View Full Version : Banned books
flowerseverywhere
6-11-23, 7:08am
I've been hearing a lot about banned books in libraries and schools. Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Missouri, North Dakota, and Oklahoma have even passed legislation that potentially could fine or jail librarians. Many states are working on it. In 1959 many formally banned books were unbanned the a Supreme court.
So I'm trying to read as many as I can that are under fire now or in the past. Many I've already read, like Hunger Games, Twilight series, and Harry Potter series.
1984 by George Orwell has frequently been a target. I just read this and some parts of "BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING" are true, as we knowingly submit ourselves to voice and face recognition, movement tracking through our devices and live with surveillance cameras everywhere. I'm not sure why it has been targeted.
Looking for Alaska by John Green is on the review list in many Florida counties as inappropriate. I thought it was a masterfully written story of teens coming of age. There was some sex but not nearly as much as goes on in normal high school age kids in my opinion. Way too heavy subjects for young kids. But might not be to some parents.
So what do you think about all this? I'm quite fascinated by some of these books. Of course, I doubt many on the list should ever be in elementary schools, but normal kids have tremendous access to television and the internet which of course is loaded with inappropriate content for young kids. But of course, some parents might think it is all fine.
I saw an interview with Ellen Hopkins who is on the banned list for her series. I had tried to read two of her books and couldn't see the problem....I read All Boys aren't Blue which was definitely for late teens, but again, I know there are children who need to read about themselves and what they are going through. It's all part of trying to control thinking and it is frightening.
iris lilies
6-11-23, 11:58am
Where is this “ banned” list? I assume you mean books that have been challenged in a library collection somewhere in the U.S. . Since the government has not actually banned any books, I find that rhetoric more than a little heightened. But the American library Association wants to promote itself and that phrase “banned books “gets them a lot of mileage.
I say this as someone who retired from managing the “banned books “ function of a large public library.
Where is this “ banned” list? I assume you mean books that have been challenged in a library collection somewhere in the U.S. . Since the government has not actually banned any books, I find that rhetoric more than a little heightened. But the American library Association wants to promote itself and that phrase “banned books “gets them a lot of mileage.
I say this as someone who retired from managing the “band books “ function of a large public library.
I have to agree with you there. People like to use that term to pretend they’re bold rebels fighting against a vicious tyranny. Sort of like the people who used to style themselves as the “resistance”.
If I refuse to provide you with free chili dogs, it doesn’t mean I’ve banned chili dogs.
iris lilies
6-11-23, 12:50pm
I have to agree with you there. People like to use that term to pretend they’re bold rebels fighting against a vicious tyranny. Sort of like the people who used to style themselves as the “resistance”.
If I refuse to provide you with free chili dogs, it doesn’t mean I’ve banned chili dogs.
And yet, the REAL challenges to the First Amendment are seldom spoken of.
I have a lot to say about the primacy of Free speech and will likely mosey by later to do that. I started an thread about challenges to free speech here, but we prefer to talk about headline news.
As an aside, after many years of membership I soured on The American Library Association as a bloated, self important/self absorbed Byzantinely complicated organization. I think it was the never ending debates at membership meetings about the status of Cuban library workers that did me in.
flowerseverywhere
6-11-23, 3:59pm
Where is this “ banned” list? I assume you mean books that have been challenged in a library collection somewhere in the U.S. . Since the government has not actually banned any books, I find that rhetoric more than a little heightened. But the American library Association wants to promote itself and that phrase “banned books “gets them a lot of mileage.
I say this as someone who retired from managing the “banned books “ function of a large public library.
I explained they were books being challenged. And librarians being challenged.
flowerseverywhere
6-11-23, 4:01pm
I have to agree with you there. People like to use that term to pretend they’re bold rebels fighting against a vicious tyranny. Sort of like the people who used to style themselves as the “resistance”.
If I refuse to provide you with free chili dogs, it doesn’t mean I’ve banned chili dogs.
I never claimed to be a bold rebel. Just trying to be better informed about what the problem is people are seeing. Don't make assumptions as to what you think peoples motives are.
