When Spiegelman's Maus Was Challenged, Sales Spiked
How school board members lashed out against dirty words

This year the school board in McMinn County, Tennessee, voted unanimously to remove cartoonist Art Spiegelman's Pulitzer Prize–winning memoir Maus from the school curriculum. The book had been assigned in an eighth-grade module covering the Holocaust.
In Maus, Spiegelman retells his parents' experiences as Auschwitz survivors. Subverting the tropes of classic funny animal comics, he draws Jews as mice and Nazis as cats. The book's surprising critical and commercial success was the linchpin of comics' rise to serious literary prominence in the past 35 years.
The fact that comics had long been associated with children helps explain why the book was assigned to eighth-graders in the first place. Its disruption of those expectations set off McMinn County's educational bureaucrats. The school board's meeting about Maus started with complaints about "eight curse words" (not specified, but the book's rough language is mostly of the "bitch" and "goddamn" level) and one "graphic image" (again unspecified but likely a very easy-to-miss image of the top half of a naked woman's dead body—the body portrayed as human, not mouse).
Maus had been the "anchor text" for the eighth grade Holocaust curriculum, taught along with supplemental material including survivors' stories and news stories. But one board member believed that middle schoolers should not be exposed to the horrors of the Holocaust. Maus "shows people hanging, it shows them killing kids," he said. "Why does the educational system promote this kind of stuff? It is not wise or healthy." Another board member seemed to misunderstand the very purpose of historical storytelling: "The wording in this book is in direct conflict of some of our policies. If I said on the school bus that I was going to kill you, we would be bringing disciplinary action against that child."
One board member said if an acceptable substitute to anchor that Holocaust module wasn't found, "It would probably mean we would have to move on to another module."
Predictably, the week after the news of the curriculum removal hit, Maus' weekly sales went up about 50 percent.
This article originally appeared in print under the headline "Maus."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
All good libertarians know that only apolitical librarians and teachers have a right to determine what is stocked in the public and school libraries.
I actually have made $18290 within a calendar month via working easy jobs from a laptop...~ni185~As I had lost my last business, I was so upset and thank God I searched this simple job achieving this I'm ready to achieve thousand of dollars just from my home...~ni185~All of you can certainly join this best job and could collect extra money on-line visiting this site.> https://oldprofits.blogspot.com/
Are you in dire need of a career change? Isn’t it frustrating to have to create budgets for everything in life? What if I told that up to $500 can be earned daily without stepping outside of your home, would you be interested? In fact,
.
soft skills supposedly suffice to make:>>>>> https://yourjobs85.blogspot.com/
Bloody hell. Banned books are having sales spikes. Will soon be having a spate of hoax "book bans" like hoax "hate crime spray painting.."
Will reason please jump off the ".gov not presenting every teacher's personal kink to kids' is book banning' bandwagon?
If teachers aren't allowed to teach kindergartners how to safely perform anilingus with a dental dam, we are risking young lives by potentially exposing them to monkey pox via unsafe rimjobs.
Think of the children and Trust the Science!
Well stated.
You're on a roll this week Rabbi Weinstein. The burger wars comment was genius, too.
I actually have made $18k within a calendar month via working easy jobs from a laptop. As I had lost my last business, I was so upset and thank God I searched this simple job (ebt-12) achieving this I'm ready to achieve thousand of dollars just from my home. All of you can certainly join this best job and could collect extra money on-line visiting this site.
>>>>>>>>>> http://dollarspay12.tk
Then it becomes exponentially harder to ‘Both Sides!’ everything
Well said. Working out what educational materials will be consumed in a curriculum at the local level is not book banning.
It is a pity that the government and history have conspired to create federal, state, county, and city gatekeepers who all have their say on what material will or will not be consumed by classes. But if there is ever going to be a system where parents, schools and their staff collaborate on what education will be consumed, it will probably be something like this: where people representing the interests of parents largely define the curriculum that will be consumed.
This shit happens ALL THE TIME. Since modern literacy programs began, most schools chose to use phonics-based curriculums. Then with the advent of common core, many teaching advocates pushed the "whole language" style of reading. This meant TONS of teaching materials were scrapped and "banned" from curriculums. Now many are realizing this was a mistake. And schools around the country are returning to phonics based learning.
