Do you think people should be allowed to ban books? Why or why not?
-
Welcome to ROFLMAO.com—the ultimate destination for unfiltered discussions and endless entertainment! Whether it’s movies, TV, music, games, or whatever’s on your mind, this is your space to connect and share. Be funny. Be serious. Be You. Don’t just watch the conversation—join it now and be heard!
literature Banned books?
- Thread starter Bazinga!
- Start date
For discussions on books, authors, poetry, and all things related to literature and storytelling.
Banning books is not right but it could be censored. In my perspective, banning books could be very damaging as it could lead to suppression of ideas because books have the power to challenge our assumption and broaden our understanding about a particular thing. Banning them means essentially saying that they are not relevant and it could be likened to suppressing freedom of speech.
I think some books need to be banned. For instance, what kind of world are you trying to build by allowing books such as Hitler's autobiography. Books like these should be banned.
I completely agree with you because banning books is one of the ways to stifle intellectual freedom and it could also hinder personal growth. My suggestion is focusing on promoting open discussion instead of banning the books. By doing so, we can create a more informed society.
I sincerely understand your concern regarding promoting hateful ideologies which could be a good reason for banning books. But I still maintain a stand that studying and discussing it can give us more understanding of the dangers that are involved and we can educate ourselves on it. Don't you think it's better that way?
Should 'Mein Kampf' not have been banned?
Ban books? Maybe only if they contain illegal things.
But libraries and institutions should be able to choose which they allow or not.
But libraries and institutions should be able to choose which they allow or not.
I think every article of imagination should be allowed to ban because fundamental rights cannot be absolute but only be relative and with reasonable restrictions.
While what can be a reasonable restriction may be a subject of debate, if there is an absolute right to speech cannot be. And by speech, I mean books, movies, articles, journals and everything including digital means of communication.
While what can be a reasonable restriction may be a subject of debate, if there is an absolute right to speech cannot be. And by speech, I mean books, movies, articles, journals and everything including digital means of communication.
I think Mein Kampf is banned in Europe but in our country it is openly sold. I have read it and I strongly believe books like this one should be banned.
No.
The Anarchist Cookbook (I just had to Amazon search for it) is still in print and has been sold since 1971.
There are more dangerous texts out there than the literary works of an insane person.
No books should be banned from public institutions, but there should be restrictions set on who can access them, much like pornography in a gas station for instance. A private business? Take it off the shelves if that's what you think is in your best interest.
Funnily enough, all the books Amazon banned are slowly coming back...
It's available to buy in the UK. I merely ask for the sake of asking. “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” applies here. Books are often a window into societal themes at the time of publication. It's important that we are allowed to read what we choose to read - or how will we learn from history?
That's very true. However in a society where people are brainwashed into flying planes directly into a building, how can we stop neo Nazism?
I am against banning books because there are more dangerous things in the world than the books. But I also want to ask question, what should we do with books that contain false information and interpretation. Many years ago, a man who was responsible for murdering people during authoritarian regimes in the country, published an autobiography, and in the autobiography he claimed that he was not even present in the scene and he did not kill people. A book like this could led to The Mandela Effect.
By publishing scholarly and peer-reviewed journals, if not authors of non-fiction books containing more people's first-hand cited accounts with footnotes of where that information was gathered.
The premise that you're proposing is that people are dumb and the government (or other organizations) should look out for them. That's a slippery slope, especially when the government (the United States' CIA, at least) is known to have an influence on media companies and publishing houses.
Majority of the readers can definitely discern what is right from what is fake whenever they read books and that is why I’ll not support banning books. Instead, we should educate people on how to use books and how to differentiate what is false from what is correct.
Banning books is foolish. DH Lawrence's Lady Chatterly's Lover was banned. Lolita by Vladimir Nobokhov was banned for indecency but now look at out society how far we have come in terms of exploring sexual fantasy
