![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ALA Statement on Intellectual Freedom
Feb. 27th, 2021 05:31 amSomething I wrote in a class forum as we go through a week focusing on ethics.
-------
On the ALA's professional ethics page that was in the readings for this week, the authors quote the 7th edition of the Intellectual Freedom Manual in part as follows:
"Intellectual freedom can exist only where two essential conditions are met: first, that all individuals have the right to hold any belief on any subject and to convey their ideas in any form they deem appropriate..."
This statement has been bothering me for a while now and I want to know if other folks are similarly troubled.
The ALA seems to be saying that intellectual freedom means I can believe whatever I want to believe, and I can express that belief in whatever way is appropriate to me. I agree with the first part of that. And even if I didn't, it wouldn't matter. I can't make anyone think or stop thinking something. But I don't know how that second part should be applied to the context of a library or similar. Patrons should *not* be able to express their beliefs in whatever way they feel is appropriate or we'll have an environment that encourages and protects hate speech. I don't think it is possible to create an environment that is welcoming to everyone, because the very presence of some groups is going to make other groups feel unwelcome.
The ethics question from the expanded list this week regarding white supremacists reserving library space is, of course, an example of this. Twenty years ago, I probably would have argued for their right to use the space just like any other group. At this point in my life and in history, as racists and bigots feel emboldened and normalized by a social atmosphere in which people are unwilling to call these kinds of cancerous growths on the body of culture what they are, I would not argue for that right. I would argue against it. I think the ALA should too.
-------
On the ALA's professional ethics page that was in the readings for this week, the authors quote the 7th edition of the Intellectual Freedom Manual in part as follows:
"Intellectual freedom can exist only where two essential conditions are met: first, that all individuals have the right to hold any belief on any subject and to convey their ideas in any form they deem appropriate..."
This statement has been bothering me for a while now and I want to know if other folks are similarly troubled.
The ALA seems to be saying that intellectual freedom means I can believe whatever I want to believe, and I can express that belief in whatever way is appropriate to me. I agree with the first part of that. And even if I didn't, it wouldn't matter. I can't make anyone think or stop thinking something. But I don't know how that second part should be applied to the context of a library or similar. Patrons should *not* be able to express their beliefs in whatever way they feel is appropriate or we'll have an environment that encourages and protects hate speech. I don't think it is possible to create an environment that is welcoming to everyone, because the very presence of some groups is going to make other groups feel unwelcome.
The ethics question from the expanded list this week regarding white supremacists reserving library space is, of course, an example of this. Twenty years ago, I probably would have argued for their right to use the space just like any other group. At this point in my life and in history, as racists and bigots feel emboldened and normalized by a social atmosphere in which people are unwilling to call these kinds of cancerous growths on the body of culture what they are, I would not argue for that right. I would argue against it. I think the ALA should too.