If there has been anything complicating this natural process, it has been the desire of people like Doherty who want to turn local consumptive decisions into national issues with articles like this.
Who knew there was such a robust black market for books! Because if a book is banned, that means buying and selling it is illegal. By definition. But progressives love changing the definitions of words to fit their narratives.
changing the definitions of words to fit their narratives.
Don't we all?
I mean, my consider my definition of Eight Inches when I'm trying to get a date.
Given that they kept the books in libraries, this was not censored, for fuck's sake.
"But one board member believed that middle schoolers should not be exposed to the horrors of the Holocaust."
Pretty sure that's not the issue, just like the issue with CRT-adjacent curriculum is not to avoid teaching kids about slavery or racism.
What specific educational goal is being met by this book, that can't be met by a different text? There are thousands of books on the holocaust- both fiction and non-fiction- that could be used as an anchor text. Why this one? Why not one of the thousands of other books? What's so uniquely special about this one, that it absolutely NEEDS to be the one used for the lesson?
Also, if weekly sales went up 50%, then it's not banned.
I would also state that a more straightforward text would be better to understand the holocaust at that age. Maus is better understood if you already have knowledge so you can better see through the metaphor.
I know! Let's put Cronut in charge of the national reading curriculum for eighth graders.
Seems more rational than Reason writers or you.
Asking "Is this the best text for this topic?" should be a base question for any book in a curriculum.
Jeff is a hysterical idiot.
Jeff is indeed hysterical, and he is indeed an idiot. Now do Toby.
It's Kunta Kinte!
How about we leave it to the local school boards and stop trying to second guess these people from the other side of the country on national magazines? Can we do that instead?
Why should there be a *national* reading curriculum for 8th graders?
Another central planner reveals itself.
I read Maus after there was this blow-up over the text and found it a very engaging read. That may why it is an important book for the study the Holocaust. The writer has told a story and in an engaging way. A way that student will likely read and so better understand the topic. Yes, student could be assigned some dry fact filled book about the Holocaust that they would ignore, but Maus is something they are more likely to read and in doing so get a good feeling for what happened to Jews in Europe.
Why should anyone be surprised that a left-wing neurotic found the writings of another left-wing neurotic to be engaging?
Hint, the REAL left-wing neurotics find MAUS problematic for teaching children.
Indeed
https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1544369087748390914?t=zwo0Ac2YdFYFiglCTr5crw&s=19
Remember all that dust-up about the book MAUS being removed from Tennessee schools and the Left going bonkers saying it's antisemitic and whatnot? Here's MAUS referenced in a Woke book about Woke education (Feeling Power, Megan Boler) from 1999, indicating it's a powerful lever.
One thing is clear here: The Woke have been playing the long game a lot better than we have. They recognized the disruptive potential of certain materials a long time ago and have been misusing them to their purposes for decades, ready to play a lie if called on it.
The reason I'm reading this book today and found this out is because I'm trying to understand one of Boler's key ideas: the "pedagogy of discomfort," where students can have discomfort pushed into them to achieve social and emotional "learning" goals (cult grooming).
The idea, drawing from feminism and Paulo Freire's Critical Pedagogy, is that privilege and fatalism cannot be overcome without making learners uncomfortable. The discomfort is the open door to teaching, esp about privilege. It's also how you groom into a cult and radicalize.
The goal of a pedagogy of discomfort is "collective witnessing" so that people can willingly "inhabit a more ambiguous and flexible sense of self." It's about overcoming the accusation that Critical manipulations work on emotions like induced guilt, ultimately, though.
"A pedagogy of discomfort, then, aims to invite students and educators to examine how our modes of seeing have been shaped specifically by the dominant culture of the historical moment."
Of course, it's straight Marxist-Hegelian. Its objective is to "push beyond the usual Western conceptions of the liberal individual" into a "process of 'becoming'" more in line with an identity that has its meaning in a social collective.
The issue she identifies with MAUS is that if it isn't read with the right facilitation, it will only produce passive empathy rather than a "testimonial reading" that spurs radicalization. They've been thinking about that book for a LONG TIME.
[Links]
It was good, but if you are looking for compelling personal narratives on the subject, I would suggest Night by Eli Wiesel instead. While I hesitate to call it a favorite, it is my go-to book suggestion on the topic.
