Liberty, or Library?
I can't find the library thread so I'm starting a new one.
I'm afraid I never go to libraries, I went when I was a student but haven't felt the need for one since, or perhaps I haven't come accross one that I like.
This is to write what I think is a nice little story from one of my students-- it certainly had us laugh in the teachers' room.
My group was doing listening comprehension using one of Obama's speeches (a deep male voice and a non-British accent are difficulties for this sort of task). When it came to quoting from the Declaration of Independence and American people's inalienable rights, one boy wrote what he heard: "among these are life, library and the pursuit of happiness."
So here is a second poll for Americans at BT: Would you be willing to give up the "liberty" bit so that you can keep the ...libraries?
After all, think of the lovely library Gentle Reader seems to have in Eugene, Oregon (the ones I know are all rather drab). Wouldn't you be willing to give up something to keep such an enchanting place?
-
In total there are 24 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 24 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 789 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:08 am
Liberty, or library?
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
- GentleReader9
-
- Internet Sage
- Posts: 340
- Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 2:43 pm
- 15
- Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA, Earth.
- Been thanked: 7 times
Ophelia,
This really makes sense to me and I like the question! I do give up some "liberty" (of the superficial, material consumerist kind that Bacevich talks about in The Limits of Power, as well as a kind I think is more substantive) in order to have our library.
I live in a small, supernatural area a little outside the offical city limits of Eugene in terms of services (and maybe property tax and zoning, I guess; I'm a renter) yet my mail goes to Eugene and I have a vote for mayor and a city council representative, and the children here are in the Eugene school district, so go figure that out. Anyway, a majority of Eugene voters decided at some point that people who are not in some specifically, definitely Eugene, proper, limited zone need to pay $80 per year (that's if you pay it all at once; it's more if you pay it in pieces over time because you're poorer) in order for the household to have library cards. So I actually pay at least $80 per year to support the library. Unlike the people who voted for this situation, I do not resent subsidizing their use of the library. If that's how they feel about it, too bad for them to be so pinched and stingy-minded.
In a capitalist, supposedly democratic republic we have to be tolerant, even of the insecurity and pettiness of others, and be willing to sacrifice to some degree for what we believe to be of value for everyone. As I said before, I love our library. I take out and benefit from hundreds of books, tapes and CDs every year that I could not possibly buy for $80, not to mention the computer use and some other benefits I could get away with for free without a card. I probably wouldn't think to donate this much voluntarily if the law didn't exist, because I don't make very much money. But I can pay the out-of-city limits fee without resentment and flatter myself that I am one of many such "anonymous donors" who are willing to make up what might otherwise be a shortfall, even though the method for deciding this as a group is not the most economically progressive or fair way to raise the revenue. Who's to say it doesn't work out even or more than even? I don't care enough to do the math. I've never argued with an ex- for any money and I'm not arguing with my neighbors over it if I can help it either. In my case, I think it's worth it. If I didn't, I could forgo it and lose my library card privilege. It is a privilege, afterall. If we want to have nice, civilized institutions, we have to pay for them and we have to do so under the constraints other participants bring to the table. I am only in charge of my vote, but I can help give other future voters a chance to become more educated and refined if I am willing to pay for it. I am.
This really makes sense to me and I like the question! I do give up some "liberty" (of the superficial, material consumerist kind that Bacevich talks about in The Limits of Power, as well as a kind I think is more substantive) in order to have our library.
I live in a small, supernatural area a little outside the offical city limits of Eugene in terms of services (and maybe property tax and zoning, I guess; I'm a renter) yet my mail goes to Eugene and I have a vote for mayor and a city council representative, and the children here are in the Eugene school district, so go figure that out. Anyway, a majority of Eugene voters decided at some point that people who are not in some specifically, definitely Eugene, proper, limited zone need to pay $80 per year (that's if you pay it all at once; it's more if you pay it in pieces over time because you're poorer) in order for the household to have library cards. So I actually pay at least $80 per year to support the library. Unlike the people who voted for this situation, I do not resent subsidizing their use of the library. If that's how they feel about it, too bad for them to be so pinched and stingy-minded.
