Parents should not be able to banish books at school libraries

A commitment to intellectual freedom and social justice requires that libraries not only protect the truth from suppression, but also prevent its distortion. [1]

The American Library Association is committed to upholding our core values, which include equitable access to knowledge, social justice, and intellectual freedom. As members of a profession committed to free and equitable access to information and the pursuit of truth, we stand firm in opposing any effort to suppress knowledge, to label “controversial” views, or dictate what is orthodox in history, politics, or belief. [1]

[BLOCKQUOTE] Starting in 1934, it was illegal to criticize the Nazi government. Even telling a joke about Hitler was considered treachery. People in Nazi Germany could not say or write whatever they wanted.

Examples of censorship under the Nazis included:

- Closing down or taking over anti-Nazi newspapers;

- Controlling what news appeared in newspapers, on the radio, and in newsreels;

-

Banning and burning books that the Nazis categorized as un-German;

- Controlling what soldiers wrote home during World War II. [3]

The Nazi Party tried to extend its influence over all aspects of German society. The Hitler Youth and the League of German Girls were developed as Nazi Party youth groups to introduce children and juveniles to Nazi ideology and policy. These youth groups also prepared Germany’s young people for war. [4]

The Nazi state wanted the Hitler Youth to be in charge of all German youth. They saw other youth movements as competition. In 1933, political youth groups were quickly incorporated or suppressed. However, apolitical and religious youth groups lasted well into the 1930s. The dissolution and incorporation of youth groups was part of a society-wide process called Gleichschaltung, or “coordination.” [4]

All youth organisations under the Nazi Party were anti-intellectual. Whilst they did not replace school, they reduced the influence and importance of education to children. [5]

The Nazis also adapted where the students learned from. They introduced new textbooks which were often racist, and promoted ideas such the need for Lebensraum . Any textbooks used to educate students had to be approved by the party. [5]

As a primary source of education and enjoyment, literature was a key target for Nazi reform.

The Nazis initially blacklisted authors they did not like or approve of. Many of the authors targeted were Jewish, such as Max Brod, but the Nazis had a range of other opponents who were also targeted, from communists, such as Karl Marx, to socialists, to foreign influences.

This blacklisting led to a series of book burnings led by the National Socialist German Students Association, a group of university students who strongly supported the Nazis. [5]

The trouble began on Oct. 4, 2020, when my colleagues and I—Dr. Martin Kulldorff, a professor of medicine at Harvard University, and Dr. Sunetra Gupta, an epidemiologist at the University of Oxford— published the Great Barrington Declaration. It called for an end to economic lockdowns, school shutdowns, and similar restrictive policies because they disproportionately harm the young and economically disadvantaged while conferring limited benefits...

Federal officials immediately targeted the Great Barrington Declaration for suppression. Four days after the declaration’s publication, National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins emailed Fauci to organize a “devastating takedown” of the document. Almost immediately, social media companies such as Google/YouTube, Reddit, and Facebook censored mentions of the declaration.

In 2021, Twitter blacklisted me for posting a link to the Great Barrington Declaration. YouTube censored a video of a public policy roundtable of me with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for the “crime” of telling him the scientific evidence for masking children is weak. [6]

Third, government-ordered lockdowns have been unimaginably destructive, as readers of AIER’s research know. The collateral damage spreads in every direction: Heart attack death rates spiked because patients were kept away from needed care. Tens of thousands of preventable cancer deaths and cancer diagnoses will be traced to delayed treatment and screening caused by lockdowns.

The isolation, job loss and depression triggered by lockdowns will lead to 75,000 deaths from drug abuse, alcoholism and suicide. And surely there’s a correlation between the lockdowns and the 30-percent surge in homicides in 2020—the largest single-year increase in 50 years. One study estimates “mortality, morbidity, mental health conditions and direct economic losses” in America to be a staggering $16.121 trillion— “more than twice the total monetary outlay for all the wars the U.S. has fought since September 11, 2001.” [9]

"Only the continuous and steady application of the methods for suppressing a doctrine, etc., makes it possible for a plan to succeed." [12]

 “no book ban has occurred in Walton County.”

