Book Banning is More Pernicious Than We Think

Photo courtesy of Panev Manoel.

Literacy has become flagship collateral damage in American conservatives’ relentless uphill battle for dominance. A casualty of the so-called “culture war” between progressive inclusivity efforts and traditionalist backlash, politically charged book banning has skyrocketed in recent years, particularly in public school libraries. The trend is wide-ranging, encompassing countless texts prohibited for various reasons nationwide, but the bulk of the data indicates that Republicans, lawmakers and parents alike, are targeting books that discuss LGBTQ+ or racial topics and are succeeding the most in red-leaning states. As the movement grows, it’s critical we place it in the proper policy context. Book censorship is not just another conservative tool to gain votes—it poses an existential threat to education, marginalized groups, and American democracy.

While its partisan undertones have burgeoned in recent decades, reading restrictions are nothing new. Various governments, organizations, and world leaders have tried to control the flow of written material since the dawn of writing itself. In ancient Rome, Emperor Caligula wanted to ban The Odyssey for its promotion of Greek freedom. Students in Nazi Germany infamously held public burnings of works by Jewish, liberal, and leftist writers. And in the United States, censors have banned books from publication numerous times over the past 400 years, often taking particular aim at those that challenge conventional or dominant ideas and institutions, such as religion, slavery, and Jim Crow laws. Now, the paradigm is no different. 

Book banning is, at its essence, a political tactic for staying in power. It’s no coincidence that classic dystopian texts like 1984 and Fahrenheit 451—which have been ironically subjected to school book bans in the past—feature destruction or modification of literature as a prime characteristic of the authoritarian regime. In controlling the books and information available, the government isn’t only telling people what to think—it’s shaping how they think. 

For example, book restrictions in prisons are the most widespread form of censorship in the nation, curtailing carceral readership of an arbitrary tapestry of works, from The Art of War to self-help guides to Cosmopolitan magazines. PEN America divides prison censorship into two categories: content-based and content-neutral bans. While the latter and more common type holds its own injustices, content-based censorship particularly excels at taking away power from the incarcerated and placing it in the hands of prison officials. Officials may ban any book they please so long as it is “detrimental to the security, good order, or discipline of the institution or if it might facilitate criminal activity,” but this precedent still allows them a breadth of leeway for deciding what constitutes a legitimate threat, leaving prisoners’ access to literature hopelessly at their whims. 

In the country’s current climate, where minority rights are a political token rather than concrete bipartisan legislation, conservatives like Governor Ron DeSantis, who has helped make Florida the leading state for public school book bans, are turning their anti-“wokeism” campaigns into crusades against vulnerable groups. With not a grain of reverence for the First Amendment, Republicans now disproportionately prohibit books in schools that particularly spotlight LGBTQ+ and Black voices. Although censors most commonly cite “sexual content” as the reason behind this, their intentions are clear.

“We see the way LGBTQ+ humanity is sexualized quite a bit or the way sexual content is overwhelmingly challenged if it includes characters of color or LGBTQ+ characters,” said Kasey Meehan, the Freedom to Read Program Director at PEN America. “Sexual content is generally an appropriate and expected part of literature and nonfiction for young people. There are many classic works that have always included sexual content,” she added.

The literary crackdown falls under a broader right-wing campaign to preserve traditional values of American society and identity. But in their desperate attempts to cling to the old world, they’re ripping the new one apart. Pundits and politicians alike fixate on gender-affirming care, sports, education, and even drag shows to openly deny transgender people’s right to exist. Teaching any inkling of the Black perspective has become a partisan taboo, with African American-oriented curricula facing crackdown nationwide. 

Given the political evils of the trend, when, if ever, is it okay to restrict people’s access to books? While the vast majority of bans have come from conservatives, liberals have engaged in the practice as well, often flagging titles with racist language or imagery. Book bans have also, at times, occurred out of legitimate, non-political concern. For example, parents and school districts have gone after Jay Asher’s novel 13 Reasons Why out of fear it “glamorizes suicide.” And plenty of parents are simply opposed to literature with sexual content of any sort, regardless of identity depicted, being taught or available to their children. 

These all raise thoughtful questions about where to draw the line when deciding what to shelve and what not to shelve. As politics nests itself in the literary world, it becomes difficult to determine which objections are valid and which stem from prejudice. But most censorship advocates, whether politically motivated or not, miss the point of reading: books are innately disruptive. They are unsanitary, traumatizing, and mind-boggling. They incite, offend, challenge, and transform—and they should stay that way. 

“Books offer ‘mirrors, windows, and sliding glass doors.’ Dr. Sims Bishop offered that phrase to say books can be reflections for young people to see themselves, windows to learn about somebody else’s experiences, and a sliding door to walk a mile in somebody’s shoes, to get a deep sense of how somebody with a different lived experience may have navigated the world,” Ms. Meehan said. “By preventing those opportunities, there’s a real loss to learning and empathy and a real threat to democracy and a deeper understanding of the pluralistic world that we live in.”

Underpinning the war on reading is a malignant force that preys on ordinary people: young students, ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+ communities, the incarcerated—any group with less of a voice in governing our nation. Books are unshakably powerful tools in challenging the hegemonic class, which is why they are under threat. Without books and the freedom of ideas that comes with them, we face a generation-wide loss of knowledge, open-mindedness, curiosity, and identity. Literacy is the Promethean fire from which civilization moves forward. And nowhere is it more essential than in schools. 

*The author of this piece conducted the interview referenced. All quotations included from this interview have been published with the express permission of the interviewee. This article, inclusive of the quoted material, has been approved for publication by all parties involved. 

Elliot Heath (CC ’27) is a staff writer for CPR planning to study English and film studies. A native New Yorker, he’s passionate about U.S.-based politics, social issues, and the arts. He can be reached at emh2276@columbia.edu.