How stupid is the (for now) Misecretary of Diseducation Carlos "Ponderous (Republican) Pachyderm" Chardón?
Stupid enough to ban reading in a country where reading is as welcome as explosive diarrhea.
The censorinng of 5 books by the Retardepartment is the latest salvo in the war against education characterized by headless leadership, moral defectives and increasingly-failing education policies that are aimed mainly at keeping the graft intact. Just ask the Feds: they're certainly looking into that tendency closely enough.
In the way stenches spread, the banned books, removed from school libraries and assignment lists, have created an even wider miasma of stupidity as (non)governor Luis "The Larva" Fortuño has defended the (soon-to-be-fired) Lumbering Lardcan's decision as "not being censorship."
Memo 1 to The Larva: censorship n. 1 a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring.
Memo 2 to The Larva: censoring trans. v.: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable.
Memo 3 to The Larva: You are wrong. Again.
Extending the miasma, defenders of literature--or more correctly, pseudo-intellectual academics--pretend to chastise the action of the Overweight Oaf by by comparing the banning of 5 novels to the Taliban's suppression of culture. The stupidity in that statement is equivalent to the moronic bandying about of the term "Nazi" to refer to some opposing political view or person; it is the melodramatic equivalent of saying you are "hysterical" when you are splashed with a drop of water.
What the King-sized Kook did was censorship--censorship, Larva--but it is a far far cry from the deliberate destruction of irreplaceable cultural treasures that the Taliban has become infamous for. (And along those lines, the Nazis killed--killed--millions of people. Even the murderous moron can't be compared to that depth of evil.) So if you academic acephalics want to blow hot air, how about (a) doing it to encourage more reading amongst My Brethren and (b) actually reading the damn books you purport to pseudo-defend?
No one gave a tinker's damn about these 5 books until the Zaftig Zero decided that curse words were fucking awful and that sexual innuendo fucked up his karma. Boo-hoo. If you want to--and too many idiots do--you can find a reason to ban any book. Even the Bible. (Don't look at Me that way: there's enormous amounts of violence, sexual innuendo [Solomon, anyone?] and outright incest to curl the toenails of most aardvarks, if aardvarks learned how to read.) But rather than finding reasons to ban books, how about finding reasons to read books? Especially--especially--if you're supposed to be the educators of a nation drowning in its own indifference to reading.
In a "Set the clock to the right time after the Titanic hit the iceberg" kind of way, this whole banning books business is like slapping lipstick on a pig: colorful distraction, but the huge hog still reeks.
And the Retardepartment does too...
The Jenius Has Spoken.
P.S. (22 Sep.) Well, We just got noticed for this on BoingBoing, My first blog crush. Yes, I just wrote "blog crush."
2 comments:
I find it terrifying that the person who recommended the censorship apparently has not read the books.
Also, I bet those books are read at the private school Fortunos kids are attending
You're right, Gabo, about the not reading and about The Larva's kiddies reading those same banned books...which are now (15 Sep) unbanned, or at least 4 of them are, with the remaining outcast being one of the Puerto Rican novels.
Here's My suggestion: Let's ban the Retardepartment.
Post a Comment