What do you think?
Rate this book
The Least We Can Do
In celebration of Independent Bookstore Day 2021, we’re proud to present Josh Cook’s The Least We Can Do!
Like most of our cultural institutions, bookshops and the booksellers who run them have worked hard the last few years to respond to political and social issues in our society. They’ve formed committees and hosted panels, held training sessions and had difficult conversations in both their private and professional lives. Yet books by White supremacists, fascists, misogynists, and other dangerous ideologues are bought and sold in independent bookshops across North America every day. What are the economic, social, and moral consequences of stocking and selling these titles? In The Least We Can Do, Josh Cook, bookseller at Porter Square Books in Cambridge, Massachusetts, takes up these questions and more, embarking on an urgent and insightful reckoning with critical issues around freedom of expression, public discourse, industry ethics, and moral culpability.
The first in a new series of pamphlets to be published by booksellers, for booksellers and those invested in bookstores and book culture, The Least We Can Do is a call to action and the beginning of an essential conversation.
Like most of our cultural institutions, bookshops and the booksellers who run them have worked hard the last few years to respond to political and social issues in our society. They’ve formed committees and hosted panels, held training sessions and had difficult conversations in both their private and professional lives. Yet books by White supremacists, fascists, misogynists, and other dangerous ideologues are bought and sold in independent bookshops across North America every day. What are the economic, social, and moral consequences of stocking and selling these titles? In The Least We Can Do, Josh Cook, bookseller at Porter Square Books in Cambridge, Massachusetts, takes up these questions and more, embarking on an urgent and insightful reckoning with critical issues around freedom of expression, public discourse, industry ethics, and moral culpability.
The first in a new series of pamphlets to be published by booksellers, for booksellers and those invested in bookstores and book culture, The Least We Can Do is a call to action and the beginning of an essential conversation.
- GenresNonfiction
46 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2021
73 people want to read
About the author
Josh Cook
18 books17 followersJosh Cook has been a bookseller at Porter Square Books since 2004, and in that time has hosted hundreds of author events for every kind of author from bestselling international superstars, to debut literary authors, to self-published authors. As an author, he has performed in dozens of readings and has recently completed a book tour for his debut novel, An Exaggerated Murder. He has also presented at numerous workshops and panels on books, the book industry, and writing.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
August 7, 2024
I found this zine to be super informative!! Lots of underlining and highlighting and adding exclamation marks to the pages. Most of the info wasn’t necessarily new information, but was really nice to read from someone doing the work as a bookseller! an important work!!
January 2, 2025
"Whatever we do going forward, we can no longer pretend that we are innocent. Donald Trump put children in cages. We can no longer act as though book sales do not have ethical and moral components. ...We cannot pretend that we don't have some responsibility over what ideas are discussed in public discourse." (8)
"We've formed committees, hosted panels, and held training sessions and though all of that is important, I have almost never seen booksellers grapple directly with the economic, social, and moral consequences of selling books by White supremacists, fascists, misogynists, and other believers in objectively dangerous ideologies." (8)
"Furthermore, free speech is a concept with ragged edges and many of the decisions we make about what speech is protected or not, what speech is appropriate for what spaces, what speech should be amplified on which platforms, require nuance and context to be made. Since I can't provide that nuance and context for everything, I'm going to focus on speech by Republicans with actual political power and Fox News and conservative pundits with significant influence over politics and policy." (9)
"The complicity of American publishing and bookselling with White supremacy is not the most powerful force supporting and sustaining White supremacy in America. It's probably a minor one. And whatever antiracist and antifascist actions we take within our industry will also be relatively minor compared to actions taken by other institutions and industries. But we should take them, nonetheless. There are no minor actions in a civil war." )11)
On "free speech absolutists":
"Even when used as kind of shorthand for giving the benefit of the doubt to allowing rather than restricting speech, the term obfuscates the debate by shutting down the nuance around these issues." (11)
"There has never been, there will never be, and no one has ever actually argued for, absolute freedom of speech." (12)
"Though some people, like the bookseller I was talking with, certainly use the term in good faith and it certainly sounds like a principled idea, most of the time arguments for 'absolute freedom of speech' aren't actually used to advance a idea or work towards the truth. Rather, they are designed to shift the debate away from the ideas themselves while creating space to occupy on a platform. It is, essentially, a kind of rhetorical jiu jitsu that creates publicity and recruitment opportunities, obscures the terms of the discussion, and shifts the focus away from the problematic or difficult-to-defend ideas to vaguer notions of free speech. If there was any doubt, any ambiguity, any space to learn something about personal expression and its relationship to society, it might be worth our time to seriously engage with arguments that include versions of the phrase 'free speech absolutist,' but there isn't, so we don't." (12)
