What do you think?
Rate this book
Dangerous Ideas: A Brief History of Censorship in the West, from the Ancients to Fake News
A fascinating examination of how restricting speech has continuously shaped our culture, and how censorship is used as a tool to prop up authorities and maintain class and gender disparities
Through compelling narrative, historian Eric Berkowitz reveals how drastically censorship has shaped our modern society. More than just a history of censorship, Dangerous Ideas illuminates the power of restricting speech; how it has defined states, ideas, and culture; and (despite how each of us would like to believe otherwise) how it is something we all participate in.
This engaging cultural history of censorship and thought suppression throughout the ages takes readers from the first Chinese emperor’s wholesale elimination of books, to Henry VIII’s decree of death for anyone who “imagined” his demise, and on to the attack on Charlie Hebdo and the volatile politics surrounding censorship of social media.
Highlighting the base impulses driving many famous acts of suppression, Berkowitz demonstrates the fragility of power and how every individual can act as both the suppressor and the suppressed.
Through compelling narrative, historian Eric Berkowitz reveals how drastically censorship has shaped our modern society. More than just a history of censorship, Dangerous Ideas illuminates the power of restricting speech; how it has defined states, ideas, and culture; and (despite how each of us would like to believe otherwise) how it is something we all participate in.
This engaging cultural history of censorship and thought suppression throughout the ages takes readers from the first Chinese emperor’s wholesale elimination of books, to Henry VIII’s decree of death for anyone who “imagined” his demise, and on to the attack on Charlie Hebdo and the volatile politics surrounding censorship of social media.
Highlighting the base impulses driving many famous acts of suppression, Berkowitz demonstrates the fragility of power and how every individual can act as both the suppressor and the suppressed.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published May 4, 2021
70 people are currently reading
2439 people want to read
About the author
Eric Berkowitz
9 books34 followersEric Berkowitz is a writer, lawyer and journalist. He is the author of Sex and Punishment: Four Thousand Years of Judging Desire. He has a degree in print journalism from University of Southern California and has published in The Los Angeles Times and The Los Angeles Weekly, and for the Associated Press. He was an editor of the West Coast's premier daily legal publication, The Los Angeles Daily Journal. He lives in San Francisco.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 56 reviews
July 12, 2023
Dangerous Ideas: A Brief History of Censorship in the West, from the Ancients to Fake News, written by Eric Berkowitz, is a global cultural history of censorship.
The book is thoroughly researched and starts with several examples that occurred in the 1960s and 70s. During the Chinese Cultural Revolution between 1966 - 1976, secular schools and universities were closed and millions of books were destroyed. The Chinese writer, Lu Xin, stated, "The statesman hates the writer because the writer sows the seeds of dissent." When Pol Pot ruled Cambodia, the ability to read was a capital offense. During the Mayan civil war between 1960 - 1996, elders were killed with exceptional cruelty to destroy people's links with their past.
Some of the memorable passages include:
* When a regime's power rests on force rather than consent, its legitimacy requires constant manhandling of the past.
* There has been a long-standing tension between the ideals of free speech and the urge to prevent harm that words can cause.
* The compulsion to silence others is as old as the urge to speak.
* US Supreme Court: Those who begin coercive elimination of dissent soon find themselves exterminating dissenters.
* Censorship targets have usually been outliers who are vulnerable to the force of authority.
* Protections of speech have almost always represented a gain for the powerless at the expense of governing classes.
* With Facebook and other social media sites, ordinary citizens now have the ability to silence rulers and Presidents.
* Destruction of books is a confession by authorities that they cannot coexist with nonconforming ideas.
* Censorship is always a display of weakness.
* What is venomous for one person is nourishment for another.
* Books contain a potency of life.
* US Senator Hiram Johnson: The first casualty when war comes is truth.
* George Orwell 1945: If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they don't want to hear.
The book is thoroughly researched and starts with several examples that occurred in the 1960s and 70s. During the Chinese Cultural Revolution between 1966 - 1976, secular schools and universities were closed and millions of books were destroyed. The Chinese writer, Lu Xin, stated, "The statesman hates the writer because the writer sows the seeds of dissent." When Pol Pot ruled Cambodia, the ability to read was a capital offense. During the Mayan civil war between 1960 - 1996, elders were killed with exceptional cruelty to destroy people's links with their past.
Some of the memorable passages include:
* When a regime's power rests on force rather than consent, its legitimacy requires constant manhandling of the past.
* There has been a long-standing tension between the ideals of free speech and the urge to prevent harm that words can cause.
* The compulsion to silence others is as old as the urge to speak.
* US Supreme Court: Those who begin coercive elimination of dissent soon find themselves exterminating dissenters.
* Censorship targets have usually been outliers who are vulnerable to the force of authority.
* Protections of speech have almost always represented a gain for the powerless at the expense of governing classes.
* With Facebook and other social media sites, ordinary citizens now have the ability to silence rulers and Presidents.
* Destruction of books is a confession by authorities that they cannot coexist with nonconforming ideas.
* Censorship is always a display of weakness.
* What is venomous for one person is nourishment for another.
* Books contain a potency of life.
* US Senator Hiram Johnson: The first casualty when war comes is truth.
* George Orwell 1945: If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they don't want to hear.
June 26, 2021
Given my interest in intellectual history, I was expecting to love this, but it was a huge disappointment. I don't know how you can take a subject so inherently sexy (controversial ideas, government suppression, heroic resistance, intellectual history) and make it so boring... Bleh.