In a capitalist, supposedly democratic republic we have to be tolerant, even of the insecurity and pettiness of others, and be willing to sacrifice to some degree for what we believe to be of value for everyone. As I said before, I love our library. I take out and benefit from hundreds of books, tapes and CDs every year that I could not possibly buy for $80, not to mention the computer use and some other benefits I could get away with for free without a card. I probably wouldn't think to donate this much voluntarily if the law didn't exist, because I don't make very much money. But I can pay the out-of-city limits fee without resentment and flatter myself that I am one of many such "anonymous donors" who are willing to make up what might otherwise be a shortfall, even though the method for deciding this as a group is not the most economically progressive or fair way to raise the revenue. Who's to say it doesn't work out even or more than even? I don't care enough to do the math. I've never argued with an ex- for any money and I'm not arguing with my neighbors over it if I can help it either. In my case, I think it's worth it. If I didn't, I could forgo it and lose my library card privilege. It is a privilege, afterall. If we want to have nice, civilized institutions, we have to pay for them and we have to do so under the constraints other participants bring to the table. I am only in charge of my vote, but I can help give other future voters a chance to become more educated and refined if I am willing to pay for it. I am.
"Where can I find a man who has forgotten the words so that I can talk with him?"
-- Chuang-Tzu (c. 200 B.C.E.)
as quoted by Robert A. Burton
-- Chuang-Tzu (c. 200 B.C.E.)
as quoted by Robert A. Burton
- Saffron
-
- I can has reading?
- Posts: 2954
- Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:37 pm
- 15
- Location: Randolph, VT
- Has thanked: 474 times
- Been thanked: 399 times
I concur! I use our little library several times a week. I don't think I could get by without it.GentleReader9 wrote:Ophelia,
This really makes sense to me and I like the question! I do give up some "liberty" (of the superficial, material consumerist kind that Bacevich talks about in The Limits of Power, as well as a kind I think is more substantive) in order to have our library.
- Dissident Heart
-
- I dumpster dive for books!
- Posts: 1790
- Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 11:01 am
- 20
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 18 times
Within our sacred secular mythology, the Library is a sanctuary for Liberty. It is the Library that feeds, informs, inspires and guides an unruly chaos into a Liberated Citizen. Libraries are the Liberty-hating Tyrant's first and perpetual enemy. Libraries are radical because they maintain our connections to our roots, reminding us that we are rooted in Liberty.Ophelia: So here is a second poll for Americans at BT: Would you be willing to give up the "liberty" bit so that you can keep the ...libraries?
- The Real Macai
-
- Creative Writing Student
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:33 pm
- 14
- Location: New York
- Been thanked: 1 time
- johnson1010
-
Tenured Professor
- Posts: 3564
- Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
- 15
- Location: Michigan
- Has thanked: 1280 times
- Been thanked: 1128 times
- Krysondra
-
- Intern
- Posts: 158
- Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:56 am
- 14
- Location: Austin, Texas
- Been thanked: 1 time
I agree that you have to have liberty in order to have a good library. Afterall, what good is a library that is full of censored, politicised material? You could trust what you read even less, and you wouldn't be able to find counter-arguments. So, I vote give me liberty, and give me library.John Milton, Areopagitica
Who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, God's image; but he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God, as it were in the eye.
Milton, J. (1644). Areopagitica. http://www.uoregon.edu/~rbear/areopagitica.html
- GentleReader9
-
- Internet Sage
- Posts: 340
- Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 2:43 pm
- 15
- Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA, Earth.
- Been thanked: 7 times
There was a specific context to the definition of liberty in the original question. Obviously I wouldn't give up Liberty, in the abstract, on the whole, in order to go to the library. That would be silly. Not that I haven't done anything silly, but that's another issue.
I was thinking of the way some people (like Bacevich, an author we were reading at the time) seem to conflate liberty with consumerist choices, setting up the kind of false dichotomy we were playing with above: Library or Liberty. It's a silly question and since I'm silly that's how I answered it.
Superficial product distinctions, ownership and exclusivity are not liberty; capitalism just makes them seem alike.
The public library is a collectivist institution, which ignores largely artificial values attached to ownership, marketing and brands to allow for a more genuine exploration of content, and a deeper kind of Liberty: the liberty to think and say anything. Even silly things sometimes.
I was thinking of the way some people (like Bacevich, an author we were reading at the time) seem to conflate liberty with consumerist choices, setting up the kind of false dichotomy we were playing with above: Library or Liberty. It's a silly question and since I'm silly that's how I answered it.
Superficial product distinctions, ownership and exclusivity are not liberty; capitalism just makes them seem alike.
The public library is a collectivist institution, which ignores largely artificial values attached to ownership, marketing and brands to allow for a more genuine exploration of content, and a deeper kind of Liberty: the liberty to think and say anything. Even silly things sometimes.
"Where can I find a man who has forgotten the words so that I can talk with him?"
-- Chuang-Tzu (c. 200 B.C.E.)
as quoted by Robert A. Burton
-- Chuang-Tzu (c. 200 B.C.E.)
as quoted by Robert A. Burton
- Thomas Hood
-
Genuinely Genius
- Posts: 823
- Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 7:21 pm
- 16
- Location: Wyse Fork, NC
- Been thanked: 1 time