Book Burning

Don't believe people when they tell you that book burning is something only fascists do. Nonsense! Communists do it too. "Tolerance" would have us outlawing "hate" speech before it hits the press (it's shameful that the Bible, Talmud or Koran make such nasty value statements). Religious doubters, believers and deniers alike have been enjoying a good word burn for years.

Books make excellent kindling after all. They are dry (hopefully) and are made of delightfully flammable materials. Torn pages from even a single book can help light a fire daily for a whole week or more!

I think you'll agree, some books are worth more burning on a fire than they are remaining in print, (age, size, illustrations can all be quite irrelevant). Instead of turning away someone cold saying "be warmed" why not heat up his limbs to the glow of a few worthless books?

Now many, perhaps the vast majority of books currently in print (there are a lot of Harlequin novels, trust me) are useless worthless trash, much like large chunks of the film industry.

OK so lets get to the real point, when is it okay to light up?
Book burning must be voluntary, it must be from one's own collection.

Now of course, certain materials, such as child pornography, nuclear weapons schematics, etc. are outlawed by government (an outside hand restricting your collection) for the protection of the public - that is the business of the government right? We might argue for more outlawed books; like 'hate' literature or ALL pornography. Yes that would probably be beneficial for society in many ways.

Is this a double standard? Government dipping into somebody's collection while I insist that we should only be allowed to burn our own books? I think the fact that God is true though every man be made a liar has something to do with it. But generally speaking (civil liberties-wise), the things that are outlawed are so because they are considered grievously close to or already violating the safety of society.

Inherent is this idea: ideas, images are not imminently dangerous until they are acted upon (acted in a holistic sense). It is generally accepted that the plans, materials and methods used to build bombs are considered so risky to life that they should not be freely disseminated. Why? Because of the minds that will make them a reality.

But you should now be touting a proud pair of dilemmas (and this is really what I wanted to talk about); First, child porn and nukes are not the only media damaging humanity, why not outlaw more? Second, who gets to decide what's right and wrong and who gets to have power with what information?

The world is a mess and the Devil would sure like to clean it up for you. Remain where you are, don't get concerned and whatever you do, don't act on any dangerous ideas; or, heaven forbid, become a fascist and start burning books.