The organization is poor and there's little overarching narrative to tie things together. It is a chapters and chapters long string of "and then" "and then" "and then". It reads like a catalog of events in the history of censorship (and even so, there are some events I knew of from other sources that I'm surprised weren't included), without any judicious choice in what is included and why. There were long, meandering accounts of, e.g., the rise of iconography, which never tied into the supposed subject of the book. It admittedly gets a bit more coherent in dealing with the 18th and early 19th centuries, but then gets very scattershot again.
Also, the author harped almost non-stop on how "futile" the efforts at suppression were and how suppression simply causes more interest. I'm sure someone else (more articulate and careful than I) will come along and thoroughly review the problems in such a single-minded approach, but here are a few that struck me: (1) Selection bias: we of course only know of the efforts that were, ultimately, futile. Anything successfully suppressed is, well, suppressed. (2) An enormous amount of texts and knowledge - that we actually do know about - WERE permanently lost. (3) Citizens WERE successfully subdued for centuries upon centuries. He really, really soft pedals any damage done here and mostly just makes fun of the government officials who failed, ultimately, in the (very) long run, to stop the rise of more enlightened thought. I think he's missing a bit of the point and certainly protests a bit too much in his quest to convince the reader that censorship is not the answer.
And look, I can't stand Trump myself, but given the overall scope of this book, he simply did not deserve the pages and pages and pages dedicated to his idiocy.
This was not rigorous and scholarly and responsible in its claims, nor was it interesting and approachable as a popular book should be.
The organization is poor and there's little overarching narrative to tie things together. It is a chapters and chapters long string of "and then" "and then" "and then". It reads like a catalog of events in the history of censorship (and even so, there are some events I knew of from other sources that I'm surprised weren't included), without any judicious choice in what is included and why. There were long, meandering accounts of, e.g., the rise of iconography, which never tied into the supposed subject of the book. It admittedly gets a bit more coherent in dealing with the 18th and early 19th centuries, but then gets very scattershot again.
Also, the author harped almost non-stop on how "futile" the efforts at suppression were and how suppression simply causes more interest. I'm sure someone else (more articulate and careful than I) will come along and thoroughly review the problems in such a single-minded approach, but here are a few that struck me: (1) Selection bias: we of course only know of the efforts that were, ultimately, futile. Anything successfully suppressed is, well, suppressed. (2) An enormous amount of texts and knowledge - that we actually do know about - WERE permanently lost. (3) Citizens WERE successfully subdued for centuries upon centuries. He really, really soft pedals any damage done here and mostly just makes fun of the government officials who failed, ultimately, in the (very) long run, to stop the rise of more enlightened thought. I think he's missing a bit of the point and certainly protests a bit too much in his quest to convince the reader that censorship is not the answer.
And look, I can't stand Trump myself, but given the overall scope of this book, he simply did not deserve the pages and pages and pages dedicated to his idiocy.
This was not rigorous and scholarly and responsible in its claims, nor was it interesting and approachable as a popular book should be.
June 8, 2021
I thoroughly enjoyed this book, chronologically documenting centuries of both fiction and science, and both speech and historical papers, being censored by those afraid of disagreement, dissent, and distastefulness.
Usually it was religious, superstitious people, but sometimes it was businesses and political leaders.
But usually religion, patriarchy, and bigotry were the deep roots of silencing art, music, literature, or experimentation meant to express oneself or to further society's progress.
A book of shameful events, really, but an entertaining read nonetheless.
Usually it was religious, superstitious people, but sometimes it was businesses and political leaders.
But usually religion, patriarchy, and bigotry were the deep roots of silencing art, music, literature, or experimentation meant to express oneself or to further society's progress.
A book of shameful events, really, but an entertaining read nonetheless.
September 5, 2021
Dangerous Ideas: A Brief History of Censorship in the West, from the Ancients to Fake News, by Eric Berkowitz, is an interesting book discussing the ideas of free speech and censorship within the Western world. Many in the West would look at Chinese or other authoritarian states, and discuss measures related to the suppression of journalism, control of information and ideas through censorship of books and culture, and so forth; these same people may not realize or understand how much free speech and censorship suppression exists within Western cultures. Berkowitz looks at the history of censorship through the eras, focusing on religious censorship, the burning of "pagan/heretical" texts (and sometimes, tragically, authors and printers). Another area of focus is libel/defamation suits, often used in Western history to target opponents of elite politicians and business people. Moving to the US, Berkowitz looks at the suppression of ideas surrounding race and racism in the United States, with some horrifying and oft suppressed ideas and facts coming to the fore. During WWII in the Western world, information was heavily suppressed by wartime governments for propaganda purposes, and this continued on into the era of cold war hysteria that gripped America and the West, targeting actors, directors, authors, and publishers, as well as academic scholars, with defamation suits, criminal charges, and other draconian forms of debasement.
The buck does not stop in history, even though this style of cold war censorship only ended recently. The West (and the rest of the world, although not the context of this book) is moving through a moment of enormous change in how information is consumed, and how censorship works. Berkowitz discusses concepts such as fake news, internet technology firms, and the commoditization of information, safe spaces vs. harmful racism, and so forth.
