Since the 2024 elections concluded, the internet has exploded into debates about what this means for the country’s future. Movements to deplatform famous individuals for their political stances have increased tenfold. This crusade hasn’t missed BookTok in a campaign coined as “red-listing,” where users have been scrambling to uncover which authors voted for Trump. This practice has frustrated some who oppose the polarization by asking people to “keep politics out of BookTok.” Proponents cite that the community should remain unified and enable others to share their thoughts on books without disclosing their political standing. Many avid readers, including me, vehemently oppose this notion.
Consider this: If books aren’t political, why does history tell us the opposite?
Despite the founding doctrine of “all men are created equal,” the United States has a sordid past with anti-literacy policies that primarily target Black people. Keeping slaves in the dark made it easier to rationalize their dehumanization for the sake of reinforcing the country’s racial hierarchy. These policies peaked in the Antebellum Period, affecting both slaves and freedmen. Some slave owners blamed abolitionists for anti-literacy laws, citing that if it weren’t for their deviance, slaves wouldn’t feel empowered to revolt. Others feared that if slaves could read and write, they could forge documents that would grant them freedom. Literacy was considered so alarming that wanted posters for runaways would mention whether slaves could write. Regardless of the justification, anti-literacy laws had one goal: control. Even when they were phased out after the Civil War, systemic discrimination in education persisted under Plessy V. Ferguson and remains insidious today. Literacy empowers people to learn about other perspectives and express themselves, thus giving them agency. It’s no surprise that governments looking to enforce conformity will attempt to control who gets to read along with what material they consume.
Controlling literacy isn’t exclusive to the United States. One of the most infamous instances occurred in Berlin’s Opera Square on May 10, 1933, when university students mobilized to burn 25,000 books in order to “purify” German literature. Students all over the country would steal books from predominantly libraries if their titles and authors were comparable to those banned by the Nazi Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda. Books considered “un-German” would include works by Jewish authors or those suspected of containing Pacifist, Marxist, or Freemasonic themes. That day, around 40,000 people gathered in Opera Square to hear Joseph Goebbels fiercely declare, “No to decadence and moral corruption!” This effectively framed Nazi Germans as victims of these “foreign” influences. This method isn’t only a facet of modern history. Government-mandated book burnings date back to 213 B.C. when Chinese emperor Qin Shi Huang orchestrated massive bonfires to burn writings he perceived to be political threats. He mostly censored historical writings to prevent comparisons with earlier, more virtuous leaders. Historian Lois Mai Chan recognized an ironic pattern with book burnings; rather than diminishing a text’s value, it is “a recognition of the power of knowledge.”
True stories or not, books do not spawn from the void. They are informed through their social and historical contexts- diving into these always deepens an understanding of their stories. Additionally, the relevance of book censorship ripens when the current climate begins looking familiar. Ray Bradbury was only 15 when the Nazi book burnings occurred, but was still greatly disturbed by the implications. From there, he said it was “only natural” that he would eventually write and publish “Fahrenheit 451.” Suzanne Collins wrote “The Hunger Games” after channel flipping. She was bothered by the juxtaposition of reality shows with battleground footage of the Iraq War, essentially trivializing the latter. Margaret Atwood, the author of “The Handmaid’s Tale,” confessed in The Atlantic that she thought the book’s plot was “too far-fetched” when she originally wrote it. After Roe V. Wade was overturned, she realized that the Supreme Court was bringing Gilead closer to reality. She agrees that not everyone believes life begins at conception, but the ruling reveals a most frightening consequence: “That which is a sin within a certain set of religious beliefs is [made] to be a crime for all.”
Atwood’s words ring true with the United States’ newest attack on education: book bannings. Consequently, the previously mentioned titles have all been among the top 100 banned books in the country from the 2000s to now. The American Library Association (ALA) has kept a timeline of book bannings, where the numbers have steadily risen over the years, exploding in 2021. These numbers have hit record highs in the following years. In 2022, the ALA reported that 2,571 unique titles were targeted with censorship demands. 58% of these materials were within school libraries and curricula; the remaining portion was within public libraries. These campaigns are largely headed by Conservative parents mobilizing against books whose content they perceive as “inappropriate” or “corrupting their children.” School administrations enable parents who already force their beliefs onto their children to extend the reach of that entitlement to their whole communities.
There are clear trends in the content they seek to ban. Since 2021, book-banning campaigns have eerily mirrored educational gag orders – a term coined by PEN America to describe laws enforcing restrictions on subjects concerning race, gender, LGBTQ+ identities, and historical marginalization across these fields. Book-banning movements have therefore primarily targeted books relating to these topics. Complaints about diversity, equity, and inclusion motions have been answered by removing books with POC protagonists, or for merely featuring LGBTQ+ characters. Recently, they have honed in on LGBTQ+ books in K-12 schools, contesting their age appropriateness, asserting that material that doesn’t conform to heteronormative standards is inherently sexual or pornographic.
Book bans are ultimately detrimental to learning. Since 2019, K-12 literacy rates have plummeted with book bans exacerbating this. In a 2023 study, educators divulged how book bans negatively affected their teaching capabilities and student engagement with reading. Restricting access to diverse books discourages students from finding stories they find compelling, an essential for teaching children about empathy and getting them interested in reading. Additionally, censuring these perspectives constricts their worldview, thus stifling their critical thinking abilities. Between Trump’s promise to abolish the Department of Education and Project 2025’s agenda to ramp up censorship in classrooms, education is fundamentally under attack in the United States.
Politics ultimately dictate our future- precisely why it’s impossible to ignore the role these policies and movements play in our lives. The government has largely stayed out of the internet until recently, when its impact has begun to become more widespread. BookTok creates a community that has played a pivotal role in igniting a passion for reading in younger generations. However, being a niche corner of social media is a double-edged sword, and this polarizing debate further supports the idea. Even if books don’t explicitly have themes concerning oppressive power structures and rebellion, they still possess unique nuances that appeal to people on some level. Indulging in escapism, no matter how silly the book’s plot may be, is still a choice. One that can be revoked if someone in power deems it a threat.
Stories are shaped by the context and environment that spawned them. In turn, their messages shape our perspectives. We don’t exist in a vacuum, and neither does our art. If we cannot critically engage with the media we consume or have complex discussions about their implications, what does the reading community become? If books and their content are constantly attacked in a country preaching freedom of speech, will readers have a community at all? Censorship is not protection- it is control. Like similar efforts in the past, organized attacks on education only spell disaster for the future. Reading is and always has been political. Engage with the world and keep these critical conversations alive. It is imperative now more than ever.