Late to the party, but I checked my library and of all the missing books, I could find every one but "The 1619 Project: A Critique (Phillip W. Magness)" - now I live in Douglas County, Colorado, which is pretty conservative.
Saw the follow up post today (1/25). I may not have an MLS and thought we'd moved past using "cocksucker" as an acceptable insult (I guess we've come full circle and someone who identifies as "gay AF" can say it unironically?). In any event, however ill-presented, isn't there a good point here: we're looking for literary merit and actual interest. And who wants to read this biography over and over again: wealthy scion benefits from nepotism and born membership in cultural elite, finds his way into public office. Granted, Trump's self-aggrandizing tales are admittedly more colorful (if not compelling).
I'm a moderately conservative New England Jew from an ultra liberal town, and I'd much rather read a biography of Clinton or Obama (neither of whom I've ever voted for), because their life stories are the stuff of American Dreams: brilliant, interesting, compelling, and in large measure, self-made. Who wants to read about aristocrats like the Bushes and Trumps, when you can hear from someone, well, interesting?
Now a good Reagan biography? THAT I would donate to all of these school districts if they don't have it in the stacks already.
Sorry, but you lost me when you equate a book by the a president of the United States with those of a bunch of wannabes. School library budgets only stretch so far. I suggest you buy a batch of Vivek's books -- there in the bargain bin by now -- and donor then to your local libraries.
Although I am sympathetic with your basic thesis as to the absence of books on varying sides of controversial issues, your argument would be bolstered by by using better comparisons as to which books are owned in libraries. For example, it is not at all surprising. There would be more books written by the countries. First African American president who served two terms then by various losing Republican candidates for president. A better comparison would be books about or by Reagan, or either George Bush. John McWhorter isn't a conservative nor are Robin D'Angelo or? Kendi liberals. In racial categories you have at least three schools, the critical race theorists, the liberals like McWhorter, King, Rustin or conservatives like Sowell or Loury. My other quibble, is that of comparing writing of comparable quality. I would argue for books of heterodox opinion but generally high quality. In other words, the best thinkers from varying traditions and viewpoints. Many of the books mentioned in your article are not quality writing and thinking on the topics. Too fairly judge between different points of view they need to be equally well and accurately presented.
If AI /Chat GPT uses the books available , knowledge from the web to process answers .then if AI is only exposed to certain books does it make it intelligence flawed ?
I noticed in the weekly TGIF on 1/12/24 there was a joke related to the book ban situation in the Escambia County School District in Florda (Get that filthy dictionary out of here), which inaccurately portrayed the situation, so I appreciate James’ further investigation and insight on this issue.
As a Florida resident (and parent to 3 kids in Florida public schools) I take great interest in this area. Personally, I have a knee jerk reaction whenever Florida is portrayed inaccurately whether merited or not, to speak to what is really occurring. In this case, as it relates to book bans, it is appalling (although not surprising) the media’s bias and obsession over this issue. While I wholeheartedly agree with James’s argument that a majority of the book ban issue is attributed to the lack of conservative books available, and parents/citizens are pushing back. The other part of the issue, is the abundance of books that have made there way into school libraries that are for a lack of better word pornographic, explicit in sexual content and nudity, including obscene references to sexual activity. I know this because I’m currently serving on the book advisory committee for my local school district which is reviewing material that has been requested to be removed or moved to the age-appropriate level of school, like High School to meet state requirements.
What’s unfortunate in all of this talk about book bans, is that in my school districts case, it has caused greater interest and involvement of parents and the community at large to care more about our students and schools, resulting in improved age appropriate and reading materials available to students that will ultimately enhance teaching, foster learning and develop essential skills for all students. Sadly, the media doesn’t seem to care about this goal and thus places like Florida get a bad wrap for advocating for students and their education.
I appreciate the sentiment in this article, when considering public libraries in the same lot. I have a 4 year old daughter who loves getting books for us to read from the local library. From my anecdotal point of view, the children's section is always displaying progressive social justice children's books selected by the staff. I routinely see the Greta Thornberg kids book or the children's book about Joe Biden or various Covid CDC propaganda books. As any parent knows, kids are drawn to the books which covers are on display. I know most parents try to pay attention to what their kids bring home from the library, but I would appreciate not having to strategically monitor the stack of books my daughter is collecting to secretly dispense of a book I don't want to be reading to her. On a number of occasions books have made it home that I couldn't even quickly judge by their covers. At any rate my whole point, although it is fairly peripheral in the grand scheme of things, is that librarians do have a lot of power over what books are promoted to be read over others in the library.
Librarians are the de facto gate keepers of ideas. Library science teaching schools need to be better. Excellent report. I’m against banning books, but like some sites on the internet, I think it is fair to determine an appropriate age for reading them.
