Re: Could Declan or some libertarian explain this?

[Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>]

Rich Graves wrote:
> >From the so-called fight-censorship list. I would ask there, but the list
> owner won't let me, and I won't stoop to Vulis's level.
> |        PLEASE MARK MY WORDS: IF MY BOOK IS NOT RE-PUBLISHED AND AVAILABLE
> |IN BOOKSTORES, THE CAUSE OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM IN THE WEST WILL BE IN A SORRY
> |STATE.  FEW ACADEMICS WOULD BE PREPARED TO SUFFER THE MANY BLOWS AND
> |THREATS THAT I HAVE NOW ENDURED FOR SIX MONTHS. IF 'The 'g' Factor'
> |DISAPPEARS, SO WILL OTHER SERIOUS PRODUCTS OF RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP --
> |ESPECIALLY IF THEY ARE DEEMED "CONTROVERSIAL" BY THE LIBERAL-LEFT.

> His complaint is that his publisher stopped distribution of his book arguing
> that blacks are mentally inferior to whites.
> Could someone please explain to me how Chris Brand is different from Vulis?
> I mean in form; in practice, Declan is bashing Vulis for not recognizing
> rights of private editorial control, but uncritically passing on Mr. Brand's
> message alleging that private editorial control is censorship. Far be it
> from me to criticize Declan's right to exercise editorial control over
> substantive dissent and factual correction, but I was just wondering.

Could someone explain to me why we have to have *any* censorship, if
people on a list are given tools to filter with and reminded on occasion
how to use them?