Historically, the US government has banned books under the Comstock law, under the anti-obscenity laws. Here is an excerpt from Wikipedia:
Moll Flanders (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moll_Flanders) or The Fortunes and Misfortunes of the Famous Moll Flanders (1722)
Daniel Defoe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Defoe)
1722
Novel
Banned from US mail under the Federal Anti-Obscenity Act (Comstock Law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock_Law)) of 1873, which banned the sending or receiving of works containing "obscene", "filthy", or "inappropriate" material. U.S. obscenity laws were overturned in 1959 by the Supreme Court in Kingsley Pictures Corp. v. Regents.[246] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#cite_note-caselaw.lp.findlaw.com-246)[247] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#cite_note-The_Day_Obscenity_Became_Art-247)[249] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#cite_note-upenn2-249)
Fanny Hill (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanny_Hill) or Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure
John Cleland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cleland)
1748
Novel
Banned in the US in 1821 for obscenity, then again in 1963. This was the last book ever banned by the US government. U.S. obscenity laws were overturned in 1959 by the Supreme Court in Kingsley Pictures Corp. v. Regents.[246] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#cite_note-caselaw.lp.findlaw.com-246)[247] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#cite_note-The_Day_Obscenity_Became_Art-247)[122] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#cite_note-isbn0-8352-1078-2-122) See also Memoirs v. Massachusetts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoirs_v._Massachusetts).
Fanny Hill is quite the racy book, although you have to be able to understand the 18th century writing. I read it in college.
iris lilies
6-11-23, 4:45pm
Historically, the US government has banned books under the Comstock law, under the anti-obscenity laws. Here is an excerpt from Wikipedia:
Moll Flanders (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moll_Flanders) or The Fortunes and Misfortunes of the Famous Moll Flanders (1722)
Daniel Defoe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Defoe)
1722
Novel
Banned from US mail under the Federal Anti-Obscenity Act (Comstock Law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock_Law)) of 1873, which banned the sending or receiving of works containing "obscene", "filthy", or "inappropriate" material. U.S. obscenity laws were overturned in 1959 by the Supreme Court in Kingsley Pictures Corp. v. Regents.[246] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#cite_note-caselaw.lp.findlaw.com-246)[247] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#cite_note-The_Day_Obscenity_Became_Art-247)[249] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#cite_note-upenn2-249)
Fanny Hill (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanny_Hill) or Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure
John Cleland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cleland)
1748
Novel
Banned in the US in 1821 for obscenity, then again in 1963. This was the last book ever banned by the US government. U.S. obscenity laws were overturned in 1959 by the Supreme Court in Kingsley Pictures Corp. v. Regents.[246] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#cite_note-caselaw.lp.findlaw.com-246)[247] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#cite_note-The_Day_Obscenity_Became_Art-247)[122] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments#cite_note-isbn0-8352-1078-2-122) See also Memoirs v. Massachusetts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoirs_v._Massachusetts).
I seem to remember DH Lawrence was not published in the United States, but that was a long time ago. I don’t think Lolita was “banned “because by that time there was no governmental restrictions. But I could be wrong about Lo, light of my life, fire of my loins.
since Lolita focuses on pedophile activity, there are plenty of hotheads of any stripe who would speak against that novel. It happens to be one of my favorites.
It's obvious that all the recent hoopla about banned books is really just a review of the appropriateness for some books in specific environments. It's interesting seeing it being constantly referenced otherwise.
It's obvious that the right wing has a cover story of age appropriateness, when I've seen people objecting to books objecting to the content, never mentioning age appropriateness. Like the one I shared the other week that you didn't comment on. The parent just didn't want the material to be accessible to /anyone/.
They don't like the ideas for anyone, has nothing to do with the age of the child.
iris lilies
6-11-23, 7:11pm
As one of those librarians who was challenged, I’ve always thought that citizens in an open society have a right to question what their tax dollars go for and question the appropriateness of —for instance —books in their public library. And the American Library Association agrees with that, and even recommends that public libraries have a transparent policy that lays out the path a local citizen may take to “challenge “library material.
In my large public library there were a few staff members who were reactive in a challenge, but they tended to be the non-professional staff. My process in managing a challenge was to form a temporary committee of two other people and me, and we all reviewed the material, and if it was a book we read it, and if it was a video, we watched it, made written comments, and I then decided to keep the material or pull out from the collection. Usually we kept the material but every couple years there were something that after every review, we decided it wasn’t appropriate for our collection. Once in a while, we moved something from one location to another, or from one age collection to another, if it was youth material.