One problem with k-12 book selection is that local librarians generally don’t do it. Many if not most school libraries subscribe to services that provide packages of books that are considered appropriate for the age level of the readers and support the curriculum offered. Curriculum is pretty much the same nationwide since state standards for each subject are decided at the state level and heavily influenced by the left-leaning teachers unions.
While American school kids are taught about slavery and the Holocaust, little is taught about the millions who suffered under Communism. How many can say what the Holodomor is or the origin of the term “iron curtain” or know that the Nazis and the Soviets signed a non aggression pact that included side agreements that planned the division of Europe by the two powers after conquest.
This is a problem, reflected in the book choices described in this article and in the attraction of socialism to so many young Americans. However, a biography of Mike Pompey or Nikki Haley is not going to do it.
An interesting survey would be the reading lists from English and social studies classes at a cross section of high schools around the country - urban, suburban and rural. As a former high school English and history teacher, I guarantee that even though most of my students only read the "cliff notes" of the assigned books, they sat through classroom lessons and discussions about the selected books. I had tremendous power to influence my students' thinking (especially in my years as a "younger" teacher). Fortunately I did not believe in indoctrination or influencing and spent my class time teaching critical thinking and reading skills. I did not always agree with my students' conclusions, but since I was part of the the "old guard" I believed my job was to educate and not indoctrinate.
This should have been titled, "The truth about bias in library book selection" as this isn't so much about taking books off the shelf as it is about some books never making their way to the shelf. It also uses a very narrow subset of titles (mostly in the poli-sci space) to argue that progressives have nothing to complain about when it comes to book banning, when there is a strong effort in some districts to actively remove popular titles because someone is offended by the slightest whiff of diversity or mention of human sexuality. Yes, we should be asking librarians and publishers for more balanced promotion and selection of books that represent conservative political views. But we should also be very, very critical of any suggestion to outright ban books. To his credit, the author briefly made this point relative to the ban of the Kendi book in one Florida district, but I was looking for more of that balanced view in this piece.
Not at all surprising. I had a very close, long time friend who is high up in the ALA and has been for at least 20 years, and she is very much aligned with all of this. She is also completely arrogant in her deeply biased beliefs. Back in 1990 she and I traveled together in Europe. I, being a Jew, was very emotional and touched as I toured the Anne Frank house. I vividly recall her comment to me as we left: that I was narrow-minded and didn't consider any other minorities. I wasn't even allowed to feel the pain of the Jewish people, who I belong to, while visiting the site highlighting their historic genocide, without being required to acknowledge every other marginalized group.
If anyone said such a thing to ANY other minority person, as they acknowledged some of the most profound suffering of their own group/people, it would be considered beyond the Pale. I was deeply hurt at the time, but I realized over time that it wasn't a one-off or thoughtless comment; that it came from a deeply held self-righteous antisemitic ideology. I finally stopped talking to her after an enlightening conversation where all of her judgment and bias became painfully clear.
I find the educational takeover by self-proclaimed marxists and socialists, and everything queer, anti-Judeo/Christian, and anti-white to be, frankly, WTF? Where did this all start? Were they egged on by college professors? Did they really not have anything better to do? One of the reasons I find it disturbing is that it is so single-sided, duplicitous, and lacking in viewport diversity. It is extremely self-protecting and venomous against anything that argues against it while claiming compassion and tolerance. Don’t agree with us? Let’s come up with the most odious term for you and your friends! Such as “book banning” referring to some Nazi practice. Don’t want us to hide how your child is transitioning at school? You are a parental “extremist”! Do you appreciate any of America’s benefits and history or work ethic, you must be a “white supremacist” sympathizer! Really, these people are preying on young minds, while undermining the very capitalist system that gives them comforts. I find myself truly not wanting to share this country with them anymore. They are the “eat your parents” type of people. Bill Ayers would be proud. Do what you can to support people who actually have an appreciation of what this country offers them.
A terrific example in support of Fishback's article, I think, is the preponderance of left-biased news outlets against extremely few right-biased ones (mainly just Fox). How can people ever see the whole picture of an issue or understand it without ever hearing the other views or only hearing about conservative views as extreme negatives (e.g. being pro-life means you're anti-women's rights). Another e.g. is people believing NPR and NYT are the best middle-ground sources of news. These people don't even realize they are biased.
In my personal view, "stopping" things is never the answer--primarily because there will always come the next thing (like TikTok and virtual reality headsets!) we don't want. But, "out-creating" negatives is what we _always_ need to do. In this instance we need to make the balancing and understanding of different views desirable, and make ignorance undesirable, by teaching THAT there are other views and WHY it is important to learn all sides of issues.
Late to the party, but I checked my library and of all the missing books, I could find every one but "The 1619 Project: A Critique (Phillip W. Magness)" - now I live in Douglas County, Colorado, which is pretty conservative.
