Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on February 24, 2016, 11:33:02 AM
-
I was reading an article this morning about our current "offended society". The author quoted some passages from "Fahrenheit 451". It's been at least thirty years since I read the book. I need to reread it again. I would have never guessed three decades ago that it would be such a prescient work.
“You must understand that our civilization is so vast that we can’t have our minorities upset and stirred. Ask yourself, What do we want in this country above all? People want to be happy, isn’t that right?…Colored people don’t like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don’t feel good about Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Burn it. Someone’s written a book on tobacco and cancer of the lungs? The cigarette people are weeping? Burn the book. Serenity, Montag. Peace, Montag. Take your fight outside. Better yet, to the incinerator.”
And regarding "minorities", I agree with the article's author about what Bradbury meant:
And before you get offended, let’s clarify what Bradbury means by minorities. He’s not talking about race. He’s talking about it in the same way that Madison and Hamilton did in the Federalist Papers. He’s speaking about small, interested groups who try to force the rest of the majority to adhere to the minority’s set of beliefs.
-
Almost picked that book up for my son a week or so ago. He was looking for a book to read, and ran out of whatever current young adult series he was reading, so I picked him up 'Alas Babylon.'
But yeah, I have noticed the ramped up efforts of censorship by the left on twitter and other places.
-
It's been at least thirty years since I read the book. I need to reread it again.
Well, you could always just read the Cliff Notes. They're roughly as long as the actual book.
Seems ironic that Cliff Notes even exist for that particular book, too. I'm waiting for "Harrison Bergeron For Dummies" to hit the shelves.
-
I had an English professor who once pointed out that fiction has a somewhat creepy tendency to foreshadow the future, but you usually don't see it until decades after the fact.
Well, you could always just read the Cliff Notes. They're roughly as long as the actual book.
Seems ironic that Cliff Notes even exist for that particular book, too. I'm waiting for "Harrison Bergeron For Dummies" to hit the shelves.
Text of "Harrison Bergeron For Dummies" :
Forcing people to be "equal" is BAD. mmmmKay?
the end
-
Seems ironic that Cliff Notes even exist for that particular book, too. I'm waiting for "Harrison Bergeron For Dummies" to hit the shelves.
Isn't that the DNC platform?
-
Isn't that the DNC platform?
No. The DNC platform is the "How too" version.
-
Well, you could always just read the Cliff Notes. They're roughly as long as the actual book.
Seems ironic that Cliff Notes even exist for that particular book, too. I'm waiting for "Harrison Bergeron For Dummies" to hit the shelves.
"Harrison Bergeron" is the Cliffs Notes for "Equality: The Impossible Quest," by Martin Van Creveld.
-
Almost picked that book up for my son a week or so ago. He was looking for a book to read, and ran out of whatever current young adult series he was reading, so I picked him up 'Alas Babylon.'
But yeah, I have noticed the ramped up efforts of censorship by the left on twitter and other places.
Censorship from right and left.
-
Censorship from right and left.
Censorship from the right? Examples?
-
But yeah, I have noticed the ramped up efforts of censorship by the left on twitter and other places.
Yeah, apparently Twitter is quite out of control right now with the right leaning / conservative censuring and banning. Between that and their stock nosediving, I have to wonder how long they'll still be around, at least in their present form. The part of their community screaming for censure of opposing views is very vocal, but I'm guessing SJWs are a fairly small segment of the Twitter population.
-
Censorship from the right? Examples?
Censorship from the right is a meme with zero backing that just won't die.
-
Doesn't the right have an anti-obscenity thing going on, and try to stop porn and strip clubs?
-
Yeah, there's a subset of the Rs that is not fond of the masturbation industry at all.
-
Doesn't the right have an anti-obscenity thing going on, and try to stop porn and strip clubs?
??? I haven't seen much of it lately. Not sure that counts as censorship, of course.
-
Censorship from the right? Examples?
Books from public schools; teaching sex ed, masterbation as alternative to sex, use of birthcontrol; talking about gay marriage; probably more but this what I can think of off the top of my head.
-
??? I haven't seen much of it lately. Not sure that counts as censorship, of course.
Left probably feels the same way about the items we feel are being censored about.