One of the things I am always leary about when reading American-based free speech discussions is the new discourse on safe spaces. Many countries in the West suffer from numerous issues with how they process and conceive of subjects like national culture, ethnicity, nationalism, and so forth. Berkowitz notes some interesting moments in history; in Europe, where anti-Jewish speech is often punished through the court systems, but a young Muslim teenager was jailed for saying that British soldiers should "Die and go to hell" is an interesting case point where utilizing protective speech measures can often serve political purposes. In the US, a similar issue exists, although from the opposite perspective. The US Supreme Court in 1992 sided with hate groups that, for example, would place burning crosses near people's homes (sometimes in public spaces). Clearly, the use of burning crosses can be used to target people, scare them, and force them out of the confines of society, precisely the aim of such white supremacist groups, and clearly, in some respects, court-sanctioned. The discussion around this is complex and nuanced. In my opinion (I am Canadian, and these are the laws we have), hate speech, or speech used to degrade or spread terror through a particular group of people, is definitely not right, and should not be condoned even in the name of "free speech". In these cases, the speech is not free - although one person, usually of a majoritarian bend, is able to express themselves, it bars and degrades the ability of those not part of the group to speak, and is often used to suppress not only their ideas but their literal selves; a much more heinous act, in my opinion. However, Berkowitz notes in the West that attempts to suppress free speech, no matter how and why, are often less than successful. Clearly, much of the "problem" lies within the body populace - ignorance, lack of education, and competition over scarce resources probably have more of a role to play in the advent of our modern racist moments than actual racism. If nations (Canada and the United States among them) did a better job of reducing tensions, avoiding making ethnicity and race political tools for electoral purposes, and spread resources more fairly by using progressive taxation systems and beefing up education and healthcare access to the underprivileged (and so on), we would see far less racially motivated attacks. Ignorance comes from a lack of understanding, and the sheltered lives that the middle class strives for in many of our societies insulate us from learning and understanding. I personally feel that the argument over free speech, targeting safe spaces, or having provocative individuals standing in crowds and screaming at people, is a waste of time and energy, focusing on a highly nuanced subject that is complex but ultimately is not the source of the tensions it generates. People are angry at the lack of opportunities, at unfair treatment by authorities, and at discriminatory practices within our working and cultural spheres. These things are a much wider issue and encompass not only free speech but numerous other rights and responsibilities. Berkowitz offers such discussions within this book, and the discourse at hand is interesting and worth a look for those who are avid readers of the discussions revolving around media, culture, and free speech in the Western political sphere. An interesting book, and worth a read!
The buck does not stop in history, even though this style of cold war censorship only ended recently. The West (and the rest of the world, although not the context of this book) is moving through a moment of enormous change in how information is consumed, and how censorship works. Berkowitz discusses concepts such as fake news, internet technology firms, and the commoditization of information, safe spaces vs. harmful racism, and so forth.
One of the things I am always leary about when reading American-based free speech discussions is the new discourse on safe spaces. Many countries in the West suffer from numerous issues with how they process and conceive of subjects like national culture, ethnicity, nationalism, and so forth. Berkowitz notes some interesting moments in history; in Europe, where anti-Jewish speech is often punished through the court systems, but a young Muslim teenager was jailed for saying that British soldiers should "Die and go to hell" is an interesting case point where utilizing protective speech measures can often serve political purposes. In the US, a similar issue exists, although from the opposite perspective. The US Supreme Court in 1992 sided with hate groups that, for example, would place burning crosses near people's homes (sometimes in public spaces). Clearly, the use of burning crosses can be used to target people, scare them, and force them out of the confines of society, precisely the aim of such white supremacist groups, and clearly, in some respects, court-sanctioned. The discussion around this is complex and nuanced. In my opinion (I am Canadian, and these are the laws we have), hate speech, or speech used to degrade or spread terror through a particular group of people, is definitely not right, and should not be condoned even in the name of "free speech". In these cases, the speech is not free - although one person, usually of a majoritarian bend, is able to express themselves, it bars and degrades the ability of those not part of the group to speak, and is often used to suppress not only their ideas but their literal selves; a much more heinous act, in my opinion. However, Berkowitz notes in the West that attempts to suppress free speech, no matter how and why, are often less than successful. Clearly, much of the "problem" lies within the body populace - ignorance, lack of education, and competition over scarce resources probably have more of a role to play in the advent of our modern racist moments than actual racism. If nations (Canada and the United States among them) did a better job of reducing tensions, avoiding making ethnicity and race political tools for electoral purposes, and spread resources more fairly by using progressive taxation systems and beefing up education and healthcare access to the underprivileged (and so on), we would see far less racially motivated attacks. Ignorance comes from a lack of understanding, and the sheltered lives that the middle class strives for in many of our societies insulate us from learning and understanding. I personally feel that the argument over free speech, targeting safe spaces, or having provocative individuals standing in crowds and screaming at people, is a waste of time and energy, focusing on a highly nuanced subject that is complex but ultimately is not the source of the tensions it generates. People are angry at the lack of opportunities, at unfair treatment by authorities, and at discriminatory practices within our working and cultural spheres. These things are a much wider issue and encompass not only free speech but numerous other rights and responsibilities. Berkowitz offers such discussions within this book, and the discourse at hand is interesting and worth a look for those who are avid readers of the discussions revolving around media, culture, and free speech in the Western political sphere. An interesting book, and worth a read!
Read
March 22, 2022Skip the audiobook if compelling narration is essential for you but if you don't care, this route is solid enough. The book has some parts which are more interesting than others, as well as some noticeable repetition (how many times in the last few chapters was it necessary to bring up Trump's Section 230 executive order?).
Pair this with Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right and it becomes very clear how censorship, power, and right-wing money are all interconnected. Note this book is very much an overview, with few deep dives into any particular topic or issue, so if you're looking for names, they're not here (even The Hate U Give's brief mention did not include the author's name).
Pair this with Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right and it becomes very clear how censorship, power, and right-wing money are all interconnected. Note this book is very much an overview, with few deep dives into any particular topic or issue, so if you're looking for names, they're not here (even The Hate U Give's brief mention did not include the author's name).
