When is cencorship apropriate?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stanislaw

I read all of the other posts and am a bit perplexed. I could go to another librarry, but that is not the point, I was outraged that certain books would be censored, especially if they are neede to complete class assignments. I am also not sure why banning religiouse texts from a library would prevent an incident, like columbine.

---

peculiar...
did you read the school policy or library policy where it said that they must provide all the books required for any class assignments?
i`m pretty sure that the library besides the books in question does not have even half of the actual amount of literature required for the whole school to complete assignments. i`m not even talking about additional literature...

anyway... you probably feel now very satisfied and all....congratulations. this "juvenile maximalism" passes relatively fast anyway.
next time do try to consider the school`s point of view as well. it might help, you know...heh

The 'generation gap' constitutes about 1% of the underlying problem behind conflicts that transpire between parents and children or teachers and students. A generation gap is when progress (or change) clashes with tradition, that's not the same as a communication breakdown. For example, my parents made the same stupid mistakes that I have (and even some I haven't), so, at worst, there should be a bridge of sympathy between our generation and theirs. I think the the fact that parents and school administrators are being given power over young people might explain why that bridge is seldom crossed.

Personally, I don't believe in 'progress', scientific or otherwise. The institutions of Family and Education seem to rest on a false sense of security because their purpose has meaning only insofar as they produce efficient workers (or drones) who can easily be reduced to Capitalist machinery. Security requires that people own things like property, people, ideas, &c, which is personified in the Capitalist. Kerouac showed how insecurity is congenial with anarchy in On the Road; how uplifting one's roots, losing one's sense of 'territorialism' (a strange term coined by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guatari in the Marxist study of psychoanalysis, Anti-Oedipus, to define the state of human possession over the World), led to an anxiety that philosophers like Heidegger and Camus embraced (this is known as Existentialism). Anxiety is different from fear though: fear has an object, anxiety doesn't. Because it has no object of its own, anxiety is often the object of fear, a feeling of horror that, to many, is impossible embrace. If you've seen 'Apocalypse Now' you might recall Col. Kurtz' famous line, 'horror can be a friend, but if he is not, then he is truly an enemy to be feared'.

Schools censor thought, whether you choose to embrace this idea or not. They censor speech, too. They vehemently reject anxiety (political or whatever) and insecurity (social, &c.) with every joule of energy they can muster. A school's most important function is to undermine any idea, any force, that could call into question the motives of the State (in our case, the United States). For this reason you will not read about the federally funded terrorist network, the School of the Americanas, in South America that has been working under the iron curtain of the Reagan and Bush administrations for two decades. Al Quaeda pales in comparison to the ruthless savagery of this proxy force. Any christians here might be alarmed to know that thousands of Jesuit followers in El Salvadore were assassinated for supporting a self-imposed democratic regime. You will not learn of the ruthless butchering of human beings for supporting a government that refused to partake in the US political marionette. No, that would throw everything, including the War on Terror, into radical doubt. Of course, none of this could be kept secret or, even worse, made to seem like ridiculous conspiracy theorising, without the aid of schools.

Take Vietnam, for instance. Lyndon Johnson had the same ethnocentric mentality that Hitler had towards jews when it came to dealing with the Vietnamese. The list of war atrocities in Vietnam is only slightly shorter than the number of atrocities the US funded proxy army, the Contra force, committed in Nicaragua in 1987. What? Never heard of the Contras? That doesn't surprise me, the US can't pardon itself until Bush's son is out of office and all ties to those atrocities are severed. That's how the game works. The US admits to its mistakes only when they've become irrelevent. They apologized for Vietnam, it will never happen again. We can forget about it, move on with our lives. No one is responsible, it was just another mistake to ponder in our history books.

