Amazon Censorship Expands

[tompe]

Originally Posted by nguirado

Again, you're doing a surface reading without understanding the historical context or theological implications. Jewish and Christian people have been commenting on this for thousands of years. Have you ever read any of it?

But a new reader having not read these commentary and buy the book from Amazon will read what is written.

If you have to be aware of all the commentary you can argue that you should know the commentary about situations depicted in all books (like depictions of sex and violence) and therefore you would be equipped to handle them properly.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

once again I have to ask if your having problems with the language or just see red whenever you see my name? try reading for content as this was a response to a comment about the legalization of gay marriage and marijuana.

I'm not sure why you keep attacking me, but this is what you replied to:

Originally Posted by eppythacher :
Also, looking forward 50 years into the future, do you think there will be a online bookstore that has every book every written available for sale?

Originally Posted by kindlekitten:
I doubt very seriously it will last 50 years. I don't even think it will last 5!

[ebookrights1]

It seems I may have offended some people who are not guilty of the one sided, single minded propaganda that exists here.
I apologize for that.

I accused the many with the crimes of the loudest.

I wonder where I picked that tactic up from.

[nguirado]

But a new reader having not read these commentary and buy the book from Amazon will read what is written.

If you have to be aware of all the commentary you can argue that you should know the commentary about situations depicted in all books (like depictions of sex and violence) and therefore you would be equipped to handle them properly.

Yes. I didn't mean to offend. I

The Bible isn't a catechism. It's a collection of histories, poems, and other genres that require some background to fully understand although most people who read more than a few lines will get something out of it. Most religions based on the Bible have some sort of catechesis to summarize this accumulated wisdom.

Neither ancient nor modern Jews or Christians ever taught that rape or incest was OK. In fact, both groups have traditionally been strong opponents and did much to alleviate this problem compared with their respective surrounding societies (the neighbors of ancient Jews and the Romans, primarily, for Christians).

[AGB]

Originally Posted by ebookrights1

It seems I may have offended some people who are not guilty of the one sided, single minded propaganda that exists here.
I apologize for that.

I accused the many with the crimes of the loudest.

Just because someone is loud doesn't mean he's wrong.
It doesn't support your accusation either.

I wonder where I picked that tactic up from.

Fox?

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

I'm not sure why you keep attacking me, but this is what you replied to:

Originally Posted by eppythacher :
Also, looking forward 50 years into the future, do you think there will be a online bookstore that has every book every written available for sale?

Originally Posted by kindlekitten:
I doubt very seriously it will last 50 years. I don't even think it will last 5!

bullsh*t. this is what I responded to;

Quote:
Originally Posted by eppythacher
I look forward to restarting this thread as Amazon continues to bans books into the future. Lets be honest, most book topics are not really interesting to the majority of people. Censorship will always be a interesting topic. Also, looking forward 50 years into the future, do you think there will be a online bookstore that has every book every written available for sale? I think there will. These treads will also be important for future students and scholars to show how people thought in this time. This is one of the things I don't understand about people or companies; that they are going against the tide of

history. In the US, the tide is for the legalization of

marijuana and gay marriage. People are fighting it now

but I would be very surprised if in 50 years both would

still be illegal. The US is now letting gays into the military. How do you think history will judge the people that are anti gay, drug, and pro censorship? I think it will be like when we watch films of senators being anti black, or anti giving the women the right to vote.
I doubt very seriously it will last 50 years. I don't even think it will last 5!

now QUIT following me around and misquoting me!

[boxcorner]

Anyone got a fire extinguisher?

[nguirado]

It's very hard to predict based on current trends. Somebody gave the Roman example earlier. In Japan, many men, especially Samurais, had boy lovers. The Victorian era saw a general conservative trend. Americans' resistance to abortion is increasing so that it's about 50-50 now.

Remember that before same sex marriage advocates discovered the benefits of matrimony, some, maybe the same people, predicted the end of marriage (it was an oppressive institution, etc.). The equal rights ammendments didn't pass.

Some parts of Europe may see a demographic shift in the next 100-150 years that might (who knows for sure?) reverse many of the changes in social morays.

As for what people will think. I guess it depends on whether people decide things based on some permanent principle or what's accepted during their time.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by eppythacher

In terms of banning books, I think you can look to the past to see how the future will judge you.

No, you really can't.

There is absolutely no way to ensure that future individuals or societies will hold the values you expect.

For example, it is always possible that today's democracies could morph into totalitarian states, much in the same way the Roman Republic lurched into an Empire largely commanded by a single man, or Nazi Germany went from a representative democracy to fascist state in a few short years.

Or in the modern world, a series of food and energy crises could easily knock most of humanity into a pre-industrial state, replete with a return to feudal states and repressive theocratic injunctions on behavior (made all the more persuasive due to a lack of resources).

History does not aim to turn the entire planet into a series of liberal democracies, and such beliefs are equivalent to wearing blinders.

