“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” This, First Amendment to the US Constitution was prompted by the British censorship of colonial printers.
In brief, it forbids censorship which means the, “suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.” Even so, censorship remains a constant threat.
After its passage, in 1798 and again in 1917, Congress passed so-called “Sedition Acts” that punished certain speech in wartime. Similarly, the Smith Act of 1940 still prohibits the forceful overthrow of either U.S. or state government, but even “advocating” for such overthrow. The Supreme Court, has since ruled the “advocating” part unconstitutional.
In lead-up to the Civil War, we saw a new form of censorship. When abolitionists used the US Mail for a pamphlet campaign aimed at swaying southern citizens against slavery, pro-slavery groups pressured the Postmaster General to block delivery of these materials.
The sedition acts punished unfavored speech after the fact. By contrast, pamphlet censorship prevented certain speech altogether. It was far more insidious than the former.
The threat of punishment may discourage speech, but it cannot muzzle it. Those with courage to speak out can still do so and defend themselves in court. But censorship that prevents certain words from being heard is impossible to counter. A courageous speaker is simply de-platformed. He can speak but cannot be heard. Meanwhile the audience has no way of knowing either what they have not heard or that they have not been allowed to hear it.
Free speech is vital to human thriving because human beings are not ruled by our instincts, we are ruled by our reason. We are designed to speak and hear, think and reason. And how we think has a direct bearing on our wellbeing.
Wrong thinking causes misery. Right thinking causes us to thrive. While wrong information can lead to false thinking and misery, it doesn’t always. But the inability to get the right information will most certainly do so.
That’s why the First Amendment allows for all speech—even wrong speech—to make sure that the truth cannot be silenced. The censorship of right information is a greater threat than the dissemination of false information.
The American Library Association (ALA) collaborates annually with the American Book Sellers Association and the National Association of College Stores to oppose the suppression of certain books. Since 1982 they have used Banned Books Week to oppose censorship of this kind.
The ALA is so afraid of censorship that it even opposes parents and who would like the library to protects children from the pervasive sexualizing of our culture. Its recent annual conference included workshops on how to circumvent guidance from library patrons on what they would like to see promoted.
Meanwhile, the ALA website that promotes Banned Books Week is utterly silent on the most powerful form of censorship that the world has ever seen. Amazon.com, the world’s largest retailer of books, started banning books with specific content in March of 2017.
They began with “revisionist histories.” Then, early this year, banned white nationalist authors. In March 2019, Amazon banned a book by Tommy Robinson, a popular British speaker. Shortly after that, it censored books that questioned vaccinations. Most recently, Amazon banned all books written by Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, a psychologist who has written books on how to help people struggling against unwanted same-sex attraction.
Notice the pattern. The first books banned were written by fringe authors who taught a version of history rejected by almost everyone. Then, nearly two years passed to let customer get used to censorship.
With this groundwork laid, Amazon started banning more views. They began with the more fringe and gradually encroached on wider and wider audiences. The most recent victim was a respected psychologist who has died and is unable to defend his name. Who will be next? Where will it end?
You may disagree with every author banned by Amazon. Still, every American should be concerned. If Amazon considers banned books harmful, why has it continued to use the First Amendment in defense of books promoting pedophilia and violence? While the Constitution allows falsehoods to be spoken so that truth is not accidentally silenced, Amazon bans acknowledged truth while ensuring that falsehood is promoted.
If the ALA is serious about fighting censorship, it should publicize and criticize Amazon’s book-banning at least as much as it criticizes parents who are concerned to keeps the library safe for their children. As long as the ALA remains silent on Amazon’s book-banning, its Banned Book Week looks unserious and weighted for titanic corporations against parents.
No comments:
Post a Comment