May 2, 2021
Dangerous Ideas, by Eric Berkowitz;Beacon Press: Boston; $29.95 hardback
Censorship is perhaps the one issue we deal with every day. Every reader is to some extent influenced by some form of it. Every writer knows his limits and pushes the frontiers of what's acceptable at his own risk. Eric Berkowitz, respected author, renowned journalist, and careful lawyer presents a truly wonderful gift, a study of censorship which is not polemical. It is rather a straightforward, honest, and surprisingly consistent argument which illustrates the point that censorship doesn't work. Why this is true will be argued clearly and cogently, illustrated with remarkable, not to say shocking revelations.
He has much to work with. Berkowitz offers a survey of primarily Western attitudes toward censorship. We discover how the ancients saw words as issuing from the gods. Thus they were not only influential but illustrative of virtue, or when used improperly, vice. Yet as he contends, and by extraordinary examples makes abundantly clear, in this 'brief history of censorship in the West, from the ancients to fake news', censorship reinforced authority. We follow this thread of the degree of the use of censorship as a sign of stability, or the lack of a sense of security, in governments or institutions of power. Berkowitz demonstrates that when censorship is not needed, there is virtually no challenge to the ruling authority, class, or social structure. He shows however that when there is rumbling of disaffection, antagonism or revolution, then censorship is employed. Its manifestations can be tremendous and varied. Incredible tortures for religious challengers during the Middle Ages and Renaissance, persecutions of revolutionaries after the invention of the type face by Gutenburg, or exile during the European 1930s are some examples. The revolutions in France, throughout Europe in the 1800's, and even upheavals to this day reflect how a social system or nation responds to tough questions which challenge its legitimacy. Berkowitz shows how leaders such as Jefferson, Lincoln and modern American presidents dealt with challenges to their policies. We follow with simple astonishment at how our censorship laws evolved. No one who interests himself in modern communication should miss this book. It is insightful, honest, and can be a powerful influence for those who consider censorship a wise idea.
Censorship is perhaps the one issue we deal with every day. Every reader is to some extent influenced by some form of it. Every writer knows his limits and pushes the frontiers of what's acceptable at his own risk. Eric Berkowitz, respected author, renowned journalist, and careful lawyer presents a truly wonderful gift, a study of censorship which is not polemical. It is rather a straightforward, honest, and surprisingly consistent argument which illustrates the point that censorship doesn't work. Why this is true will be argued clearly and cogently, illustrated with remarkable, not to say shocking revelations.
He has much to work with. Berkowitz offers a survey of primarily Western attitudes toward censorship. We discover how the ancients saw words as issuing from the gods. Thus they were not only influential but illustrative of virtue, or when used improperly, vice. Yet as he contends, and by extraordinary examples makes abundantly clear, in this 'brief history of censorship in the West, from the ancients to fake news', censorship reinforced authority. We follow this thread of the degree of the use of censorship as a sign of stability, or the lack of a sense of security, in governments or institutions of power. Berkowitz demonstrates that when censorship is not needed, there is virtually no challenge to the ruling authority, class, or social structure. He shows however that when there is rumbling of disaffection, antagonism or revolution, then censorship is employed. Its manifestations can be tremendous and varied. Incredible tortures for religious challengers during the Middle Ages and Renaissance, persecutions of revolutionaries after the invention of the type face by Gutenburg, or exile during the European 1930s are some examples. The revolutions in France, throughout Europe in the 1800's, and even upheavals to this day reflect how a social system or nation responds to tough questions which challenge its legitimacy. Berkowitz shows how leaders such as Jefferson, Lincoln and modern American presidents dealt with challenges to their policies. We follow with simple astonishment at how our censorship laws evolved. No one who interests himself in modern communication should miss this book. It is insightful, honest, and can be a powerful influence for those who consider censorship a wise idea.
August 25, 2025
I had high hopes for this book club pick, but it quickly became apparent that the author felt a long list of dates, names and events qualifies as good popular history.
I was looking for a nuanced view of the history of censorship and how it has morphed over time and a detailed examination of its causes, effects and externalities.
What I got was: leaders (political, religious, wealthy, etc.) use censorship to attain and keep power. Ideas still bubble up and create friction. Repeat from the ancients to today and fill a book.
The best advice I can give is - take that short summary above, go to Wikipedia and search the history of censorship and save $30.
There was just not enough there there.
I was looking for a nuanced view of the history of censorship and how it has morphed over time and a detailed examination of its causes, effects and externalities.
What I got was: leaders (political, religious, wealthy, etc.) use censorship to attain and keep power. Ideas still bubble up and create friction. Repeat from the ancients to today and fill a book.
The best advice I can give is - take that short summary above, go to Wikipedia and search the history of censorship and save $30.
There was just not enough there there.
June 19, 2025
I strongly feel that my outlook on the world has changed after reading this book (in a good way).
One of the, if not THE, favorite non-fiction books I have ever read. This book is incredibly eye-opening, and one I wish everyone could read. It really highlights that much of what we know is opinions that were pushed forward by those in power, that history is largely inaccurate, and that even the Bible itself has been edited across time based on the current political and religious leaders ideologies.
Censorship is a topic I am overly passionate about, and one I am so interested in as it is the biggest double sword I have ever beheld.
One of the, if not THE, favorite non-fiction books I have ever read. This book is incredibly eye-opening, and one I wish everyone could read. It really highlights that much of what we know is opinions that were pushed forward by those in power, that history is largely inaccurate, and that even the Bible itself has been edited across time based on the current political and religious leaders ideologies.
