The term "culture war" is excessively very dismissive. The subjects that people take issue to here are matters of material well being.
People in the article and comments are using the word "ban" alot. I don't think there is any request to "ban" anything. It is just the one library. When something is "banned" it is prohibited from all sources. After actually taking a look at the list of books I don't think any of them should be removed from the collection on the basis of the complaints. I do think some of them could be re-shelved. But getting all worked up about a few random complaints that literally anyone can make because they are in a bad mood, and obliquely referring to nazis/holocaust is going way overboard.
I also don't see that anyone is "caught in the middle" of anything. Some people made complaints. People are always complaining about any large organization. They dismissed the complaints and as far as I can tell, that was the end of it? I got very bored reading off topic commentary so maybe I missed something.
about the books
I was curious so I did some looking at the actual titles since the person who wrote this article didn't have time I guess because they did so much interviewing ideologues instead. There are 3 themes in the target books.
theme 1: lgbt and sex positive books for young people
Looks like about 1/3 of the target works are pro-LGBT/sexpositive and seeking to explain this to some young audiences. I wasn't familiar with Cory Silverberg so I looked up the amazon page for You Know, Sex:
In a bright graphic format featuring four dynamic middle schoolers, You Know, Sex grounds sex education in social justice, covering not only the big three of puberty—hormones, reproduction, and development—but also power, pleasure, and how to be a decent human being.
I added emphasis because.... what a thing to complain about.
To me this book sounds perfectly nice. But whoever requests for it to be removed likely thinks it'll cause kids to come to harm. Who knows what kinds of delusional thinking motivated the specific complaint. But it isn't "culture war" because they are under the impression that this book will be dangerous physically and socially and spiritually.
theme 2: racist caricatures and other hate imagery in children's books
Another 1/3 of the complaints are about children's books depicting racist or hateful imagery. I think these complaints are legitimate. Books like this should be available for adults but not circulated to little kids! They are of historical interest, not entertainment.
I borrowed Asterix the Gladiator from the Internet Archive Library and flipped through it. Here is one of panels which is probably at issue. (I am not sure about the etiquette/politics of sharing this. I would consider feedback in the direction of not sharing racist material.) I have blurred out the actual caricature but described what is depicted in text. I put it in the spoiler. Summary: it's exactly what you think it'll be.
spoiler
This panel depicts a person with dark brown skin, a very small skull, eyes so close together that they touch and are crossed, a huge open mouth with giant red lips (larger than skull) and one tooth sticking out, wide nose, big ears, goofy body language.
I don't care to actually read this so I don't know what the plot is about. But I can say that flipping through it, the people with brown skin only come into view a few times in dozens of pages. They are not characters in the story, just devices the author occasionally employs. They are present 1-3 panels at a time.
They look to be in positions of servitude. They do not perform their jobs properly and are therefor deserving subjects of violence by the characters with pink skin. Many pages earlier, a masseurs with brown skin gives too deep a massage to a solider with pink skin. So the soldier beats him. The masseur's boss complains: "You have no right to beat up my masseurs! They're horribly expensive this season!" The most superficial joke being that the only reason not to beat the person with brown skin is the economic impact on some other person with pink skin. The person with brown skin has no lines and is depicted in a racist, caricatured way similar to the spoiler above. Except instead of being goofy he is big and strong. So strong he casually (and presumably accidentally) hurts the person with pink skin. Once he is punched so hard he flies across the room, he disappears from the story.
I remember when I was a kid, seeing this kind of thing. This series looks vaguely framiliar but there is a whole cannon of this shit. My parents did their best to raise me explicitly anti racist and I recognized the messaging as vile. I understood that it was communicating a generalized degradation and inhumanity related to perceived race. In both the presence (as objects) and their absence (as full characters). I remember being confused why people I thought of as "good" would have stuff like this lying around. But I am sure that it got into my head anyway. Sometimes really horrid stereotype illustrations I saw as a kid pop into my mind's eye. I wish I didn't have those in my brain because they are despicable. If an adult intentionally wishes to study hate lit it is different.
This is the kind of thing that teaches from a young age "black lives don't matter". Black people only involved as props, punchlines, animalistic, deserving subjects of violence etc.
There are a bazillion kids books that aren't trash like this. I vote to move these to whatever the dewey decimal is for historical hate literature, in the adult section. Possibly in the Reference library to convey the seriousness. I didn't investigate the other children's books but it seems that they are all on a similar theme and not appropriate for kids.
theme 3: right wing nutjobs
The remaining 1/3 of the books are more recent publications which appear to be regressive shitty books full of lies. I know the Shrier book hasbeenthoroughlywidelydebunkedcriticizedrebuked. It is full of medical falsehoods and her own weird fantasies misrepresented as scientific. It primarily advocates for denial of health care to trans people. This is not "culture war". She literally wants to seize control and manipulate the balance of chemicals in the bodies of other people. It is as material as you can get.