No, that's not right. We'll vote 'em out of office! Next election's coming up soon, we'll just get rid of the sour apples and straighten the whole mess out. Every vote counts. You can vote for Ralph Nader for a clean, honest political agenda. Yes! . . . but wait . . . Ralph Nader, the same Ralph who pushed for better seat belts and safer cars, and for a greener Earth, is guilty of taking favors from big corporations? Well, m-maybe he just wanted to help fund his campaign, try and compete with the Big Runners. It's not fair to Ralph. Well, to be honest, it isn't fair to anyone. If there's any evidence that corporations are running this country, it lay in the fact that political campaigns are privately funded; in other words, the ones with the most financial backing stand the best chance of winning. People are so easily coerced. But I thought we lived in an Individualist society where everyone made their own choices? Well, heh, Individualism, at best, calls for taking responsibility for one's own actions. But here in the US the media tells us which words to use, what ideas are popular, which ethics are sound; they control what we wear, what we think, what we eat, everything. And who owns the media? The corporations. [<gasp>]

Can't anything be done? Well, some people here aren't very optimistic, but then, optimism for reform never was very popular among the CEOs and the other Powers that be. Popularity is a contest the media plays with us, giving us something to live for, something to hold on to. Status. We're all trying to climb up that pillar of success and notoriety, it is climb or be climbed over. See, what happens is when you start thinking about the nature of status and whether it's good for human beings to divide themselves amongst each other, you wind up with a foot lodged in your face. In other words, the easiest way to the bottom of the pole is asking questions: where does this lead?, why are we climbing it?, can we all fit on the top? If there is any hope for revolution or reform, it will have to come from the below. I don't have an answer myself, I don't care much for politics.

[Sorry if I moved too far beyond the topic of censorship, it's not so simple an issue as you might think.]

I am quite surprised that the high school in question doesn't allow religious writings. My high school library not only has expositories on religions, but also has The Bible Codes, Dead Sea Scrolls, controversial prophecies (ie Nostradamus'), and even the Old Testament. I don't think any written material ought to be prohibited; to do so would be unjust to the readers of the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AbdoRinbo

The 'generation gap' constitutes about 1% of the underlying problem behind conflicts that transpire between parents and children or teachers and students. A generation gap is when progress (or change) clashes with tradition, that's not the same as a communication breakdown. For example, my parents made the same stupid mistakes that I have (and even some I haven't), so, at worst, there should be a bridge of sympathy between our generation and theirs.

---

heh...there should....but no one proved that it must be there....there are very many illogical things.....nothing to do about it.
and i`m sorry but i dont really think that the definition of the generation gap that you provided is accurate and can actually difine the notion. believe it or not but even people that were born and grew-up in the century of progress and technology are going to have their "gaps" with the children....it is not about traditions or whatever....i assume that the main point is in the fact that the adults have experience and therefore there come points when you cannot really explain anything (which, certainly, is a drawback) but just say "dont do this or that, or else..." sad....but true (c). of course this is perhaps not the best definition as well, but i wrote it just to illustrate the point that i have in mind.

Quote:

---

I think the the fact that parents and school administrators are being given power over young people might explain why that bridge is seldom crossed.

---

and again i think that this is not really so....well, yes, administration and parents do have the power - but in most cases, as to the administration, you are able to avoid it. taking this particular example (this censorship thing at the school) - the guy had the ways to avoid it, didn`t he? yes, he did. but he did not use them. who`s to blame? basically if you follow the rules and do not get impudent you are probably are going to stay out of trouble with the administration as well as with parents. however, i do not advocate total resignation....but one just have to know when it is possible to make an issue of something and when not. unfortunately, the latter variant sounds more realistic.

Quote:

---

Schools censor thought, whether you choose to embrace this idea or not. They censor speech, too. They vehemently reject anxiety (political or whatever) and insecurity (social, &c.) with every joule of energy they can muster. A school's most important function is to undermine any idea, any force, that could call into question the motives of the State (in our case, the United States). For this reason you will not read about the federally funded terrorist network, the School of the Americanas, in South America that has been working under the iron curtain of the Reagan and Bush administrations for two decades.

---

Now in this topic everyone....almost everyone talks about the way school restricts and bannes and forbids and what not. no one, however, suggested any other ways.....logically reasoned...ways according to which any school could teach stuff they have to teach them. + besides the facts and general knowledges, teach them how it is appropriate to behave in society....just to be able to exist there....unfortunately, the culture starts with taboos.
as an example: allowing to do everything at school is just as allowing kind to eat everything they like....and in this case they`ll probably be dead in a couple of weeks...

Quote:

---

...I don't have an answer myself,

---

neither do I. but i can assure you that such things happen everywhere...

Quote:

---

I don't care much for politics.

---

yeah...right...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Demona

heh...there should....but no one proved that it must be there....there are very many illogical things.....nothing to do about it.

