Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when the ACLU represented the rights of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie? I think the liberals had it right then and are getting it wrong now. Censorship through other means is still censorship.

So what alternative are you proposing? That the publisher be FORCED to publish the book by the governement? Really?

This question has been asked about 10 times on this thread and no one will answer. I wonder why.

Still waiting.

I suppose that this point illustrates that it is current society itself that I "fear" - it seems there are thought police afoot that are powerful enough to have real impact on what is presented in the media, arts, news (I felt the same way with the way that Disney/MMA actress was treated - anyone that actually read her tweet could tell it was NOT anti-Semitic). These are corporations making decisions based on money, which is within their rights, but the far-left is trying to erase any exposure to things that they don't agree with or could be construed as offensive. And the far-left are either embedded within these corporations or have the money to exert influence. It's just a "scary" circular effect that seems wrong and the train is moving so fast in this direction with tech and social media and the 24/7 news cycle.

I would fear the thought police too. But the problem is there is no such thing as the thought police, only free people expressing their ideas and using their rights to live their lives as they see fit. The only way to fight this is to present better ideas on the marketplace of free ideas.

It's the twitter mob, the modern day equivalent of the torches and pitchforks. I'm sure the Dr. Seuss foundation saw it was either this or be burned to the ground.

The Twitter mob has no power to "burn the publisher to the ground." And they aren't typically big buyers of kids' books.

Is it possible that...just maybe... the publisher decided to do this on their own?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when the ACLU represented the rights of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie? I think the liberals had it right then and are getting it wrong now. Censorship through other means is still censorship.

So what alternative are you proposing? That the publisher be FORCED to publish the book by the governement? Really?

This question has been asked about 10 times on this thread and no one will answer. I wonder why.

Still waiting.

I suppose that this point illustrates that it is current society itself that I "fear" - it seems there are thought police afoot that are powerful enough to have real impact on what is presented in the media, arts, news (I felt the same way with the way that Disney/MMA actress was treated - anyone that actually read her tweet could tell it was NOT anti-Semitic). These are corporations making decisions based on money, which is within their rights, but the far-left is trying to erase any exposure to things that they don't agree with or could be construed as offensive. And the far-left are either embedded within these corporations or have the money to exert influence. It's just a "scary" circular effect that seems wrong and the train is moving so fast in this direction with tech and social media and the 24/7 news cycle.

I would fear the thought police too. But the problem is there is no such thing as the thought police, only free people expressing their ideas and using their rights to live their lives as they see fit. The only way to fight this is to present better ideas on the marketplace of free ideas.

It's the twitter mob, the modern day equivalent of the torches and pitchforks. I'm sure the Dr. Seuss foundation saw it was either this or be burned to the ground.

No corporation actually makes decisions based on tweets. They make decisions based on money. If you don't agree with something being said, then speak up, and let the corporations know that not everyone agrees with the point of view you find so objectionable. If you can't get enough people to speak up, then you lose in the marketplace of ideas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when the ACLU represented the rights of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie? I think the liberals had it right then and are getting it wrong now. Censorship through other means is still censorship.

So what alternative are you proposing? That the publisher be FORCED to publish the book by the governement? Really?

This question has been asked about 10 times on this thread and no one will answer. I wonder why.

Still waiting.

I suppose that this point illustrates that it is current society itself that I "fear" - it seems there are thought police afoot that are powerful enough to have real impact on what is presented in the media, arts, news (I felt the same way with the way that Disney/MMA actress was treated - anyone that actually read her tweet could tell it was NOT anti-Semitic). These are corporations making decisions based on money, which is within their rights, but the far-left is trying to erase any exposure to things that they don't agree with or could be construed as offensive. And the far-left are either embedded within these corporations or have the money to exert influence. It's just a "scary" circular effect that seems wrong and the train is moving so fast in this direction with tech and social media and the 24/7 news cycle.

I would fear the thought police too. But the problem is there is no such thing as the thought police, only free people expressing their ideas and using their rights to live their lives as they see fit. The only way to fight this is to present better ideas on the marketplace of free ideas.

It's the twitter mob, the modern day equivalent of the torches and pitchforks. I'm sure the Dr. Seuss foundation saw it was either this or be burned to the ground.

