There are four very different stories involving libraries on
Curmie’s mind at the moment. They all involve
some combination of censorship, incompetence, and a particularly noxious blend
of racism, sexism, and xenophobia.
Curmie hastens to note that actual librarians are never the bad guys in
these scenaria. At worst, those folks
might be too unwilling to risk their livelihoods by refusing to accommodate
absurd demands from “superiors.” At
best, they almost literally man the barricades against authoritarian idiots.
Library Story #1: Back in late March, Defense
Secretary Pete Hegseth, who turns out to be even less qualified than Curmie believed when his confirmation was still pending, ordered the Naval Academy’s library to eliminate any books that promoted diversity, equity, and inclusion
viewpoints. Some 900 books were
“reviewed,” and 400 were indeed removed.
This silliness (or it would be silliness if the effects
weren’t so real) is even worse than the crap we’ve seen in schools in Florida,
Utah,
Kansas,
and elsewhere. At least there, the
censorship was at the public school level where there is at least the whiff of
validity to the plaintive cries of “think of the children.” The examples linked above, of course, are
just about book bans; there are plenty of other variations on the general theme
of what can’t be said in a classroom (a student’s preferred name,
for example) or, God forbid, shown on a stage (too many examples to mention).
But there are no little kids at the Naval Academy. Its library should reflect its status as a
respected institution of higher learning.
Every major book on whatever topic, from whatever culture or era, should
be there. Indeed, as the saying goes, “a
truly great library contains something in it to offend everyone.” Having a book on a library shelf is not an
endorsement of its ideas. Indeed, it’s
vital that we understand the arguments of those with whom we disagree:
otherwise, it’s impossible to effectively critique that reasoning.
And that means there should be a copy of The Prince, and
Leviathan, and Das Kapital, and (wait for it…) Mein Kampf
on those shelves. And it sure as hell
means that there ought to be at least some representation of more recent works
by the likes of Robin DiAngelo, Ibram X. Kendi, and Ta-Nehisi Coates.
None of this is to suggest that these books should
necessarily be required reading, or that a decision not to buy a
particular volume is inherently problematic. Removing already purchased books for
no reason other than the capricious political predilections of a government
official, however, is a little too far down the road to the scenario described
in a not-so-coincidentally frequently banned book, Fahrenheit 451, for
Curmie’s taste. Book-burners, literal or
metaphoric, are never, and Curmie does mean never, the good guys.
Library Story #2: Speaking of book-burners… in April,
a man checked out a total of 100 books over two trips to the public library in Beachwood, Ohio. (That’s a little over a half hour away from
the library where Curmie’s sister-in-law worked for over 40 years.) The books were about black and Jewish history
and LGBTQ+ education. He then apparently
burned them all in what he called a “cleansing,” posting a video to the Gab.com
social media site, which is described by the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism as
“an online hub for extremist and conspiratorial content” frequented by “conspiracy
theorists, white nationalists, neo-Nazis, members of militias and influential
figures among the alt right.”
That’s disturbing enough, but it appears that the library is
powerless to do much until the books are overdue, and even then the punishment
may be simply to pay the cost of the books, which is listed at approximately
$1700. That figure seems quite low to
Curmie. Might it be the original cost,
or perhaps a “used copy” cost? It’s
difficult to imagine that new replacement copies would cost less than $17
apiece.
Moreover, whereas the guy had to have a name and address
associated with his library card (the library seems to think they can send him
a bill), he is “unidentified” according to news reports, and there seems to be
little interest on the part of the police to make this a criminal case. It might be turned over to the city
prosecutor for a civil case.
There is some good news coming out of this, though. There’s a good deal of indignation on the
part of the locals. More importantly,
there’s some action. The Interfaith
Group Against Hate [https://www.igahcle.org/]
describes itself as “a coalition led by Jewish, Muslim, and Christian
congregations in solidarity with community partners united by the belief that
we must confront white supremacy and create a society where people of all races
and religions thrive together.”
