The Library Dance Continues

I've mentioned the public library issues locally before now; it continues to be the flash point driving the culture war in these mountains about here. The local newspapers, which claim to have received threats driven by the Republican political faction, are reporting: you can account for that matter in how you read the coverage.

When Jackson commissioners on May 5 reviewed a draft document outlining the framework of a new county library board upon departure from Fontana Regional Library system, Commissioner Jenny Lynn Hooper, clad in a Turning Point USA T-shirt, was quick to express her central grievance: “I don’t think [a board member] ought to have a library card.” 

Bitter laughter erupted from the audience. 

“I feel like that’s kind of a prerequisite to knowing what’s happening in the library, is to have a library card and be active,” responded Chair Mark Letson.

But Hooper wasn’t backing down.

“Well to me, it’s like, do you make people that’s going to be on the ABC Board know all about liquor?” she asked.

Hooper’s comment analogized two independent bodies not typically ripe for comparison. ABC boards in North Carolina are responsible for “controlling the sale of spirituous liquor.” Library boards do not exist to “control” public access to literature nor are members intended to reflect the will of elected leaders.

This is a news piece, not an opinion piece, by the way.

While serving FRL and JCPL, Richards supported a “juvenile card program” for children ages 15 and younger, requiring “parental consent for use of the library by a minor.” She also proposed a policy to ban “banned book” displays in system libraries. Her motivation to join the board was stated in just three words — “to provide oversight.” 

Martinez also backed the juvenile card program and introduced a motion to curtail librarian reports....Blaine is an anti-LGBTQ+ activist. He backed JCPL’s withdrawal, routinely expressing misinformation in the process. His reasoning for wanting to join the board came in a list of handwritten bullet points: “provide oversight, evaluate budgets, evaluate policies, evaluate programs, perform book challenge reviews.” 

The thing is, the journalists have a point this time even if it's disabling their ability to report dispassionately. It is definitely true that the Republicans locally view the library as a disagreeable phenomenon similar to a liquor store, one that -- if it must be allowed to exist at all -- needs careful regulation and oversight to prevent harm to young people from exposure to toxic contents. Censorship is the whole reason they have been waging this battle, exactly as their opponents content. There are stark First Amendment issues in the power play they are attempting. 

It is also true, as the Republicans contend, that the prior library governance was running the public library as a platform from which to wage cultural civil war against the values of the local community. That's also definitely the truth, and indeed explicitly in accordance with the American Library Association's published intent for such libraries in rural communities. They are indeed actively pursuing the charge that got Socrates put to death by an earlier revolt: 'corrupting the youth,' i.e. intentionally exposing the youth to ideas that their parents would find horrifying and subversive. 

There doesn't seem to be a compromise position on offer, one that respects the First Amendment and also allows the community to enjoy an undisrupted common peace according to local values and traditions. Both of the sides are, in a way, speaking the truth and correct in their assertions; neither side is promoting an acceptable way forward. Even if they didn't despise each other, it's not clear how they could move forward. 

The most likely outcome will be that the library system collapses locally, because both sides seem to prefer that it be destroyed than ceded to the other side.