The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewIlana Mercer Archive
The Wussification of the West: Will We Ban Shakespeare for Othello and Shylock?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The Dr. Seuss book-burning gave a guest on Tucker Carlson’s eponymous show the giggles: “It’s total distraction from the real issues,” claimed one Chadwick Moore. So wrong.

Come to think of it, our much-loved TV host’s defense of the purged Dr. Seuss books fell short of freedom’s standards: “Dr. Seuss was not a racist” was the gist of it.

But before deconstructing Tucker’s defeatist and defensive argument—here is the latest in the saga of Dr. Seuss and the wussification of the West, for lack of a better word.

The New York Times reports that, “Six Dr. Seuss books will no longer be published because of their use of offensive imagery.”

None other than Dr. Seuss Enterprises, “the business that oversees the estate of the children’s author and illustrator,” “had decided last year to end publication and licensing of” the following titles:

  • “And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street” (1937)
  • “If I Ran the Zoo” (1950)
  • “McElligot’s Pool”
  • “On Beyond Zebra!”
  • “Scrambled Eggs Super!”
  • “The Cat’s Quizzer”

These custodians of Theodor Seuss Geisel’s work simply rolled over. They conceded to cancelling their own books after consulting with the educational idiocrasy.

It took panels of ponderous oafs to conclude that the “whimsical stories [that] have entertained millions of children and adults worldwide” “revealed strong racial undertones.”

Some parents were aflutter, too.

The following headline perfectly captures the “wussification“—that fretful melding of “wimps” and “p-ssies,” en masse—that makes for a Wussy Nation:

Parents grapple with racist images in Dr. Seuss books.”

Grown-ups “grapple” with things like, let’s see, food and medicine shortages; with the fact that the educational idiocracy that is depriving kids of the literary canon has failed to teach them to read, write and speak English properly.

Or, picture this: Video footage of Kamala Harris being swallowed whole by a python has surfaced. She is being subjected to the crushing peristaltic movements of the giant reptile, as he digests her. You “grapple” with that:

To pull or to publish these ostensibly upsetting images, that is the question. (Adult-humor alert for Wussy Nation.)

But grownups do not “grapple” with Dr. Seuss content!

Tucker’s mistake was his contents-driven defense of these kiddie books:

“Dr. Seuss was not a racist. He was an evangelist against bigotry,” pleaded Tucker. “He wrote an entire shelf of books against racism, and not in a subtle way. They were clearly, explicitly against racism. That was the whole point of writing them, to teach children not to be racist.”

Yawn.

Even if Dr. Seuss was the pedagogic, sanctimonious bore Tucker makes him out to be—actual racism in the targeted literature should be a peripheral issue, or no issue at all.

The Argument from Freedom means arguing process, not content.

Whether he intended it or not, the premise of Tucker’s defense of Dr. Seuss is that if we do detect “legitimate” racism in literature—there is a case for banning it. (Now, Tucker might not have meant it that way, but, this is what the structure of his argument portends.)

By contrast, freedom makes the case for an unfettered free market in ideas, good and bad. Freedom argues for politically impolite books to be published and read freely.

Banning books, moreover, assumes a lack of choice and agency among individual human beings. It’s also predicated on a higher authority that decides for the rest of us which cultural products are fit for our consumption.

The Argument from Freedom means arguing not over the contents of Mein Kampf or McElligot’s Pool, but for their publication irrespective of their content.

Which is why I say freedom’s argument is an argument from process, and not content.

ORDER IT NOW

Mein Kampf, and any offensive literature, needs to be available in a free society to free men and women who want it. And not because of history; so that we don’t forget it or repeat it (blah, blah, blah, as I heard it enunciated by Seattle’s radio mouth, Jason Rantz, the other day).

Alas, in the face of the cancellation of people and publications, cancelled conservatives just keep these logically weak and, frankly, loser mea culpas coming. Like the Argument from Hitler, which is a kind of “WhatAboutism”:

“Amazon and eBay sell Mein Kampf, why not Dr. Seuss? I want what Hitler got, Amazon and eBay. Me too. Boo-hoo.”

Tweeted “Musil Protégé”: “Conservatives [inadvertently] condone presentism. As Audrey says in Whit Stillman’s Metropolitan: ‘Has it ever occurred to you that our world judged by the standards of Jane Austen’s time would (look ridiculous)?’”