They’ve promised to collect and donate “1000 new books
lifting up Black, Jewish, and LGBTQ+ voices.”
As of this writing, they’re up to 100 and counting. Rabbi Robert Nosanchuk from Congregation Mishkan Or summed up the group’s response: “Whoever
perpetuated the idea that you can burn us out of Cleveland, deport us out of
Cleveland and deny our ideas and oppress us and frighten us to the corner… they
picked the wrong community!”
And that, Gentle Reader, is how you do that.
Library Story #3: For a primer on how not to
do that, we turn to Columbia University.
Columbia has been apparently rudderless for some time, somehow managing
to suppress protected speech while simultaneously failing to take action
against students (and others) who actually were breaking the law in
pro-Palestinian protests dating all the way back to the Hamas attack in October
of ’23.
The university leadership, and Curmie uses that term rather
loosely, has spent most of this calendar year academic year groveling and
capitulating to Trumpian bellicosity. It
has done them precisely zero good.
Worse, they’ve picked up on the recklessness and lack of concern for
things like due process that have become the signature characteristic of the 47
regime.
Earlier this month, students at Columbia and its affiliate
Barnard College occupied a reading room at the Butler Library as a response to
Israel’s acceleration of attacks on Gaza.
This was, apparently, a violation of the university’s “time, place, and
manner” restrictions. Curmie has no
opinion on whether those regulations are reasonable; such a consideration is
irrelevant to the point to be made here.
Anyway, there were dozens of arrests. Curmie isn’t going to comment on them,
either. Rather, he’s going to
concentrate on the university’s actions,
which included suspending a host of students, including at least four student
journalists who were merely covering the protest and at least two who were
simply studying in a different part of the library. And that’s not just the affected students who
are saying that; Columbia and Barnard de facto admitted as much by lifting
those suspensions, all the while threatening the possibility of future
sanctions.
Let’s get a couple of things established up front. 1). Criticism of a foreign government is
protected speech, and criticism of Israel is not inherently anti-Semitic. 2).
Chanting “from the river to the sea” and similar slogans is not inherently
illegal (irrespective of the claims of Trump and Rubio), but doing so in that
place at that time (especially during finals!) may well be. 3).
Actual threats, violence, and vandalism are indeed subject to both
criminal prosecution and sanctions, such as suspension, imposed by the
university; actions have consequences.
The suspensions were effective immediately, meal cards were
voided, and students were given 48 hours to vacate campus housing. Is this an appropriate punishment for
students willfully participating in a protest they knew to be a violation of
the university’s code of conduct?
Sure. But. (Insert tired joke about a “big but”
here.) That’s a reasonable response after
due process. This wasn’t quite as bad as
some of ICE’s kidnappings, but the “guilty until proven innocent” (“…and even
then we won’t necessarily concede”) attitude is pretty similar.
Most if not all of the readers of this blog have undergone a
finals week at a college or university.
Not the least stressful moments in your life, Curmie suspects. So add to that not merely the threat
of suspension, but a suspension per se and expulsion from your dorm
room. How the hell is any student
supposed to be able to perform at their best under those circumstances?
Apparently, the administration promised even those who
really did participate in the protest they’d get due process should any
disciplinary proceedings be undertaken.
They lied. (Of course.) And for at least several of those suspended,
the “crime” in question turns out to be… not being able to leave the library
when a bunch of people you don’t know block the exit. Oh, and being brown-skinned and having a name
like Samra Roosa, whose tale is told in the story in The Intercept, linked
above. Mustn’t forget that part.
By the way, if you’re smart enough to get into Columbia or
Barnard, you’re unlikely to be an intellectual pushover. Here’s Ms. Roosa’s statement:
This accusation has caused me significant emotional distress and disrupted my ability to complete my final assignments. As a Muslim woman, I feel that Barnard has repeatedly failed to create a safe and supportive environment for students like myself. It is unacceptable for the College to claim inclusivity while subjecting students of color to racial profiling and false accusations.