So, your argument is essentially that 8th graders need to be given comic books in order to engage with material, because they are too stupid and apathetic to engage with it otherwise, and that we should pander to that.
This is why my kids go to private school.
That's a pretty contemptuous way of saying "8th graders should be given books that are engaging, at their reading level, and respectful of their time." Besides being an engaging book, comics also usually take less time to read than prose books, which gives kids time to do other homework, or to do something meaningful.
"Pandering" gets a bad name, but the fact is that it is easier to get people to do what you want if you attempt to engage their interest and make it easier for them. Just yelling at kids to try harder and be less apathetic is stupid and counterproductive.
I am contemptuous of that approach.
8th graders are perfectly capable of reading books without pictures. Or they should be. National literacy scores show otherwise, so obviously this approach is not getting results.
"I read Maus after there was this blow-up over the text and found it a very engaging read."
Good for you. The glory of the free market is that people are allowed to pick and choose what engages them or their children. I don't understand why everyone is so obsessed with cramming their preferred learning material down the throats of other peoples' kids.
You call it preferred and I call it assigned. We had assigned reading when I was in eighth grade, about 44 years ago. No one asked you if you liked the book assigned, they just told you to read it and you would be tested on it.
Sure, but also, why not this one? Any book on the holocaust is going to contain some disturbing and horrible things.
It's not really banned and its not the end of the world, but sometimes the objections to certain books are a bit silly.
Exactly. The teacher who created the lesson plan needs to be able to defend the plan and the choice of this particular book and not just REEEEEEE about it being "banned." Why is THIS way of learning about the Holocaust the best or most effective? Defend it.
When you get down to it, a lot of consumptive choices are a bit silly to some- especially people who do not have skin in the game. Why go see a movie when you could stay home? Why go see THAT movie when you could see others? Why buy that SUV? Why THAT e-car?
Why do we fucking care what the people of podunk flyover town want to teach their kids? It's their kids. Let them work it out and trust that the reasons are good enough for them.
It seems we continue to compress rhe acceptable time for our children to mature. In the 8th grade they not old enough to be exposed to the holocaust but 4 years later they're supposed to fully formed and functioning adults. This in the same world where elementary students are supposed to be rational enough to request gender reassignment surgery.
I don't many of these parents opposing maus grasp the depth of what their children are exposed to on the internet. Or that the more they shield their children from reality the more they'll have trouble discerning reality from fantasy. For reference see the continued rise of socialism in America.
Not to dismiss your primary points but are you saying WWII was about cats and a mouse holocaust? If you're doing an intro to WWII and it's atrocities you probably need to start with facts before you move on to allegory if you're talking about separating fact from fiction.
There are tons of engaging, factual books that can be used but probably are out of bounds because the proggy parents need to shelter their spawn from unpleasant things leaving a watered down, fantasy telling like Maus as one of the few options that can be brought to bear.
because the proggy parents need to shelter their spawn from unpleasant things
lol look at the responses to this article. In this case it's not the "proggy parents" who want to have their kids sheltered from 'unpleasant things'.
What conservative has called for it to be banned?
Most want the subject taught (all here, actually). They just think that hard facts are more useful for introductory information than an allegory in a comic book.
I like how you have to resort to this deflective non-sequitur.
Oops, should have been a reply to your posts below about who gets to make the determination.
As if the marxists in the public school system ever want to have a conversation about the holocausts their own side committed in the 20th century.
When I was in school, most of the WW2 curriculum centered around the Holocaust, as opposed to the nuances of how the war even came about to begin with. Hell, in 8th grade we devoted a whole day of instruction--no science, math, English, etc.--to it.
You know what wasn't covered, at all? The mass slaughter of Russians by the Soviet regime during the same period. Nor did we cover the millions killed in China by Mao in World History. Funny how the atrocities of the marxist regimes were always glossed over by my New Left history teachers.
the obvious reaction for anyone with intellectual integrity is to gloss over the atrocities of fascist regimes!
Wut?
To be fair, my daughter read Animal Farm in her commie school.
As instruction or as caution?
Commies don't know the difference.
As near as I can tell, a little of column A, and a little of column b.
Depending on how you look at it, Animal Farm can be seen as a critique of communism, or a critique of how a noble communist agenda can be corrupted in a particular situation.