Censorship is a topic I am overly passionate about, and one I am so interested in as it is the biggest double sword I have ever beheld.
November 5, 2025
way too bland given how interesting the topic could be
the book pull lots of interesting tidbits from history and strings them together in somewhat cohesive fashion, but it just ends up being a litany of anecdotes rather than having any deeper message (beyond “censorship usually bad”).
the book pull lots of interesting tidbits from history and strings them together in somewhat cohesive fashion, but it just ends up being a litany of anecdotes rather than having any deeper message (beyond “censorship usually bad”).
August 25, 2025
This book was painfully dull. The subject matter had so much potential, but the writing was flat and lifeless. I only finished it because of a book club obligation, not because I wanted to.
August 25, 2021
This is an exceptional book, covering the history of censorship from ancient times to our modern ones.
While his focus is on the West, it is easy enough to draw lessons to our own countries.
Suffice it to say that what is happening is scary. What makes it scary, is that we are willing sheep, allowing our minds to be manipulated. A brilliant book.
Essential for our times.
While his focus is on the West, it is easy enough to draw lessons to our own countries.
Suffice it to say that what is happening is scary. What makes it scary, is that we are willing sheep, allowing our minds to be manipulated. A brilliant book.
Essential for our times.
May 14, 2021
Wow! I thought that I understood the challenges relating to censorship, and the pros and the cons of silencing dissenting voices if/as deemed warranted. Boy was I wrong! Eric Berkowitz has crafted a terrific and engaging historical analysis of stifling opinion and just how misguided this becomes. Kudos to Eric for highlighting the importance of this issue and challenging all of us to think more carefully and intensively about the implications of censorship for all of us.
May 4, 2021
A beautiful writer. I've long wanted to read such an insightful and clarifying examination of censorship in all its insidious forms. To anyone who thinks censorship isn't steering our lives every day, I encourage you to read this book.
May 29, 2021
Well researched and argued, written with wit and insight, Berkowitz's tour through the history of censorship is as necessary as it is timely. Required reading for every citizen concerned for the future of free expression in our nation and world.
June 20, 2021
A well researched and written history of censorship. I really think everyone should read this book! I don't totally agree with the author's conclusions but he did a great job with this important book.
November 7, 2025
This study was likely inspired by recent events of the past 10 years but provides a concise insight on the history and current state of censorship in the world. Berkowitz shows how censorship fluctuates over time based on cultural shifts, changes in leadership, etc. and calls due attention to the dilemma of censorship. The less well-intended censorship seeks to protect certain cultural or political interests and is often founded in insecurity around the impermanence or unpopularity of those interests. Often times too, the censorship can be self-defeating as overly stringent censorship also makes the forbidden material even more desirable in its scarcity. But there is also a challenge in enacting well-intended censorship. Even from the perspective of a hypothetical just-minded and unbiased governing body seeking to protect free speech inasmuch as it doesn't cause harm to others, there is a fine balance that's difficult to maintain through legislature. Every act of censorship incurs risk of over-censoring well-intended individuals along with the bad actors, so any censorship laws and enforcement methods need to be considered carefully. For the sake of thought experiments, I'll list a few stark examples from the book:
- The Roman Catholic church suppressing anything that didn't reinforce their existing power structure
- Governments suppressing anti-war sentiments and draft objections during wartime (US/UK)
- Militaries suppressing reports of their own war crimes because they realized how atrocious their actions were, but also that reports would limit further development of their assets (Example: The US military with the atomic bomb)
- Rwandan genocide - Someone had the opportunity to jam the radio signals spreading hate speech that inspired the genocide but chose not to due to concerns over freedom of speech, according to Berkowitz's account.
- Not mentioned in this book but another key example is the 2016 genocide in Myanmar enabled by hate speech being spread on Facebook. Per accounts from other books I've read, Facebook only acknowledged that there was an issue once their platform had been blocked throughout the country. This demonstrates the precariousness of having much of our communication managed and manipulated by profit-seeking corporations with little or no governmental oversight.
Obviously there are a lot of immediate concrete problems to solve such as properly regulating tech companies in how they manage our information and manipulate public opinion and expression, but a more timeless theoretical question concerns the balance between protecting free speech while preserving the dignity and well-being of all people groups.
- The Roman Catholic church suppressing anything that didn't reinforce their existing power structure
- Governments suppressing anti-war sentiments and draft objections during wartime (US/UK)
- Militaries suppressing reports of their own war crimes because they realized how atrocious their actions were, but also that reports would limit further development of their assets (Example: The US military with the atomic bomb)
- Rwandan genocide - Someone had the opportunity to jam the radio signals spreading hate speech that inspired the genocide but chose not to due to concerns over freedom of speech, according to Berkowitz's account.
- Not mentioned in this book but another key example is the 2016 genocide in Myanmar enabled by hate speech being spread on Facebook. Per accounts from other books I've read, Facebook only acknowledged that there was an issue once their platform had been blocked throughout the country. This demonstrates the precariousness of having much of our communication managed and manipulated by profit-seeking corporations with little or no governmental oversight.
Obviously there are a lot of immediate concrete problems to solve such as properly regulating tech companies in how they manage our information and manipulate public opinion and expression, but a more timeless theoretical question concerns the balance between protecting free speech while preserving the dignity and well-being of all people groups.