"But not all ideas or expressions are actual intellectual trials. Take, for example, the sentence 'Cheetahs are a type of tree.' This is, obviously, not true. But not only it is not true, it also doesn't help discover any truth. Everyone knows cheetahs are not trees and re-proving the fact that cheetahs aren't trees doesn't help produce some other truth." (13)
"As others have eloquently pointed out, there is no compromise between 'Black people are human beings' and 'Black people are not human beings.' And we know this, not just because of obvious logic, but because the vast majority of America's social and economic problems and injustices are rooted in trying to create a compromise between 'Black people are human beings' and 'Black people are not human beings.' Can you imagine looking someone in the eye and telling them they need to believe that they are watching a 'debate' or 'free exchange of ideas' if one of the possible conclusions is 'You are not human?' Furthermore, the process that created this 'compromise' is much less like actual compromise and much more like appeasement. To many (to most), this isn't a conversation. It's a conflict. To others, this isn't a debate. It is still a war.
Supremacist ideas, in the form of White supremacy, in the form of misogyny, in the form of xenophobia, are inherently antithetical to compromise. In a White supremacist society, White people do not have to compromise with non-White people, regardless of the issues, ideas, policies, and potential actions. In a misogynistic society, men don't need to compromise with women. In a xenophobic society, you don't have to compromise with someone born in a different country. The alt-right, White supremacists, incels, fascists, and a whole lot of people who would consider themselves (and are considered) to be mainstream Republicans don't actually believe in compromise; they believe in getting what they want, however they can." (13-14)
"Every now and then you read a book and something mysterious snaps into focus. I had always wondered why contemporary Republicans could act like increasing the federal deficit was the single worst sin an administration could commit when Democrats wanted to spend money on social programs yet they themselves increase the deficit all the time with tax breaks, military spending, and wats when they are in power. In Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America, Dr Ibram X Kendi shows that racist policies and practices preceded racist ideas and ideologies. The ideas were designed to justify slavery, rather than slavery growing out of racist ideas. Because the job of these ideas is to support a specific policy, they aren't held to the same standards as other ideas. They don't need to be consistent over time. They don't need to incorporate agreed upon fact. They don't need to be internally consistent. They can even include facets that are mutually exclusive." (22)
"Republicans act as if increasing the federal deficit is like a gunshot wound when they are arguing against funding social programs because it's an easier argument than arguing some people deserve to starve to death in the richest country in the world. Once again, we find ourselves unable to debate ideas because the ideas do not follow rules that create debate. You can't debate ideas that aren't interested in being true." (24)
"Much like Popper's paradox of tolerance, when negation is allowed to stand on the platform eventually there will only be negation on the platform. To connect back to the nature of compromise, if one expression is a house and the other expression is burning down the house, if the second expression is allowed to stand then there is no more house." (25-6)
"To put this another way, honest discourse cannot happen with dishonest materials." (26)
"Every book on your shelves is taking the place of another book that could be there. The same display goes for display space, which is even more limited." (27)
American Dirt
"What you have on your shelves is a statement of what you value, just like every book a publisher publishes is a statement of what they value. There is only so much control over how readers and customers interpret that valuation. What does it feel like for a person of color to walk into a bookstore and see a copy of Sean Hannity's latest book? Is the first thing they see a 'commitment to free expression' or 'an acceptance of White supremacy'? Do they see 'giving space to opinions you disagree with' or 'more concerned about an angry old White dude's anger than your fear'? Do they see 'This one copy represents a limited platform' or 'We're cool with making money off racism'?" (29)
"Furthermore, 'a key component of discrimination in our culture is that it minimizes the very real suffering of marginalized people,' so be very careful before you argue that something that happens in or is a part of your space is 'not that bad' to make sure you have truly examine the act or situation from the perspective of those who might feel hurt by it and factor in how this moment might fit in with a lifetime of accumulated moments." (30-1)
"It is also somewhat difficult to hear a principle of non-judgement from an industry that judged and shamed romance readers and writers for decades." (32)
Curation is not censorship
"Displays are not an expression of accessibility but of amplification." (33)
"Though we focus on how customers feel when they are in our stores, we shouldn't neglect how our booksellers feel when they are in our stores. If we want our staffs to look like the real world, if we want booksellers of color, booksellers across the gender spectrum, booksellers with a range of abilities and challenges, both visible and invisible, we need to at least ask them what it feels like to sell books by people who deny their humanity." (38-9)