Really? What exactly can the “Twitter mob” do? Especially to Dr. Seuss books?

Some of the concerned people on this thread don’t seem to understand that you have complete control over how YOU participate in the culture. You can support whatever books movies etc. that you want to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when the ACLU represented the rights of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie? I think the liberals had it right then and are getting it wrong now. Censorship through other means is still censorship.

So what alternative are you proposing? That the publisher be FORCED to publish the book by the governement? Really?

This question has been asked about 10 times on this thread and no one will answer. I wonder why.

Still waiting.

I suppose that this point illustrates that it is current society itself that I "fear" - it seems there are thought police afoot that are powerful enough to have real impact on what is presented in the media, arts, news (I felt the same way with the way that Disney/MMA actress was treated - anyone that actually read her tweet could tell it was NOT anti-Semitic). These are corporations making decisions based on money, which is within their rights, but the far-left is trying to erase any exposure to things that they don't agree with or could be construed as offensive. And the far-left are either embedded within these corporations or have the money to exert influence. It's just a "scary" circular effect that seems wrong and the train is moving so fast in this direction with tech and social media and the 24/7 news cycle.

Here's a thought. Why doesn't the right or far right or whoever that cares so much about the agenda of the 'far left' do something to oppose them? I mean, the Mercers and Murdochs of the world aren't exactly poor, yaknow? Or is their only agenda to gin up outrage, but actually not do anything, because really, it doesn't much matter to them?

You still haven't come up with an answer to the question. IF a publisher decides to not publish a book, do you want them to be forced to do it? If a movie/TV show decides to fire an employee because they disapprove of their speech or conduct, should they be forced to keep them on as employees? How does that end?

Exactly. If you are bothered by this, contact the publisher. Start a social activist group. Publish the book yourselves.

But people MUST stop pretending that when someone uses their right to free speech, it's censorship to the rest of us. This idea is incredibly dangerous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when the ACLU represented the rights of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie? I think the liberals had it right then and are getting it wrong now. Censorship through other means is still censorship.

So what alternative are you proposing? That the publisher be FORCED to publish the book by the governement? Really?

This question has been asked about 10 times on this thread and no one will answer. I wonder why.

Still waiting.

I suppose that this point illustrates that it is current society itself that I "fear" - it seems there are thought police afoot that are powerful enough to have real impact on what is presented in the media, arts, news (I felt the same way with the way that Disney/MMA actress was treated - anyone that actually read her tweet could tell it was NOT anti-Semitic). These are corporations making decisions based on money, which is within their rights, but the far-left is trying to erase any exposure to things that they don't agree with or could be construed as offensive. And the far-left are either embedded within these corporations or have the money to exert influence. It's just a "scary" circular effect that seems wrong and the train is moving so fast in this direction with tech and social media and the 24/7 news cycle.

I would fear the thought police too. But the problem is there is no such thing as the thought police, only free people expressing their ideas and using their rights to live their lives as they see fit. The only way to fight this is to present better ideas on the marketplace of free ideas.

It's the twitter mob, the modern day equivalent of the torches and pitchforks. I'm sure the Dr. Seuss foundation saw it was either this or be burned to the ground.

Tune into The View on ABC: they’re discussing this after the commercial break.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when the ACLU represented the rights of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie? I think the liberals had it right then and are getting it wrong now. Censorship through other means is still censorship.

So what alternative are you proposing? That the publisher be FORCED to publish the book by the governement? Really?

This question has been asked about 10 times on this thread and no one will answer. I wonder why.

Still waiting.

I suppose that this point illustrates that it is current society itself that I "fear" - it seems there are thought police afoot that are powerful enough to have real impact on what is presented in the media, arts, news (I felt the same way with the way that Disney/MMA actress was treated - anyone that actually read her tweet could tell it was NOT anti-Semitic). These are corporations making decisions based on money, which is within their rights, but the far-left is trying to erase any exposure to things that they don't agree with or could be construed as offensive. And the far-left are either embedded within these corporations or have the money to exert influence. It's just a "scary" circular effect that seems wrong and the train is moving so fast in this direction with tech and social media and the 24/7 news cycle.

Here's a thought. Why doesn't the right or far right or whoever that cares so much about the agenda of the 'far left' do something to oppose them? I mean, the Mercers and Murdochs of the world aren't exactly poor, yaknow? Or is their only agenda to gin up outrage, but actually not do anything, because really, it doesn't much matter to them?