-
Books from public schools; teaching sex ed, masterbation as alternative to sex, use of birthcontrol; talking about gay marriage; probably more but this what I can think of off the top of my head.
Thats true... along with trying to censor library computers from porn, plus the right doesn't like kiddie porn either....
-
Being against exposing minors to images, concepts and (im)moralities contrary to their families values is not censorship as in F451.
-
plus the right doesn't like kiddie porn either....
I think most of the left would also agree
-
I don't know why I didn't post it in the OP, but here is the URL to the article:
http://observer.com/2015/09/the-real-reason-we-need-to-stop-trying-to-protect-everyones-feelings/
-
Being against exposing minors to images, concepts and (im)moralities contrary to their families values is not censorship as in F451.
Thank you.
-
Being against exposing minors to images, concepts and (im)moralities contrary to their families values is not censorship as in F451.
The education of my child(ren) is my responsibility, not the state's...
-
The education of my child(ren) is my responsibility, not the state's...
But, but, but who is going toindoctrinate teach them about the health and emotional benefits of sweaty man on man sex? That kind of responsibility can't be allowed in the realm of the individual, its too important to the hive.
-
Books from public schools; teaching sex ed, masterbation as alternative to sex, use of birthcontrol; talking about gay marriage; probably more but this what I can think of off the top of my head.
I can't tell if you're talking only about public schools/libraries, or if you're claiming the right wants to censor, say, privately-run websites. If the former, you're talking about .gov censoring itself. I'm not sure that is a thing.
The education of my child(ren) is my responsibility, not the state's...
Folks could take that a couple of different ways. ???
-
I can't tell if you're talking only about public schools/libraries, or if you're claiming the right wants to censor, say, privately-run websites. If the former, you're talking about .gov censoring itself. I'm not sure that is a thing.
Public Schools and Libraries is what I am referring too. Websites can reject material but not people, i.e. Facebook can prohibit gun sales, but can't ban Baptists. A bakery can prohibit carrying a firearm on premises but can't ban gay people, yes it is a private business but the are open to the public.
Parents have a choice to send their kids to public schools or private or homeschool. If parents are really worried about protecting their kids from "immoral" things, they would never let them ride the school bus or play unsupervised with their peers.
-
Interestingly, as more conservatives are banned from Twitter, Twitchy has linked to the Twitter "report abuse" form. It includes, "in disagreement with my opinion".
https://support.twitter.com/forms/abusiveuser
-
I watched the movie, really need to read the book.
-
I watched the movie, really need to read the book.
The movie stinks compared to the book.
-
Public Schools and Libraries is what I am referring too. Websites can reject material but not people, i.e. Facebook can prohibit gun sales, but can't ban Baptists. A bakery can prohibit carrying a firearm on premises but can't ban gay people, yes it is a private business but the are open to the public.
I don't understand how that relates to censorship. Are you saying that it's OK for libraries and schools to reject material? Would you consider that censorship?
Parents have a choice to send their kids to public schools or private or homeschool.
You could justify anything that way. "Don't like your kids being converted to snake-handling Presbyterianism in the public schools? You have a choice of private or home-school."
If parents are really worried about protecting their kids from "immoral" things, they would never let them ride the school bus or play unsupervised with their peers.
Not a good argument to make. They might get insulted or slapped by the kids on the bus, or have their lunch money stolen, but that doesn't mean you want those things to be school policy.
-
Books from public schools; teaching sex ed, masterbation as alternative to sex, use of birthcontrol; talking about gay marriage; probably more but this what I can think of off the top of my head.
BUT... BUTBUTBUTBUTBUT...
THAT'S NOT CENSORSHIP! THAT'S PROTECTING THE CHILLRUNS! WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILLRUNS???
-
Ridicule often trumps reason, so well-played.
The fact that government doesn't give you whatever you want does not equal censorship.
-
No, what he's saying is that the right wing parents groups have a rather long history of objecting to books in schools and local libraries, which is no different than the left's actions.
-
Ridicule often trumps reason, so well-played.
That's actually how some of the right-leaning banning groups have couched their arguments against some of the materials that Charby mentioned. It's "inappropriate" to expose them to such tawdry subjects; it will warp their minds and turn them in to cereal killers (TAKE THAT, Frosted Flakes!)