I wish I could remember some of the titles of the more interesting challenges. One of them was the film In The Realm of the Senses about a Japanese prostitute in the 1930s, who killed her lover, and then cut off his penis and carried it around with her for several days. That film is tricky because it was X-rated at the time because it was made in the days when the rating X was given to films, but it was an art house film. I think we pulled that one from the collection and I talked to my boss about it. She was the administrator in charge of the film collection. That challenge was especially tricky if I remember correctly because the person who originally ordered the video refused to consider the challenge in the “I am right/do not question me” vein and that right there is a problem if you don’t go into it with an open mind.
iris lilies
6-11-23, 8:11pm
I remember the moral panic of rap music when it frst hit big, popularity. We ordered directly from Billboard charts, which means we bought a lot of raunchy rap music. There are a couple titles that the Director of the library put a hold on while he considered whether we would add them to the collection. Boy that was in the early days when we were all very innocent. It was before the NC-17 ratings were slapped on rap CDs, before the days when the rap artists made two versions, a clean version, and a not so clean version. Tipper Gore was a lead censor figure in those days if you all remember back then.
I got pressure for my staff to put “labels “on these music CDs that indicated strong language, and I fought that because I simply didn’t want the burden of defining a standard of raunch and then determining which music met that standard. I don’t mind if the artists themselves do it, that’s up to them.
iris lilies
6-11-23, 8:15pm
https://www.kcur.org/news/2023-02-23/aclu-sues-missouri-over-book-ban-law-that-pushed-school-libraries-to-remove-hundreds-of-titles
I was just reading this article yesterday before flowers everywhere started this thread. I think we’ve talked about this before but I’ll add comments later.
It's obvious that the right wing has a cover story of age appropriateness, when I've seen people objecting to books objecting to the content, never mentioning age appropriateness. Like the one I shared the other week that you didn't comment on. The parent just didn't want the material to be accessible to /anyone/.
They don't like the ideas for anyone, has nothing to do with the age of the child.
I'm sorry for not commenting on your post. At this point I'm assuming it's the one in the 'Why Not To Vote Republican' thread regarding the poem one Florida school moved from one shelf to another. I'm also assuming my non-response has to do with the link you posted to give more information taking me to a page that no longer existed.
If I'm correct in those assumptions, all I can say is that one parent in Florida probably doesn't represent the entirety of the "right wing", and if I recall correctly the complaint in that case did have to to with age appropriateness which resulted in the book being removed from the 'elementary' section of the library and placed in the 'middle school' section. I think most people would agree that it had nothing to do with removing the book from all audiences but rather ensuring it was curated for an appropriate audience. But maybe that's just me.
flowerseverywhere
6-11-23, 10:03pm
Finished another one currently under review in some Florida districts. "All the bright places" by Julia NEVIN. Sorry for the caps but kept correcting to Kevin. Anyway, this is a young adult novel. There is some mentions of sex going on between two seventeen year olds, and mental health and suicide are some of the themes. Another very well written book. Obviously not written for young children, but I really don't know what is considered appropriate reading for high school. I thought it was very good.
ApatheticNoMore
6-12-23, 12:02pm
I remember very disturbing stuff being not just available but assigned reading in high school. We read Crime and Punishment. Do you know how disturbing that book is to a teenager? Very.
I wish I could remember some of the titles of the more interesting challenges. One of them was the film In The Realm of the Senses about a Japanese prostitute in the 1930s, who killed her lover, and then cut off his penis and carried it around with her for several days. That film is tricky because it was X-rated at the time because it was made in the days when the rating X was given to films, but it was an art house film.
That is a troublesome film. It's "pornographic" upon casual inspection. It's also a "significant film", "art", and biting political commentary. The Criterion release contains some useful supplemental material, including Tony Rayns' observations.
There are a fair number of films and books that are deliberately edgy and provocative like this.
What is the purpose of a public library?
What material is appropriate for a public library?
Is curation-by-age-appropriateness appropriate?
Is deciding which art/political/technical/... material should be allowed to adult readers appropriate?
Should materials be presented with some sort of "trigger warnings"?
Etc.
I'm not sure I have a clear idea here, but I bet Iris could help us understand what the state-of-the-art understanding among library folks is. My mother works at our local library on the procurement side, but they basically order everything anyone in the community asks for without too much pre-judgement.
flowerseverywhere
6-12-23, 10:53pm
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/texas-library-books-banned-schools-rcna12986
An interesting article about books that have been requested to be removed from the school libraries in Texas and why. My favorite was the one about Michelle Obama which was requested to be removed because it portrayed Trump as a bully. I kid you not.
IL gov just signed a bill banning book banning. Something about political or religious reasoning being a bad reason to ban books. The IL Sec’y of State has the authority to forbid grants to public or school libraries that have banned books for the reasons listed in the law.