You still haven't come up with an answer to the question. IF a publisher decides to not publish a book, do you want them to be forced to do it? If a movie/TV show decides to fire an employee because they disapprove of their speech or conduct, should they be forced to keep them on as employees? How does that end?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when the ACLU represented the rights of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie? I think the liberals had it right then and are getting it wrong now. Censorship through other means is still censorship.

So what alternative are you proposing? That the publisher be FORCED to publish the book by the governement? Really?

This question has been asked about 10 times on this thread and no one will answer. I wonder why.

Still waiting.

I suppose that this point illustrates that it is current society itself that I "fear" - it seems there are thought police afoot that are powerful enough to have real impact on what is presented in the media, arts, news (I felt the same way with the way that Disney/MMA actress was treated - anyone that actually read her tweet could tell it was NOT anti-Semitic). These are corporations making decisions based on money, which is within their rights, but the far-left is trying to erase any exposure to things that they don't agree with or could be construed as offensive. And the far-left are either embedded within these corporations or have the money to exert influence. It's just a "scary" circular effect that seems wrong and the train is moving so fast in this direction with tech and social media and the 24/7 news cycle.

I would fear the thought police too. But the problem is there is no such thing as the thought police, only free people expressing their ideas and using their rights to live their lives as they see fit. The only way to fight this is to present better ideas on the marketplace of free ideas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please include links, people.

This story has multiple headlines on Fox News. That’s why troll op is glomming on to it.

The Dr. Seuss foundation says it will stop publishing several books due to racist stereotypes. It’s pretty stupid and I think the backlash will be pretty significant. That said, this is not due to the government action but because of people with power listening to an increasingly shrill and insane minority. They don’t seem to have any moral compass of their own so they just follow the Twitterati.

I’m OP, not a troll. Before posting here I mentioned this article to my husband (a conservative) and how it bothered me, and he said “well this is exactly what you voted for! You voted to affirm behavior like this”. Which made me very angry, and I turned here for a discussion. As a democrat, I am afraid of the influence this extremely loud minority has. I do not support pulling books from shelves, or re-writing history, or large tech companies silencing opposing or even offensive participants. It just seems like society is going to a weird place, and the corporations are perhaps in a place to censor on behalf of the government, which can claim it has no influence?

+1 fellow Democrat. There is also concern that this is coming from social pressure where people want to erase our past rather than engage it. From the AP article: "“Dr. Seuss Enterprises listened and took feedback from our audiences including teachers, academics and specialists in the field as part of our review process. We then worked with a panel of experts, including educators, to review our catalog of titles,” it said." I don't know what imagery is of concern. I might agree with their decision if I see the books myself. But we need to be cautious. How do we learn about the past if we erase it? How do we learn about culture (chopsticks) if we're not allowed to talk about it?

So all books ever written should be published forever?

After the copywrite expires, the work would become public domain and available to anyone to publish.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I came to the US in the mid 80s, from communist China. People in the modern day have no conception of what it's like to experience the western culture for the first time, coming from a nearly perfect state of vacuum. Everything was new, vibrant, and amazing, including sliced bread and bologna.

Now throw on top of this, Dr Seuss books. It's like adding Mentos to a bottle of soda. I remember vividly pulling those books off the shelf at the local public library, which was mind blowing in and of itself. An air-conditioned building where everyone is polite and quiet, filled with books! A children's section, my gawd! What are these books, with cats, funny hats, strange words, what does it all mean?

Of all the books I read during those first few months of being in the US, the only ones I remember is my English text book, and Dr Seuss books. Maybe Dr Seuss books contain racially insensitive content, but to stop printing a volume because it talks about Chinese people using chopsticks? I imagine the 11-year-old me would have giggled at understanding that one reference, a moment of familiarity on and otherwise wild mental ride.