Most great literature doesn’t meet the sub-intelligent standards of the woke illiterati, who control the intellectual means of production—the schools (primary, secondary, tertiary), the press, publishing houses, think tanks, Deep Tech and the Deep State.

In some of the axed Dr. Seuss books, the typically cartoonish illustrations exaggerate the physical characteristics of a “Chinaman” and one or two African islanders. You know, just the kind of characteristics that, once-upon-a-time, made books about faraway places and people so exciting to kids.

Much of the Western literary canon—indisputably the greatest works of literature ever—is guaranteed to violate woke racial dogma.

Yet, even by Wokepedia’s telling, “Shakespeare is regarded as the greatest writer in the English language and the world’s greatest dramatist.”

What next? Shall we ban Shakespeare due to Othello and Shylock?

YouTube: The Wussification Of The West: Shall We Ban Shakespeare For Othello And Shylock?

Ilana Mercer has been writing a weekly, paleolibertarian column since 1999. She’s the author of Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa (2011) & The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed” (June, 2016). She’s currently on Parler, Gab, YouTube & LinkedIn, but has been banned by Facebook and throttled by Twitter.

 
Hide 25 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Rational says:

    IF YOU DON’T LIKE RACISM, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO READ RACIST LIT.

    Thanks, Mam. There was a post here about pornography (and Judaists behind it). Some lib commentators claimed that if we do not like porn, we do not have to watch it. But these liberals have a double standard, with this insane cancel culture. By their own logic:

    If they think Seuss was a racist, they do not have to read it.

    If they think Shakespeare was a racist, they do not have to read it. BTW, they cannot ban it. We will post PDF’s online.

    If they think math and science are racists, they do not have to count change after buying their fries, or turn on electricity. If they think classical music is racist, they don’t have to play it.

    If they think holocaust really happened, they do not have to imprison scholars who question it—they can simply ignore them and not read them.

    • Replies: @SafeNow
  2. What a word salad…had to read it twice. You are fast becoming the queen of the thought evoking one liners. Some serious melding going on here. “panels of ponderous oafs” “sub-intelligent standards” “guaranteed to violate woke racial dogma”, all excellent. I too am a Tucker fan,mostly because,he’s the only one on T V still speaking intelligently about freedom. It appears they are going after Carlson again,this time with a more organized,coordinated effort. “what next?” is my area of concern.Wait and tell,time will see…

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  3. SafeNow says:
    @Rational

    “If they think Seuss was a racist, they do not have to read it.
    If they think Shakespeare was a racist, they do not have to read it.”

    Correct…but only as far as it goes. If it is a student who believes that the “refreshed” literary canon is inferior to the traditional literary canon, the student must still read the “refreshed” version — and, parrot-back that it is superb.

    Also, beyond reading, applying “do not have to” to a situation where woke insanity has captured family and friends means distancing oneself from family and friends. The cultural divide is usually discussed at the institutional level, and neglected at the immediate level.

  4. Really good article, Ilana.
    Your “argument from freedom ” is the correct & applicable strategy.
    There can never be a banning of historical (& contemporary ?) cultural works without ensuring catastrophe. Ban Mozart & Shakespeare ? Cultural/ social suicide.

    • Agree: ILANA Mercer, MarkU
  5. White Millennial chicks are setting the ‘racist’ agenda, and, we used to tell them to STFU, but then gave them a say. The entire argument is driven by White feminist idiots. When you dig in, identify these malignant broads in the media, all of them are Jewish. Where’s it end? When you ask how much is enough, their answer is only, “More!!!”. It’s a stupid Pussy March. Stupid like a (((Fox))). Sorry for noticing. I’m bad that way.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
  6. Speaking of which, isn’t the Talmud a massively, malignant piece of privileged, racist literature extensively quoted at every bar mitzvah and (((holiday)))?

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  7. It’s Anglosphere, not the whole West. As far as I’ve seen, many schools have cancelled Mark Twain, Joseph Conrad, Edith Wharton, …. because of “race thing”. Bizarrely enough, I haven’t heard of cancelling Jack London, who was simultaneously a socialist and a racist.

    As far as Uncle Adolph goes, I’ve said on another occasion ….