The other books by the likes of Beck, Ngo are certainly full of bullshit. Judging by the title and my understanding of the authors, they will probably be encouraging violence. I had never heard of Forbes before. The book is highly rated on amazon and the top rated review begins:
Fantastic book. As a supporter of those bands I found that the information in it is invaluable.
Emphasis added. Reviewer is a fan of white supremacist music and ideas. All the positive reviews are from people who are straight up white power jackasses.
I found this review on goodreads that I think is probably accurate:
This thing is f***ng nightmare. Read it for research on a project. It ended up being really valuable as a primary source, but if you're not literally writing a book about white nationalist skinheads, I can't imagine wanting to read the biased blathering of a bunch of racist boneheads reminiscing about their glory days.
This person also describes who there is value in the book even though the topic really sucks.
It seems like this book gives really shitty people good feelings about themselves. That sucks. When this kind of people feel good about themselves, they like to go around kicking the shit out of people who are just minding their own business. They form militias and murder. The reason someone was bothered by this book is likely because they know it can help stir the pot and encourage street violence. I know people who've been targeted by these douche bags. It's serious.
This book costs about $200-300 to purchase. It should be in the reference library with all the other expensive books, not in circulation.
If you are going to say that the authors are horrible people, you should be familiar with their own words so you can critique and dispute from the athors' own words. You seem to be labelling the books and authors without disbuting the material in the books. Why won't you read it to point out what is so bad and quote the writing along with an explaining how it is false?
If you don't want to read them because of who wrote them then say you have never read anything in their own words but you hate what they say anyways without reading it .
quite a homework assignment to make a post on lemmy. read half a dozen books then write a book report on each one. I'm sure people would love to read that 8 million word post.
I did more work to investigate the books than the professional journalist who published the original story. I went all the way to look up the dumb racist cartoon and get a screen shot of it.
As punishment for this obnoxious comment you are compelled to read not only the excerpts below but also the entire wikipedia pages linked.
Among his core values, he lists personal responsibility, private charity, the right to life, freedom of religion, limited government, and the family as the cornerstone of society.[109] Beck believes in low national debt, and has said, "A conservative believes that debt creates unhealthy relationships. Everyone, from the government on down, should live within their means and strive for financial independence."[110] He supports individual gun ownership rights, opposes gun control legislation, and supports the NRA and its state chapters.[111]
Beck rejects the scientific consensus on climate change.[112] He contests the evidence, and has said, "There is more proof for the resurrection of Jesus than man-made climate change."[112] He views the American Clean Energy and Security Act as a form of wealth redistribution, and he has promoted a petition rejecting the Kyoto Protocol.[113]
and it goes on further
Andy Ngo's wikipedia is less concise but he is also a shitbag, here is one of the many incidents chronicled:
On August 26, 2019, the Portland Mercury reported[57] on a video where Ngo was seen smiling[39] and laughing at certain points[10][58] while standing in the presence of members of Patriot Prayer on May 1, as they planned an attack on antifascists following the May Day protests.[12] He later followed the group on foot a few blocks to the Cider Riot bar, where Patriot Prayer members attacked the patrons. The video became part of court documents in a lawsuit against Patriot Prayer members for causing the riot. One of the victims of the attack was knocked unconscious with a baton and suffered a broken vertebra; Ngo later posted a video of her being attacked and identified her online.[59] The Portland Mercury's Alex Zilenski stated "there's no way [Ngo] couldn't know the group was planning on instigating violence."[58] The Portland Mercury also quoted an undercover antifascist embedded in Patriot Prayer saying that Ngo had an "understanding" with the far-right group that the group "protects him and he protects them".[57]
Also hilariously, there is a section on his page labeled Credibility, which of course means he doesn't have any.
If you want to waste your time pouring their diarrhea into your brain you can head down to the library and check out either of their books. I am very confident in my judgement regarding these people.
I have to fully reject everything you said and I am 100% against you because everything you believe in is fuled by hate and destruction. It shows how you are so stunted, under developed, you have to get your narcassism under contfol from you being a lunatic, it shows that you believe there is only one acceptable opinion and anyone who expresses a contrary view from you must be destroyed. If you continue to choose to stay enslaved to your emotions, you will forever suffer self-induced misery.