That’s wonderful that the books gave you so much joy. Dr. Seuss had a very wide catalogue of other books that will still be published. My personal favorite is the 500 Hats of Bartholomew Cubbins. Also his fine art is available as puzzles from Liberty Puzzle. https://www.libertypuzzles.com/store/products/search?term=Seuss&category_id=&size=#results

Here are some of the images being referenced: https://library.nashville.org/blog/2019/08/tackling-racism-childrens-books-conversations-seussland

PP here. Thanks for sharing the article. People like to complain about racism, but then turn around and magnify race to their kids, relying on their own ill-conceived understandings of other cultures and what's important to them. Look at how this parent is leading with her questions to promote thoughts about race and stereotypes to her daughter, who is innocent and not at all interested in going on a guilt trip for thought crimes that she will only have committed because her mom put them there.

What's ironic is her description of the Chinese man image is so inaccurate as to show that she has no understanding of what Chinese people wear and how they eat. Yet she feels like she is in some position of authority to not only critique the book but also to influence her daughter with her own misinformed stereotypes. The image in the Dr. Seuss book is very clearly based loosely on a Qing Dynasty government/soldier uniform, as is indicated by the red hat covered in red tassels, red robe with an insignia in the front, and blue pants. The red "Muji" shoes are wrong because male officials/soldiers in the Qing dynasty wore boots or cloth shoes - which speaks to the artist's incorrect understanding, yet the blog author did not recognize this and saw it as stereotypical of what a Chinese wore. She also used the Japanese name for this shoe style, which is an odd thing to do. Similarly, the robe is just a government-issued robe, is not a Kasaya, which is the Japanese name for "Jiasha", a ceremonial robe wore by Buddhist monks. In terms of eating habits, people during Qing Dynasty only used spoons for cooking and drinking soup, but chopsticks for eating rice, exclusively. The bowl in the image is clearly a rice bowl, and not a soup bowl. They did not use spoons and certainly not forks for eating rice. To suggest that Chinese people commonly used spoons or even fo forks to eat in the Qing Dynasty is laughable.

Yet out of this abundantly displayed ignorance, the author feels like she is in an elevated moral position to pass judgment on the artwork of others, poison the mind of her kids, and to publish her self-righteous thoughts to the world.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when the ACLU represented the rights of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie? I think the liberals had it right then and are getting it wrong now. Censorship through other means is still censorship.

So what alternative are you proposing? That the publisher be FORCED to publish the book by the governement? Really?

This question has been asked about 10 times on this thread and no one will answer. I wonder why.

Still waiting.

I suppose that this point illustrates that it is current society itself that I "fear" - it seems there are thought police afoot that are powerful enough to have real impact on what is presented in the media, arts, news (I felt the same way with the way that Disney/MMA actress was treated - anyone that actually read her tweet could tell it was NOT anti-Semitic). These are corporations making decisions based on money, which is within their rights, but the far-left is trying to erase any exposure to things that they don't agree with or could be construed as offensive. And the far-left are either embedded within these corporations or have the money to exert influence. It's just a "scary" circular effect that seems wrong and the train is moving so fast in this direction with tech and social media and the 24/7 news cycle.

There is a whole different thread about Gina Carano, and it wasn’t just about one tweet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when the ACLU represented the rights of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie? I think the liberals had it right then and are getting it wrong now. Censorship through other means is still censorship.

So what alternative are you proposing? That the publisher be FORCED to publish the book by the governement? Really?

This question has been asked about 10 times on this thread and no one will answer. I wonder why.

Still waiting.

I suppose that this point illustrates that it is current society itself that I "fear" - it seems there are thought police afoot that are powerful enough to have real impact on what is presented in the media, arts, news (I felt the same way with the way that Disney/MMA actress was treated - anyone that actually read her tweet could tell it was NOT anti-Semitic). These are corporations making decisions based on money, which is within their rights, but the far-left is trying to erase any exposure to things that they don't agree with or could be construed as offensive. And the far-left are either embedded within these corporations or have the money to exert influence. It's just a "scary" circular effect that seems wrong and the train is moving so fast in this direction with tech and social media and the 24/7 news cycle.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please include links, people.

This story has multiple headlines on Fox News. That’s why troll op is glomming on to it.

The Dr. Seuss foundation says it will stop publishing several books due to racist stereotypes. It’s pretty stupid and I think the backlash will be pretty significant. That said, this is not due to the government action but because of people with power listening to an increasingly shrill and insane minority. They don’t seem to have any moral compass of their own so they just follow the Twitterati.

