KOZMA: Attempts to ban books due to 'divisive concepts' hurts academic freedom
Column: With Liberty and Justice for All
Amid a surge in attempts to remove controversial books from school libraries in the early 1980s, the American Library Association (ALA) started commemorating Banned Books Week every September to celebrate free expression.
Unfortunately, the ALA warns that we are in the middle of a new surge, with the most book challenges in at least 20 years. Challenged books range from classic titles like "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" and "To Kill a Mockingbird" to more modern books dealing with themes of race, LGBTQ+ issues or sex education.
Book bans are nothing new, with censorship attempts common on both the Left and Right. Although, today’s challengers may feel especially emboldened by a wave of attempts in conservative state legislatures to restrict classroom discussions surrounding racism, discrimination and sexuality.
As of this month, 88 such bills are currently moving through the legislative process in dozens of statehouses, with three new ones proposed every day, according to PEN America, a nonprofit organization promoting academic freedom.
Many of these bills will never become law, but 12 already have. Just a year ago, none of this was on the public's radar.
These "educational gag orders," as PEN America calls them, vary from state to state. Typically, supporters of such bills frame them as banning the teaching of "critical race theory” (CRT).
Theoretically, CRT is a specific analytical framework to explain racial disparities in a society where the law is formally race-neutral, but in the past year, it has become a buzzword. Like most buzzwords, if you ask 10 people to define CRT, you will get 10 different answers.
Many of these bills ban educators from promoting or even discussing a long list of "divisive concepts," which range from outright racial supremacism to critiques of the U.S. as fundamentally racist and analyses of white privilege.
The relationship between "divisive concepts" and CRT is often unclear, as no self-described critical race theorists would argue that any race is superior, and the notion that white privilege exists in American society is not limited to CRT advocates.
Texas' educational gag order specifically prohibits using the 1619 Project, a collection of essays in The New York Times centering the Black experience in American history, in any curriculum. The statehouse launched investigations into school libraries carrying books related to race, sex education, LGBTQ+ themes or gender, leading some districts to temporarily remove or review hundreds of books.
When they do not outright ban books or ideas, Texas bars teachers from discussing any controversial issue unless they avoid giving deference to one side.
While it is a laudable sentiment to promote impartial debate when there is no one right answer, it is laughable to consider facts and myths equally valid. Plenty of clear facts — vaccines work, climate change exists — are extremely controversial.
Even worse, combining these two policies imposes contradictory requirements on educators. They must give all viewpoints a fair hearing while censoring the viewpoints which the State legislature dislikes.
A teacher may reasonably conclude that the safest course of action is to not talk about anything remotely controversial. It is easier to walk on eggshells than face the potential punishments, which include termination, school budget cuts and lawsuits from angry parents depending on the state.
This is the chilling effect of censorship. In a 1952 Supreme Court decision striking down California's "loyalty oath" for educators, which required them to denounce Communism and other subversive ideologies, Justice Felix Frankfurter criticized the oath's "unmistakable tendency to chill that free play of the spirit which all teachers ought especially to cultivate and practice … it makes for caution and timidity in their associations by potential teachers."
The purpose of history and social studies is to practice the critical thinking skills necessary to be an active citizen in a democracy. Often, that means engaging with uncomfortable or divisive concepts.
There is no telling where this censorship campaign may lead. In a single year, the original drive to ban CRT has blossomed into a comprehensive assault seeking to ban books, forbid teachers from criticizing the founding of the country, restrict mental healthcare for students, limit discussions of LGBTQ+ issues and force schools to out LGBTQ+ children to their parents.
Nor will these attempts stop at K-12 schools — 38 of the 88 censorship bills currently under debate in state legislatures would apply to universities, according to PEN America. Signs of political interference are already apparent.
Take Idaho, where legislators established a modern-day House Un-American Activities Committee to shut down any hints of "social justice" in Idaho's public universities while threatening crippling budget cuts for noncompliance. Colleges in Oklahoma are dropping courses that examine racism, while the University of Florida restricts professors from testifying against the government’s rollback of voting rights.
Just like the original McCarthyism eventually provoked backlash, this current wave will hopefully meet the same fate.
Nothing is inevitable, though, so censorship opponents must be as vigilant and involved in local government as its proponents. Supporting organizations like PEN America and the ALA cannot prevent people from trying to impose censorship, but it can stop them from succeeding.
Thomas Kozma is an Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy junior majoring in planning and public policy. His column, “With Liberty and Justice for All,” runs on alternate Tuesdays.
*Columns, cartoons and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff.
YOUR VOICE | The Daily Targum welcomes submissions from all readers. Due to space limitations in our print newspaper, letters to the editor must not exceed 900 words. Guest columns and commentaries must be between 700 and 900 words. All authors must include their name, phone number, class year and college affiliation or department to be considered for publication. Please submit via email to oped@dailytargum.com by 4 p.m. to be considered for the following day’s publication. Columns, cartoons and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff.
