____________________

One story, curated by Gregory Bufithis. More about me here.

____________________


THOUGHTS OVER MY MORNING COFFEE:


The attack on American education:

emulating Nazi book burning



"The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists. It is the same in all totalitarian regimes. Mass leaders seize power, and then fit reality to their lies, their propaganda marked by its extreme contempt for facts".


- Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (1950)



18 MAY 2023 -- On 10 May 1933, a bonfire was held on Unter den Linden in Berlin, the boulvard which sits at the heart of the historic section of Berlin. By the 19th century, as Berlin grew and expanded to the west, Unter den Linden became the most renowned and grandest street in Berlin.


Watched by a cheering crowd of almost 40,000 regular citizens and Nazi military and staff, a group of students marched up to the fire carrying a bust of Magnus Hirschfeld, the Jewish founder of the Institute of Sexual Sciences. Chanting the "Feuersprüche", a series of fire incantations, they threw the bust on top of thousands of volumes from the institute's library, which had joined books by Jewish and other "un-German" writers (gays and communists prominent among them), that had been seized from bookshops and libraries. The books burned even included works by American authors F. Scott Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway, Helen Keller, Jack London, and Upton Sinclair. Even British authors Joseph Conrad, Aldous Huxley, D. H. Lawrence, and H. G. Wells.


Rows of young men in Nazi uniforms stood around the fire saluting. Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi Party Minister of Propaganda gave a speech:


"No to decadence and moral corruption! Yes to decency and morality in family and state! The future German man will not just be a man of books, but a man of character. It is to this end that we want to educate you. You do well to commit to the flames the evil spirit of the past. This is a strong, great and symbolic deed".


These public book burnings were repeated 100s of times across Germany.


90 years later, the excuses of "decency" and "morality" are being used by those who seek to control the books that people can access in public libraries across many U.S. states.


PEN America has tracked more than 4,000 instances of books being challenged or removed from American public libraries since July 2021, with more than 1400 between July and December 2022 alone. The repressive action began with an organised takeover of U.S. local education boards by alt-right Republicans, which boards govern public libraries in most states.


NOTE TO READERS: the system is different in the UK, for example, where local authorities have been required since 1964 to provide libraries as a public duty).


Schools have also been targeted, with right-wing pressure groups such as "Moms for Liberty" (recognizing no irony as they oppose the freedom to read) controlling which books are stocked in classrooms or school libraries. One of the books the group sought to ban in Tennessee was "Ruby Bridges Goes to School", which celebrates racial integration in schools. In Florida, the state Education Department rejected two new Holocaust-focused textbooks for classroom use. As to this latter rejection, it might make sense. As a Florida teacher noted sarcastically on Twitter:


"Obviously Ron DeSantis [Florida's governor who has spearheaded the book bans in his state] doesn't want people to see the similarities between Republicans and the Nazi party".


Since last year, 7 U.S. states have introduced restrictive legislation:


  • Florida is considered to be the most restrictive, requiring the state's Education Department to vet all books in all school libraries and classrooms across the state, with access to books withheld until the vetting can take place.
  • In Tennessee, publishers and booksellers are subject to criminal prosecution if they sell "obscene" books to public schools - with at least 4 more states contemplating the adoption of similar criminal prosecution laws.
  • In Indiana, a new education bill imposes controls on books that could be considered "morally, sexually or intellectually" offensive to a "reasonable person" (Goebbels would smile). It places the onus on librarians to censor books which they have been acquiring and making available to their communities for many years, or risk being charged with felonies that carry custodial sentences. Many of the targeted books have LGBTQIA+ subjects but racial equity also features prominently.
  • The New College of Florida, a liberal arts college in Sarasota, is part of the "independent" state university system. Appointments to its board of trustees are in the hands of the governor. The librarian and chief diversity officer were both fired for opposing the ultra-conservative policy perspectives of the new board members appointed by Florida governor Ron DeSantis in January.


Meanwhile in the UK, a survey carried out by the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals found a spike in demands from members of the public to censor or remove books from library shelves. So far these challenges have not moved into the legal frameworks that govern libraries, but media comment is that the profession will have to remain vigilant as alt-right politics moves into UK communities.


On 10 May 1934, a year after the book burning in Berlin, the Deutsche Freiheitsbibliothek (German Freedom Library) opened in Paris. Founded by Alfred Kantorowicz, with support from literary alum such as André Gide, Heinrich Mann, Bertrand Russell among others, it collected more than 20,000 volumes: not only the books targeted for burning in Germany but also copies of key Nazi texts, to help understand the emerging regime. The library became a focus for German émigré intellectuals, with organised readings, lectures and exhibitions, much to the disgust of Nazi newspapers.