"Through staff picks, shelf-talkers, displays, events, recommendations, conversations with readers, and on all of our platforms both physical and digital, booksellers should advocate for marginalized voices and communities, center own voices, guide readers to the books and authors that will help them grow and develop as readers, take risks to bring attention to books that might make some readers uncomfortable, use books to show how big the world is, be willing to lose the occasional sale because you have been honest with your readers about a book or an author, respect your readers' intelligence in what books you talk about and how you talk about them, and talk back tp publishers and other media in ways that develop and support that vital national discourse. Every shift, every single shift, at an independent bookstore is an opportunity for antifascist, antiracist, anti-supremacist, and anti-misogynist advocacy. What a privilege that is." (41)
"Creating a space for productive discourse between opposing ideas doesn't just happen. Simply having books with conflicting ideologies (with each other and with the general values of your staff and community) doesn't mean you're creating a meaningful exchange of ideas. Work needs to be done for people to feel safe enough to hear critique, to confront their own biases, to cope with learning that something they long held to be true might, in fact, be false. Even an event, or an event series, isn't necessarily going to create that space without preparation and active (and experienced) moderation." (43)
"White supremacy is persistent. We are here because too many people, too many White people, saw a few big wins as proof of final victory. We took our eye off the ball. We must be persistent as White supremacy. We must remember that our society didn't get this way by accident, that we don't 'just happen' to live in a White supremacist state, and we don't just 'grow out of it.' We got here actively and so cannot be passive if we want to move forward." (45)
"We've formed committees, hosted panels, and held training sessions and though all of that is important, I have almost never seen booksellers grapple directly with the economic, social, and moral consequences of selling books by White supremacists, fascists, misogynists, and other believers in objectively dangerous ideologies." (8)
"Furthermore, free speech is a concept with ragged edges and many of the decisions we make about what speech is protected or not, what speech is appropriate for what spaces, what speech should be amplified on which platforms, require nuance and context to be made. Since I can't provide that nuance and context for everything, I'm going to focus on speech by Republicans with actual political power and Fox News and conservative pundits with significant influence over politics and policy." (9)
"The complicity of American publishing and bookselling with White supremacy is not the most powerful force supporting and sustaining White supremacy in America. It's probably a minor one. And whatever antiracist and antifascist actions we take within our industry will also be relatively minor compared to actions taken by other institutions and industries. But we should take them, nonetheless. There are no minor actions in a civil war." )11)
On "free speech absolutists":
"Even when used as kind of shorthand for giving the benefit of the doubt to allowing rather than restricting speech, the term obfuscates the debate by shutting down the nuance around these issues." (11)
"There has never been, there will never be, and no one has ever actually argued for, absolute freedom of speech." (12)
"Though some people, like the bookseller I was talking with, certainly use the term in good faith and it certainly sounds like a principled idea, most of the time arguments for 'absolute freedom of speech' aren't actually used to advance a idea or work towards the truth. Rather, they are designed to shift the debate away from the ideas themselves while creating space to occupy on a platform. It is, essentially, a kind of rhetorical jiu jitsu that creates publicity and recruitment opportunities, obscures the terms of the discussion, and shifts the focus away from the problematic or difficult-to-defend ideas to vaguer notions of free speech. If there was any doubt, any ambiguity, any space to learn something about personal expression and its relationship to society, it might be worth our time to seriously engage with arguments that include versions of the phrase 'free speech absolutist,' but there isn't, so we don't." (12)
"But not all ideas or expressions are actual intellectual trials. Take, for example, the sentence 'Cheetahs are a type of tree.' This is, obviously, not true. But not only it is not true, it also doesn't help discover any truth. Everyone knows cheetahs are not trees and re-proving the fact that cheetahs aren't trees doesn't help produce some other truth." (13)
"As others have eloquently pointed out, there is no compromise between 'Black people are human beings' and 'Black people are not human beings.' And we know this, not just because of obvious logic, but because the vast majority of America's social and economic problems and injustices are rooted in trying to create a compromise between 'Black people are human beings' and 'Black people are not human beings.' Can you imagine looking someone in the eye and telling them they need to believe that they are watching a 'debate' or 'free exchange of ideas' if one of the possible conclusions is 'You are not human?' Furthermore, the process that created this 'compromise' is much less like actual compromise and much more like appeasement. To many (to most), this isn't a conversation. It's a conflict. To others, this isn't a debate. It is still a war.
