I’m a liberal democrat horrified by the current Dr Seuss drama and normalization of censorship

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So there are 500,000 dead, the economy is teetering, President Biden has a wildly popular bill to address both the economy and COVID and the GOP is distracting you all with this idiocy.

Congrats.

Don’t forget the new assault on the Middle East.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So there are 500,000 dead, the economy is teetering, President Biden has a wildly popular bill to address both the economy and COVID and the GOP is distracting you all with this idiocy.

Congrats.

If you want to know the truth (quite sure you don't) you all are the distractors because I am a Democrat and so is OP. I'm sure you don't believe it, because you keep ignoring that fact . And if you do, I'm sure you will find something else wrong with me. You are certainly consistent and persistent. Congratulations on your perfect cynicism, all of you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is not one child that will be harmed through not having access to any of the no longer published books. Not one. The republicans on here arguing for keeping them in print are doing so from a place of self entered privilege and nothing else. Perhaps the GOP can purchase the copyrights and enter the publishing industry? Mulberry Street can be changed to MAGA Street. Come to think about Trump does kind of look like a Dr. Seuss character... Coincidence? Putin hears a Who?

I don't think any child will by harmed by keeping it either. Not one. So why get rid of it?

Also, do you think everyone who disagrees with you is a Republican? OP is not.

Finally, how exactly am I privileged? I have NO power whatsoever over the decision. Where is the privilege?

You don’t think depicting Black people as basically monkeys is harmful to any child? Fly that white hood high, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is not one child that will be harmed through not having access to any of the no longer published books. Not one. The republicans on here arguing for keeping them in print are doing so from a place of self entered privilege and nothing else. Perhaps the GOP can purchase the copyrights and enter the publishing industry? Mulberry Street can be changed to MAGA Street. Come to think about Trump does kind of look like a Dr. Seuss character... Coincidence? Putin hears a Who?

I don't think any child will by harmed by keeping it either. Not one. So why get rid of it?

Also, do you think everyone who disagrees with you is a Republican? OP is not.

Finally, how exactly am I privileged? I have NO power whatsoever over the decision. Where is the privilege?

You don’t think depicting Black people as basically monkeys is harmful to any child? Fly that white hood high, I guess.

1) whether I think that or not, where is the privilege? Are thoughts mot free?
2) If we are agreed that the standard is subjective, why is it wrong to disagree on whether it is harmful?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is not one child that will be harmed through not having access to any of the no longer published books. Not one. The republicans on here arguing for keeping them in print are doing so from a place of self entered privilege and nothing else. Perhaps the GOP can purchase the copyrights and enter the publishing industry? Mulberry Street can be changed to MAGA Street. Come to think about Trump does kind of look like a Dr. Seuss character... Coincidence? Putin hears a Who?

I don't think any child will by harmed by keeping it either. Not one. So why get rid of it?

Also, do you think everyone who disagrees with you is a Republican? OP is not.

Finally, how exactly am I privileged? I have NO power whatsoever over the decision. Where is the privilege?

The publisher determined that they no longer wished to put the books out. It’s their decision, not yours. If you don’t agree, get with your buddies over at National Review, purchase the rights, and put it back out on the street.
As to privilege, imagery and language in those books was problematic and you display your privilege through not acknowledging this, what others plainly feel.
Move on! Start planning your stage design for next year’s CPAC.

I thought privilege was some kind of benefit. I got nothing out of this one. And what kind of privilege is failure to acknowledge something? Doesn't everyone have that right?

meant right not opinion.

The privilege is being reinforced through subtle racist imagery and language that is dated and not tolerated any longer in a diverse society. The privilege you enjoy is not being affected by it.
Again though, this was also a business decision to pull the book. The only ones seeming to be screeching by the company’s decision are the Fox News viewers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is eBay really banning the sale of ALL Seuss books (not just the six or so take out of print by the publisher) but still allowing the sale Mein Kampf? If true, we are in a really, really weird distorted / demented place.

Nope.

They’re just removing all the books that have been taken out of print. You can still buy The 500 Hats of Bartholomew Cubbins, The Sneetches and The Lorax and all the rest.
https://www.newsweek.com/ebay-removes-discontinued-dr-seuss-books-1573824

The “Democrats” on this thread would do really well to stop obsessing over racist old books that are being discontinued and pick up something like the Sneetches, in fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is not one child that will be harmed through not having access to any of the no longer published books. Not one. The republicans on here arguing for keeping them in print are doing so from a place of self entered privilege and nothing else. Perhaps the GOP can purchase the copyrights and enter the publishing industry? Mulberry Street can be changed to MAGA Street. Come to think about Trump does kind of look like a Dr. Seuss character... Coincidence? Putin hears a Who?

I don't think any child will by harmed by keeping it either. Not one. So why get rid of it?

Also, do you think everyone who disagrees with you is a Republican? OP is not.

Finally, how exactly am I privileged? I have NO power whatsoever over the decision. Where is the privilege?

You don’t think depicting Black people as basically monkeys is harmful to any child? Fly that white hood high, I guess.

