New law regulation banning books more than 50 years old..

[Kingstonalloy]

I love classic novels. I'd hate it and I would be curious why they would ban them. There are a lot more controversial books today than there were in the past.

[Nannersauce]

RaziellaDarkFrost

Nannersauce

Fahrenheit 451 was my initial thought.

Same!

And for all those that can't see it ever happening, have you READ Fahrenheit 451?

Even for those who did. Most people seem to miss the underlying plots.

Main plot: The government burns books to keep citizens under their thumb, oppressed, and uninformed so that they may be a fully controlling government body, free tax, arrest, start wars, and do whatever else they want as they see fit.

Sub Plot: This is what most people seem to miss. The government didn't just come in and take over with weapons and force. They people GAVE them the power to do this.

People were so busy in their computers/tvs/social lives/entertainment, always searching for instant gratification, that they didn't want to have to worry about all the problems of the world.

Friend 1"Oh did you hear about that fight that started between those two countries over seas? I don't remember what their names are....."
Friend 2 replies " Oh yeah! I don't remember either, but I think they are over on that side over there...well never mind it doesn't matter! Are you going to see that cool new movie tonight? There are supposed to be zombies and action and like 150 people get slaughtered onscreen!"
Friend 1" Hell yeah! That movie is supposed to be the shizz! If we get there we can get front row seats! The new tech at the theater is supposed to make you feel like your getting splashed with their blood!"

^ THIS was what led to the government controlling everything.

People were so busy trying to get what they wanted, that they didn't care about anything that didn't directly affect them anymore.

In the book, because books take so long to read, the language was parsed down into easy to remember phrases. This meant that after a series of years, Books became unnecessary, as all the information that a person could ever need was either condensed into shorthand (read chatspeak) or was stored on a devices that could call it up at any point in time.

But lets be honest. Who wants to read a book that makes you cry, when you can go sit in front of a TV and laugh at people making idiots of themselves? Why do you want to read about the horrible wars, and slaughters, and things that make people fight like religion, when you can sit in peaceful happiness in your home, oblivious to the pain?

In the end, the government removed the books because people didn't WANT them. Then by removing them, they made sure that the remaining people, the very small minority who did, no longer had access to information that could cause an uprising and make their oh so blissful citizens unhappy.


You may try to see that it will never happen. But do you have ANY idea how close we are to that occurring? Eventually the only books will be in museums because everything is on computer! Then when the government decides its time, they will be able to slowly delete them one by one, and no one will remember what books were there to start with. Then they destroy the remainder, and that's it. New generations don't know of our old mistakes, of a time when the government didn't rule everything, of a time when we had the freedom to make our own decisions. Every day we inch closer and closer to this as a reality.

You spoke what was on my mind... only I was too high and lazy to go so in depth. We need more people like you.

[Elraine Figarette]

Exoth XIII

GunsmithKitten

Je Nique vos Merdiers

False Dichotomy

Besides, the subject is hypothetical.

Yeah, I know, that was the first thing I said. So why is anyone using it to insult my intelligence when my answer was clearly meant to be silly?

Oh, you're not impressed by me? That's fine, since I'm not impressed enough by the low level of discussion around here to post anything substantial.

Shithead, you got no place criticizing anyone's level of banter when you yourself just admitted to intentional trolling.

And there's the lesson for the day; if you're going to troll, never admit it.

*wanders in, looks around* I don't think he was even really trolling. He just didn't want to admit that he missed his mark by not accounting for the lack of a sarcasm font.

[marshmallowcreampie]

I'd be against the law, of course. But, what is the reasoning behind the law? If you're going to make up a hypothetical situation, there needs to be some logic behind it.

[InnerUtopia]

What would the actual purpose of this ban be? There's no real reason or benefit from it whatsoever.

[Exoth XIII]

Elraine Figarette

Exoth XIII

GunsmithKitten

Je Nique vos Merdiers

False Dichotomy

Besides, the subject is hypothetical.

Yeah, I know, that was the first thing I said. So why is anyone using it to insult my intelligence when my answer was clearly meant to be silly?

Oh, you're not impressed by me? That's fine, since I'm not impressed enough by the low level of discussion around here to post anything substantial.

Shithead, you got no place criticizing anyone's level of banter when you yourself just admitted to intentional trolling.

And there's the lesson for the day; if you're going to troll, never admit it.

*wanders in, looks around* I don't think he was even really trolling. He just didn't want to admit that he missed his mark by not accounting for the lack of a sarcasm font.

Yes, sarcasm IS hard to do without a special font, isn't it?

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Eh.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

marshmallowcreampie

I'd be against the law, of course. But, what is the reasoning behind the law? If you're going to make up a hypothetical situation, there needs to be some logic behind it.

Logic is the weapon of the damned.

Only cursed men dare speak the constraints of logic in the ED, for they know their time is near. ninja

[village midget]

unfortunately millie

Let's say the government was introducing a new law regulation banning books more than 50 years old.
How would you feel about this?
Discuss.

Elated! No more Bible Torah or Q'ran

[weezrod]

I wouldn't approve. A lot of this forum seems to think the destruction of the Bible would be mans greatest accomplishment. While I'm not a Christian, I don't believe just destroying an ancient text is appropriate because you disagree with it or dislike it. That's almost an ignorant notion. Ignorance in any subject is not a virtue, and even if you are not a Christian, the Bible is quite interesting.

[Streex]

Farenheit 451, Intellectuals will find a way to preserve knowledge.

[Ratttking]

Je Nique vos Merdiers

Quite pleased, since that would include every religious text ever written.

Book of the Subgenius came out in 1983, so no.

[ChemicalKidBITES]

I'd be pretty upset. :/

[Owned Kitten Tairious]

Je Nique vos Merdiers

Quite pleased, since that would include every religious text ever written.

Wouldn't that form of censorship be illegal? Not to mention massively dulling? Some of the greatest works of art and Literature were inspired by Religion/ Religious texts.

[Je Nique vos Merdiers]

Ratttking

Je Nique vos Merdiers

Quite pleased, since that would include every religious text ever written.

Book of the Subgenius came out in 1983, so no.

Eh, that one's okay. I think we could all do with some slack.