Of silent minorities. Of fear and freedom.

Once again, we´ll cross the Atlantic, just so that we realise how close we actually are and why we should be paying attention.

In July, I wrote an article for the Portuguese newspaper Público (see translation) regarding the what is now an extreme situation of banning books in US school and public libraries. I wrote at the time that the contested books normally relate to LGBTQI+ issues, race and racism, slavery, the genocide of indigenous people, religion. There are also numerous demands to move books about puberty from the juvenile section to the adult section… Similar situations are occurring in Brazil and other countries, being more or less reported in the mainstream media.

A recent report regarding the situation in the US, published by the Knight Foundation, showed some very relevant results: that 78 percent of people trust their public schools to select appropriate materials; it also found that “most Americans feel informed about efforts to ban books in schools, but just 3% of respondents said that they have personally engaged on the issue - with 2% getting involved on the side of maintaining access to books, and 1% seeking to restrict access.” (read more). What does this tell us? That too many people are aware, a few get involved in defending freedom to read in a democratic country, while a vocal, often violent, fringe is allowed to decide what everyone may read and where. Does it sound slightly familiar?

In that same article for Público, I shared my concern regarding the first attempts to ban books in Portugal and the statement by publishers, bookshops and associations (subscribed, in the meantime, by more than 3000 people) denouncing “the repeated attacks by elements of Habeas Corpus and the far-right party Ergue-te on children’s book authors and librarians, on peacefully reading in a public library and during book presentations and debates.” The statement also refers to these bullies invading and disrespecting the authors’ privacy and family life, seeking to “create a climate of fear and insecurity, [intimidating] with shouts and insults, slander and lies.” Last August, Habeas Corpus presented a list of “LGBTQI+ terrorists”, which is being updated every month (I was informed yesterday that I am included in the October list). Having been accused of inciting hate and violence against the people on the list, they are now making a disclaimer: “These people are not terrorists; these people should not be the target of any form of violence. (…) These people promote homosexualism and transsexualism with children and young people.” They also claim that this “movement” is financed by tax payers’ money. (I particularly like this argument… Who are the tax payers? And what do they want?)

So far, in our political spectrum, only Bloco de Esquerda has repeatedly questioned the government and the authorities regarding the actions of this group and the tolerance towards it. A number of formal complaints have been filed by their victims, but I am not aware of any concrete action that followed them. More recently, the Socialist Party also questioned the government regarding this group being allowed to spread hate. Once again, I am not aware of any answers having been given.

We are now entering a new chapter in this story. One not unseen, not the least surprising, which is already developing on the other side of the Atlantic and probably elsewhere too: it’s called “soft censorship”.

Although there are solid data regarding requests to ban books, a recent article in NBC News reminds us that “What the reports do not quantify is the collateral damage of book bans, or so-called soft censorship, when a title is excluded, removed or limited before it is explicitly banned, out of fear of backlash.” George M. Johnson, whose first book, “All Boys Aren’t Blue,” is one of the most banned books in the U.S, said that this “applies heavily is schools and libraries. Where they won’t even order the books for their library.” We cannot track books that are not ordered, authors who are not invited by fairs, schools or libraries to talk about their work. Does this sound slightly familiar? Perhaps not, but it is exactly what’s happening in Portugal too.

And it should concern us all: parents, teachers, cultural professionals, writers, publishers, judges, politicians, the police, everyone. Travelling around the country in these last days I saw many municipalities marking with pride the 50^th anniversary of the Carnation Revolution. Do we really feel proud when a tiny bunch of shouting bullies imposes its views on everyone else? Do we feel proud when children are made to feel scared about their parents’ safety and their own? Do we feel proud in being part of the silent majority? And do we feel proud of teaching fear and silence to the younger generations in order to avoid trouble? Is this what April is about?