    Hitler was much maligned by “good Germans” as a mediocre writer (true, he was not a great stylist). Just, he is still very readable, with flashes of unexpected & bizarre humor (I am writing from memory). Stalin, on the other hand, was a boring but efficient writer whose main strength was in catechetical enumeration of chief points, thus making ideological “truths” easy to remember & digest for masses of commissars & low-level functionaries. Also, Stalin enjoyed playing sadistic power games with everyone, including his own daughter (“Your latest comments are anti-Soviet! We could perhaps find Stalin another daughter.”), while Hitler was more civil & not so vulgar, let alone threatening in dealing with his subordinates.

    Judging Hitler solely by his Bible, Mein Kampf (and not by more interesting Table Talk) is an ambiguous task. When I read him to get the gist, he did not leave much impression: German destiny lies in the colonization of the East & Jews are guilty of everything. These two themes he repeats endlessly, so one is left with the feeling of reading one & the same thing again & again. After 20% of Mein Kampf, one gets the impression that Hitler has nothing new to offer.

    It is true, but Hitler still remains, despite too frequent lapses into sentimentality, kitsch & silliness, a magnetic writer. Mein Kampf is haunted by a vision, growing Hitler’s vision of life not only as the struggle, but as something inherently vicious, cruel as Aztec gods feasting on human sacrifice. And while this vision is evidently authentic, it is not just a metaphysical blather or a catalog of repetitive mantras. His most memorable parts are saturated by his experiences in pre-war Vienna, as well as with his political activity after the Great War. Images of decay & rot dominate – but not without humor. Hitler frequently digresses, and Mein Kampf could also be read as a stream-of-consciousness philosophical novel, although written in a rather conventional manner.

    He is also funny. I recall how he bares his soul, confessional-style. For instance, the text is studded with phrases like: I was deeply shattered in the essence of my being. I did not know what to do with my life. I felt there was a great Destiny waiting for me- but I was not sure. What if I am wrong? What will others think of me? For hours, I would contemplate my existence and was torn between doubt and ecstasy.

    In other words, Mein Kampf‘s humor is not in witticisms, but it suffuses reader’s feelings as if he is reading an ideologized soap opera, a Russian-type hysterical confession replete with sincere platitudes better suited for a Woodyallean comedy (without sex, of course).

    I remember a few funny parts, especially when he analyzes collective psychology of imperial Germany’s military circles & industry. Serious elements of his analysis are well worth reading & I think they still apply to any society in crisis. But, when he delves into details, the entire affair becomes comedy gold. In just 2-3 pages, Hitler discusses how German Navy was polarized re issue whether to produce 283 mm naval guns or 305 mm ones (they opted for 283 mm). Hitler rages about that decision & concludes: Laziness & defeatism! Had rotten and dumb admirals decided to go for 305 mm guns, we would have certainly sunk the entire British Fleet and sent them to the bottom of the sea. Ha! The whole war was lost because of incompetence combined with laziness. Less than 25 millimeters had robbed us of victory!

    Such passages make Mein Kampf an entertaining read, at least in parts.

    But- Hitler is not a fiction writer for school. If you are interested, you may read him (or anyone else, if you don’t live in a totalitarian culture). Twain, Conrad, Wharton, Seuss, Kipling, Lawrence, Shakespeare, … are, on the other hand, cancelled in schools because of being on “the wrong side of history”.

    • Replies: @saggy
  8. Anonymous[331] • Disclaimer says:

    You could have spiced this up with another ” fretful” melding for the parents: Skunts (skanky c-nts)

  9. Realist says:

    The Argument from Freedom means arguing process, not content.

    Whether he intended it or not, the premise of Tucker’s defense of Dr. Seuss is that if we do detect “legitimate” racism in literature—there is a case for banning it. (Now, Tucker might not have meant it that way, but, this is what the structure of his argument portends.)

    Excellent point.

    • Thanks: ILANA Mercer
  10. @goldgettin

    On last night’s show Tucker reported that Pentagon Chief Lloyd Austin’s woke military, more concerned with rooting out Trump-friendly Whites and promoting transgenders than defending the country, is now coming after him too. Given all the powerful enemies he’s made, how much longer can the Murdoch family stand strong and back Tucker, regardless of his ratings and huge loyal audience? Tucker must have gonads of steel to laugh thru it all and never apologize to the woke idiots.