---

Good, then we are in agreement. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Demona

and i`m sorry but i dont really think that the definition of the generation gap that you provided is accurate and can actually difine the notion. believe it or not but even people that were born and grew-up in the century of progress and technology are going to have their "gaps" with the children....it is not about traditions or whatever....

---

I'm sorry, I just don't see any clash here. I never said (and I hope I never implied) that technology and progress could bridge the gap between parents and youths, in fact I'm pretty sure I pointed out that progress was a fallacy. But I did say that tradition and change are what separate each generation, you're right. It makes sense though, am I wrong? Life experience isn't what separates us, in fact it often has the contrary effect of bringing people closer together through shared learning. But there are some things that our parents, with all of their wisdom, will never understand (such as growing up computer literate, having access to a treasure trove of knowledge that they could only have dreamed of at our age). That's what a generation gap is, a change in the times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Demona

i think that this is not really so....well, yes, administration and parents do have the power - but in most cases, as to the administration, you are able to avoid it. taking this particular example (this censorship thing at the school) - the guy had the ways to avoid it, didn`t he? yes, he did. but he did not use them. who`s to blame? basically if you follow the rules and do not get impudent you are probably are going to stay out of trouble with the administration as well as with parents. however, i do not advocate total resignation....but one just have to know when it is possible to make an issue of something and when not. unfortunately, the latter variant sounds more realistic.

---

You're only seeing one side of the power coin. The mere fact that he had to choose between rejecting someone else's will or satisfying it is proof enough that he was repressed by desires that were not his own. The power to keep someone alive and happy is just as overwhelming and oppressive as the power to punish. Remember, torment is not just biological. We are not born with an innate set of laws, we are forced into them. Some people naturally reject them, and who is to say whether they can help it or not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Demona

Now in this topic everyone....almost everyone talks about the way school restricts and bannes and forbids and what not. no one, however, suggested any other ways.....logically reasoned...ways according to which any school could teach stuff they have to teach them. + besides the facts and general knowledges, teach them how it is appropriate to behave in society....just to be able to exist there....unfortunately, the culture starts with taboos.
as an example: allowing to do everything at school is just as allowing kind to eat everything they like....and in this case they`ll probably be dead in a couple of weeks...

---

Do I have to offer an alternative even if I know I'm not capable? I see what's wrong with the US government and its society, but who am I to say I know how to change it for the better? There are things they are doing wrong that I'm probably not even aware of, so how am I to fix them? I know that in the US you are taught how to function in a democratic society, that's the farthest aim. We are told what we can and can't do, what the penalities are for breaking the rules, and those who aren't kicked out are taught how to succeed at a certain vocation. Being told what not to do is just as important as being told what to do, and the question arises as to what would happen if we were given free reign over the Earth. Do you think we are innately evil and would destroy everything, including ourselves, given the first opportunity? Like I said, the issue with censorship is more complicated than banning books and blacklisting authors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Demona

yeah...right...

---

Alright, I'll admit my guilty pleasure is Noam Chomsky. Other than that I think it just a popularity contest.

Chomsky? The linguist?
(i have a feeling i shouldn't just read the last 2 sentences of a thread...but the rest is so long and i lost track so long ago...)

I finally have my computer back and running properly. I am glad to hear that other schools do have these texts. And to answer a question, It does not say anywhere in the school policies about needing to have certain books, but it also does not speek about censored books. I am also not doing this just to feel good. But to set a wrong right. These books are needed for variouse classes and I feel that they should be availiable to the students.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koa

Chomsky? The linguist?

---

Chomsky the Linguist and Political Dissident (capitalized like a Comic Book Hero).

Good, then we are in agreement. :D

:yes: :)

Quote:

---

I'm sorry, I just don't see any clash here. I never said (and I hope I never implied) that technology and progress could bridge the gap between parents and youths, in fact I'm pretty sure I pointed out that progress was a fallacy. But I did say that tradition and change are what separate each generation, you're right. It makes sense though, am I wrong?

---

perhaps i misunderstood something. i admit, but what i was trying to say is that despite the fact that parents might be technically advanced and just as good as kids are with all those new thingies - it does not necessarely mean that they will understand each other. i`m pretty confused with the rich choise of points....so pardon me... heh

Quote:

---

Life experience isn't what separates us, in fact it often has the contrary effect of bringing people closer together through shared learning.