-
You're saying that if government doesn't give you whatever you want, then it's censorship. That's the exact same argument leftists use when they claim that insurance companies or employers are "blocking access" to some forms of health care. "They won't give me whatever I want. Therefore, they are blocking my access."
Real censorship means that someone's actually repressing a certain point of view.
-
If I, as the parent of my children, refuse to allow my children to view material I find offensive or inappropriate, that is my prerogative and right as a parent.
-
That's actually how some of the right-leaning banning groups have couched their arguments against some of the materials that Charby mentioned. It's "inappropriate" to expose them to such tawdry subjects; it will warp their minds and turn them in to cereal killers (TAKE THAT, Frosted Flakes!)
A group like that went after my middle school library over Goosebumps. I *expletive deleted*it you not, Goosebumps (the RL Stein series of books)
It is your right as a parent to limit what your kid is exposed to (if you can) However, you don't get to dictact to other parents. As far as public libraries go, the way I see it, either we can have all books or no books. You pick it. But this picking and choosing based on what's "appropriate" isn't going to work.
-
A group like that went after my middle school library over Goosebumps. I *expletive deleted*it you not, Goosebumps (the RL Stein series of books)
It is your right as a parent to limit what your kid is exposed to (if you can) However, you don't get to dictact to other parents. As far as public libraries go, the way I see it, either we can have all books or no books. You pick it. But this picking and choosing based on what's "appropriate" isn't going to work.
Two different animals. Public library can and should have all books. A school library, is under the purview of the elected school board and as such is answerable to the parents of said children. The parents have a right to determine the content of such library. And yes, refusing to allow the school library to carry Goosebumps is stupid. However, the parents still get to determine whether or not the books should be in the school.
-
Two different animals. Public library can and should have all books. A school library, is under the purview of the elected school board and as such is answerable to the parents of said children. The parents have a right to determine the content of such library. And yes, refusing to allow the school library to carry Goosebumps is stupid. However, the parents still get to determine whether or not the books should be in the school.
The thing is which parents are getting the choice? The group who went after Goosebumps failed most miserably and spent the rest of the year bitching and moaning about how horrible it was that their precious snowflakes where being exposed to the works of the devil. They kept trying to take it to the next level and get some sort of special consideration due to religion.
What's more, I'm pretty sure the lot of them had never read a Goosebumps book at all. In fact, the majority of my peers parents were not particularly well read.
How about instead of having parents choose, let's just have the library stocked with whatever the librarian can get their hands on that is within the designated reading levels?
The thing I don't understand about all this concern about children being exposed to stuff you don't like is... Well, if you're a good parent, your kid will stick with your ideals and morals, right?
I mean, for pete sake, I went to a school in a liberal county during the height of the Clinton years and I promise you, I never once came home and told my Dad "you are wrong, guns are evil and they all need to go!!"
-
Two different animals. Public library can and should have all books.
As far as public libraries go, the way I see it, either we can have all books or no books. You pick it. But this picking and choosing based on what's "appropriate" isn't going to work.
No, it works, and it makes sense. So long as the government is going to be involved in educating children, or at least loaning them reading material, parents will have to have a say in it. The parents who tried to ban GersBerms had to convince others to go along with them, and they failed. Anyone who tries to ban the Bible would have to do the same.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.kym-cdn.com%2Fentries%2Ficons%2Foriginal%2F000%2F009%2F479%2FGERSBERMS.%2520BERST%2520BERKS%2520EVARH_e7cb73_3456208.jpg&hash=2f5d1d36a75906c8df82ba53af203206a568893b)
-
Two different animals. Public library can and should have all books. A school library, is under the purview of the elected school board and as such is answerable to the parents of said children. The parents have a right to determine the content of such library. And yes, refusing to allow the school library to carry Goosebumps is stupid. However, the parents still get to determine whether or not the books should be in the school.
Why do only the parents get a say?
I am constantly told (albeit mostly by leftists, but not exclusively) that it is in my, and Society's best interest to have well educated kids coming out of HS ready to be a contributing member of society. I am certainly made to pay for a portion of those school libraries. If it's my interest to see the kids be well educated, and I am [partially] paying for it why do I not get at least equal say as every other taxpayer?