    Good thing that My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell still funds his show and others on Fox. He sure must sell a lot of pillows to pay for so much advertising. But what happens to Tucker and Fox when Lindell, who is being sued for billions by Dominion Voting Systems, is cancelled by the Mob?

    • Replies: @Buck Ransom
    , @goldgettin
  11. Hans says:

    We won’t but (((we))) will.

  12. saggy says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    When I read him to get the gist …..

    MK is a must read, a work of genius …. first quotes, then the vid….

    Before coming to Vienna his view of the Jews is benign,

    As I thought that they were persecuted on account of their Faith my aversion to hearing remarks against them grew almost into a feeling of abhorrence.

    However as he engages in political discussions with the Jews his opinion changes:

    [MORE]

    The more I argued with them, the better I came to know their dialectic. First they counted on the stupidity of their adversary, and then, when there was no other way out, they themselves simply played stupid. If all this didn’t help, they pretended not to understand, or, if challenged, they changed the subject in a hurry, quoted platitudes which, if you accepted them, they immediately related to entirely different matters, and then, if again attacked, gave ground and pretended not to know exactly what you were talking about. Whenever you tried to attack one of these apostles, your hand closed on a jelly-like slime which divided up and poured through your fingers, but in the next moment collected again. But if you really struck one of these fellows so telling a blow that, observed by the audience, he couldn’t help but agree, and if you believed that this had taken you at least one step forward, your amazement was great the next day. The Jew had not the slightest recollection of the day before, he rattled off his same old nonsense as though nothing at all had happened, and, if indignantly challenged, affected amazement; he couldn’t remember a thing, except that he had proved the correctness of his assertions the previous day.

    Sometimes I stood there thunderstruck.

    I didn’t know what to be more amazed at: the agility of their tongues or their virtuosity at lying.

    Gradually I began to hate them.

    In Vienna Hitler is employed as a common worker, and he encounters trade unions, Social Democrats, Jews, and Marxism:

    At midday some of my fellow workers used to adjourn to the nearest tavern, while the others remained on the building premises and there ate their midday meal, which in most cases was a very scanty one. These were married men. Their wives brought them the midday soup in dilapidated vessels. Towards the end of the week there was a gradual increase in the number of those who remained to eat their midday meal on the building premises. I understood the reason for this afterwards. They now talked politics.

    I drank my bottle of milk and ate my morsel of bread somewhere on the outskirts, while I circumspectly studied my environment or else fell to meditating on my own harsh lot. Yet I heard more than enough. And I often thought that some of what they said was meant for my ears, in the hope of bringing me to a decision. But all that I heard had the effect of arousing the strongest antagonism in me. Everything was disparaged – the nation, because it was held to be an invention of the ‘capitalist’ class (how often I had to listen to that phrase!); the Fatherland, because it was held to be an instrument in the hands of the bourgeoisie for the exploitation of’ the working masses; the authority of the law, because that was a means of holding down the proletariat; religion, as a means of doping the people, so as to exploit them afterwards; morality, as a badge of stupid and sheepish docility. There was nothing that they did not drag in the mud.

    ……

    Hitherto my acquaintance with the Social Democratic Party was only that of a mere spectator at some of their mass meetings. I had not the slightest idea of the social-democratic teaching or the mentality of its partisans. All of a sudden I was brought face to face with the products of their teaching and what they called their Weltanschhauung. In this way a few months sufficed for me to learn something which under other circumstances might have necessitated decades of study – namely, that under the cloak of social virtue and love of one’s neighbour a veritable pestilence was spreading abroad and that if this pestilence be not stamped out of the world without delay it may eventually succeed in exterminating the human race.

    Hitler identified the Jews with Marxism and communism (Churchill shared this view see -Zionism versus Bolshevism). The above passages refer to a period before WW I, but were written after WW I and the Bolshevik revolution in Russia.

    Regarding the Bolshevik revolution in Russia

    Now begins the great last revolution. In gaining political power the Jew casts off the few cloaks that he still wears. The democratic people’s Jew becomes the blood-Jew and tyrant over peoples. In a few years he tries to exterminate the national intelligentsia and by robbing the peoples of their natural intellectual leadership makes them ripe for the slave’s lot of permanent subjugation.