Neither 1984 nor Animal Farm were ever critiques of communism as a political philosophy. Both of them are Orwell's way of trying to cope with the fact that these left-wing nations he championed turned in to oppressive shitholes.
1984 was a caution about how easily and quickly any system can turn into authoritarian dickweaseldom, not specifically about communism.
"As if the marxists in the public school system ever want to have a conversation about the holocausts their own side committed in the 20th century."
Including the nazi holocaust. Can't discuss it, because some bright little boy or girl might recognize how nazism is fundamentally marxist, and how the exact same path taken to the holocaust is being seen again today in the teachings of CRT and climate apocalyptism.
Best to just browbeat the youngins that nazi=hitler=racist=evil, and definitely don't examine any of those aspects beyond the most superficial level.
if Maus were a metaphorical comic of the Ukranian genocide featuring Communist cats central planning the starvation of millions of mice using the "crime" of mice growing food for profit as a justification for mass murder, Trumptards and Libtards would be be pulling the oI' tribal switcheroo on it being part of a school curriculum faster than you can say "for the children"
You're not a very clear thinker, are you?
Certainly not a deep one.
So, I can buy it in stores.
I can buy it on line.
I can find it in libraries
Nearly all of the time
Book sales have spiked
Maybe that was the plan
Because what happened to Maus
Sure as hell was no ban.
To check out a ban
There's only one thing to do
Try to find books
By Dr Seuss
They said he had books
Offensive and mean
So they forced them from print
To keep young minds clean.
Not in libraries
Not in stores
They don't print them
Anymore.
Not like Maus
Understand?
You can't get them
THAT'S a ban.
Bravo
Well done.
First, none of these books are getting banned. There is no attempt to remove them from book stores, much less mass destruction or punishment of people for possessing the books. There is a world of difference between not assigning a book or even not providing it in a local library and actually banning the book.
By changing the definition of the word you undermine the impact of actual book bans. Interestingly, this fits well into Maus's themes.
Secondly, Maus is not really appropriate for an 8th grade class.
If we were talking about 10th grade, this would be a different story, but just because it's a graphic novel told in the form of a metaphor does not mean its not an adult work that requires maturity to understand.
Secondly, Maus is not really appropriate for an 8th grade class.
Can we appoint both you and Cronut to be in charge of the national eighth grade reading curriuclum?
It'd be better than the alternative.
Luckily we have school boards assigned to do that, hopefully under consultation with the people responsible for the children (their parents). You are the only one talking about national policies here.
Can we appoint both you and Cronut to be in charge of the national eighth grade reading curriuclum?
I'm not sure what this statement is supposed to mean. When I read this statement you're repeating, I'm tempted to interpret it as an argument opposing speech controls, warning that if someone is put in charge or made a gatekeeper of appropriate speech, that it's a violation of free speech principle where... NO ONE should be in charge of moderating speech.
But that's not the situation here. There IS someone in charge of the national eighth grade reading curriculum (or in this case, the county or regional curriculum), so at that point, why NOT put Ben of Houston and Cronut in charge of it? Or me... or you? The curriculum is not a wide open, free speech fest in which children can watch hardcore tranny futa porn, and any attempt to limit that represents a "ban". (although at the rate we're going, we'll probably be there within a year or two) So that means there must be *some* limits as to what is chosen for 8th graders to read, by the current group who are... in charge of the reading curriculum for 8th graders.
I don't have a strong opinion on this but it seems to me that the Tennessee parents were concerned over curse words. So the question seems to be one about age-level appropriateness which takes the controversial sting out of the whole thing a bit for me.
And I do agree with some of the commenters that we keep throwing the word "ban" around very... VERY loosely which kind of makes it meaningless. But hey, you wanna play this game? Let's play it. Twitter shut down some high profile accounts this week. Their speech has been banned in America!
"I don't have a strong opinion on this but it seems to me that the Tennessee parents were concerned over curse words. "
And of course, this is what this always comes down to. Doherty, who lives in Los Angeles, is judging local consumptive decisions based on his left coast morals. In Los Angeles, middle school kids cuss, have sex regularly, do drugs and engage in all sorts of other socially deviant behavior. And so he is just so flummoxed that uptight parents in flyover-land might have a different set of moral expectations for kids.