---

aha! it brings people together if they are capable of normal communication! which does not really sound like truth, to my mind...

Quote:

---

But there are some things that our parents, with all of their wisdom, will never understand (such as growing up computer literate, having access to a treasure trove of knowledge that they could only have dreamed of at our age). That's what a generation gap is, a change in the times.

---

now here goes the point that i stated above: being computer literate does not really change anything. yes they (meaning parents) might as well be computer literate and whatnot, but it does not mean that misunderstandings are not going to take place. i do agree though that the generation gap is the change of the times, but i also think that it should be perceived differently, that is, you are right about this technology things from the point of view of change - meaning that since the things change they influence peoples way of thinking and understanding life and generally any kind of facts. since times change adults also have the possibility of acquiring things that they did not have, but with this the generation gap is not becoming less. therefore, i suggest that the things you brough as an example only influence the way of thinking and understanding things, and this difference (we should understand that growing up with something and acquiring something later are different things) is the core of the so called generation gap.
i`m sorry for my confused articulation....i just dont have enough time to make it sound normal.

Quote:

---

You're only seeing one side of the power coin. The mere fact that he had to choose between rejecting someone else's will or satisfying it is proof enough that he was repressed by desires that were not his own. The power to keep someone alive and happy is just as overwhelming and oppressive as the power to punish. Remember, torment is not just biological. We are not born with an innate set of laws, we are forced into them. Some people naturally reject them, and who is to say whether they can help it or not?

---

you are not quite right in stating that. i do see the other side and i stated in one of my very first posts. it is just everyone else seems to reject the side that i`m trying to present. that is it.
exactly, we are forced into these laws. but if you want to make something of your life i`m afraid you have to follow them.

Quote:

---

Do I have to offer an alternative even if I know I'm not capable? I see what's wrong with the US government and its society, but who am I to say I know how to change it for the better? There are things they are doing wrong that I'm probably not even aware of, so how am I to fix them? I know that in the US you are taught how to function in a democratic society, that's the farthest aim. We are told what we can and can't do, what the penalities are for breaking the rules, and those who aren't kicked out are taught how to succeed at a certain vocation. Being told what not to do is just as important as being told what to do, and the question arises as to what would happen if we were given free reign over the Earth. Do you think we are innately evil and would destroy everything, including ourselves, given the first opportunity? Like I said, the issue with censorship is more complicated than banning books and blacklisting authors.

---

of course you dont. but in this case be careful with criticism. it is very easy to criticise - but try to create a system of your own that would satisfy everyone and every criteria, that functions perfectly and achieves its goals with no errors.
but you are aware of the school system and obviously you are not really pleased with that....how would you fix it? let`s not again dive in verbiage but try to deal with more particulare issues.
yes, i think so. everything depends on the culture, on the way a person is brought up....but you cannot guarantee that everyone is going to be equal, happy and so...there is always this balance...that has to be controlled...

i never said that censorship is not a complicated issue i was just trying to keep the conversation tied to this particular example in other case it is just going to expand too much. that`s it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stanislaw

I finally have my computer back and running properly. I am glad to hear that other schools do have these texts. And to answer a question, It does not say anywhere in the school policies about needing to have certain books, but it also does not speek about censored books. I am also not doing this just to feel good. But to set a wrong right. These books are needed for variouse classes and I feel that they should be availiable to the students.

---

right....but did you find out precisely how the library chooses the books? are they obliged to provide all the materials that are required for completing tasks?
next point...the whole business started (message on the forum i mean) on 10th of September. obviously, it took you some time to compile the letter, to send it and, as your last post proves, to read the policies (not that this is generally useless, but, i suppose, you`d never even think of spending time on that be it not for this case) and so on.......imagine! you could have spent all this time reading the books that you wanted to read....finding another library and books would probably take about an hour if not less...(in case you know particularly what you are looking for). i wonder if you did bother to find the books in another library or just told your lecturer that the school library does not have them....anyway, i dont mean to be ironic or what ever...but it is just that i still think that apart from the censorship issue this is not really a point to make a fuss about. besides, as far as i understood the conclusion that the books are banned was your idea...right? did you ever think that there might be another reason why they are not there? as far as i remeber the lady answered you that it was a public school...maybe she meant that it was not a national library, which is sort of obliged to have a really wide choise of books...