NOTE TO READERS: when the library was broken up after the fall of Paris in June 1940, most of the volumes were hidden, and after the war joined the collections of the Bibliothèque Nationale.


There is a fight-back in America today, too:


  • In Illinois, a bill has been passed prohibiting libraries from banning books under partisan or doctrinal pressure.
  • In Glen Ridge, New Jersey, the public library board of trustees voted unanimously in February to keep six challenged books on the shelves, following a mobilisation of public opinion by librarians and others concerned with the freedom to read.
  • In Texas, an organised effort pushed for a judicial review of twelve books removed from the public library of Llano County. The judge reversed the ban and required the books to be returned to the shelves in April.


But the attacks are endless and continue on libraries and librarians, some of whom have received death threats. Amanda Jones, a librarian in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, spoke out against book banning at a public meeting and has since been subjected to an online campaign of extreme hostile misinformation, accusing her of "grooming" children. She continues to defy the onslaught and has filed defamation suits, sometimes under police protection.


Librarians are organising in other ways, with groups such as EveryLibrary and Freadom, as well as the American Library Association developing strategies, toolkits and support networks for the librarians defending basic rights for access to knowledge. Libraries in states which are not in the grip of book-banning have been using technology to get past the restrictions. The Brooklyn Public Library's digital library of banned books saw more than 100,000 downloads last year by teenagers across America.


"You may burn my books and the books of the best minds in Europe", Helen Keller wrote in 1933, "but the ideas those books contain have passed through millions of channels and will go on". Earlier this year, Margaret Atwood challenged people to "go ahead and ban" The Handmaid's Tale, as it would only make teenagers more interested in her book.


The attacks on libraries and librarians are an attempt to reduce people's freedom to take on board, through reading, ideas that may challenge received opinion, or help support their own identity. John Stuart Mill in On Liberty nails it:


"Only through a diversity of opinion is there in the existing state of human intellect a chance of fair play at both sides of the truth".


John Rawls went further in Political Liberalism, arguing:


"That a diversity of reasonable, comprehensive religious philosophical and moral doctrines must be a permanent feature of the public culture of democracy".


As the attempts to suppress the books circulated by American libraries show, libraries and the people who work in them are part of the critical infrastructure of democracy - fighting to stop the seemingly continual erosion of America.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * 



For the URL link to this post, please click here.


To read my other posts,

please visit my full archive by clicking here


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Curating my media firehose
A NOTE TO MY NEW READERS
(and updated for my long-time readers)

My media team and I receive and/or monitor about 1,500 primary resource points every month. But I use an AI program built by my CTO (using the Factiva research database + four other media databases) plus APIs like Cronycle that curate the media firehose so I only receive selected, summarized material that pertains to my current research needs, or reading interest.

Each morning I will choose a story to share with you - some out-of-the-ordinary, and some just my reflections on a current topic.

I take the old Spanish proverb to heart:
Or even better:

“A desk is a dangerous place from which to watch the world”
-John le Carré, in The Honourable Schoolboy

Carre was correct. I am seeped in technology. Much of the technology I read about or see at conferences I also force myself “to do”. Because writing about technology is not “technical writing.” It is about framing a concept, about creating a narrative. Technology affects people both positively and negatively. You need to provide perspective. You need to actually “do” the technology.

But it applies to all things. In many cases I venture onto ground where I’ve no guarantee of safety or of academic legitimacy, so it’s not my intention to pass myself off as a scholar, nor as someone of dazzling erudition. It has been enough for me to act as a complier and sifter of a huge base of knowledge, and then offer my own interpretations and reflections on that knowledge.

No doubt the old dream that once motivated Condorcet, Diderot, or D’Alembert has become unrealizable – the dream of holding the basic intelligibility of the world in one’s hand, of putting together the fragments of the shattered mirror in which we never tire of seeking the image of our humanity.

But even so, I don’t think it’s completely hopeless to attempt to create a dialogue, however imperfect or incomplete, between the various branches of knowledge effecting and affecting our current state.

And it’s difficult. As I have noted before, we have entered an age of atomised and labyrinthine knowledge. Many of us are forced to lay claim only to competence in partial, local, limited domains. We get stuck in set affiliations, set identities, modest reason, fractal logic, and cogs in complex networks. And too many use this new complexity of knowledge as an excuse for dominant stupidity. We must fight that.

It’s the only way I understand writing. It’s certainly the way I’ve been all my life and it’s how every other writer I admire is – a kind of monomaniac. I’m not sure how you can make any art if you don’t treat it very seriously, if you’re not obsessed with doing it better each time.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * 




Palaiochora, Crete, Greece

To contact me: