Censorship: Innocence and Ignorance

The UK television has pulled a Beyonce advertisement from TV, claiming that it is not suitable for children. There have been precedents for this decision, and none of them are good.

In 19th century, the US Supreme Court ruled to ban books deemed salacious for reasons that such would pollute the minds of the children. The author of the dissenting opinion stated that this would reduce the American adults to reading material that is suitable for children. Besides this obvious problem there is another one, and one that was discovered only too late by the two generations - the Victorian generation and the World War II generation - that under the name of protecting innocence practiced such things. And that is the following: Such upbringing fails to provide the children the knowledge that they require to understand the world. And the children raised this way, being misinformed and naive on many important matters, then go out into the world and get torn to shreds.

The early 20th century "flapper" generation and the baby boomers were both raised in such over-protective settings. Neither of these generations has had a particularly happy experience of life. Once they discovered that they had been fed a pack of lies, they rightly rebelled against the order that had consistently lied to them, including the parts of the order that were right. Then they both went far in the direction of what had been forbidden and, bearing no familiarity with the matter, got knocked around or came under control of terrible people. The people who had inflicted on them such an upbringing keep claiming that their children were spoiled (when they were the ones raising them) or that they were evil. In fact, their children were simply misinformed.

The people who misinformed them were not "damn libruls." There were very few liberals at the time, and those who did have liberal tendencies were aggressively persecuted by both the Victorian and the World War II generation. These generations were misinformed by their parents who wanted to protect "innocence" - meaning ignorance - and then sent their children out into the world without giving them adequate knowledge as to what the world was like.

Whereas the people who did in fact do well were people who were informed truthfully, or who themselves found their way to clarity - usually after many painful experiences and dead-ends. One of the most effective parents I know is a baby boomer who had been a member of a bike gang in his youth and then straightened his act and rose to become vice president of catering for a major hotel chain. Having found out a lot about the world before having children, he was able to inform them truthfully about the consequences of any particular action that they considered. The result: The children were getting straight A's in high-level universities and in no kind of trouble. Another highly effective parent I know - whose three kids are now all big earners and in wholesome marital situations - is an entrepreneur who came from a poor family background and did many things in his life to rise to his present position. He likewise succeeded as a parent not by denying his children reality but by adequately understanding reality to tell his children the truth.

Whereas among the people who were raised in over-protective settings, I have seen a vast array of problems. Everything from drug addiction to severely abusive relationships to unrealistic beliefs about the world to constantly being taken advantage of by scoundrels. Being misinformed about the world, they are not ready for the world. And that results are very clear.

The people who want to "protect innocence" are the people who would inflict ignorance on their children. And in all such cases, the results are predictable. Their children will go out in the world and, not understanding the world, will get clobbered. And that is a far greater disservice to do to one's children than it is to allow them to watch a Beyonce commercial.