January 2, 2026
قرأت هذا الكتاب بمتعة فائقة وأنا أتابع تاريخ كل المحاولات اليائسة والبائسة معا للرقابة وتقييد التعبير في العالم الغربي. بعد قراءة الكتاب فكرت ماذا سيقول أبناؤنا وأحفادنا عنا في يوم ما وهم يتذكرون ما الذي دهانا في تطبيق قانون مثل هذا. ما علينا، نعود إلى تاريخ الرقابة الغربية لنكتشف أنها مرت بفترات ومراحل تشبه تماما كل محاولات تقييد التعبير في كافة أنحاء العالم. من المدهش أنه حتى خمسين سنة تقريبا كانت هنالك رقابة وتقييد شديدين في نشر المضمون الذي يسمى "إباحيا" أو "مثليا" في الثقافة الغربية وان كل هذا الانفتاح الذي يدعون العالم إليه حاليا لم يعيشوه إلا منذ عقود. من المدهش أنه في القرن التاسع عشر كان كتاب مثل ألف ليلة وليلة المنتشر في كل العالم الإسلامي بدون قيود ممنوعا من التداول في أوروبا بحجة الاباحية وتخريب الأخلاق. يكفي أن نتابع معركة رواية "مدام بوفاري" لنعرف كيف حاولت كل القوانين أن تمنع نشر الكتاب بحجة المضمون اللا أخلاقي قبل أن يكسب المؤلف وجمعية الأدباء الفرنسيين الدعوى في المحكمة.
هل يمكن أن يصدق أحد أنه في الحرب العالمية الأولى كان هنالك قانون في الولايات المتحدة يمنع التحدث باللغة الألمانية، وأن الشرطة داهمت منزلا تم فيه سماع حديث باللغة الألمانية ليتبين أن المتحدث كان ببغاء لعائلة من أصل ألماني ولم يسمع لسوء حظه بهذا القانون البديع.
أمثلة كثيرة يحتويها الكتاب عن محاولات التقييد وخاصة لأسباب دينية وطائفية وسياسية. يبدأ الكتاب في سرد الرقابة على التعبير في الديانة اليهودية القديمة وخاصة منع الصور والكلمات التي تصف الرب "يهوة" ثم ينتقل إلى محاربة الزندقة في أثينا القديمة وروما، مرورا بتحول المسيحيين من ضحايا الى جلادين لحرية التعبير بعد أن اقر الإمبراطور الروماني قسطنطين الديانة المسيحية ديانة رسمية للعالم الروماني القديم. هذا الإعلان كان يعني سيطرة قطعية للبابا على كل مظاهر التعبير الأخرى، وخاصة حرية اعتناق ديانات غير المسيحية أو العودة إلى الوثنية أو حتى اتباع تعليمات مسيحية غير كاثوليكية.
يستمر الكتاب ليتحدث عن محاربة العلم والفلسفة في العصور الوسطى ثم قيام إختراع المطبعة بفتح المجال أمام حركة النهضة والتنوير، ولكن ذلك لم يستمر مع تنامى التعصب الطائفي والمشاعر القومية في أوروبا في القرون 16-19 والتي شهدت الكثير من عمليات إسكات الأصوات الناقدة بمنتهى العنف.
في القرن العشرين تواصلت الرقابة بشدة وخاصة في الشؤون السياسية في خضم الحربين العالميتين اللتين شهدتها غياب أي تسامح مع الأفكار المختلفة، وصولا إلى القرن الحادي والعشرين وسيطرة الأخبار الزائفة والإشاعات.
كتاب ممتع في متابعة تاريخ الرقابة، يثبت بأن الرقابة هي واحدة من أفشل الأفكار في تاريخ الحضارة البشرية.
هل يمكن أن يصدق أحد أنه في الحرب العالمية الأولى كان هنالك قانون في الولايات المتحدة يمنع التحدث باللغة الألمانية، وأن الشرطة داهمت منزلا تم فيه سماع حديث باللغة الألمانية ليتبين أن المتحدث كان ببغاء لعائلة من أصل ألماني ولم يسمع لسوء حظه بهذا القانون البديع.
أمثلة كثيرة يحتويها الكتاب عن محاولات التقييد وخاصة لأسباب دينية وطائفية وسياسية. يبدأ الكتاب في سرد الرقابة على التعبير في الديانة اليهودية القديمة وخاصة منع الصور والكلمات التي تصف الرب "يهوة" ثم ينتقل إلى محاربة الزندقة في أثينا القديمة وروما، مرورا بتحول المسيحيين من ضحايا الى جلادين لحرية التعبير بعد أن اقر الإمبراطور الروماني قسطنطين الديانة المسيحية ديانة رسمية للعالم الروماني القديم. هذا الإعلان كان يعني سيطرة قطعية للبابا على كل مظاهر التعبير الأخرى، وخاصة حرية اعتناق ديانات غير المسيحية أو العودة إلى الوثنية أو حتى اتباع تعليمات مسيحية غير كاثوليكية.
يستمر الكتاب ليتحدث عن محاربة العلم والفلسفة في العصور الوسطى ثم قيام إختراع المطبعة بفتح المجال أمام حركة النهضة والتنوير، ولكن ذلك لم يستمر مع تنامى التعصب الطائفي والمشاعر القومية في أوروبا في القرون 16-19 والتي شهدت الكثير من عمليات إسكات الأصوات الناقدة بمنتهى العنف.
في القرن العشرين تواصلت الرقابة بشدة وخاصة في الشؤون السياسية في خضم الحربين العالميتين اللتين شهدتها غياب أي تسامح مع الأفكار المختلفة، وصولا إلى القرن الحادي والعشرين وسيطرة الأخبار الزائفة والإشاعات.
