"If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear," George Orwell, the celebrated author of dystopian novels, once wrote.
Partisans love to cite Orwell when accusing their opposing political tribe of intolerance.
While these comparisons are often ridiculous we are not "living in 1984" no matter what alarmists say it is true that many on both the left and the right have grown too comfortable with censorship.
In progressive activist circles, certain words and ideas are considered "violence" and thus worthy of prohibition.
The right has made plenty of political hay out of such sentiments sneering that leftists are "snowflakes" hiding in safe spaces and coddled by trigger warnings. But at the same time, conservatives have a long, ignoble history of proudly embracing "Moral Majority"-style censorship and cancellation of the insufficiently "patriotic."
Despite this legacy of "value-based" censorship, the right has recently sought to recast itself as the defender of Western civilization including the principles of free speech and open inquiry.
Don't buy into the branding.
Over the past two years, state governments have been awash in Republican-authored bills that criminalize legitimate protest and lay broad blanket bans on ideas and words associated with "wokeness."
Prominent voices on the right have also cleverly co-opted the language of the left insisting that they're not censoring anything, they're just protecting marginalized voices. Only the names are changed.
It's all a sham.
Republicans are using the force of government to ban books, words, and ideas that offend their sensibilities.
The recent "Banned Books Week" spearheaded by librarians, academics, and writers' advocates helped lay bare just how triggered conservatives can be words and ideas that run counter to their moral codes.
Young adult novels with LGBTQ protagonists and books dealing with antiracist philosophies, once again, represented the lion's share of banned content.
Case in point, a Wyoming pastor is trying to get librarians criminally prosecuted for stocking books dealing with LGBTQ-related themes.
And even after some civil libertarian backlash to the many "anti-Critical Race Theory" laws including from organizations with uber-Republican donor Charles Koch Republicans across the country are running rampant in their efforts to stamp out words and ideas they find offensive.
The Wisconsin Assembly last week overwhelmingly approved a Republican-authored bill that, among other things, prohibits teaching students that any individual "by virtue of the individual's race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously."
A lot of parents are not comfortable with their children being taught to essentialize people based on immutable characteristics, which frankly is one of the tenets of social justice activism.
But the bill also bans dozens of words and ideas to the point of grotesque absurdity.
Among the prohibited "terms and concepts" are:
The apparent intention is to stamp out not just "Critical Race Theory," but the mere discussion of any topic that was once known as "politically correct." If that isn't censorship, then the word has no meaning.
The bill hasn't been passed by Wisconsin's Senate, and even if it is, it's likely to be vetoed by the state's Democratic governor. But it's a revealing window into the speech-chilling aspirations of the right.
In Johnston County, N.C., the Board of Commissioners threatened to hold millions of dollars in public school funding unless the school board adopted a policy that essentially deems off-limits any criticism of the Constitution, the founding fathers, and "people who contributed to American Society."
The newly-adopted "Code of Ethics" even bans "fictional accounts or narratives" that can be "used to invalidate actual objective historical events."
Got that? Me, neither.
Would the novel "Uncle Tom's Cabin" be prohibited for depicting the horrors of slavery in the antebellum South? What about Toni Morrison's "Beloved"?
Does any book depicting many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence as owners of human beings violate the Code's edict that they should be "recognized and presented as reformists, innovators and heroes to our culture"?
Rather than stimulate a nuanced discussion of the founders' admirable contributions that also recognizes their moral deficiencies and hypocrisies, the Johnston County Code of Ethics aims to dictate a "positive vibes only" version of America. Instead of opening the discussion to provide historical accuracy and context, it's about forcing an "America, F--- Yeah!" version of history down students' throats.
School districts, rightfully, have a great deal of autonomy in determining curricula including the books that are assigned to students and the framing of historical events.
This won't always yield great results.
San Francisco last year wasted countless hours on removing "problematic" names from school buildings at times getting the historical justifications completely wrong.
Meanwhile, the South still has a smattering of counties which dabble in teaching creationism to public school children.
Like I said, not good.
What's far worse, however, are elected officials using childrens' educations to fight political battles by imposing overbroad bans with vague language on the curriculum of these schools.
It's wrong when woke progressives do it. It's wrong when reactionary conservatives do it.
But it's particularly galling when cynical hacks on the right claim the pro-speech Enlightenment mantle while literally calling for words that upset them to be banned and teachers to be fired.
Don't let conservatives who support these speech bans get away with calling them "anti-woke" or "anti-Critical Race Theory."
Call them what they are, "anti-free speech" and wholly "un-American."
Originally posted here:
Republicans Cancel Words, History, and Ideas in Libraries and Schools - Business Insider