It is really strange that all the people who want diversity and individuality react with such contempt to diverse moral codes that aren't completely libertine.
Doherty is not a moral relativist, in other words.
Very few people are moral relativists. Most don't find it necessary to go on a national publication to complain that people he will never meet thousands of miles away have different views on raising their kids.
You needn't travel thousands of miles to visit the moral relativists of Tennessee.
Now you are talking gibberish.
To be clear, as someone who is thousands of miles away from Tennessee, I really would need to travel thousands of miles to visit any [people] of Tennessee.
What makes you think that moral relativists of Tennessee confine themselves to live within state borders?
What makes you think that a moral relativist Tennessean who visits me has anything to do with the non-moral-relativists who are minding their own business directing the education of their kids?
Just now?
First, this isn't about NATIONAL policy. This is about a cirriculum selection in one school system. Stop being juvenile. You sound like my pre-teen daughter who inflates everything into a life or death crisis
Second, parents in the school district have a right to challenge curricular choices, and school boards and teachers should have to justify them. Sending your kids to school doesn't mean you give up any right to supervise their education.
Parents don't have the right to supervise the education of their kids' classmates, either. Like it or not, the classroom is a collective and it's best to leave its running in the hands of trusted, dedicated, competent teachers.
"Parents don't have the right to supervise the education of their kids' classmates, either"
Luckily that isn't what is happening. They are working collectively, through a school board, to supervise the education of all kids.
" it's best to leave its running in the hands of trusted, dedicated, competent teachers."
Competence doesn't give teachers any rights. They are employees, there to do what the "collective" decides. And that collective is governed by the school board, who is predominately empowered to balance and carry out the will of the parents.
"And that collective is governed by the school board, who is predominately empowered to balance and carry out the will of the parents."
That's how it works in theory. In reality once the classroom door closes, it's the teacher who runs the show. If the parents send their kids to be taught by teachers they don't trust, they can hardly be expected to supervise their kids' education competently or with integrity.
If it's not working how it's supposed to work, with public employees accountable to the public, and thinking they can just close the doors and "run the show," all the more reason for parents to step in and exercise greater supervision of their kids' education.
"the more reason for parents to step in and exercise greater supervision of their kids' education"
I assume that most responsible parents send their children to be educated by teachers they trust to be dedicated and competent. If you don't trust the integrity or competence of your kids' teachers, then whinging over whether or not Maus is on the curriculum seems absurdly beside the point.
I assume that most responsible parents send their children to be educated by teachers they trust to be dedicated and competent.
You understand that the vast majority of parents have no say in who "educates" their kids, right?
You need to read Reason more carefully. Not a week goes by without an article praising the 'choice' of home schooling and private schools.
"If you don't trust the integrity or competence of your kids' teachers, then whinging over whether or not Maus is on the curriculum seems absurdly beside the point."
But again, they aren't whinging about anything, so you don't need to worry about that. They are exercising the control that is due to them. The school boards, not an individual teacher, establishes the curriculum. The school board, is governed by the parents, not the teachers.
The right to supervise a child's education is solely that of the parent. As a part of exercising that right, they may need to compromise with other parents in some sort of collective effort. In this case, the parents have a school board that identifies what is to be taught and an employee who does the teaching.
"But again, they aren't whinging about anything, so you don't need to worry about that. "
Thanks but really I was never worried about it in the first place. This comes under the heading of other people's problems.
"The school boards, not an individual teacher, establishes the curriculum. The school board, is governed by the parents, not the teachers. "
Once again, all fine and dandy in theory, but once the classroom doors are closed, it's the teacher who runs the show. That's why we call them teachers.
"The right to supervise a child's education is solely that of the parent. "
Rights and responsibilities are joined at the hip. While the parents have the right to supervise education, the responsibility falls on the teacher. That's why we pay their salaries and they constitute the largest body of civil servants.
"That's how it works in theory. In reality once the classroom door closes, it's the teacher who runs the show. If the parents send their kids to be taught by teachers they don't trust, they can hardly be expected to supervise their kids' education competently or with integrity."
I would advise deciding what the hell you are arguing. Are you arguing who has "the right", what is "best" or what is "to be expected"?