كتاب ممتع في متابعة تاريخ الرقابة، يثبت بأن الرقابة هي واحدة من أفشل الأفكار في تاريخ الحضارة البشرية.
July 2, 2023
"Despotism is a legitimate mode of government in dealing with barbarians, provided the end be their improvement." - John Stuart Mill 👀
"'Philosophers and theologians,' he said, 'Are the only ones capable of guiding simple minds to sort truth from false notions and protect them from being misled.'" - John Stuart Mill 👀👀
"As restrictions on offensive speech tighten, the question resurfaces as to whether censorship works at all. Have the laws reduced the quantum of hatred in the world or are they as futile as speech suppression has always been?...A 2015 report by Norwegian researchers suggests that filtering out controversial expression may increase the risk of extremist violence, while an Australian study found that the country's laws reduced expression of hatred in mediated outlets, but not on the street."
"...yet the overall trend toward micromanaging of speech is in decline. A report by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education found a 50% decrease from 2009 to 2020 in the number of American colleges earning its most restrictive red light rating. As for the deplatforming of controversial speakers at colleges that get so much attention, it occurs far less often than news coverage implies. A BBC survey of 120 UK universities found just six cancelling speakers from 2010 to 2018 because of what the speakers were anticipated to say. While in 2018, American college administrations disinvited 11 speakers. Not good, but also not enough to man the freedom of speech barricades."
"'Philosophers and theologians,' he said, 'Are the only ones capable of guiding simple minds to sort truth from false notions and protect them from being misled.'" - John Stuart Mill 👀👀
"As restrictions on offensive speech tighten, the question resurfaces as to whether censorship works at all. Have the laws reduced the quantum of hatred in the world or are they as futile as speech suppression has always been?...A 2015 report by Norwegian researchers suggests that filtering out controversial expression may increase the risk of extremist violence, while an Australian study found that the country's laws reduced expression of hatred in mediated outlets, but not on the street."
"...yet the overall trend toward micromanaging of speech is in decline. A report by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education found a 50% decrease from 2009 to 2020 in the number of American colleges earning its most restrictive red light rating. As for the deplatforming of controversial speakers at colleges that get so much attention, it occurs far less often than news coverage implies. A BBC survey of 120 UK universities found just six cancelling speakers from 2010 to 2018 because of what the speakers were anticipated to say. While in 2018, American college administrations disinvited 11 speakers. Not good, but also not enough to man the freedom of speech barricades."
September 24, 2025
i think this book struggled between the lines of entertainment/pop history and a serious critical analysis. it wound up being pretty dull and repetitive, but not super informative. the point is that censorship doesn't work, which like fair, but it tried so hard to hedge and qualify the ultimately free-speech absolutist message that it came across as almost performative? like "yeah of course Nazis are bad! that's why we need a free market of ideas!" which honestly falls flat. yeah nazi ideas are just inherently bad, and maybe censorship isn't the answer, but the (imo too lightly touched on) idea that algorithms boost controversial topics for engagement farming, therefore pushing right-wing ideologies for profit kinda makes the "free market of ideas" moot? the free market of ideas has to exist with the actual commodity market, and in a world where the political landscape is dominated by rich assholes who sell people's innermost thoughts and most intimate moments for ad space, it's not really practical to "welp we'll see where it goes!" not even touching on how many news sources are owned by people with vested interest in maintaining wealth and power, bc oligarchic suppression of speech is separate, i guess
August 7, 2024
✨
كتاب: #أفكار_خطرة 💭
المؤلف: #اريك_بركويتز 🇺🇸
الصفحات: 319 صفحة 📕
التقييم: 5/🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕
📚📚
#رأيي:🖋️
- مراجعة جديدة، لأكثر كتاب أخذ مني وقتاََ في قرائته في حياتي!.
- يتناول كتاب "أفكار خطرة" الرقابة والأنظمة الرقابية الغربية عبر التاريخ، منذ الرومان والإغريق وصولاََ الى عصر الإنترنت، مروراََ بحقبة المسيح والعصور الوسطى والثو رة الصناعية والثو رة الفرنسية والكثير من الأحداث التاريخية الأخرى.
- رغم عدد صفحاته المتوسطة، الكتاب دسم للغاية ومليئ بالتفاصيل والأحداث والمعلومات والوقائع، وهذا يدل على الجهد الكبير المبذول من الكاتب في جمع المعلومات.
- يجب الإشادة بالترجمة التي كانت أقل ما يقال عنها مذهلة، ولا غلطة حرفياََ، كأنك تقرأ كتاب لغته الأصلية العربية.
- في رأيي، الكتاب موجه بشكل خاص لمحبي التاريخ، وبشكل عام هذا الكتاب بكل تأكيد ستخرج منه بكثير من الإستفادة من الناحية التاريخية، والأهم بكثير من المعلومات جديدة والغريبة احياناََ!! .
- في النهاية أقول أن الكتاب رائع ومهم للغاية ويستحق القراءة لما فيه من معلومات وجهد مبذول من الكاتب وبترجمة مذهلة. الكتاب +18. أنصح به ❤️
📚📚
🚨 هذه المراجعات البسيطة هي آرائي الشخصية وقد تختلف من شخص لآخر ❤️
______
#كتب #الكتب #كتاب #رواية #روايات #مراجعة #قصة #أدب #اكسبلور #قراءة #ليبيا #مصر
كتاب: #أفكار_خطرة 💭
المؤلف: #اريك_بركويتز 🇺🇸
الصفحات: 319 صفحة 📕
التقييم: 5/🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕
📚📚
#رأيي:🖋️
- مراجعة جديدة، لأكثر كتاب أخذ مني وقتاََ في قرائته في حياتي!.