    The most frightful example of this kind is offered by Russia, where he killed or starved about thirty million people with positively fanatical savagery, in part amid inhuman tortures, in order to give a gang of Jewish journalists and stock exchange bandits domination

    Hitler also identified Jews with the international financiers, and wrote:

    As I listened to Gottfried Feder’s first lecture about the ‘breaking of interest slavery,’ I knew at once that this was a theoretical truth which would inevitably be of immense importance for the future of the German people. The sharp separation of stock exchange capital from the national economy offered the possibility of opposing the internationalization of the German economy without at the same time menacing the foundations of an independent national self-maintenance by a struggle against all capital. The development of Germany was much too clear in my eyes for me not to know that the hardest battle would have to be fought, not against hostile nations, but against international capital. In Feder’s lecture I sensed a powerful slogan for this coming struggle.

    And here again later developments proved how correct our sentiment of those days was. Today the know-it-alls among our bourgeois politicians no longer laugh at us: today even they, in so far as they are not conscious liars, see that international stock exchange capital was not only the greatest agitator for the War, but that especially, now that the fight is over, it spares no effort to turn the peace into a hell.

    The fight against international finance and loan capital became the most important point in the program of the German nation’s struggle for its economic independence and freedom.

    Hitler believed that the Jews and leftist elements in Germany sabotaged the war effort. Probably the most well known quote from MK is on the big lie:

    But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity for falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute responsibility for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the catastrophe which he had foreseen and to save the nation from that hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsibility for the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorffthey took away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous enough to be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the Fatherland to Justice.

    All this was inspired by the principle—which is quite true within itself—that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.

    It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

    This vid gives the gist ….




  13. Over the past 75 years thousands of books containing loathsome ideologies, opinions, lies and ‘feelings’ by deranged leftists have been published. I despise them (and their authors) and share my opinion of them with others but I will never support the banning or burning of them. Once a government and society decides what is and is not acceptable for people to read we are being controlled by totalitarians, which in fact we are. Strong words are all well and good but things have gone too far for words to be of much use. What is called for is strong action to remove the totalitarian government. The conservative reaction to this latest nonsense has been absurd. Sales of Seuss books have skyrocketed but they aren’t the ones that the Seuss family literary clowns decided to no longer publish. Therefore the people with whom conservatives are so angry are raking in lots of money from their idiotic emotive reaction to this woke crap. Counter-productive, no? Also it should be noted that Geisel himself was an early practitioner of ‘cancel culture’. He was a leftist ideologue who produced nasty political cartoons and screeds in a Marxist newspaper ‘PM’, against “isolationists” and conservatives and encouraging early entry into WWII. Life has become Theater of the Absurd. When will our Bunker (Breed’s) Hill or Fort Sumter moment come? If not soon then never. Now that that’s off my chest, your article/podcast was excellent.

  14. JimDandy says:
    @Jim Christian

    Millennial shrews are particularly in need of a good old fashioned Shakespeare-style tamin’.

    https://www.shondaland.com/live/a15860669/the-problem-with-kiss-me-kate/

    • Thanks: Jim Christian
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
  15. @follyofwar

    Mike Lindell is getting ready to launch a new free-speech social media platform, which he describes as a melding of Youtube and Twitter. It will be called vocl.com (think vocal), and he claims it will be the most secure platform out there. He announced this a few days ago on Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast, and says it should be ready to go in 2 or 3 weeks.

    As for his Dominion lawsuit, he sounds very confident because he claims that he has already accumulated a great deal of evidence proving election fraud enabled by their machines. Also, as the defendant, he has the right of discovery to demand access to all sorts of Dominion’s records.

    • Thanks: follyofwar
  16. @follyofwar

    Maybe My Pillow should call in the army and add razor wire to
    his compound as well. If vocl. get’s his platform on top,he’s rich.
    If the case against Dominion succeeds a “lone wolf” r.v camper
    might show up requesting an appeal and if “looks can kill-they probably will”
    It’s “Games without Frontiers” -walk w/o fear

  17. It may be a pedantic point, but even Mein Kampf isn’t offensive unless you are offended by it. An objective label of “offensive” can only be accurately given if the work in question is clearly designed to offend.