Sure, it's your right to raise your kids as you see fit, with the morals, mores, religions, and what not that you think are important. Until you force me to finance it. Then I get a say. And I say they get to read Hienlein. (all of it. even the later stuff like The Cat Who Walks Through Walls. Good luck with THAT conversation.)
Fistful, all my personal experience in right wing censorship is 25 or so years out of date, and I was young so details are sketchy, but I have seen right wing groups push through laws that made information flat illegal in a small town. (Porn mostly) Since the First amendment and Larry Flint exist, it was mostly done with zoning and creative enforcement of decency laws. But using the power of government to completely ban ideas or expression from an entire community fits, I think, the definition of censorship. Clearly, with the advent of the internet that is much more difficult to do.
The movie stinks compared to the book.
As close to a universal truism as exists.
-
I don't understand how that relates to censorship. Are you saying that it's OK for libraries and schools to reject material? Would you consider that censorship?
If something was banned because it offended a small minority of religious and was counter to the social norms, yes. The last I remember was 6-7 years ago a subset of a E-free church trying to get Harry Potter books removed from the public school library.
You could justify anything that way. "Don't like your kids being converted to snake-handling Presbyterianism in the public schools? You have a choice of private or home-school."
Beauty of living in the USA, don't have to worry about a church taking over a public school.
Not a good argument to make. They might get insulted or slapped by the kids on the bus, or have their lunch money stolen, but that doesn't mean you want those things to be school policy.
I learned more about sex, drugs and rock-n-roll on the school bus, then I ever did in sex ed at the Catholic School I attended. Passing around Hustler magazines was a daily occurrence by 4th grade on the bus.
-
I learned more about sex, drugs and rock-n-roll on the school bus, then I ever did in sex ed at the Catholic School I attended. Passing around Hustler magazines was a daily occurrence by 4th grade on the bus.
And this would be the biggest reason why certain subjects should to be taught early and factually. It's not the adults you have to worry about. It's the other kids.
Growing up, there were a number of lightbulb moments when I realized that what I had "learned" from my peers was WAY off... and considering some of the ignorant crap that I overheard up into collage, well, I see the statistics on teenage pregnancy and STDs and I'm surprised it's not more.
-
If something was banned because it offended a small minority of religious and was counter to the social norms, yes. The last I remember was 6-7 years ago a subset of a E-free church trying to get Harry Potter books removed from the public school library.
Which can't be censorship, as they aren't keeping anyone from buying or reading or selling the material. They are only trying to keep their tax money from being used to disseminate it, in the same way that atheists have tried similar things from their own perspective.
I learned more about sex, drugs and rock-n-roll on the school bus, then I ever did in sex ed at the Catholic School I attended. Passing around Hustler magazines was a daily occurrence by 4th grade on the bus.
Are you just sharing, or are you trying to recycle the same argument I already gutted, stuffed, and mounted above my fireplace? :P
Beauty of living in the USA, don't have to worry about a church taking over a public school.
With the state they're in these days, they should be so lucky. But you said the right was doing all sorts of censorshippy stuff. ???
Fistful, all my personal experience in right wing censorship is 25 or so years out of date, and I was young so details are sketchy, but I have seen right wing groups push through laws that made information flat illegal in a small town. (Porn mostly) Since the First amendment and Larry Flint exist, it was mostly done with zoning and creative enforcement of decency laws. But using the power of government to completely ban ideas or expression from an entire community fits, I think, the definition of censorship. Clearly, with the advent of the internet that is much more difficult to do.
Yeah, like I said, I haven't heard about that kind of thing lately. I know a guy who used to do that sort of thing back in Illinois, but that was decades ago, and he's not even trying to do that stuff anymore. I think you're probably correct that the internet makes it less of an issue these days.
-
All kids really need is the bible. It will teach them about the importance of low taxes, balanced budgets, and refraining from destroying the poor through handouts.
