The liberal hypocrisy over "banned books"

P & P advertises itself as open-minded, diverse (of course), LGBTQ, and, most elementally, against the banning of books. Every year they virtue signal about “Banned Books Week.” Former President Barack Obama shops at Politics and Prose, and wrote an essay about the importance of reading what you want: “That’s why I’m celebrating Banned Books Week and the freedom to read with people across the country,” he said. “Because the ability to learn about each other and engage with different ideas doesn’t just open our minds and broaden our perspectives — it brings communities together and strengthens our democracy.”

Exactly. That’s why P & P should carry my book, The Devil’s Triangle: Mark Judge vs the New American Stasi . It recounts the nightmare I lived in 2018 when the Democrats tried to draw me into the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination. Using opposition researchers, lies, extortion attempts, and even an attempted honey trap, the Stasi Left tried to bury me and my high school friend. In it, I argue that these criminal and unconstitutional tactics are indeed a great threat to our democracy. …

For the Left, that abolition of injustice now means censorship and book banning. They sic “sensitivity readers” on writers to tell them what they can and cannot put in their books. They even go through old books and bowdlerize them of anything “insensitive” about race, gender, and anything else.

So what about it, Politics and Prose? On your website you say you champion “books that have been banned or threatened with banning by a school district, library, or municipality.” What about a book that has been banned by your own bookstore?

[Even that wouldn’t settle the matter, but it certainly would be a fun test. I’d bet they never sold my book either, but that’s about curating content for a particular customer base. Bookstores and libraries ALL curate content, but progressives want to pretend that calling for the removal of age-inappropriate material from school libraries is the equivalent of a ‘ban’. It’s absurd, and it’s intellectually dishonest. — Ed]