    The current preoccupation with offensiveness is rooted only in the subjective sense of the word, which ties censorship inextricably with mere public opinion. If you accept this sense, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with censorship for any reason whatsoever, just as long as a lot of people can be persuaded that it’s warranted.

    What’s worse is that most of the pro-censorship people believe themselves to be able to distinguish between objective and subjective offensiveness well enough. They feel completely able to view offensive material with a purely intellectual, abstract sort of “offense” that does them no real damage, but they assume that lesser beings will be unable to muster that same enlightened power and so need to be protected. That’s why the focus is always children, the perennial get-out-of-jail-free card of the sanctimonious social improver. They are tacitly admitting that it’s a war over adult control of children’s minds — one that they are waging intentionally against works that were not intended to control anybody in the first place.

  18. @JimDandy

    Mildly interesting site, Shondaland.

  19. chris m says:

    Nowadays, It seems that even Tucker Carlson is succumbing to this political correctness nonsense .
    Doubt any serious person would or should give a damn as to whether creator of Dr Seuss was or was not a racist.
    Although most “normal” people would or probably should have the feeling that any racist inclinations (likely not much) on the part of Theodor Seuss Geisel would be more likely to make us more interested in his works, not less. (partly as a result of our own curiosity, but mainly as a result of a desire to be entertained, if that)

    Likewise that icon of moral rectitude, Abraham Lincoln. If we were dig to around in the archives a little bit, then The average reader must be horrified (not) to find out that the man who has been credited with single-handedly ending the practice of slavery, turns out to be not the quite Mr Nice Guy we have all been led to believe.(and even maybe he was not that honest).

    Karl Marx was right on at least one thing.
    History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.
    Well at least we have had the tragedy (Stalin, Mr H, Mao, Pol Pot etc)
    And now it seems that what we are seeing is the comedy. (except it is not the farce we had maybe expected)

    The best we can say of the current situation in the US, is that it is currently in the throes of its own cultural revolution (in the same that China and Russia experienced in the 1960s, 1930s respectively.)
    And perhaps we shouldn’t take things too seriously.

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  20. WTF?! This is lunacy.

    The facts as I understand them are that Dr. Seuss Enterprises, “the business that oversees the estate of the children’s author and illustrator,” has decided to cease publishing six books that it owns the copyrights to. Get that? The entity that owns the copyrights and therefore owns the material (their property) and all rights to publish it, or do whatever it wants with it, has decided to cease publishing it.

    How the hell is that a problem whatsoever for anyone?

    Some may not agree with the reasons for their actions, but it doesn’t matter and it’s largely irrelevant what we think of them. We have absolutely no say in the matter.

    This entire story and the attention it continues to receive is about as relevant as Meghan’s and Harry’s tribulations.

  21. @Jim Christian

    How about the Torah/Old Testament with its litany of genocides, cruel punishments and racist hatred? Ban it first, I say.

    • Agree: Jim Christian
  22. @chris m

    Ha, ha-Marx only correct on one thing? It is to laugh.

  23. While I can agree that there is too much hoolabaloo about the sins of Dr. Seuss, but these “free speech” arguments don’t apply so much to children’s books. If I was going to recommend a book for children today I probably would not want it to have the kind of images of Japanese which Rooseveltian propaganda used in World War II. The Seuss books which involve such imagery should not be banned, but neither should they be used with little kids. Of course, I don’t think that kids should be bombarded with Hollowco$t imagery either, even though that is now in vogue.

  24. The problem is really tyranny by the few.

    People driving this are what Sailer calls the “coalition of the fringes” – lunatic lefties, sex deviants who get upset when normal people object to their “lifestyles”, liberal women who think “macho” national anthems/flags are too “offensive”, blacks who see “systemic racism” everywhere like witchcraft back in Africa and gatekeepers obsessed with phantom anti-Semitism such as the ADL.

    It’s also a religious issue since on the left traditional Christianity has been replaced by “progressive values” like drinking fairtrade coffee, vegan diets, riding bicycles to lower carbon emissions, anti-racism, virtue signals, diversity is our strength etc.

    Forget reason and logic you are dealing with dogmatists.

  25. Mrs. Mercer has a great ASMR voice.

    She makes my scalp tingle.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ilana Mercer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2
The JFK Assassination and the 9/11 Attacks?