Hacker News Reader

Comment by MK999 | Hacker News Reader

I don't think it is easily searchable, that would defeat the point.

One example of a suppressed book would be when the North American distributor of said books gets two shots to the back of the head. Another would be when its taken out of printing after a mere 3000 copies even though its author is a famous and well respected European professor. Another would be that its not translated into English even though it's by one of the most celebrated authors in the world. Another example would be when the author is thrown into prison under false murder charges because he's ruffling the wrong feathers. All true stories, to discover the books and the authors is an exercise for the reader.

If you look at the banned book list its usually because it offends Christian morality, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_commonly_challeng..., but offending social morals and offending (elements of) the power structure are very different.

View on HN

A good answer for the distinction of suppressed inre: banned, but your post as a contribution to the discussion at large is weakened by the "wise mystic who won't reveal the whole truth for the good of the student" routine. You might as well speak in riddles.

I'm fairly certain your second example is Tragedy and Hope by Carroll Quigley, although he was an American teaching at Georgetown. Your first might be Dark Alliance by Gary Webb (if one defines "distributor" very loosely), but I haven't a clue on the last two. They don't trigger anything in memory and the details are too vague for a fruitful search. Be a good sport and elaborate.

Tragedy and Hope is a fine guess, but I was thinking of an Italian professor.

My point is just there is another level of control, not banning books but silencing or suppressing them (or pick some other term that fits better)

I understand and agree with your point ("a good answer", as I said). My point is that your position is weakened (for the individual you responded to and all other readers) by not naming the books and authors in question.

Anyone not previously familiar with suppression as it is practiced would be more readily swayed with something they can sink their teeth into and investigate. What you've given them instead are vague and unverifiable claims that, without elaboration, carry the hint of paranoid fancy rather than serious conspiracy(which risks unjust dismissal by someone could have otherwise been informed).

Let's use my first guess of Tragedy and Hope as an example. Consider the following:

-pedigree of Quigley: History professor at the Georgetown School of Foreign Service who taught Bill Clinton and an entire generation of diplomats

-contents of the book: macrohistorical view of Anglo-American governmental, financial and intellectual organizations and how they shaped history

-manner of its suppression: first editition pulled, subsequent editions published without the passages detailing the establishment of the BIS backed by private bankers and the existence of what Quigley called the "Round Table Groups"

These combine to paint a clear (and researchable) picture of what you alluded to: books not being banned, but having their impact diminished, because they challenge or critique the power structure.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com