So funny, I misread your first sentence as Il gov just signed a bill banning books banning book burning.
I think this topic is getting convoluted, at least in my head.
iris lilies
6-13-23, 8:55am
So funny, I misread your first sentence as Il gov just signed a bill banning books banning book burning.
I think this topic is getting convoluted, at least in my head.
That is a troublesome film. It's "pornographic" upon casual inspection. It's also a "significant film", "art", and biting political commentary. The Criterion release contains some useful supplemental material, including Tony Rayns' observations.
There are a fair number of films and books that are deliberately edgy and provocative like this.
What is the purpose of a public library?
What material is appropriate for a public library?
Is curation-by-age-appropriateness appropriate?
Is deciding which art/political/technical/... material should be allowed to adult readers appropriate?
Should materials be presented with some sort of "trigger warnings"?
Etc.
I'm not sure I have a clear idea here, but I bet Iris could help us understand what the state-of-the-art understanding among library folks is. My mother works at our local library on the procurement side, but they basically order everything anyone in the community asks for without too much pre-judgement.
The collection development policy of my library was 30+ pages long, but basically it strove for a well balanced collection that served our community. So we didn’t buy anything that would not have much use. Some titles were more popular than others, obviously! Our public library “system “was made up of one very large central library of 750,000+ volumes that considered itself a “research “collection (lots of debate around that) and satellite branches with smaller “popular” collections.
The film “in the realm of the senses “could’ve gone either way because it was appropriate for a large film collection, but it was also very strong material. I consulted with my boss on this tricky one because she had expertise in film collections and there were personality problems with the person who ordered it. I think I’m remembering correctly that I was a little surprised at her decision to withdraw it. But with the stamp of approval of the reviewers it was easy enough to justify keeping. I am not sure it was part of the Criterion collection at the time of this challenge.
iris lilies
6-13-23, 8:57am
So funny, I misread your first sentence as Il gov just signed a bill banning books banning book burning.
I think this topic is getting convoluted, at least in my head.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/texas-library-books-banned-schools-rcna12986
An interesting article about books that have been requested to be removed from the school libraries in Texas and why. My favorite was the one about Michelle Obama which was requested to be removed because it portrayed Trump as a bully. I kid you not.
I don’t know why you think that is outrageous. Frugal-one here complained about someone flying a flag on their own property, a flag denigrating Joe Biden. Ideologues of all stripes like to tamp down free-speech.
I don’t know why you think that is outrageous. Frugal-one here complained about someone flying a flag on their own property, a flag denigrating Joe Biden. Ideologues of all stripes like to tamp down free-speech.
At long last, the left has found a free speech issue they can get behind and milk for all it’s worth. The people who gave us university speech codes, the Disinformation Governance Board, “deplatforming” and “sensitivity readers” can now play free speech champions against rural school districts and local library boards. It’s the biggest thing since the great crusade against gas ovens.
ToomuchStuff
6-13-23, 11:55pm
Is curation-by-age-appropriateness appropriate?
And if you base it on age, age does not correlate with maturity.
I don’t know why you think that is outrageous. Frugal-one here complained about someone flying a flag on their own property, a flag denigrating Joe Biden. Ideologues of all stripes like to tamp down free-speech.
Still I must have missed the banned list, because I don't see any mention of Huck Fin, any of several books by Dr Seus (example, I think that I saw it on Mulberry Street), Little Black Sambo, etc.
iris lilies
6-14-23, 1:13pm
And if you base it on age, age does not correlate with maturity.
Still I must have missed the banned list, because I don't see any mention of Huck Fin, any of several books by Dr Seus (example, I think that I saw it on Mulberry Street), Little Black Sambo, etc.
https://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/top10
This page on the American Library Association’s website tracks book challenges that they know about.
None of the challenged books at my large urban library system are on those lists.