If more kids were raised on the bible we just might have achieved paradise by now. Jesus couldn't have been clearer in explaining how important it is to be wealthy, and our kids learning about that would no doubt set us on the right track
-
Are you just sharing, or are you trying to recycle the same argument I already gutted, stuffed, and mounted above my fireplace? :P
You talked about kids getting slapped around and lunch money taken; I talked about you learn the facts of life on a school bus. So trying to ban from schools what people fell that is inappropriate for kids their precious snowflake to learn about, well they are going to learn it about elsewhere and as Liz mentioned, and usually very incorrect knowledge, that could cause other problems.
-
Which can't be censorship, as they aren't keeping anyone from buying or reading or selling the material. They are only trying to keep their tax money from being used to disseminate it, in the same way that atheists have tried similar things from their own perspective.
About taxes? No it is about control, just like the antigun movement is. If I don't like it, no one should be able to like it. If I don't think my children should see it in school, then no one's children should be able to see it.
"Censorship: the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts."
-
"Censorship: the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLlTlYfqQV4
-
About taxes? No it is about control, just like the antigun movement is. If I don't like it, no one should be able to like it. If I don't think my children should see it in school, then no one's children should be able to see it.
"Censorship: the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts."
Kind of like removing the Bible and references to the role of Christianity and Christian thought in the formation of our country.
-
I learned more about sex, drugs and rock-n-roll on the school bus, then I ever did in sex ed at the Catholic School I attended. Passing around Hustler magazines was a daily occurrence by 4th grade on the bus.
The only thing ya learn from porn is that tab "A" goes in... ANYWHERE and that YOU are woefully underdeveloped!
-
Kind of like removing the Bible and references to the role of Christianity and Christian thought in the formation of our country.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/02/living/america-christian-nation/
-
All kids really need is the bible. It will teach them about the importance of low taxes, balanced budgets, and refraining from destroying the poor through handouts.
If more kids were raised on the bible we just might have achieved paradise by now. Jesus couldn't have been clearer in explaining how important it is to be wealthy, and our kids learning about that would no doubt set us on the right track
:P
-
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/02/living/america-christian-nation/
You are going to post an article to CNN to prove your point to a man in his 50's who was a history major, who has spent most of his adult life reading history, political science, philosophy and theology for fun?
Who in this thread said America was founded as a Christian nation? You are setting up a straw man. All you are doing is regurgitating propaganda designed to ease your conscious over your antipathy toward Christianity.
Having said that, our founders actually believed in truth, that reality could be known and discovered. They believed in inalienable rights and natural law as something that existed and could be discovered. Enlightenment thought is much closer to where I'm at than where modern society is at philosophically (some tangent off of post modernism).
Considering that enlightenment thought was based upon an understanding of Aquinas and a whole host of other Christian thinkers as well as the Greek classics the very idea of contrasting them as being as oppositional as this article does is basically revisionist propaganda ignoring the full continuum of thought at the time.
Our founders were very very much "cultural Christians", it was the water they swam in and took for granted.
By the way, separation of church and state is as much a new world Christian idea as it is enlightenment. Try reading up on Roger Williams a bit and his influence on the founders.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/god-government-and-roger-williams-big-idea-6291280/?no-ist
-
About taxes? No it is about control, just like the antigun movement is. If I don't like it, no one should be able to like it. If I don't think my children should see it in school, then no one's children should be able to see it.
"Censorship: the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts."
By that logic, if an EBT card can't be used to buy cigarettes, cigarettes are being "suppressed." People are not being allowed to "like them." The folks in Bradbury's novel destroyed books so that no one could read them. Had the firemen simply refused to provide books, free of charge, it would be an awfully mediocre work.
Your analogy to the anti-gun movement perfectly explains the flaw in your reasoning. If they were after the sort of "control" you're talking about, I could buy a silenced machine gun at the corner store. I just wouldn't be able to check it out from the public library.
-
All kids really need is the bible. It will teach them about the importance of low taxes, balanced budgets, and refraining from destroying the poor through handouts.
If more kids were raised on the bible we just might have achieved paradise by now. Jesus couldn't have been clearer in explaining how important it is to be wealthy, and our kids learning about that would no doubt set us on the right track
True. The Bible has a lot to say about the dangers of intrusive government, the importance of hard work and money management; and that Christians must be self-reliant, and be charitable w/o simply enabling sloth. It turns out that if you actually read the Bible, you find a great deal of practical wisdom relevant to our everyday lives.
Good comment, De Selby.