You lost me when you cited at least 2 conservative "authors" in your list. Jared Kushner & Ben Carson. I LOL'd.🙄
Saw the follow up post today (1/25). I may not have an MLS and thought we'd moved past using "cocksucker" as an acceptable insult (I guess we've come full circle and someone who identifies as "gay AF" can say it unironically?). In any event, however ill-presented, isn't there a good point here: we're looking for literary merit and actual interest. And who wants to read this biography over and over again: wealthy scion benefits from nepotism and born membership in cultural elite, finds his way into public office. Granted, Trump's self-aggrandizing tales are admittedly more colorful (if not compelling).
I'm a moderately conservative New England Jew from an ultra liberal town, and I'd much rather read a biography of Clinton or Obama (neither of whom I've ever voted for), because their life stories are the stuff of American Dreams: brilliant, interesting, compelling, and in large measure, self-made. Who wants to read about aristocrats like the Bushes and Trumps, when you can hear from someone, well, interesting?
Now a good Reagan biography? THAT I would donate to all of these school districts if they don't have it in the stacks already.
Sorry, but you lost me when you equate a book by the a president of the United States with those of a bunch of wannabes. School library budgets only stretch so far. I suggest you buy a batch of Vivek's books -- there in the bargain bin by now -- and donor then to your local libraries.
Although I am sympathetic with your basic thesis as to the absence of books on varying sides of controversial issues, your argument would be bolstered by by using better comparisons as to which books are owned in libraries. For example, it is not at all surprising. There would be more books written by the countries. First African American president who served two terms then by various losing Republican candidates for president. A better comparison would be books about or by Reagan, or either George Bush. John McWhorter isn't a conservative nor are Robin D'Angelo or? Kendi liberals. In racial categories you have at least three schools, the critical race theorists, the liberals like McWhorter, King, Rustin or conservatives like Sowell or Loury. My other quibble, is that of comparing writing of comparable quality. I would argue for books of heterodox opinion but generally high quality. In other words, the best thinkers from varying traditions and viewpoints. Many of the books mentioned in your article are not quality writing and thinking on the topics. Too fairly judge between different points of view they need to be equally well and accurately presented.
Lets take this to another step
If AI /Chat GPT uses the books available , knowledge from the web to process answers .then if AI is only exposed to certain books does it make it intelligence flawed ?
I noticed in the weekly TGIF on 1/12/24 there was a joke related to the book ban situation in the Escambia County School District in Florda (Get that filthy dictionary out of here), which inaccurately portrayed the situation, so I appreciate James’ further investigation and insight on this issue.
As a Florida resident (and parent to 3 kids in Florida public schools) I take great interest in this area. Personally, I have a knee jerk reaction whenever Florida is portrayed inaccurately whether merited or not, to speak to what is really occurring. In this case, as it relates to book bans, it is appalling (although not surprising) the media’s bias and obsession over this issue. While I wholeheartedly agree with James’s argument that a majority of the book ban issue is attributed to the lack of conservative books available, and parents/citizens are pushing back. The other part of the issue, is the abundance of books that have made there way into school libraries that are for a lack of better word pornographic, explicit in sexual content and nudity, including obscene references to sexual activity. I know this because I’m currently serving on the book advisory committee for my local school district which is reviewing material that has been requested to be removed or moved to the age-appropriate level of school, like High School to meet state requirements.
What’s unfortunate in all of this talk about book bans, is that in my school districts case, it has caused greater interest and involvement of parents and the community at large to care more about our students and schools, resulting in improved age appropriate and reading materials available to students that will ultimately enhance teaching, foster learning and develop essential skills for all students. Sadly, the media doesn’t seem to care about this goal and thus places like Florida get a bad wrap for advocating for students and their education.
I appreciate the sentiment in this article, when considering public libraries in the same lot. I have a 4 year old daughter who loves getting books for us to read from the local library. From my anecdotal point of view, the children's section is always displaying progressive social justice children's books selected by the staff. I routinely see the Greta Thornberg kids book or the children's book about Joe Biden or various Covid CDC propaganda books. As any parent knows, kids are drawn to the books which covers are on display. I know most parents try to pay attention to what their kids bring home from the library, but I would appreciate not having to strategically monitor the stack of books my daughter is collecting to secretly dispense of a book I don't want to be reading to her. On a number of occasions books have made it home that I couldn't even quickly judge by their covers. At any rate my whole point, although it is fairly peripheral in the grand scheme of things, is that librarians do have a lot of power over what books are promoted to be read over others in the library.
Librarians are the de facto gate keepers of ideas. Library science teaching schools need to be better. Excellent report. I’m against banning books, but like some sites on the internet, I think it is fair to determine an appropriate age for reading them.