The process to remove a book from a library can differ from school to school. On average the process includes a review of content. In some cases, books are not removed from a school library after a complaint is reviewed. 

Presenter Keira Parrott describes determining grade level as “more of an art then a science” and that SLJ does not use a checklist or rubric to assign grade level recommendations to titles. The factors SLJ uses to determine grade level include age of the protagonists, the plot, and the complexity of the text in addition to content. Parrott also notes that they do not use the publishers recommended grade levels in their reviews, since those grade levels are assigned by marketing teams to sell the title to the widest audience possible. She then goes on to explain that when providing information about mature content in titles, there is a difference between sexual content and character’s identities. The example she uses is that it may be worth mentioning that their are graphic depictions of sex in a title in a review so that collectors can make informed choices about what they’re buying and where it should go in their libraries, but if a character just happens to be LGBTQ that may or may not be relevance depending on the plot of the title. Another presenter Mahnaz Dar makes that point of the importance of being value neutral when mentioning mature content in reviews, stating that the goal is to inform readers about what takes place in the book and in what context not to tell them how to feel about it. 

Above article highlights mutual concerns for abusive approaches to banning any book from a school library.

The contents at a library should mirror the developmental stage of its audience.

Indeed, Nobel Laureate F. A. Hayek argued that the worst people tend to get to the top of government power structures. Hayek’s analysis focused on totalitarian governments in the run up to World War II, but similar dynamics are at work in contemporary democracies. [1] 

while disinformation is a serious problem worthy of debate and countermeasures, censorship and repression is likely to be a cure worse than the disease. [2]

As current debates illustrate, one person’s cherished truth is someone else’s despised or feared “fake news.” Speech that critics seek to suppress as disinformation almost never consists of objectively verifiable facts alone, but rather, also involves subjective matters of interpretation and analysis. [2]

We can see from the above links that censorship is well in place for many years. We can consider it a precedent. Censorship exists.

There is a review process, my point 1b, that limits censorship at our schools.

Sometimes that review processes occurs when a complaint is made or prior to obtaining books for a library.

There is a natural balance between censorship to non-censorship in our society today.

A commitment to intellectual freedom and social justice requires that libraries not only protect the truth from suppression, but also prevent its distortion.[3]

the ideal of informed citizenship necessitates an educated public. Educators must provide an accurate view of the past in order to better prepare students for community participation and robust civic engagement. Suppressing or watering down discussion of “divisive concepts” in educational institutions deprives students of opportunities to discuss and foster solutions to social division and injustice. [4]

The CATO Institute ... thoroughly disagrees:

Different ages and stages will require different frameworks for approaching discussions about puberty, sexuality, identity, and consent. 

A 4 year old is on average learning to read. They do not need novels or text books. A 10 year old on average will be able to read what the 4 year old can not, but is still limited in capabilities. Likewise, a 10 year old, on average, does not benefit from reading books intended for 6 month olds or 4 year olds. The books we expect these ages to read would not benefit the average college student. 

 The earlier a child is exposed to sexual content and begins having sex, the likelier they are to engage in high-risk sex. Research shows that children who have sex by age 13 are more likely to have multiple sexual partners, engage in frequent intercourse, have unprotected sex, and use drugs or alcohol before sex.

PRO also is likely aware that murder has been well in place for many years. PRO therefore argues we should allow murder.

There is a natural balance between censorship to non-censorship in our society today. Forces push and pull. The more important part is having a method in managing what needs to be censored vs. material that does not need to be censored. 

So, while disinformation is a serious problem worthy of debate and countermeasures, censorship and repression is likely to be a cure worse than the disease. 

As I meticulously documented in my round 1 opening statement (which PRO has completely left uncontested, meaning he agrees with it), the Nazis had a review process as well.

He also completely ignored my entire opening statement