Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!nike!oliveb!intelca!qantel!cpro!asgard
From: asgard@cpro.UUCP (J.R. Stoner)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Politics and measurement and Maroney and Heinlein.
Message-ID: <110@cpro.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 2-Oct-86 17:53:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: cpro.110
Posted: Thu Oct  2 17:53:50 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 11-Oct-86 08:19:55 EDT
References: <1119@hoptoad.uucp> <2599@watdcsu.UUCP>
Organization: CompuPro/VIASYN Corp.
Lines: 30
Summary: Censorship and boycotts anonymous.

In article <2599@watdcsu.UUCP>, dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi) writes:
 
[...]

> I have a mildly paranoid idea about all this.  Imagine that somebody
> didn't like some of Heinlein's ideas, and wanted to prevent other
> people from coming to believe them.  What better way than to
> misrepresent Heinlein as having opinions that are much worse than his
> actual opinions?  If enough people can be convinced that Heinlein is
> disgusting enough, they'll never read him to find out what he actually
> thinks.  It only takes one person to launch such a lie, then other
> people who dislike Heinlein will eagerly accept it and spread it,
> because they are predisposed to believing bad things about him.  And
> once people are convinced that Heinlein is a scum/filth/vermin, they
> will feel that it is their moral duty not to read anything by him...
> 
> 	When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes
> 	to say to its subjects, "This you may not read, this you must
> 	not see, this you are forbidden to know," the end result is
> 	tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives.
> 	-- R. A. Heinlein
> 
> Could all this Heinlein-bashing be nothing more than the practice
> of censorship as a cottage industry?
> -- 
> David Canzi

This is very interesting.  It also occurrs to me that the current DeCamp-bashing
on the net is similar to what you say about Heinlein-bashing in the intellectual
dishonesty they both share.