1) whether I think that or not, where is the privilege? Are thoughts mot free?
2) If we are agreed that the standard is subjective, why is it wrong to disagree on whether it is harmful?

You said it was harmful to no child. I’m not the one defending minstrel-levels of racism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So there are 500,000 dead, the economy is teetering, President Biden has a wildly popular bill to address both the economy and COVID and the GOP is distracting you all with this idiocy.

Congrats.

That's their modus operandi

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is not one child that will be harmed through not having access to any of the no longer published books. Not one. The republicans on here arguing for keeping them in print are doing so from a place of self entered privilege and nothing else. Perhaps the GOP can purchase the copyrights and enter the publishing industry? Mulberry Street can be changed to MAGA Street. Come to think about Trump does kind of look like a Dr. Seuss character... Coincidence? Putin hears a Who?

I don't think any child will by harmed by keeping it either. Not one. So why get rid of it?

Also, do you think everyone who disagrees with you is a Republican? OP is not.

Finally, how exactly am I privileged? I have NO power whatsoever over the decision. Where is the privilege?

You don’t think depicting Black people as basically monkeys is harmful to any child? Fly that white hood high, I guess.

1) whether I think that or not, where is the privilege? Are thoughts mot free?
2) If we are agreed that the standard is subjective, why is it wrong to disagree on whether it is harmful?

The pretend pseudo intellectualism of Jordan Peterson emerges from the basement!!! Welcome!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The first book of an all time great author and illustrator has been removed from print due to political pressure. For those trying to claim this is some sort of commercial decision - take a look at Amazon's Best Seller List.

This has already been discussed. Try to keep up.

It has, and you are being called out once again on your political motives, as is the publisher

Eh. Go read the only book in your possession, a tatty old copy of Little Black Sambo. Hey, it’s only subjective, right?

In an effort to derail this from devolving further, did you know that Little Black Sambo doesn't have any black characters? It takes place in India and its characters are Indian.

Yes, I did know that. I have my great-grandmother’s copy from her childhood somewhere in a box. But the similarity between the depiction of that character and the way Black people were rendered in a lot of different places (black face was EVERYWHERE if the antique stores in rural Virginia are any indication) meant that people saw a lot of parallels and it was commonly taken to be about Black people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Story_of_Little_Black_Sambo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there are 500,000 dead, the economy is teetering, President Biden has a wildly popular bill to address both the economy and COVID and the GOP is distracting you all with this idiocy.

Congrats.

That's their modus operandi

It's the only thing they can do. Certainly they can't govern or legislate.

GOP = hysterical drama queens

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So there are 500,000 dead, the economy is teetering, President Biden has a wildly popular bill to address both the economy and COVID and the GOP is distracting you all with this idiocy.

Congrats.

The people determined to cancel these books started this idiocy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The first book of an all time great author and illustrator has been removed from print due to political pressure. For those trying to claim this is some sort of commercial decision - take a look at Amazon's Best Seller List.

This has already been discussed. Try to keep up.

It has, and you are being called out once again on your political motives, as is the publisher

Eh. Go read the only book in your possession, a tatty old copy of Little Black Sambo. Hey, it’s only subjective, right?

In an effort to derail this from devolving further, did you know that Little Black Sambo doesn't have any black characters? It takes place in India and its characters are Indian.

Yes, I did know that. I have my great-grandmother’s copy from her childhood somewhere in a box. But the similarity between the depiction of that character and the way Black people were rendered in a lot of different places (black face was EVERYWHERE if the antique stores in rural Virginia are any indication) meant that people saw a lot of parallels and it was commonly taken to be about Black people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Story_of_Little_Black_Sambo

I know. I just thought that was interesting aside.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is not one child that will be harmed through not having access to any of the no longer published books. Not one. The republicans on here arguing for keeping them in print are doing so from a place of self entered privilege and nothing else. Perhaps the GOP can purchase the copyrights and enter the publishing industry? Mulberry Street can be changed to MAGA Street. Come to think about Trump does kind of look like a Dr. Seuss character... Coincidence? Putin hears a Who?

I don't think any child will by harmed by keeping it either. Not one. So why get rid of it?

Also, do you think everyone who disagrees with you is a Republican? OP is not.

Finally, how exactly am I privileged? I have NO power whatsoever over the decision. Where is the privilege?

You don’t think depicting Black people as basically monkeys is harmful to any child? Fly that white hood high, I guess.

1) whether I think that or not, where is the privilege? Are thoughts mot free?
2) If we are agreed that the standard is subjective, why is it wrong to disagree on whether it is harmful?

The pretend pseudo intellectualism of Jordan Peterson emerges from the basement!!! Welcome!

OMFG. Why don't you read some dead white guys and figure out where he got everything from? Oh, I know, because they are racist. You are so smart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there are 500,000 dead, the economy is teetering, President Biden has a wildly popular bill to address both the economy and COVID and the GOP is distracting you all with this idiocy.

Congrats.

The people determined to cancel these books started this idiocy.

You mean the people who own the copyright and have an absolute right to print or not print them? Does the GOP now stand for try us government forcing copyright holders to publish against their will? The same GOP that went apeshit over the completely made up possibility that the government might force people to eat broccoli?