7 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Karl's avatar

I must disagree. Restriction of speech that does not have a nexus with physical violence and is motivated primarily by philosophy or politics is abhorrent, period. That means both the right-wing book-banning/burning and the left-wing speech codes, which often are overreactions to each other. There are plenty of center-left mediums that have noted the excesses of leftist academics, students, and politicians - it's not just an obsession of rightward pundits.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 19, 2022
Comment removed
Expand full comment
rlritt's avatar

That's true. All my Republican friends are quite annoyed with the extremism coming from the right. And my liberal friends, when I ask about canceling Harry Potter or the classics, roll their eyes at such nonsense.

Expand full comment
suzc's avatar

The privately owned bookstores are also wrong. The law USED to say -- perhaps it has gone the way of antitrust and other guardrails -- that a public business, a business open to the PUBLIC, cannot discriminate, cannot impose the personal opinions of its owners. I suppose the Gay Cake Case stopped all that. But the premise remains that if you are open to the public you must be open to all the public; you cannot pick and choose. If you want to be private and impose your private opinions then open a CLUB! So I'm not saying don't stop GOVT from censorship (does that mean there is no longer such a thing as pornography or yelling Fire! in a crowded theatre??), I'm saying stop BOTH from doing it in public forums.

Expand full comment
Liberal Cynic's avatar

The law never said that bookstores have to carry every book. There isn't a bookstore big enough.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 19, 2022
Comment removed
Expand full comment
suzc's avatar

Wow. Twisted AND Confused. I will retire from the fray..... (but I take your point; thanks for the clarification, if not the abuse.)

Expand full comment