Any idea what they say about the Koran?
True. It kinda depends what we mean by âhardâ. He was definitely anti-authoritarian and therefore not a communist.
That Prevent strategy seems interesting. Iâll check it out. I tried from the link you posted, but the sources did not get me to the main document, so I went directly to it. Iâll skim it through this weekend.
At least radical islam was labelled as no. 1 threat to the state. The document is long and goes through various of risks for UK. No any mention of writers mentioned above, but Iâm just at the beginning.
Itâs pretty telling that both the US and the USSR censored his books.
1 Like
Reading Orwell in high school was one reason why I got interested learning about political topics.
The official independent review didnât name the specific authors, but it points out how absurd including those authors is on page 24.
He wasnât censored in the USA at all. His major works could be found in nearly every high school library in the country and was part of the curriculum at my high school. It may have even been Jr. High that we read Animal Farm.
2 Likes
If only Google was a thing and we could easily figure out which one of us is right.
One county in Florida in 1981 misinterpreting it as pro-communist isnât the same thing as USSR levels of censorship at all. Orwell was the opposite of censored by the government in the USA.
1 Like
Orwell was definitely in the curriculum when I was in school many, many moons ago.
Both grok & gemini say Orwell has never been banned by the federal govât. Local school shenanigans, yes.
1 Like
For another example of absurd leftist narratives, Graham Platnerâs Nazi tattoo narrative is getting some serious holes punched in it. If what this person says is true, youâd THINK it would tank his campaign, but it may not. He has a large number of easily-manipulated leftists backing him up in Maine now, and reconciling fact with fiction is obviously not their strong suit. If it were, they wouldnât support Democratic Socialism.
In other local news about absurd leftist narratives, someone parked a sign outside the Maine Immigrant and Refugee Services office in Lewiston. The current narrative, promoted by all of the whoâs who of Maine Democrats, is that the process for diverting mass shooting funds to unrelated immigrant and prisoner advocacy nonprofits was done with full donor transparency and the most noble of intentions.
Susan Collins will win over this dude in a statewide election.
Charlie Kirk has said that Collins does what she has to do to stay elected in Maine, but when the Republicans absolutely need her vote, sheâs always been there. So thereâs that bit of optimism for you.
It will depend on how mobilized the Democratic machine gets for him (assuming he wins the primary). Our current Secretary of State is a hardcore Democratic Socialist and sheâs also on the ballot for Governor, conveniently overseeing her own election.
I donât think it is a slam-dunk for Collins at all. Without a SAVE act, the election will be wide-open to all kinds of rigging, and flipping a US senate seat is about as high of a priority as the DNC could possibly have.
Okay. Now I got it.
The parts weâre from a draft on Prevent, sent openly to be reviewed for. This was published review about the plan.
The idea of labeling these as far right was downright idiotic, who the fuck thought that was a good call. The point is brought up in the review. So Prevent corrected the final version.
So saying that UK is labeling these authors as far right seems to be untrue at the moment. There seems to be some pretty interesting people drafting the Prevent, but luckily the review process works as intented.
Part from the review (which you posted)
I do not consider the above to be appropriate subjects for RICU analysis or Preventâs attention, particularly as little care was made to clarify that these mainstream conservatives should not actually be considered part of the far right themselves. The analysis products in question did not present sufficient or convincing evidence that this material is relevant to countering terrorism or meeting Preventâs objectives. Their inclusion in RICUâs output is liable to confuse practitioners about where they should focus efforts to stop people from becoming terrorists or supporting terrorism.
I have seen nothing to suggest that RICU has formally adopted an official policy of applying radically different standards to different ideologies. In practice, however, the bar for what RICU includes on Islamism looks to be relatively high, whereas the bar for what is included on Extreme Right-Wing is comparably low.
Preventâs response:
We accept this recommendation and agree it is important to have one, consistent and proportionate threshold across all extremist ideologies and workstreams.
We acknowledge the reviewâs finding that this has not always been the case â that the bar for what the Research, Information and Communications Unit (RICU) has included on the Extreme Right-Wing is comparably lower than that for Islamism and that RICUproducts on right-wing terrorism and extremism have sometimes included centre-right commentators and debate. We will ensure that RICU products and the wider information we use to inform our approach are refocused and proportionate across all ideologies.
So no worries. Tolkien, Leviathan or Orwell arenât haram yet.
Most of Prevent seems to focus on recognizing and preventing islamic radicalism.
1 Like
Iâve never heard of Orwell being banned is US before, good that it wasnât true.
There has not been many censorship cases in US? I remember some Japanese stuff being censored/edited for political reasons.
I recall the 1958 novel Candy being banned in the 1960âs. We all (teenagers) wanted to read that.
Not officially, as you explained, but the fact that the sentiment was strong enough for it to even be in discussion by the UK government is yet another sign that theyâre heading in the wrong direction. They are arresting an awful lot of people for what they say over there, after all.
Wartime censorship has definitely been a thing, but our First Amendment is quite strong. The most notable cases of my lifetime was probably 2 Live Crew, whose album As Nasty As They Wanna Be was widely-circulated in my rural township with bootleg copies getting widely distributed. That also wasnât a federal or nationwide ban, but a local one in Florida (again) that declared it obscene material and ended up with some of the performers getting arrested for performing in a club.
2 Live Crew ran with it and made a song about the whole ordeal that is firmly within the MAGA ideological camp today.
Most of the hand-wringing coming from the left about âRepublicans banning booksâ boils down to whether or not local school boards should have pornographic books about gay and trans sex stuff in the school libraries. Thatâs been a big issue in many Maine school districts, and the idea that sexually explicit books donât belong in public school libraries is totally different than government censorship where even publishing something like that would be illegal.
The argument used to suggest it is helpful and educational to learn blowjob techniques at public school could also be made for learning how to âreduce harmâ when smoking fentanyl, taking steroids, engaging in autoerotic asphyxiation, or take your pick of any other adult activity children have no business being exposed to in public schools.
What is in those files???.. 
Bullshit. Ol shakey is in the Murkowski coalition. She has switched sides on a few big votes.
I was quoting what I personally heard Charlie Kirk say in a podcast. Youâre a (democrat) politician now? quoting what I said w/o the context?
Sure, Collins may be lying because politician, but she has a different position on the Save America act than Murkowski.
It seemed you stated that quote as if to say you dont know a ton about Collins, but Kirk felt this way and Iâm inclined to believe him. I must have misunderstood if thats not what you meant.