page, sometimes per paragraph. The book is consistently redundant and badly out of balance. Not recommended, even for the staunchest Reagan supporter.

 

That must have hurt!  I would not recommend his "No. 1" book, as it probably only got that status because he bought a bunch of copies himself to give out.  LoL!

[NoMan]

which is better to buy for reading purposes: the paperback or hardback?

[VintageComics]

Call it limiting freedom of reach, freedom of speech or whatever but the phenomenon of cancelling things is being driven by people who think it's better to shield people from information than it is to expose them to it. The intent is the most important part of any situation when judging it. 

The entire phenomenon of counter culture comes from people rebelling against this sort of thing. If you want to limit the misinformation, you can't dictate what people can and can't see. If you want people to stop believing in flat earth theory, forcing them to stop somehow will have the opposite effect. 

I always bring it around to children. The more you hide from them the harder they are going to push to do what you don't want them to do.

That's just nature and it can't be stopped. It always finds a way.

 

[Robot Man]

On 2/1/2022 at 11:05 AM, VintageComics said:

Call it limiting freedom of reach, freedom of speech or whatever but the phenomenon of cancelling things is being driven by people who think it's better to shield people from information than it is to expose them to it. The intent is the most important part of any situation when judging it. 

The entire phenomenon of counter culture comes from people rebelling against this sort of thing. If you want to limit the misinformation, you can't dictate what people can and can't see. If you want people to stop believing in flat earth theory, forcing them to stop somehow will have the opposite effect. 

I always bring it around to children. The more you hide from them the harder they are going to push to do what you don't want them to do.

That's just nature and it can't be stopped. It always finds a way.

 

Correct. That is why I let my kids wear what they wanted, listen to whatever music they wanted and play video games ect. I knew they would push it and do it behind my back anyway.

I raised them to be good, smart and think for themselves using common sense and a firm belief between right and wrong. Although a bit awkward and hard, I always told them the truth.  And when they got caught, there was hell to pay.

They grew up to be good human beings. Hard working, responsible and considerate of others. I am very proud of them. Too bad all parents didn’t or don’t do the same. 

 

[JJ-4]

On 2/1/2022 at 10:58 AM, october said:

I was specifically talking about social media, which is the primary recruiting engine for people like this. Free speech isn't implicated, since Facebook et al are private companies and not government entities. Constitutional protection applies to infringement by the latter, not the former.

The people who join causes like this aren't going to be swayed by rational argument. Do you really think balanced, factual debate can sway someone advocating for a race war? Or a pogrom? There's a limit to what ideas merit discourse, and as much as I want a free exchange of ideas, literal Nazism is well beyond the pale (ironic use of that idiom notwithstanding).

Sorry, I'm always going to side with free speech regardless of platform (Facebook, Comic book message board, the local bar you drink at).  The cure for bad ideas are good ideas discussed openly and honestly, not acting like a dictator and wanting someone shut down / silenced / de-platformed.

 

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Evelyn Beatrice Hall

[jcjames]

This applies to all sides who have the power.

 

[VintageComics]

On 2/1/2022 at 2:29 PM, Calling All Monsters said:

They'll think the Earth is flatter than they did before?

The only way to disprove a bad idea is with more ideas. Yeah, I just made that up. 

On 2/1/2022 at 3:15 PM, JJ-4 said:

Sorry, I'm always going to side with free speech regardless of platform (Facebook, Comic book message board, the local bar you drink at).  The cure for bad ideas are good ideas discussed openly and honestly, not acting like a dictator and wanting someone shut down / silenced / de-platformed.

 

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Evelyn Beatrice Hall

Agreed. 

As we have seen in the past year or two, social media platforms decided through advice from authorities to absolutely censor and destroy any sort of online chatter about some concepts. 

Well, now they're not. Why?

Because they are worried about liability issues as it not only turns out those authorities were WRONG they or someone along the way may have been falsifying information. Who watches the Watchmen?

There really is NEVER a good reason for censorship for grown adults as at some point one side will ALWAYS, NECESSARILY lean towards corruptions. We've learned this through history repeating it endlessly.

The only way to keep a balance is to allow a proper entanglement and a proper opposition to form so that the conversation can be moved forward towards more understanding.

