In 2018, on the train from Munich to Dachau, a somber feeling engulfed me as we pulled into the station. Stepping off the train, I embarked on the “Path of Remembrance,” tracing the route that the majority of prisoners took to the concentration camp.
Walking this path to the Dachau Concentration Camp left an indelible impact on my life, one that I will never forget. The first prisoners arrived at Dachau in March 1933, and by May of the same year, book burnings commenced, serving as a potent symbol of Nazi intolerance and censorship.
In 2018, I held the belief that the majority of Americans shared the view that WWII was one of the most horrific events in modern world history. However, witnessing events in America today, I am now compelled to confront how some Americans perceive WWII and the concerning rise of extremism. This extremism is evident not only in individuals but also in recent incidents of book burning and censorship within our own country.
Millions of American military personnel served in WWII, with over 400,000 deaths and 670,000 injuries. Soldiers who liberated concentration camps witnessed first-hand horrifying atrocities. As a US Navy veteran, I question our commitment to veterans when we deny their truths, in this time of revisionist history.
The book burning in Tennessee in 2022 left me appalled. I kept asking myself why don’t people recognize that this is how it all started in 1933? Regrettably, not all Americans share this concern.
Book banning and censorship are a slippery slope. Most book-banning efforts in the US have been initiated by students’ parents. More than 37% of all challenges targeting books in the US since 1990 were from parents. In 2022 there was a 34.15% increase in book bans compared to 2021. Prior to 2021 the number of challenges in the US decreased, with only 68 reported in 2019 and 78 in 2020.
However, despite the grandstanding about “freedom” in the US, banning books contradicts its very essence. Book banning is a form of censorship, typically driven by a group’s personal beliefs, seeking to deprive every one of the right to read certain materials. In all honesty, the concept of freedom does not extend to all people in the US.
It is disheartening to witness the banning of both “Maus” and “Anne Frank’s Diary,” two powerful works that reflect the horrors of the Nazi regime and the atrocities inflicted on their authors. Were they banned because they were considered too graphic or because they simply spoke the truth about their harrowing experiences?
Many people eventually yearn for the truth that was withheld from them. They might seek this truth out later in life and even feel resentful that it was kept from them.
At the age of six, I lost my mother and I went on to endure and survive through different stepmothers. However, I can’t say they raised me, as they provided no nurturing. As I entered my pre-teen years, I found myself with numerous questions and no one to confide in or seek guidance from. This was during the 1970s, a time when discussing delicate matters with one’s father was unheard of.
My father, whom I eventually came to love and forgive, was largely absent, occupied with work or spending time with friends. When I was 11, I discovered the book “Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret.” This book offered answers to my many questions and proved immensely helpful. Had this book been banned, I would have felt even more lost than I already was.
I firmly believe that all Americans should have the freedom to read the books they desire.
If a parent chooses not to let their child read something, that should remain a decision between the parent and the child. But why should others be deprived of the experience?
I want to emphasize that I support parents’ rights. For instance, if a child’s class is going on a field trip and a parent doesn’t want their child to attend, they should have the right to prevent their child from going without any negative consequences.
The same principle applies to books. If a parent disapproves of a book their child’s class is reading, providing an alternative option should be available. Ultimately, it boils down to ensuring freedom of choice for everyone involved.
In the pursuit of happiness, we shouldn’t impose our beliefs on others, dictating what they can or cannot do, read or even where they can live. Such actions contradict the very essence of “freedom.”
This article was published in the News-Review on Jul 30 2023.