New Zealand mass shooting.
- Thread starter Sol Tee Nutz
- Start date
You mean the book the government didn't ban, that this researcher who isn't a government official didn't recommend be banned, but approved of a shop choosing to withdraw it for a while, and which was restored five days later?
You *really* need to reread the book, I don't think you remember it very well.
As for the "it may have been linked" - did you even follow the story? Social media had pictures circulating of JP posing with someone wearing an "I am a proud islamophobe" at an event in Australia. Peterson'a alt-right following is well known, and the manifesto referenced a bunch of themes that appear in Peterson's works. So the bookstore erred on the side of caution and then put the book back. You are 100% correct that 12 Rules of Life is not about Islamophobia in any concrete way. So they put it back. That you think a 5-day decision (maybe a week?) to pull something from the shelves in response to a news event is Orwell is amazing. Are you this angry about Amazon pulling stuff? (Which I don't think it has put back?)
I presume you mean the January 27 attacks that people on social media spread around after the Christchurch attacks claiming they had happened afterwards and not been reported on? I agree that the January bombing didn't provoke the same outrage, but then things that happen in non-white countries never do in our media. (I mean, yes it was on CNN and in the NYTimes and such, but it didn't provoke the same reaction.)
OK, I realize that I need to go slow today. So I repeat for a third time in this thread: my Orwell allusion was not made in reference to the removal of the book, nor to its return to the shelves (which occurred a week or so after my post), but to the justification given by the lady quoted in that article (whom you christened a "guy from a thinktank", no doubt after a thoughtful reading of the article.) That justification -- the book must be banned (or removed, whatever) in order to build an inclusive society -- rightfully belongs next to three official slogans "inscribed in massive letters on the white pyramid of the Ministry of Truth". [I have no doubt that you, being an attentive and thoughtful reader, remember those three slogans well. If, however, you need to have your memory refreshed, please let me know, I will be happy to do so.] Do you get the distinction now? Or is it still too subtle for you?
And thank you for finding the missing "link"! It certainly goes without saying that all the books written by that fascist who had the chutzpah to stand next to a guy wearing an offensive t-shirt, must be burned, not simply removed from the shelves. Which, by the way, also explains why (if you revisit my original post #30 ) "Mein Kampf" never caused a stir -- obviously, its author was prudent enough never to be caught in the same room with a wrong t-shirt. And I am absolutely outraged that the bookstore gave in to the pressure and decided to return the JP book to the shelf. Gutless slugs! Or did that guy take off the t-shirt by now?
I must say that all our minor disagreements notwithstanding, I salute you for your incredible tenacity. As a good sport, you never put down the shovel, even as you find yourself in the deepest of holes. Please keep up the good work!
The reason I keep ignoring your belief that the justification is Orwellian is because its a bad analogy. If you honestly think that's doublethink there isn't much I can do to help you. Let alone that this wasn't the justification given by the people who took the book off the shelves.
However, while it certainly seemed you were buying into the idea that the government banned the book, and justified it with the inclusion remark, you didn't strictly claim that.
However, while it certainly seemed you were buying into the idea that the government banned the book, and justified it with the inclusion remark, you didn't strictly claim that.
It certainly seemed to you that the lady quoted in my post was a "guy from a thinktank". It certainly seemed to you that a photo of JP (and a guy wearing an offensive t-shirt) taken in New Zealand was made "at an event in Australia". And it certainly seemed to you that I am not able to tell the difference between a bookstore and a government.
It certainly seems to me that you are just making things up as you go along.