Once I tried reporting to ALA our handful of challenged titles in a year, and the nice little ALA staffer wrote back asking me to complete a long form for each title. Haha… ah, no mam. I gave them the basic information they needed: title, why it was challenged, outcome, and name of library system. I guess that wasn’t good enough.
littlebittybobby
6-14-23, 3:10pm
Okay----While you kids are on the subject of lirrrrary books, I'd like to remind you that if you have any overdue books, maybe you should go ahead and turn them in. But yeah---do it anonymously, in the drop box, so you don't have to deal with an angry, irate lirrrarrran. So anyway---here's a recent case of a book being turned in over 80 years late! Prolly the lirrrarrrarrry director drove her truck out to the cemetery where the irresponsible patron was buried, and desecrated their grave, tipped over their monument & left ruts on their plot. Yup. Paybacks are heck. Hope that helps you some. See photo. Thankk Mee.5540
Okay----While you kids are on the subject of lirrrrary books, I'd like to remind you that if you have any overdue books, maybe you should go ahead and turn them in. But yeah---do it anonymously, in the drop box, so you don't have to deal with an angry, irate lirrrarrran. So anyway---here's a recent case of a book being turned in over 80 years late! Prolly the lirrrarrrarrry director drove her truck out to the cemetery where the irresponsible patron was buried, and desecrated their grave, tipped over their monument & left ruts on their plot. Yup. Paybacks are heck. Hope that helps you some. See photo. Thankk Mee.5540
Haha.. that must have been some fine! Back in the days when DH and I were seriously in the crapper, I actually had a judgement from the small town public library for overdue books. My uncle who helped bail us out of our foreclosure, while taking stock of our financial situation, was stunned. I was so ashamed.
rosarugosa
6-15-23, 6:31am
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/texas-library-books-banned-schools-rcna12986
An interesting article about books that have been requested to be removed from the school libraries in Texas and why. My favorite was the one about Michelle Obama which was requested to be removed because it portrayed Trump as a bully. I kid you not.
I've read 6 of these. I really loved Lawn Boy and had no idea it was controversial. I recently read George which is now under the title Melissa. That's the book I probably would have liked when I was 12 but just felt a bit too juvenile for me now.
I think once kids learn the basics about how sex works, then let them read anything they want. I read Rosemary's Baby, Myra Breckenridge, The Happy Hooker, and The Exorcist when I was in junior high, and I'm none the worse for it.
flowerseverywhere
6-15-23, 6:40am
An author who has written fantasy books has appeared on multiple school lists in Florida as being removed from libraries and reviewed is Sarah J. Maas. I read her first book, Throne of Glass. It is fantasy set on the past, with a young woman who rose from slavery to assassin for the king. Very well written, great character development, great story line. Very similar to game of thrones, hunger games and so on. In those the actual books were far better than the film adaptarions. But fewer characters than game of thrones, which at times became a little confusing. Some magic, violence and cruelty laced with human relationships, love, caring and motivation to get out of dismal situations. The familiar theme of the lowest class being enslaved, at times cruelly for the amusement and financial gain of the men in charge and their elite friends could be offensive to some. It does hit close to home. Just hints of sexual involvement.
I see no more violence than what teens see every day on the news, movies, video games, and prime time television. Maybe the hints at magic?
I'm all in at this point and will continue the series. Although taken out of many schools here, I got it from my library, which has all her books.
Another series, court of throne and roses is set to be set to film.
Most every teen alive today in the US has had to train in active shooter drills thanks to the risk of death due to the second amendment. Why on earth would we restrict them from any level whatsoever of violence in books?
flowerseverywhere
6-18-23, 10:49am
Most every teen alive today in the US has had to train in active shooter drills thanks to the risk of death due to the second amendment. Why on earth would we restrict them from any level whatsoever of violence in books?
Because its all about stirring up outrage while not doing anything about real problems.
iris lilies
6-18-23, 2:06pm
Because its all about stirring up outrage while not doing anything about real problems.
Well, i’m not sure I would characterize it all exactly that way. Legislatures doing things you don’t like are to an extent sincerely doing what they think is best. To an extent. And that means legislative action on either side of the political spectrum.
I think where you and I different greatly is that you think that legislators can actually solve many of our societal problems with legislation. See— I think those problems cannot be solved with legislation or even addressed in a somewhat thorough way.
flowerseverywhere
6-19-23, 6:13am
IL I disagree. Legislators are supposed to work for the people. Not themselves. They get enormously rich in office, as well as their cronies. Many simply want to get reelected to stay on the gravy train and they don't care who gets hurt.
Why does the US have such a high rate of incarceration, uninsured and gun deaths?
Last night I was with a group of women. One, who was Jewish, talked about her sons temple that had armed guards around the clock and two guards during services. My African American friend has been taking shooting lessons and she is careful not to go certain places alone. With the anti trans and gay laws here in Florida people are leaving because they cannot get care. Women are forced to give birth if they don't realize they are pregnant before six weeks. the war on woke is pulling books from school libraries. How about asking child experts and educators instead of the woke police? Our biggest employer is under attack by the head of the Woke Police, Desantis, for being "groomers" of children. Yet the rest of the special tax districts in the state, over 1,800 are left alone. More money that could have been spent on citizens instead of his imaginary war.