This description, unlike those of too many students (and
others) who seek victimhood as a substitute for accomplishment, rings true.
As might be expected, the Trump administration’s task force
on antisemitism (there is, of course, no such program to address Islamophobia) praised
Columbia president Claire Shipman, despite (because of?) the obvious sloppiness
and lack of anything approaching due process. But, of course, the fact that the majority of
the students suspended by Columbia/Barnard probably deserved it doesn’t change
the fact that the administration acted too hastily and with little or no
concern for the guilt or innocence of the individual students.
Curmie has to agree with the assessment of Joseph Howley of
Columbia’s Classics faculty: “Hasty punishments and violations of due process
are exactly what we would expect when we allow our disciplinary and public
safety policies to be dictated by political forces that value repression more
than our community’s well-being.”
Library Story #4:
A little over a fortnight ago, the White House, to quote the CNN article,
“notified Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden that she was removed from her
position.” There was no immediate explanation,
but Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt (Bullshit Barbie) later responded to a reporter’s question by asserting that “there
were quite concerning things she had done at the Library of Congress in the
pursuit of DEI, and putting inappropriate books in the library for children.”
Blessed Athena, tell Curmie where to begin! With the very questionable assertion that the
Executive Branch has any damned business making any decisions whatsoever about
the Library of Congress without legislative approval? With the fact that every book published in
the country is housed in the Library (provided only that a copy is sent there),
so the content is irrelevant? With the
lack of specificity with respect to the “DEI” allegations, which likely wouldn’t
stand up to even casual scrutiny? With
the fact that the Library of Congress is a research library, not a lending library,
and you have to be over 16 to even get through the door? This administration can’t even be bothered to
make their lies plausible.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries argues the firing is, “a
disgrace and the latest in his [Trump’s] ongoing effort to ban books, whitewash
American history and turn back the clock.”
That seems a little foam-flecked for Curmie’s taste, but he does strongly
suspect that the real reason for Hayden’s dismissal (that’s a photo of her at
the top of the page) had a lot to do with her surplus of melanin and X-chromosomes.
Well, on second thought, not necessarily. Perhaps she was terminated, as was Shira
Perlmutter a couple of days later from her position as the Registrar of Copyrights:
because they were impediments to what Congressman Joe Morelle describes as “a brazen, unprecedented power grab with no legal basis. It is
surely no coincidence [Trump] acted less than a day after [Perlmutter] refused to rubber-stamp Elon Musk’s efforts to mine troves of copyrighted
works to train AI models.”
So maybe Trump was acting as a grifter rather than a bigot,
which, of course, would make everything all better, right? Curmie will let you decide, Gentle Reader.
But here, too, there’s some good news. After appointing his personal lawyer, Todd
Blanche, who, needless to say, has literally no relevant experience for the
job, as the new Librarian if Congress, 47 then appointed a couple more DOJ minions,
Paul Perkins and Brian Nieves. Perkins
was to take over for Perlmutter, Nieves was to be Blanche’s deputy. But when they showed up to work, they “were not allowed into offices.” Curmie can’t find a follow-up, or even determine
if Perkins and Nieves were shown the door by staffers—you know, actual librarians—or
by Capitol Police.
This is likely a blip in the seemingly inexorable and not-so-gradual take-over by
Demented Don, (F)Elon, and their cabal of billionaire cronies and sycophantic underlings
of literally every vestige of independent thought, Constitutional protections,
or a meritocracy. There is not a Republican
in Congress with the patriotism, courage, or common decency to stand in Trump’s
way when it really matters. When the
closest thing to a principled conservative in DC is Amy Coney Barrett, the future
does not look bright.
The damage that has already been done will take decades to
fix, even if the process can start soon after the 2026 elections. But the American Dream is not dead yet, and for
at least one shining moment, the anti-intellectuals, authoritarians, and plutocrats
were held at bay. It’s not a lot, but it’s
something.
No comments:
Post a Comment