You argued that Parents don't have the right to "supervise the education" of others. I point out that they have collectively delegated that right to the School Board who is exercising this right. So now you want to argue about what happens "in reality". Uh, in reality, the parents exercised their rights and removed a book from the curriculum. So your initial argument about what rights parents have was...wrong.
I get it. You don't like the idea that Parents might have influence on their kid's education. Like all happy little maoists, that makes it very difficult to create the type of communist practices you admire in China and the Soviet Union, where kids are taken from their families and brainwashed to be resources of the state. But just argue that point. You'll be a monster either way, but at least your posts won't be a waste of time for everyone reading and replying to them.
"Are you arguing who has "the right", what is "best" or what is "to be expected"?"
Yes.
"Uh, in reality, the parents exercised their rights and removed a book from the curriculum. "
The reality is that some of the sneakier teachers will still insist on teaching about the holocaust using the Maus book. It's surprisingly popular and children seem to relate to it.
"You don't like the idea that Parents might have influence on their kid's education."
Parental influence is negligible and becoming more so. The biggest influence on a kid's education is other kids. Bigger still is the stuff on the internet, TV, etc. You want to prevent your kid from exposure to Maus? Good luck schmuck. Kids can download it here for free.
http://library.lol/fiction/F7E9AD3C89868D73E6099403BCCDC919
"The reality is that some of the sneakier teachers will still insist on teaching about the holocaust using the Maus book. It's surprisingly popular and children seem to relate to it."
Then why exactly do you care that it was removed from the curriculum?
"Parental influence is negligible and becoming more so. "
Spoken like a hopeful little maoist who really has never had kids.
"You want to prevent your kid from exposure to Maus? Good luck schmuck. Kids can download it here for free."
And this shows what an idiot you are. No one has tried to keep kids from accessing Maus. They removed it from a curriculum.
"Then why exactly do you care that it was removed from the curriculum? "
I've already told you. Because I think it's the teacher's responsibility to set the curriculum.
"Spoken like a hopeful little maoist who really has never had kids. "
Hope is a thing with feathers.
"No one has tried to keep kids from accessing Maus. They removed it from a curriculum."
It amounts to the same thing. Some parents apparently fear the influence of Maus, those dirty words and pictures, and want to prevent children from being exposed to them.
Of all the gin joints in all the world...of all the 1000's of similar decisions not to ban, but simply not to include this book over that one, Reason has to select this utterly innocuous , mundane run of the mill type decision and bore us all to tears.
They have to fight "The Man" without noticing how the friends of Reason writers tend to run all of the institutions.
I have no problem with Maus provided that there are no scenes where underage mice undergo surgery to reassign themselves as cats. And that mice use the mice toilets and cats use the cat toilets, as god intended.
Maus was not banned. It was just removed for a curriculum. It was still available in the library.
Although I too am celebrarting banned book week, I think way too many people are tossing about the "banned" word without thinking. Removing stuff from a curriculum is not banning. Hell, removing stuff from an elementary school library isn't banning either.
You're going to need at least a school board explicitly banning a book from any of its schools for it to count as a ban. But even then is that a bad thing? I should be able to walk into my local bookseller and buy Fifty Shades of Gray, but that doesn't mean I want it in the school library.
Stuff that's actually banned but no one talks about is stuff like The Anarchists Cookbook (which I have a mimeographed copy of). It's actually illegal to own. Germany knows about banning, as it has banned the sale of Mein Kampf. I don't think they should have, but I've yet to see a hand wringing librarian giving two shits about that one. Book banning is when the ban adults from selling Ginburg's Howl to other adults. Or to ban the quite age and moral appropriate Huckleberry Finn from schools. Forbidding the presence of age appropriate and classic works of a timeless nature from libraries, by law, is a ban.
But curating a short list of texts in a curriculum is not.
https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1607966123/reasonmagazinea-20/
"WARNING! NOT the Original Anarchist Cookbook"
- Pretty much every reviewer of the book
The anarchist's cookbook is not banned.
It was published up through 91 when its copywrite owner chose to stop publishing it because they believed it was not useful to public discourse. To this day you can buy copies of the book.
Now, in some countries without a 1st Amendment, including Australia and the UK, it has gone through periods of trouble. In the UK they have tried prosecuting people under terrorism charges for owning the book "seeking information to perform terrorist acts" and the like.
