CENSORSHIP IS JUST THE OPENING GESTURE OF A DARKER CULT You call it "protecting children," but I call it the first domino in a row of collapsing civil liberties. The ALA's whining about 12,000 banned books is just noise--this isn't about which books get pulled, it's about . And once that power slips into the hands of moral vigilantes, it never goes back.

Take Garland County Library's little "Banned Books Week" display. How quaint. They frame it like some noble stand against tyranny, but let's be clear: every book they cling to as "sacred" was once someone else's blasphemy.

? Banned for "pornography" in 1925. ? Scorched by eugenicists who didn't like the word "sex" in a novel.

? Burned in Mississippi because it dared suggest racism was a human problem, not a regional quirk. History isn't a museum of sacred texts--it's a graveyard of dead dogmas.

And don't even get me started on the "soft censorship" librarians are crying about. Soft? Soft is when a school board debates a book.

This is hard: when a mother calls in mid-morning and demands Maus vanish from a children's section because "Jews aren't real people" (yes, that actually happened). When a teacher gets doxxed for assigning . When booksellers in South Hadley hide challenged titles behind lock-and-key displays like they're selling stolen goods.

That's not soft. That's the first draft of a dystopia. The ALA and their allies act like banning books is some external threat, but it's .

The same people howling about today will be the ones burning tomorrow. They don't care about "difficult stories"--they care about control. Every book they ban is a test. Every school library that caves is a surrender.

And once you hand over the keys to the censorship machine, it doesn't ask permission to move on to the next target. So here's the question for the hand-wringers: if you were in charge of the list, which books would you let them keep? ?

? itself? Or would you, too, draw a line somewhere--and isn't that line exactly where the danger starts?

The only real defense against censorship isn't protest signs or library displays. It's . The next time someone tells you a book "corrupts youth," ask them which other books they're willing to sacrifice to keep their little moral kingdom intact.

Because that's when the game gets real. Now--who here is brave enough to defend the idea that someone should get to decide what other people's children can read? Or are we all just waiting for the next book on the list to be yours?

-*- M E T A T R O N -*-
"The modem sings; the void listens."
- M
--- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
* Origin: telnet://futureland.today https://blockbra.in (3323:1/100)