Why are they fighting these culture wars instead of fostering an atmosphere where hard working Americans are able to love who they want, practice their religion without fear of being massacred, decide when they want to have children and be able to afford medical care when they get sick?
iris lilies
6-19-23, 8:25am
IL I disagree. Legislators are supposed to work for the people. Not themselves. They get enormously rich in office, as well as their cronies. Many simply want to get reelected to stay on the gravy train and they don't care who gets hurt.
Why does the US have such a high rate of incarceration, uninsured and gun deaths?
Last night I was with a group of women. One, who was Jewish, talked about her sons temple that had armed guards around the clock and two guards during services. My African American friend has been taking shooting lessons and she is careful not to go certain places alone. With the anti trans and gay laws here in Florida people are leaving because they cannot get care. Women are forced to give birth if they don't realize they are pregnant before six weeks. the war on woke is pulling books from school libraries. How about asking child experts and educators instead of the woke police? Our biggest employer is under attack by the head of the Woke Police, Desantis, for being "groomers" of children. Yet the rest of the special tax districts in the state, over 1,800 are left alone. More money that could have been spent on citizens instead of his imaginary war.
Why are they fighting these culture wars instead of fostering an atmosphere where hard working Americans are able to love who they want, practice their religion without fear of being massacred, decide when they want to have children and be able to afford medical care when they get sick?
I would like to know exactly what legislators can do to address the problems you talk about? I mean exactly. They only have the power to 1) make laws 2) appropriate taxpayer dollars
do you think laws and taxpayer dollars will solve all these things? I mean really SOLVE the problems?
I agree that legislators and school boards and city councils and etc concern thrmselves with irrelevant stuff all too often. That seems to be a condition of the human race. I see it in all of my organizations.
As you well know from my many posts, I am watching this current ransgender issue invade our society to irs detriment. But as dumb and even sometimes dangerous is gender transitioning for many people, I do not think any legislative action can adequately address it. It is essentially a mental health problem. I mean that for either side of the issue, for legislatures that limit medical treatment of minors and also for legislators who write ip punishments for parents who for not “affirm. “
Legislators are heavy handed, laws are overly broad when the action they try to co trol need nuance.
flowerseverywhere
6-19-23, 10:24am
IL, I actually agree with most of what you said. However instead of legislators making up issues to wage war on, start spending money more wisely. Think of all the money spent on stupid lawsuits. How much money is spent on gender issues? Why is it the governments business? the whole Disney thing here is ridiculous. The head of the new governing Commission makes $400,000 and the old one is kept on as a "consultant.". Plus Disney has an army of lawyers and the parks are packed. They cannot keep up with Demand for new hotels and timeshares. And the money spent on endless investigations into bill Clinton, Hillary, Nixon, Hunter, Trump. Why not drive down the street and throw money out the window?
Spend money on police, medical professionals, education and infrastructure for example and actually work on legislation to curb illegal immigration. Why in the world do we have birthright citizenship for kids with parents not legally in the country? Why are kids with illegal parents in schools getting free schooling, food and education while veterans have to wait for care and are homeless? Update the laws and constitution if need be. But that takes real work and bipartisanship.
We just throw good money after bad an expect different results.
Better government doesn’t make better people. Better people can sometimes make better government.
early morning
6-19-23, 11:38am
But better government can help set the CONDITIONS so that there ARE better people. People who have decent health care - especially pre and post natal, who have parents that aren't stressed to the max, and who aren't just trying to keep food on the table and shelter over their heads - have a better chance at avoiding mental and physical health issues later in life. Governments can also provide legal protections for minority groups and give traditionally oppressed groups a more level playing field. I would argue that in that sense, and in the longer term, governments can, and do, make better people.
Better government doesn’t make better people. Better people can sometimes make better government.
If that's the case why do republican legislators keep trying to dictate how people should behave? They seem to have a mistaken perception that if everyone behaved in a cisgender straight way and stop having sex everything will be awesome. And that if little kids could work in factories those kids will be better off. And that if people can't retire at the absurdly early age of 67 the world will be a better place. And that the world will be a better place if we could just ignore all the injustices that have happened in US history. F*** the republicans and their sad sad concept of better governance. With better governance like they offer the next thing you know better governance will include pretending that a sad sack sore loser trying to overthrow the government when he doesn't win reelection will be even remotely acceptable. Oh wait, we're already there.
flowerseverywhere
6-19-23, 10:31pm
Jp1, I never could have worked as a nurse until the age of 67. Physical and mental exhaustion and physical stress on the body would have been way too much. So many of my friends have so many medical problems by late sixties, or are caring for a spouse who is ill. I agree raising the social security age will really impact them.
