No Need to “Burn” Books

"The world calls immoral books a book that shows our own shame against the world (Walde)." The book is written to help those who choose to read them, and for me, They should have the right to choose what they want. Even if you read something clearly, most people think that this is not the theme of this book. As they knew what they wanted to show to the audience, the authors chose to write specific topics in their sentences. I think that Burned should not be banned from school because Burned teaches young people to give good moral lessons.

This is the same as burning a book. The idea that people have to avoid ideas and information pushes this campaign to "foreign publicity". That is why the entire history book is burned. Whether or not it is to protect people from heresy, obscenity, political ideology, false news, publicity, the premise is the same. Normal people need to control their own ideas and information according to their interests. People are playing with it. In good faith people accepted the story of "Facebook advertisement intervention Russia" and the story of Twitter's robot. To date, I am an Australian who has never experienced a relationship with the Russian government, it is often used as a promoter for the Kremlin by corporate loyalists, warning the reader to move away from dangerous ideas It is. Mainstream Democrats are currently defending their government, "Help us! We need you to protect us from Russian propaganda!"

The misunderstanding that Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451" is about a repressive dictatorship that burns books to curb political opposition is widespread. In fact, this is a story about getting something society wants. People want to burn books for their perceived comfort. As powerful people adhere to manipulating us, we will have to stand firm and develop our ability to stick to our intellectual sovereignty. The powerful people of the world have vested rights to put rape fingers in our hearts and become the first way to control our way of thinking, actions, voting.

Burning a book is a symbolic act. Obviously, the book itself does not pose a physical threat to individuals and society. This is the content of the question, the idea, and the text - therefore the idea of ​​the book was burned and burned that the page was not destroyed, there was no book near the torch, the match, and the gasoline . For all books that have the same idea, the book's burning symbolically exists. "The book does not exist on its own, it is the printer's ink and paper death.The power, authority, and discussion of the book is up to that idea. (2006: 604)