I would like to point out to the pro-censorship-in-this-case crowd that a ban like New Zealand is doing is ultimately doomed to failure. Apart from the fact that it's likely to embolden the far-right dumpster fires they're trying to crack down on, since, in this case, they can cry censorship and actually be right about it for once, the mere fact of banning it brings it the sort of attention they're trying to avoid.
Case in point: International Gorillay. It was a film made in Pakistan in 1990 that eventually was exported to the west, and odds are, I wouldn't know a thing about it if not for one thing: the BBFC (the British equivalent to the MPAA) refused to rate it, which ultimately led to its being banned in the country. Why did they refuse to rate it? Well, the villain of the film was famed author Salman Rushdie. Yes, this film was a direct response to the Satanic Verses controversy, and, since the film was made in a Muslim-majority country that's still embroiled in violence to this day, he's the villain. Bear in mind, at this point, Rushdie was still living in hiding because there was a very good chance some extremist would still kill him. Indeed, the next year, his Japanese translator would be stabbed by a Bangladeshi exchange student in support of the retribution. How did he react to such a film being banned? He pointed out that the whole thing was utterly pointless and cruel, even saying that "''Censorship is usually counterproductive and can actually exacerbate the risks which it seeks to reduce.'' The film would eventually be given an 18 certificate, and would eventually be released. Almost nobody saw it (because even Rushdie, who argued for its release even as it posed a threat to his own life, pointed out that it was total crap, although he did find the scene where he tortured Muslims by reading from Satanic Verses funny), and there's a good chance those who did see it only knew about it because of the controversy with the BBFC. Rushdie would later say: "If that film had been banned, it would have become the hottest video in town: everyone would have seen it". Remember, the whole controversy about "Video Nasties" (where films that were condemned by the likes of Mary Whitehouse ended up getting more free publicity than they would have ever dreamed because of it) was still fresh in the memories of the British people.
And bear in mind, this is in the days before anyone and their mums could torrent a film (any film) online. And dozens of mirrors of that manifesto can easily be found online. And if one falls, two will come back up in its place. And if only one pops up, it'll turn out that the original will still be viewable on the Wayback Machine. So, yeah, the premise that censorship will do any good in cases like this is one I categorically reject.
Case in point: International Gorillay. It was a film made in Pakistan in 1990 that eventually was exported to the west, and odds are, I wouldn't know a thing about it if not for one thing: the BBFC (the British equivalent to the MPAA) refused to rate it, which ultimately led to its being banned in the country. Why did they refuse to rate it? Well, the villain of the film was famed author Salman Rushdie. Yes, this film was a direct response to the Satanic Verses controversy, and, since the film was made in a Muslim-majority country that's still embroiled in violence to this day, he's the villain. Bear in mind, at this point, Rushdie was still living in hiding because there was a very good chance some extremist would still kill him. Indeed, the next year, his Japanese translator would be stabbed by a Bangladeshi exchange student in support of the retribution. How did he react to such a film being banned? He pointed out that the whole thing was utterly pointless and cruel, even saying that "''Censorship is usually counterproductive and can actually exacerbate the risks which it seeks to reduce.'' The film would eventually be given an 18 certificate, and would eventually be released. Almost nobody saw it (because even Rushdie, who argued for its release even as it posed a threat to his own life, pointed out that it was total crap, although he did find the scene where he tortured Muslims by reading from Satanic Verses funny), and there's a good chance those who did see it only knew about it because of the controversy with the BBFC. Rushdie would later say: "If that film had been banned, it would have become the hottest video in town: everyone would have seen it". Remember, the whole controversy about "Video Nasties" (where films that were condemned by the likes of Mary Whitehouse ended up getting more free publicity than they would have ever dreamed because of it) was still fresh in the memories of the British people.
And bear in mind, this is in the days before anyone and their mums could torrent a film (any film) online. And dozens of mirrors of that manifesto can easily be found online. And if one falls, two will come back up in its place. And if only one pops up, it'll turn out that the original will still be viewable on the Wayback Machine. So, yeah, the premise that censorship will do any good in cases like this is one I categorically reject.
Comparing the Universal Oneness of All Life to Yo Mama since 2010.
![[Image: harmlesskitchen.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/yxR97P23/harmlesskitchen.png)
I was born with the gift of laughter and a sense the world is mad.
I was born with the gift of laughter and a sense the world is mad.
