Dangerous Ideas

A Brief History of Censorship in the West, from the Ancients to Fake News

De: Eric Berkowitz

Narrado por: Tim Campbell

A fascinating examination of how restricting speech has continuously shaped our culture, and how censorship is used as a tool to prop up authorities and maintain class and gender disparities

Through compelling narrative, historian Eric Berkowitz reveals how drastically censorship has shaped our modern society. More than just a history of censorship, Dangerous Ideas illuminates the power of restricting speech; how it has defined states, ideas, and culture; and (despite how each of us would like to believe otherwise) how it is something we all participate in.

This engaging cultural history of censorship and thought suppression throughout the ages takes readers from the first Chinese emperor’s wholesale elimination of books, to Henry VIII’s decree of death for anyone who “imagined” his demise, and on to the attack on Charlie Hebdo and the volatile politics surrounding censorship of social media.

Highlighting the base impulses driving many famous acts of suppression, Berkowitz demonstrates the fragility of power and how every individual can act as both the suppressor and the suppressed.

©2021 Eric Berkowitz (P)2021 Beacon Press

Reseñas de la Crítica

“[A] lively and wide-ranging history...[an] engrossing history of censorship.” (The Economist)

“Eric Berkowitz’s rollicking, entertaining book reminds us that ideas have always been contested and that censorship is undesirable and mostly counter-productive.”—The Australian

“In his captivating sprint through two millennia of censorship, Eric Berkowitz chronicles some of the more bizarre and egregious episodes, while explaining that the human instinct to suppress speech has rarely waned.”—Financial Times

CENSORSHIP

Eric Berkowitz recounts the history of free speech and censorship.  His history infers censorship is a misdirected waste of time.  Berkowitz argues freedom of speech is unstoppable.  Even in the most repressive governments in history, citizens have exercised freedom of speech. 

The fundamental point made many times in Berkowitz’s history is that censorship does not work because there is always someone who is willing pay any price to say what they think must be said.  Berkowitz offers many historical examples of why free speech is a confusing and difficult problem. 

In every country of the world, free speech is unstoppable because it is controlled by the few, not the many. The rise of newspapers, radio, and television focused and expanded the principle of free speech.  Economic interests influenced these early platforms of free speech but with a more limited threat and benefit to the public. In the age of newspapers, radio, and television, government controls were explicitly legislated but in the internet age control is hidden in platform algorithms.  Government may still have the first seat of control, but media moguls have usurped legislated government censorship.

Whether it is a newspaper reporter told to revise an article that criticizes corporate advertisers or a discloser of government secrets there is societal threat.  Even more pernicious is the Amazon, Facebook, or Twitter executive who orders a coder to increase customer clicks for corporations that pay more for advertising.  And then there are the media trolls who distort the truth, lie, or incite violence to increase click count with no regard to consequence.

Freedom of speech is “…a riddle wrapped in an enigma” (a Winston Churchill quote about Stalinist Russia). Freedom of speech is a two edged sword, a tool for defense and destruction.

Did not think I was going to enjoy this that much!

What a surprisingly well put-together story! I was not expecting that. This book did not last long in my headphones! Very informative and well written.

[expletive deleted] Brilliant!

Well researched, skillfully organized, and brilliantly written, the book presents a fascinating history that genuinely helps us understand our present moment. Right down to the word choices and sentence structures, the intelligent book is carefully crafted to be accessible and enjoyable for a wide range of readers/listeners. This book might have set my personal record for bookmarks -- so many interesting facts, so many good insights, so many clever turns of phrasing... The narrator's voice is superb, and he seems to capture the author's intention at every moment. This analogy might be silly, but I recently bought earbuds and was first stricken by how the sound seemed source-less, seemed to just somehow exist within me; that was my experience with this audiobook. I wasn't being read to by an outsider. I wasn't working to wade through thick writing. I was somehow swimming in the author's ideas and relishing the depth of understanding.

I'd like to write a definitive review but I don't

Want to upset the author or anyone else. Censorship is like pornogrophy you know it when you don't see it.

A One Sided Analysis

I am going to echo the few negative critiques of this book with strong agreement. The subject of censorship really cannot be handled adequately through a partisan lens. While the book starts out with an interesting historical tour of censorship in the West, it becomes obvious by the book’s end that the lessons of censorship have not been learned by the author. The author recognizes McCarthyism, though seems oblivious to the ubiquity of censorship coming from the Left.

The nonpartisan organizations Heterodox Academy and Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), have been clear about the magnitude of this issue, in case folks reading this think that this is Right-wing hyperbole. In much of the elite universities students, professors, and guest lecturers have been censored or worse if they challenge Progressive doctrines which are assumed to be universally sacrosanct. Scientists will lose funding, be erased from scientific journals, or booted from scientific associations if their findings conflict with Progressive doctrines. Reporters or editors of the mainstream media who question the assumptions of the dominant narrative or even show journalistic balance have been silenced and fired. These draconian measures, often prosecuted as ‘accountability’, are not merely policies of private entities. We are seeing the extension of one political party facilitated through the government apparatus, be it policies, funding, and/or collusion with the fourth estate.

Not coincidentally, there has been a record decline in trust in universities, the sciences, and mainstream news media. This is driving a new market of emerging academic institutions, alliances, independent news media, and networks of scientists and public intellectuals who champion diversity of ideas and open civil conversation in the pursuit of truth. That a book on censorship doesn’t reflect on these extraordinary social/political shifts is ashamed.

Predictably, the book ends on Trump as the latest bad actor starting from the Roman Empire, the Church, Conservative Warhawks and prudes, and Hitler. What is missing in the analysis of censorship in this book is nuance recognizing that everyone seems themself as moral and rational including the censors, be it the authoritarian Conservative types or Leftist revolutionaries. There is little analysis of the way censorship contributes to structural stupidity by distorting history and suppressing dissident voices that could otherwise be providing balance and error correction.

The first collective casualty of mass censorship is self-understanding. It is therefore not surprising how the US 2024 presidential election went: an ineffectual mainstream media in political lock-step denouncing the next Hitler incarnate, Hollywood in tears, and half the country traumatized, speechless, and scratching their heads—once again. While there was a fleeting afterthought that maybe the emergence of independent news sources and Joe Rogan types might have had an influence, there was little reflection on how a decade of heavy-handed political capture and censorship across education, science, and journalism might have helped make the election of a demagogue more desirable, than the status quo.

The discussion of censorship should therefore be a stinging analysis of both the Left and the Right, something this book fails to do adequately.