I’m OP, not a troll. Before posting here I mentioned this article to my husband (a conservative) and how it bothered me, and he said “well this is exactly what you voted for! You voted to affirm behavior like this”. Which made me very angry, and I turned here for a discussion. As a democrat, I am afraid of the influence this extremely loud minority has. I do not support pulling books from shelves, or re-writing history, or large tech companies silencing opposing or even offensive participants. It just seems like society is going to a weird place, and the corporations are perhaps in a place to censor on behalf of the government, which can claim it has no influence?

+1 fellow Democrat. There is also concern that this is coming from social pressure where people want to erase our past rather than engage it. From the AP article: "“Dr. Seuss Enterprises listened and took feedback from our audiences including teachers, academics and specialists in the field as part of our review process. We then worked with a panel of experts, including educators, to review our catalog of titles,” it said." I don't know what imagery is of concern. I might agree with their decision if I see the books myself. But we need to be cautious. How do we learn about the past if we erase it? How do we learn about culture (chopsticks) if we're not allowed to talk about it?

So all books ever written should be published forever?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please include links, people.

This story has multiple headlines on Fox News. That’s why troll op is glomming on to it.

The Dr. Seuss foundation says it will stop publishing several books due to racist stereotypes. It’s pretty stupid and I think the backlash will be pretty significant. That said, this is not due to the government action but because of people with power listening to an increasingly shrill and insane minority. They don’t seem to have any moral compass of their own so they just follow the Twitterati.

I’m OP, not a troll. Before posting here I mentioned this article to my husband (a conservative) and how it bothered me, and he said “well this is exactly what you voted for! You voted to affirm behavior like this”. Which made me very angry, and I turned here for a discussion. As a democrat, I am afraid of the influence this extremely loud minority has. I do not support pulling books from shelves, or re-writing history, or large tech companies silencing opposing or even offensive participants. It just seems like society is going to a weird place, and the corporations are perhaps in a place to censor on behalf of the government, which can claim it has no influence?

+1 fellow Democrat. There is also concern that this is coming from social pressure where people want to erase our past rather than engage it. From the AP article: "“Dr. Seuss Enterprises listened and took feedback from our audiences including teachers, academics and specialists in the field as part of our review process. We then worked with a panel of experts, including educators, to review our catalog of titles,” it said." I don't know what imagery is of concern. I might agree with their decision if I see the books myself. But we need to be cautious. How do we learn about the past if we erase it? How do we learn about culture (chopsticks) if we're not allowed to talk about it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please include links, people.

This story has multiple headlines on Fox News. That’s why troll op is glomming on to it.

The Dr. Seuss foundation says it will stop publishing several books due to racist stereotypes. It’s pretty stupid and I think the backlash will be pretty significant. That said, this is not due to the government action but because of people with power listening to an increasingly shrill and insane minority. They don’t seem to have any moral compass of their own so they just follow the Twitterati.

I’m OP, not a troll. Before posting here I mentioned this article to my husband (a conservative) and how it bothered me, and he said “well this is exactly what you voted for! You voted to affirm behavior like this”. Which made me very angry, and I turned here for a discussion. As a democrat, I am afraid of the influence this extremely loud minority has. I do not support pulling books from shelves, or re-writing history, or large tech companies silencing opposing or even offensive participants. It just seems like society is going to a weird place, and the corporations are perhaps in a place to censor on behalf of the government, which can claim it has no influence?

If Trump were President, what would he do to stop this? Sure, he would tweet about it and turn conservative cancel culture against the publisher. But what could he really do to stop it?

Not the OP, but agree let's take this out of the political realm. The important question here IMO is how much do we value free expression and free speech as a society. Even without any government action, major corporations and organizations can act to effectively severely restrict expression and remove a number of historic works from circulation.

Aren't Dr Seuss books in their way significant pieces of art. Do we want any significant works like this effectively removed from the public record. For all our lives things like "Birth of a Nation", "Mein Kampf" etc have been available for people to view or read. We abhor all the sentiments in them but as a society we believed in the value of free expression. Do we want major organizations to decide for us whether these types of works should be available. What if "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" comes up soon.

If you are concerned about removing "historic works from circulation" why don't you explain what should be done? Should every book ever written be published forever? If not, who decides which are worth publishing and which aren't?

Anyone?