From the beginning of the written word, authorities would apply censorship or banning of controversial literary works like opposing political subjects, containing obscene sexual nature, and alternative lifestyles like LGBTQ+. Books were banned in the United States even before it was the United States. The first one was published in 1637, by Thomas Morton and the book was titled New English Canaan, and it was banned because the book challenged the customs and traditions of the Puritan community. Authorities try to do what is best for the communities by banning possible damaging and influential literary works. The opponents of censorship and banning literary works fights for intellectual freedom, moral obligation, and the safety of all Earth’s inhabitants.
People have a right to know and should make their own decision on whether the literature should be read or not, but not decide for others. This is also the case for parents when it comes to children and young adult literature for their children, which is usually the main focus of book banning in the current United States. While the people in favor of banning books are well-meaning towards the targeted audience, sometimes this type of authority can be easily abused. This was the case for Australia between the years 1934-1937, when T.W. White, the Customs Minister, focused on banning communist books. It has been found that T.W. White’s motivations for banning communist materials were instilled in him since his World War II wartime captivity, and later refuged with Russian anti-communists. This is an ideal example of how authorities can take advantage of the lord over those with different lifestyles, ideals, and beliefs.
Having intellectual freedom allows people to experience new ideals, empathize with different perspectives, and, my personal favorite, feel less alone about their own situation. One side touts the first amendment right from the U.S. Constitution, especially because those that drafted this iconic document were those that were persecuted for writing and distributing material that would spark rebellion amongst colonists towards the British Empire. There would be numerous U.S. Supreme Court cases that would cover this very subject. Many are instigated by either parents of students or the school board, or both would ban books that they believed were not safe for children. Teachers and the children themselves would fight and appeal the banning or censorship actions citing the 1st and 10th Amendments, the freedom of speech, and freedom of expression. The most notable case was Tinker v. Des Moines School District where it is said that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse” (Tinker v. Des Moines School District, 1969).
Those with access to various subjects should be allowing others to use it. We have a moral obligation to teach our youth about the real world and cultures that isn’t just outside their doorstep. We also have a moral obligation to learn these things ourselves so that we become better human beings to each other. For example, my personal experience, I was a leader in the Army Reserve when President Obama repealed any restrictions for trans persons to serve in the military. So, I learned as much as I could to understand these people so that I could support them better. If I was restricted from those subjects, being from a conservative Christian and Republican household, being trans is against their beliefs and principles. Without access to knowledge about their lives, I wouldn’t be able to assist my Soldiers whom I have a moral obligation to support as their leader.
Now revisiting the Australian Censorship example, had the United States adopted the same example regarding books about communism, Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Harold G. Moore, Jr., may not have been so successful in the Vietnam War. LTC Moore had a moral obligation to the safety and welfare of his men was his reason for researching how the French attempted to control the Vietnam region. He, himself, stated “Through greater detailed preparations the 7th Calvary rose above others, they understood the people, the tactics, and history of the area of Vietnam” (LTC Moore leads 7th Cavalry, n.d.). LTC Moore’s leadership during the battle of Ia Drang Valley, (also known as the Valley of Death) is overall viewed as a success because of the amount of time that his battalion held its ground while being greatly overwhelmed by the enemy.
A third example from Australian censorship: T.W. White’s list of censored literary materials as confidential and not released to the public. Banning or censorship of literary works should not be done for the health and welfare of all inhabitants of the Earth. So, the Australian citizens would be completely ignorant of the existence of such material, which means if there was ever any violent action against Australia by a communist country, or organization or in reverse, the Australian citizens would not truly understand anything about this enemy. This would be as misguided as the Battle of New Orleans, which happened after the treaty to end the War of 1812.
The omission of literary works can cause dangerous effects, no more as dangerous than the lack of distribution of climate change. The subject of climate change is often politized and government administrators have been known to influence the distribution of such material. The first known scientific fact to be censored or banned was by Galileo about which rotated around who. In the past couple of decades, scientists have found themselves restricted about the subject of climate change. “James Hansen, the [former] head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who has vociferously complained in the media of being silenced by the Bush administration for his research on global warming” (Murray, 2006). Sadly, after the presidential election of 2020, the facts of climate change became even more politized and used as a polarizing argument between political parties. Despite whatever you may think about climate change, the effects of ignoring these facts may be fatal.
Those that fight censorship and banning of literary works, cite intellectual freedom, moral obligation, and overall health and safety of all inhabitants of Earth as reasons to continue the fight. History is full of mistakes, research, and analysis that are vital to the overall welfare of the human race, and the exclusion of this information can lead to fatality.
Sources
Joel Barnes. “The Right to Read: The Book Censorship Abolition League, 1934–37.” Labor History: A Journal of Labour and Social History, no. 107, Nov. 2014, pp. 75–93. EBSCOhost, https://eds-a-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.snhu.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=2&sid=00c22815-b73a-41f6-97b4-c1dbf71d3d6a%40sessionmgr4008&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=edsjsr.10.5263.labourhistory.107.0075&db=edsjsr.
Lieutenant Colonel Moore leads 7th Cavalry into La Drang Valley (n.d.). The University of Richmond. https://historyengine.richmond.edu/episodes/view/5269
Murray, I. (2006). Eco-Censorship: The Effort to Thwart the Climate Change Debate. The New Atlantis, 14, 134–137. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43152294
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969). https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/21
The Banned Book Reviewer 
Leave a comment