Banning books is like banning marijuana

If the government of a particular country bans something that they feel is too inappropriate for the audience of that country, they are just covering up for what they fear. If they ban books, like SH5 or Brave New World or 1984, just to choose at random, they are just covering up for what they fear might become of their country after the readers obtain some of these ideas.

In my opinion, SH5 was banned mostly because the content of the book was inappropriate for the targeted audience. This book contains sexual profanity, course language, and alcohol consumption, but the content isn't the only thing that got it banned. Even though that the theme in the novel which dictates that war is a bad thing wasn't Vonnegut's motive when writing it, it might have come across as a very strong message to those who are against war. The government is very pro-war, and does not want any protestors getting their way.

To relate the profanity back to the other novels that we have read this year, 1984 and Brave New World, the books contain more of the government-satirical-profanity. In either novel, the big idea is that the government has a new, or newer, choice of power. In 1984, its Big Brother, and in BNW, its the....ummm...whatever Mustapha Mond's position was called. The governments in our universe do not want the people under the government to form a mutiny and overthrow them, with the ideas from these novels. Even though these novels would probably not have too much authority in the mind of the believer, these books may add up and eventually obtain power.

Those are some of the reasons why the governments might actually ban books. The only thing is, I don't believe that these books have any threat to the government in any way at all. They are way too minor in the society, then and now. Other countries might disagree. I believe that banning books is very similar to banning marijuana or alcohol during the prohibition. If the government bans something, then the greed instinct, which all of us have, will overpower us. We, as humans, want what we cant have, which means that banning the books would make a greater need for them overall. We could believe that because the government bans them, there might be something hidden within them that the government doesn't want us to know, and we want to know what. To put this into perspective, Frankenstein was banned from half the world because it was, apparently, the scariest movie ever made. We look at it now and we laugh at how people actually believed this was scary. It's as scary as bringing daffodils to your unicorn. So the right decision for the government would be to give us our right to read whatever we want, it would be better for everyone.

And so ends this post.
So it goes.