- يتناول كتاب "أفكار خطرة" الرقابة والأنظمة الرقابية الغربية عبر التاريخ، منذ الرومان والإغريق وصولاََ الى عصر الإنترنت، مروراََ بحقبة المسيح والعصور الوسطى والثو رة الصناعية والثو رة الفرنسية والكثير من الأحداث التاريخية الأخرى.
- رغم عدد صفحاته المتوسطة، الكتاب دسم للغاية ومليئ بالتفاصيل والأحداث والمعلومات والوقائع، وهذا يدل على الجهد الكبير المبذول من الكاتب في جمع المعلومات.
- يجب الإشادة بالترجمة التي كانت أقل ما يقال عنها مذهلة، ولا غلطة حرفياََ، كأنك تقرأ كتاب لغته الأصلية العربية.
- في رأيي، الكتاب موجه بشكل خاص لمحبي التاريخ، وبشكل عام هذا الكتاب بكل تأكيد ستخرج منه بكثير من الإستفادة من الناحية التاريخية، والأهم بكثير من المعلومات جديدة والغريبة احياناََ!! .
- في النهاية أقول أن الكتاب رائع ومهم للغاية ويستحق القراءة لما فيه من معلومات وجهد مبذول من الكاتب وبترجمة مذهلة. الكتاب +18. أنصح به ❤️
📚📚
🚨 هذه المراجعات البسيطة هي آرائي الشخصية وقد تختلف من شخص لآخر ❤️
______
#كتب #الكتب #كتاب #رواية #روايات #مراجعة #قصة #أدب #اكسبلور #قراءة #ليبيا #مصر
September 7, 2021
I did enjoy reading this book but would place it more in the category of an entertainment rather than a critical examination of the history of the suppression and censorship of ideas. The author clearly depicts the historical pendulum as it swings between the constraints imposed by those in power and the burgeoning freedoms of dissidents to be heard. We move more recently to the appropriation of the right of freedom of speech by those whose intention appears to be to limit the freedoms of minorities and subsets within society. I applaud the author for his effort to encapsulate the full history of censorship in the west but wonder whether it might have been better to select one exemplary period and focus upon that to illustrate his point? His point? Censorship fails.
October 1, 2023
A captivating history of censorship that starts with ancient Rome and ends with the year 2020. In Dangerous Ideas author Eric Berkowitz shows that the impulse to censor, in each new century despite advances in technology and the dissemination of information, has remained fundamentally the same; censorship also can be a two-edged sword: a censorship law or measure that one day protects the disenfranchised outsider can the next day be used to protect the tyrant or the grasping corporation. Fascinating to see this argument cut both ways. Berkowitz concludes: "[I]f this book has made any point, it is that striking at free speech to eliminate a dangerous idea is not only ineffective---it will cause worse mischief in the long run." A fascinating read; engaging, nuanced, troubling.
November 28, 2024
i have finally finished this book oh my godd. overall fairly boring and a little difficult to trudge through; as a nonfiction/historically premised book i appreciate that it was chronologically structured. by the time i finished this i could barely remember what i read in the beginning unfortunately, but it’s definitely informative !! the author could’ve had a more defined and cohesive perspective, ie his language at the end was charged but his angle didn’t seem consistent. maybe i just don’t get it
January 18, 2025
كتاب افكار خطرة للكاتب إريك كورتيز وهو محامي في مجال حقوق الإنسان وايضا صحفي في صحيفة نيويورك تايمز وواشنطن بوست ولوس أنجلوس تايمز يستعرض الكاتب العديد من الأمثلة لافكار خطرة واجهت اضطهادا شديدا من قبل السلطات على مر التاريخ البشري كما يبين لنا مدى تأثير الرقابة الصارمة في تشكيل المجتمعات الحديثة والأدوات التى استخدمت لقمع الأفكار كتاب غني بالتفاصيل المرعبة والبشعة والمثيرة في قمع حرية التعبير يضرب لنا أمثلة كثيرة متعددة ومتنوعة معتمدا على مصادر ودراسات تاريخية يستعرضها الكاتب بلغة سهلة وبسيطة وباسلوب ساخر جذاب.
July 20, 2022
This book gives a concise, good overview of the history of censorship and how those in power and the masses try to find a balance between free expression and order. It is not an easy task, and efforts to counter an extreme at one end manage to spur extremes on the other end. For “bad” speech, it can be a matter of perspective, where it is “I know it when I see it.” Can’t cover everything, but offers plenty of food for thought.
August 23, 2021
I loved the author's previous two books, but this one never came to a point. I was hoping the author would take a stand around censorship and make a case for or against, but that never happened. You go a good overview history and some modern context, but nothing else. This is an excellent author and I anticipated more.
August 31, 2021
I listened to this on audible and really enjoyed it. I love history and this Eric Berkowitz gave me an entirely new understanding of censorship; taking the reader back to the history of it. This would be an excellent class study. I want to listen to this again because I learned so much about the power of censorship.
October 17, 2021
The best part we’re in the last two chapters, the early 19th century and censoring movies and the internet revolution and chaos of social media. It has some very interesting facts, just at times overwhelming. Censorship can be a problem, but as said, can we allow everyone to yell fire in a crowded theater?
October 21, 2021
It is an interesting book to read, particularly as far as I am concerned the part covering the last two centuries. It is also a book that makes you think about the dilemma of having free speech but hurting feelings or even worse inciting violence. And as the book points out this is even a bigger issue with the internet. It also shows how it has been abused by Corporations and political movements.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 56 reviews