Yeah, but there are questions about whether or not section 230 applies in Britain.
Apropos of something: My first encounters with Hitler, Nazism, World War II and the Holocaust, as well as Mussolini, Franco, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Peron, Nasser, and many other dictators, and atrocities all came, not from graphic novels, but from a home set of World Book Encyclopedias starting at age 7.
Later in the Eighth Grade, I seen a documentary film about the Holocaust that featured Heinrich Himmler ordering an inmate of a death camp out of a detail of inmates, ordering him to kneel, and then pulling out his Luger to shoot him point-blank in the skull. Also, it included bulldozers pushing bodies into a pit.
Later, in college, I discovered Yehuda Bauer's A History of The Holocaust and the many works of Sir Martin Gilbert. All chock-loaded with statistics, graphs, charts, stories, and photos, but none of it dry or detached by any means if you are anything resembling Homo Sapiens.
Worst case scenario: Even if MAUS were unavailable or even actually banned, there are other and far more explicit, graphic, and life-altering ways of learning history, and no Gummint Skoolz required.
Zachor. Hebrew for "Remember."
I doubt the veracity of any documentary film purporting to show Himmler shooting an inmate in the head. And any film of bulldozers pushing bodies into mass graves was taken after the liberation, with allied soldiers driving them.
Maus is popular with adolescents in a way that academic treatments of the holocaust can never be. It's written specifically with children in mind. The Kindly Ones is a more recent long fictional autobiography of a gay SS officer involved in holocaust crimes. Don't know how popular it is in Tennessee, but it was awarded several prestigious awards for French literature.
By the way don't confuse this with the other The Kindly Ones, the 6th installment of 12 in Anthony Powell's Dance to the Music of Time and set on the eve of WWII.
Have you been taking notes from Misek, Watemelon Rickshaw Boy?
I'll pass on your recommendation of The Kindly Ones. A capo is a capo regardless of how they swing sexually.
I doubt you ever saw a documentary purporting to show Himmler shooting an inmate in the head. You may think you remember seeing such a film, but that's not the same thing. I recommend both of The Kindly Ones. You might enjoy Powell's series if you are feeling all holocausted out. It's been billed as the English world's answer to Proust, although this is a bit of an exaggeration, in my view.
Fuck Off, Nazi Watermelon Rickshaw Boy!
Historical recreation using actors still counts as a documentary
What I saw was in black and white and real. I don't know what kind of art-house crap Mtruman is peddling from the back of his rickshaw!
"What I saw was in black and white "
Schindler's List was in black and white and featured SS officers executing inmates in just the way you describe.
I doubt that Himmler shot an inmate in the head nor was filmed doing so. Don't mean to trigger you, just expressing my skepticism. I suspect it is a simple case of miszachoring, as the Hebrews would put it.
Sounds like the same treatment that we got in 10th grade - still a bit over the top even at that age if you ask me.
Also, I and everyone in my class seen Scared Straight at age 7...on broadcast TV at 9 PM...unedited...at the recommendation of my teacher.
First time I ever head the words "fuck" and "Motherfucker" and references to prison rape. I wasn't even able to get my mouth to form such words until the 10th Grade.
I know for a fact this didn't stop some of my classmates from going to prison, nor did it benefit the Charlotte, NC area either, as crime rates attest.
However, learning about the Holocaust and all of the horrors of the Twentieth Century did help turn me into an avid libertarian! Of that, I have no regrets.
I lost sympathy for the Jews when I found out they were making weapons and equipment for the Nazis in the camps. They built the V2 rockets killing innocent British children. Fuck them. They chose to live on their knees than to die on their feet.
Those Jews were worked to death, literally as slave laborers. There wasn't much calculus going into what they were building and what the results were.
Though this: "They chose to live on their knees than to die on their feet" is a fair point that isn't discussed nearly enough.
I say that because we're rapidly headed toward the condition being a vital question for ourselves.
And it goes beyond "living instead of dying" because at some point many knew that they were going to die regardless.
So why did they submit without a fight?
Right they chose to be slaves and help the Nazis instead of doing the moral thing and choose death.
So when compelled under the threat of death, the only moral choice is to choose death? Interesting.
I'm pretty sure you have been helping fund the US Government in its efforts to drop bombs on wedding parties in the middle east. Should we treat you with the same opprobrium? If not, why not?