Originally Posted by eppythacher

In the ~3000? years of written human history, when a government or company has banned a book do we look back and think that was a good idea?

Some do, some don't. Plenty of imams, Hindu politicians and Chinese Communist bureaucrats have no qualms about suppressing content and expression.

There is absolutely no way to guarantee that social mores will become increasingly liberal in the future.

Originally Posted by eppythacher

It seems like banning is Always a bad idea, (but I might be wrong, please show when banning a book was a good idea for a company or government.)

I do not support bans. (Nor can we set up accurate counterfactuals of what would happen if certain texts were or were not banned.)

However, that's completely irrelevant.

The point is simply that the future is utterly unknown. If the United States turns into a theocracy in 2060 years, outlaws homosexuality and bans pornography, is it valid for them to look at individuals in 2010 as a pack of godless debauched degenerates wallowing in sin and vice? Should we describe ourselves that way based on the mere possibility this is how the future will turn out?

The world is not "progressing" uniformly to highly liberalized democracies. Ascribing such a teleological necessity to the mechanics of history has far more basis in bad Hegelianism (as if there is any other kind...) and a fundamental misunderstanding of evolution than in facts.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by carld

I think it's exactly as big a deal as people are claiming. This isn't the first time Amazon has targeted gay material for special treatment while leaving similar straight material alone. I don't see it as anything but anti-gay discrimination.

Sorry, but I call BS.

The biggest dust-up was well over a year ago, due to a minor change in one of the databases; no books were pulled and the error was quickly corrected.

In this case, Amazon pulled a book of straight "incest erotica" a week or two ago, as well as a book featuring pedophilia. You're clearly unaware of the recent context -- both in terms of how absolutely minor this is, and how the few similar isolated incidents are not focusing on gay erotica.

And, of course, there is an absolute ton of gay erotica and other pro-gay books that are still available, not to mention extending health insurance benefits to domestic partners.

Referring to this incident as evidence of a pattern of anti-gay discrimination is, to put it mildly, absurdly hyperbolic and excessively sensitive.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

now QUIT following me around and misquoting me!

You're the one following me around. Just because I told people that Kindles log everything you do and upload that information to Amazon. How was I supposed to know it was meant to be a secret?

[eppythacher]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

No, you really can't.

There is absolutely no way to ensure that future individuals or societies will hold the values you expect.

For example, it is always possible that today's democracies could morph into totalitarian states, much in the same way the Roman Republic lurched into an Empire largely commanded by a single man, or Nazi Germany went from a representative democracy to fascist state in a few short years.

Or in the modern world, a series of food and energy crises could easily knock most of humanity into a pre-industrial state, replete with a return to feudal states and repressive theocratic injunctions on behavior (made all the more persuasive due to a lack of resources).

History does not aim to turn the entire planet into a series of liberal democracies, and such beliefs are equivalent to wearing blinders.



Some do, some don't. Plenty of imams, Hindu politicians and Chinese Communist bureaucrats have no qualms about suppressing content and expression.

There is absolutely no way to guarantee that social mores will become increasingly liberal in the future.



I do not support bans. (Nor can we set up accurate counterfactuals of what would happen if certain texts were or were not banned.)

However, that's completely irrelevant.

The point is simply that the future is utterly unknown. If the United States turns into a theocracy in 2060 years, outlaws homosexuality and bans pornography, is it valid for them to look at individuals in 2010 as a pack of godless debauched degenerates wallowing in sin and vice? Should we describe ourselves that way based on the mere possibility this is how the future will turn out?

The world is not "progressing" uniformly to highly liberalized democracies. Ascribing such a teleological necessity to the mechanics of history has far more basis in bad Hegelianism (as if there is any other kind...) and a fundamental misunderstanding of evolution than in facts.

While your argument is technically correct, I think it might be a a type of strawman in that it can be applied to Any argument, which means we can't predict anything. If I said the sun will rise tomorrow on earth, you could say aliens could blow up the planet, and no one could argue against that. I hate to Godwin the tread by dragging Hitler into it, but in your Nazi example if I argue that history will look down on the Nazis, you could say that the US could get taken over by Neo-Nazis and approve of what Hitler did. You can't disprove a negative. I think the onus is on you to support your claim that the US is moving toward a more fascist regime that supports book banning. So far no democracy I know supports it? If you compare yourself to china, then anything goes, you can sell organs from dissidents on the black market there.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

You're the one following me around. Just because I told people that Kindles log everything you do and upload that information to Amazon. How was I supposed to know it was meant to be a secret?

She tells that to all the guys.

I'm even on her ignore list.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

You're the one following me around. Just because I told people that Kindles log everything you do and upload that information to Amazon. How was I supposed to know it was meant to be a secret?

you are not worth my time. done with you now. you get position number 2 on my ignore list

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

you are not worth my time. done with you now. you get position number 2 on my ignore list

Welcome Aboard Mr Ploppy.