More education is always the answer. Less education never is. 

[Lazyboy]

On 2/1/2022 at 2:15 PM, JJ-4 said:

The cure for bad ideas are good ideas discussed openly and honestly

If only that were still true.

[VintageComics]

On 2/1/2022 at 8:02 PM, Lazyboy said:

If only that were still true.

The cure is always true to be better ideas. The honesty part is the difficult part. So many people are so disingenuous and charged in one direction it's nearly impossible to break through. 

[october]

On 2/1/2022 at 7:02 PM, VintageComics said:

 

The only way to keep a balance is to allow a proper entanglement and a proper opposition to form so that the conversation can be moved forward towards more understanding.

More education is always the answer. Less education never is. 

For someone who is as vociferously anti social media as you are in other threads, you take a surprisingly sanguine view here. Proceeding from the premise that Facebook (or whatever platform) functions as some grand marketplace of ideas in the Athenian tradition, where "good" ideas triumph over "bad ideas", is tragically flawed. Facebook isn't some virtual agora, it's a walkie-talkie used to directly connect every formerly isolated town crazy with other town crazies. It's a black hole of an echo chamber where people like those in the video can fall into and never emerge. This is an algorithmic reality. "User engagement" is achieved not by presenting conflicting views, but by reinforcing existing ones. It doesn't foster discourse, it does the opposite. It's the main driver for current extremism...and that's not an accident. 

Social media is nothing but a rock these people hide under, together.

[Randall Dowling]

On 2/1/2022 at 11:58 AM, october said:

There's a limit to what ideas merit discourse, and as much as I want a free exchange of ideas, literal Nazism is well beyond the pale (ironic use of that idiom notwithstanding).

Completely agree.  I personally think there's a high level of naivety among those that don't get this.  There have always been limits on free speech (fire in a theater, etc.).  But there are some things that should not be supported, encouraged or frankly allowed.  Pedophilia comes to mind as an example.  Does anyone really think there should be a place for people to discuss that?  

If your answer is yes, I really don't want to know you.

[VintageComics]

On 2/1/2022 at 9:20 PM, october said:

For someone who is as vociferously anti social media as you are in other threads, you take a surprisingly sanguine view here.

I'm not against social media. I'm against kids being addicted to it, against the lack of transparency (they should have warning labels the way tobacco does) and I'm against them using SM as an information vacuum.

On 2/1/2022 at 9:20 PM, october said:

This is an algorithmic reality.

I'm well aware. 

On 2/1/2022 at 9:20 PM, october said:

"User engagement" is achieved not by presenting conflicting views, but by reinforcing existing ones. It doesn't foster discourse, it does the opposite. It's the main driver for current extremism...and that's not an accident. 

So you're saying that Facebook is guilty of creating the monster because they did it for profit? 

 

Yup. They could have built it differently, but they didn't. Hold them accountable. 

[VintageComics]

I think the word 'reasonable' should be used here when talking about open entanglement. How to build a pipe bomb is not a good instructional video to have on SM. How to be a good Nazi is probably not a good topic. I don't think ANYONE will argue those are not reasonable. 

But I also think the solution is not so much to keep limiting content as it is to build a society that is more communal, and that sort of thing happens from having cheaper education, better education, higher living standards and more involved parents. 

Northern European societies seem to excel in this in ways that most of the West doesn't so the rest of the West uses censorship as a short cut.

The West seems to always be bent on 'the short game' rather than 'the long game'

That's probably the main root problem. 

[october]

On 2/1/2022 at 8:31 PM, VintageComics said:

So you're saying that Facebook is guilty of creating the monster because they did it for profit? 

 

Yup. They could have built it differently, but they didn't. Hold them accountable. 

Not at all, but they made it far worse by giving these people a dirty little virtual basement where they can amp up the rhetoric, sharpen their knives, and goad the weakest among them to do some pretty horrible things. 

Sure. I'll pencil "hold mutibilliondollar international corporation accountable for their transgressions against society" in at 9 am tomorrow, right after I drop my kid off at kindergarten, but BEFORE I have my morning caffeine.  

Edited February 2, 2022 by october