It depends on what you're being compelled to do. Manufacturing war material for the Nazis would be a definite yes. You're helping kill the people who are trying to save you.
You might enjoy the very unTennessean movie The Night Porter with Charlotte Rampling and Dirk Bogarte. It's pure fiction, of course, but there were cases of where SS guards and concentration camp inmates who formed deep and lasting intimate relationships. Choosing love over morals in your framing of the situation.
https://thepiratebay.org/description.php?id=14795375
Are you another Misek note-taker? What happened to your devotion to the NAP?
Were slaves under a whip picking cotton that went to Confederate flags, uniforms, and gun-cotton all aiding slaveholders too and thus unworthy of compassion?
Are today's coerced taxpayers unworthy of compassion for all the horrible things taxes fund?
In a sentence, what the fuck is wrong with you?
Contempt for losers and victims is a hallmark of the authoritarian mind. It's on display here every day if you take the trouble to notice.
What about the victims of all the V2 rockets produced by Nazi prisoners?
At least you are willing to concede those killed by the rockets are victims. Why not accord the same respect to those enslaved by the Nazis? It's the authoritarian mind at work, is why.
They both were victims of Nazi coercion and terror! Unlike Adolf Eichmann, the Jews didn't do what they did willingly!
Yes.
What he said. There are some statements for which no polite or diplomatic response is sufficient.
What is wrong with you?
Excuse me, but were black slaves under the whip responsible for the cotton that went to make Confederate flags, uniforms, and gun-cotton for their slavemasters? Were these slaves reponsible for the extension of slave territory during The Mexican War?
For that matter, are coerced taxpayers responsible for all the horrible things done with their taxes, even though they speak and vote against them to no avail?
What happened to the NAP, Ice Ice Baby? And just what the actual fuck is wrong with you?
Part of the problem is (or at least was, 40 years ago back when I was in high school) that rather than mentioning the Holocaust as part of a lesson on WWII, it seemed to be the focal point of all history. That has now been replaced by slavery is currently seems to be the focal point of all American studies, but it sounds as if the Holocaust remains more than just another unpleasant part of a lecture on what can go really wrong in human society.
(And gawd forbid that the Holocaust be treated as about the same as the Armenian Genocide, the Killing Fields of Pol Pot, the mass murder of the Kulaks by Stalin, etc. etc. etc..... oh no! "The Holocaust was completely different...... you don't understand!!!!!")
Well, as I see it all mass murders are unique because all individual murders are unique. And all individual murders are unique because all individual human lives are unique.
And while all of these muders are unique, there is also a pattern and a continuum to all of them. Hitler was inspired to commit the Holocaust by the mass persecution and murder of Jews in part by nearly 2000 years of Christendom and by Ottoman Turkey's genocide of the Armenians.
And Hitler got as far as hed did because Europe feared the mass murders of the Communists who in turn got into power from opposition to Czarist mass murders and tyranny.
None of that diminishes anyone's life or experience but only makes it more pressing that we live by the words: "NEVER AGAIN!"
" there is also a pattern and a continuum to all of them"
I don't see any pattern or continuum. Pol pot targeted city dwellers out of fear that the revolution would be won in the countryside but lost in the city. Almost the opposite applies to Stalin. Hitler was faced with severe manpower shortages right from the beginning of the war, and enslaving the Jews was a way to keep the war machine humming.
Forced attendance in public (theft supported) schools leads to censorship. To focus on the censorship while accepting the force is to accept the political paradigm of authoritarian/collectivist. Why. do that? Strike at the root of the problem!
Voting for people who will win the power to initiate force, i.e., politics as usual, i.e., an exemption from the private morality? Why, because "they" won't abuse it? The fundamental problem is the concentration of power, sovereign rulers. Sovereign citizens lose their sovereignty when they pick people to rule them.
Be your own governor, trust yourself! Don't vote. Don't sacrifice reason, rights, choice, to authoritarianism/collectivism.
One exception I have to the Voluntaryist philosophy comes from the right to self-defense. If it were possible to vote for an initiative that ends the State's initiation of coersion, say a "Don't Say Or Do Compulsory Government Schooling" act, I would vote for it.
Of course. no candidate is offering anything like this with any chance of winning. so I pass on voting.