Jp1, I never could have worked as a nurse until the age of 67. Physical and mental exhaustion and physical stress on the body would have been way too much. So many of my friends have so many medical problems by late sixties, or are caring for a spouse who is ill. I agree raising the social security age will really impact them.
In hindsight you probably should have become an accountant and got a government job. If you’d done that your body would have not suffered so much and you would have a nanny G pension so you wouldn’t need to wait until you were 69 to start sucking at the government teat when you wanted to retire.
iris lilies
6-20-23, 8:49am
In hindsight you probably should have become an accountant and got a government job. If you’d done that your body would have not suffered so much and you would have a nanny G pension so you wouldn’t need to wait until you were 69 to start sucking at the government teat when you wanted to retire.
Or, a librarian job! Don’t forget us!
But better government can help set the CONDITIONS so that there ARE better people. People who have decent health care - especially pre and post natal, who have parents that aren't stressed to the max, and who aren't just trying to keep food on the table and shelter over their heads - have a better chance at avoiding mental and physical health issues later in life. Governments can also provide legal protections for minority groups and give traditionally oppressed groups a more level playing field. I would argue that in that sense, and in the longer term, governments can, and do, make better people.
But where is the evidence for that? The Great Society or Obamacare didn’t result in a flowering of virtue. I think governance is downstream of politics which is downstream of culture, not the other way round.
Or, a librarian job! Don’t forget us!
I always viewed ad hominem attacks as a sort of admission of defeat due to an empty intellectual arsenal.
iris lilies
6-20-23, 12:50pm
I always viewed ad hominem attacks as a sort of admission of defeat due to an empty intellectual arsenal.
There’s a lot of emptiness in that arsenal.
early morning
6-20-23, 1:12pm
But where is the evidence for that? The Great Society or Obamacare didn’t result in a flowering of virtue. I think governance is downstream of politics which is downstream of culture, not the other way round
But the Civil War amendments, the 19th and 24th amendments, the Snyder Act, the desegregation cases and subsequent laws, the long slow march towards civil protections for everyone (currently being threatened/thwarted by reactionary politics) - these are acts of governance that helped to level the playing field. I think we need to extend that. I don't expect a "flowering of virtue", and I don't believe that change will happen suddenly - but I do think that better health care, better public education, and a better leveling of the playing field for all Americans will result over time in more people engaged in better civic (and civilized) behavior. Obamacare? Really? Those programs have been adulterated and slashed beyond repair, and I don't currently see how you could truly study their overall impact. But my daughter, for one, has insurance she would not be able to get without the marketplace (Obamacare). The Great Society was a valiant attempt to reduce poverty, and from it I think we could pull quite a few lessons on what worked, and many more on what did not, to guide future policies. And we could drop the war on drugs at a street/small dealer level, legalize most recreational drug use, and focus on harm reduction as opposed to prison. But that's just dreamer me, being all soft on humanity...
As for your comment on culture being upstream of politics - I think that's currently a circle. White supremacists and others who just wanted to "own the libs" elected a horrible man, who encouraged white supremacists, who elected more horrible people, making white supremacy seem great again....
What I do think we agree on is that bad government hurts us all. We just may not agree exactly on what makes government "bad".
I think the demand for white supremacists far exceeds the supply, I hear about them a lot but I don't actually know any. Maybe it's a matter of definition, what must a person think, feel or do in order to be granted that title?
But the Civil War amendments, the 19th and 24th amendments, the Snyder Act, the desegregation cases and subsequent laws, the long slow march towards civil protections for everyone (currently being threatened/thwarted by reactionary politics) - these are acts of governance that helped to level the playing field. I think we need to extend that. I don't expect a "flowering of virtue", and I don't believe that change will happen suddenly - but I do think that better health care, better public education, and a better leveling of the playing field for all Americans will result over time in more people engaged in better civic (and civilized) behavior. Obamacare? Really? Those programs have been adulterated and slashed beyond repair, and I don't currently see how you could truly study their overall impact. But my daughter, for one, has insurance she would not be able to get without the marketplace (Obamacare). The Great Society was a valiant attempt to reduce poverty, and from it I think we could pull quite a few lessons on what worked, and many more on what did not, to guide future policies. And we could drop the war on drugs at a street/small dealer level, legalize most recreational drug use, and focus on harm reduction as opposed to prison. But that's just dreamer me, being all soft on humanity...