One problem with k-12 book selection is that local librarians generally don’t do it. Many if not most school libraries subscribe to services that provide packages of books that are considered appropriate for the age level of the readers and support the curriculum offered. Curriculum is pretty much the same nationwide since state standards for each subject are decided at the state level and heavily influenced by the left-leaning teachers unions.
While American school kids are taught about slavery and the Holocaust, little is taught about the millions who suffered under Communism. How many can say what the Holodomor is or the origin of the term “iron curtain” or know that the Nazis and the Soviets signed a non aggression pact that included side agreements that planned the division of Europe by the two powers after conquest.
This is a problem, reflected in the book choices described in this article and in the attraction of socialism to so many young Americans. However, a biography of Mike Pompey or Nikki Haley is not going to do it.
The truth shall set you free!
An interesting survey would be the reading lists from English and social studies classes at a cross section of high schools around the country - urban, suburban and rural. As a former high school English and history teacher, I guarantee that even though most of my students only read the "cliff notes" of the assigned books, they sat through classroom lessons and discussions about the selected books. I had tremendous power to influence my students' thinking (especially in my years as a "younger" teacher). Fortunately I did not believe in indoctrination or influencing and spent my class time teaching critical thinking and reading skills. I did not always agree with my students' conclusions, but since I was part of the the "old guard" I believed my job was to educate and not indoctrinate.
This should have been titled, "The truth about bias in library book selection" as this isn't so much about taking books off the shelf as it is about some books never making their way to the shelf. It also uses a very narrow subset of titles (mostly in the poli-sci space) to argue that progressives have nothing to complain about when it comes to book banning, when there is a strong effort in some districts to actively remove popular titles because someone is offended by the slightest whiff of diversity or mention of human sexuality. Yes, we should be asking librarians and publishers for more balanced promotion and selection of books that represent conservative political views. But we should also be very, very critical of any suggestion to outright ban books. To his credit, the author briefly made this point relative to the ban of the Kendi book in one Florida district, but I was looking for more of that balanced view in this piece.
Not at all surprising. I had a very close, long time friend who is high up in the ALA and has been for at least 20 years, and she is very much aligned with all of this. She is also completely arrogant in her deeply biased beliefs. Back in 1990 she and I traveled together in Europe. I, being a Jew, was very emotional and touched as I toured the Anne Frank house. I vividly recall her comment to me as we left: that I was narrow-minded and didn't consider any other minorities. I wasn't even allowed to feel the pain of the Jewish people, who I belong to, while visiting the site highlighting their historic genocide, without being required to acknowledge every other marginalized group.
If anyone said such a thing to ANY other minority person, as they acknowledged some of the most profound suffering of their own group/people, it would be considered beyond the Pale. I was deeply hurt at the time, but I realized over time that it wasn't a one-off or thoughtless comment; that it came from a deeply held self-righteous antisemitic ideology. I finally stopped talking to her after an enlightening conversation where all of her judgment and bias became painfully clear.
I find the educational takeover by self-proclaimed marxists and socialists, and everything queer, anti-Judeo/Christian, and anti-white to be, frankly, WTF? Where did this all start? Were they egged on by college professors? Did they really not have anything better to do? One of the reasons I find it disturbing is that it is so single-sided, duplicitous, and lacking in viewport diversity. It is extremely self-protecting and venomous against anything that argues against it while claiming compassion and tolerance. Don’t agree with us? Let’s come up with the most odious term for you and your friends! Such as “book banning” referring to some Nazi practice. Don’t want us to hide how your child is transitioning at school? You are a parental “extremist”! Do you appreciate any of America’s benefits and history or work ethic, you must be a “white supremacist” sympathizer! Really, these people are preying on young minds, while undermining the very capitalist system that gives them comforts. I find myself truly not wanting to share this country with them anymore. They are the “eat your parents” type of people. Bill Ayers would be proud. Do what you can to support people who actually have an appreciation of what this country offers them.
This just says it all. Excellent article.
A terrific example in support of Fishback's article, I think, is the preponderance of left-biased news outlets against extremely few right-biased ones (mainly just Fox). How can people ever see the whole picture of an issue or understand it without ever hearing the other views or only hearing about conservative views as extreme negatives (e.g. being pro-life means you're anti-women's rights). Another e.g. is people believing NPR and NYT are the best middle-ground sources of news. These people don't even realize they are biased.
In my personal view, "stopping" things is never the answer--primarily because there will always come the next thing (like TikTok and virtual reality headsets!) we don't want. But, "out-creating" negatives is what we _always_ need to do. In this instance we need to make the balancing and understanding of different views desirable, and make ignorance undesirable, by teaching THAT there are other views and WHY it is important to learn all sides of issues.