As for your comment on culture being upstream of politics - I think that's currently a circle. White supremacists and others who just wanted to "own the libs" elected a horrible man, who encouraged white supremacists, who elected more horrible people, making white supremacy seem great again....
What I do think we agree on is that bad government hurts us all. We just may not agree exactly on what makes government "bad".
But slavery didn’t end because government made us better people. Government institutions and the political class had accommodated themselves pretty well to slavery. A culture opposed to slavery created a new party in opposition and fought and died in the ranks to end it. It wasn’t a top down effort by an enlightened elite, it was a grand social trend.
I’m not against government in principle, but I am suspicious that handing government the power to enforce someone’s concept of social justice also hands government the power to enforce despotism.
early morning
6-21-23, 3:25pm
But a government opposed to slavery DID lead to a more enlightened attitude towards free people of color, over time. (way too much time....) However, it does seem that people don't stop hurting/oppressing "other" people until they are forced by law to do so. Social trends may lead to governmental action, what's wrong with that? Isn't that how it's supposed to be be - of the people, for the people, by the people? Marriage equality, protections for LGBTQ+, yes, they started as social trends, but to expand them, to provide legal protections to ensure other people recognize those rights, laws are needed, and enforcement. That's the role of government - to look at those grand social trends on a constitutional level (equal protections under the law!), and make sure one group of people is not trampling on the rights of a different group. And we need it to be able to do that. There is always going to be a fine line between too much, and not enough, government, and disagreement on what is "too much". It's messy, I get that.
I always viewed ad hominem attacks as a sort of admission of defeat due to an empty intellectual arsenal.
Sort of the same way I view use of fancy pants words that don't actually say much but sound impressive to the casual observer.
Sort of the same way I view use of fancy pants words that don't actually say much but sound impressive to the casual observer.
With such a glorious feast of language set out on our table, why order from the fast food menu?
But a government opposed to slavery DID lead to a more enlightened attitude towards free people of color, over time. (way too much time....) However, it does seem that people don't stop hurting/oppressing "other" people until they are forced by law to do so. Social trends may lead to governmental action, what's wrong with that? Isn't that how it's supposed to be be - of the people, for the people, by the people? Marriage equality, protections for LGBTQ+, yes, they started as social trends, but to expand them, to provide legal protections to ensure other people recognize those rights, laws are needed, and enforcement. That's the role of government - to look at those grand social trends on a constitutional level (equal protections under the law!), and make sure one group of people is not trampling on the rights of a different group. And we need it to be able to do that. There is always going to be a fine line between too much, and not enough, government, and disagreement on what is "too much". It's messy, I get that.
I think that reflects more of a cultural evolution than benevolent government directing us in a virtuous direction. Millions of people around the world have paid with their lives for governments enforcing their favored value systems.
catherine
6-22-23, 10:44am
I think you are agreeing with early morning. Most societal changes start at a grassroots level, and as early said, once the value/trend reaches a tipping point, the people are able to press their legislative leaders to put the laws in place to enforce compliance with what is seen to be an evolution in the right direction. Women's rights started with the Suffragettes, Black rights started with MLK and the Southern Poverty Law Center. Car safety started with Ralph Nader's book Safe At Any Speed. Environmental justice started 50 years ago with countless people who stood up to the pollution of air and water.
The government is there to support needed change. I've never seen a case yet when the government forced a change that wasn't already brewing and bubbling in the popular sphere.
My point was that government, at least under our system, follows in culture’s wake. That’s one reason it’s so ridiculous when politicians offer moral instruction. Every so often, government gets ahead of itself and tries to enforce eat-your-vegetable measures such as Prohibition or some new fashion in ideological school curricula and gets its fingers burned.
In less happy places with unconstrained government, you see tragic nonsense like engineered famines and “cultural revolution” perpetrated in the name of a better future.
Speaking of Rosemary's Baby, let me just say I loved Ira Levin's books. And Rosemary's Baby is a favorite film.
Speaking of Rosemary's Baby, let me just say I loved Ira Levin's books. And Rosemary's Baby is a favorite film.
I thought “The Boys from Brazil” was a lot of fun.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.