Supremacist ideas, in the form of White supremacy, in the form of misogyny, in the form of xenophobia, are inherently antithetical to compromise. In a White supremacist society, White people do not have to compromise with non-White people, regardless of the issues, ideas, policies, and potential actions. In a misogynistic society, men don't need to compromise with women. In a xenophobic society, you don't have to compromise with someone born in a different country. The alt-right, White supremacists, incels, fascists, and a whole lot of people who would consider themselves (and are considered) to be mainstream Republicans don't actually believe in compromise; they believe in getting what they want, however they can." (13-14)
"Every now and then you read a book and something mysterious snaps into focus. I had always wondered why contemporary Republicans could act like increasing the federal deficit was the single worst sin an administration could commit when Democrats wanted to spend money on social programs yet they themselves increase the deficit all the time with tax breaks, military spending, and wats when they are in power. In Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America, Dr Ibram X Kendi shows that racist policies and practices preceded racist ideas and ideologies. The ideas were designed to justify slavery, rather than slavery growing out of racist ideas. Because the job of these ideas is to support a specific policy, they aren't held to the same standards as other ideas. They don't need to be consistent over time. They don't need to incorporate agreed upon fact. They don't need to be internally consistent. They can even include facets that are mutually exclusive." (22)
"Republicans act as if increasing the federal deficit is like a gunshot wound when they are arguing against funding social programs because it's an easier argument than arguing some people deserve to starve to death in the richest country in the world. Once again, we find ourselves unable to debate ideas because the ideas do not follow rules that create debate. You can't debate ideas that aren't interested in being true." (24)
"Much like Popper's paradox of tolerance, when negation is allowed to stand on the platform eventually there will only be negation on the platform. To connect back to the nature of compromise, if one expression is a house and the other expression is burning down the house, if the second expression is allowed to stand then there is no more house." (25-6)
"To put this another way, honest discourse cannot happen with dishonest materials." (26)
"Every book on your shelves is taking the place of another book that could be there. The same display goes for display space, which is even more limited." (27)
American Dirt
"What you have on your shelves is a statement of what you value, just like every book a publisher publishes is a statement of what they value. There is only so much control over how readers and customers interpret that valuation. What does it feel like for a person of color to walk into a bookstore and see a copy of Sean Hannity's latest book? Is the first thing they see a 'commitment to free expression' or 'an acceptance of White supremacy'? Do they see 'giving space to opinions you disagree with' or 'more concerned about an angry old White dude's anger than your fear'? Do they see 'This one copy represents a limited platform' or 'We're cool with making money off racism'?" (29)
"Furthermore, 'a key component of discrimination in our culture is that it minimizes the very real suffering of marginalized people,' so be very careful before you argue that something that happens in or is a part of your space is 'not that bad' to make sure you have truly examine the act or situation from the perspective of those who might feel hurt by it and factor in how this moment might fit in with a lifetime of accumulated moments." (30-1)
"It is also somewhat difficult to hear a principle of non-judgement from an industry that judged and shamed romance readers and writers for decades." (32)
Curation is not censorship
"Displays are not an expression of accessibility but of amplification." (33)
"Though we focus on how customers feel when they are in our stores, we shouldn't neglect how our booksellers feel when they are in our stores. If we want our staffs to look like the real world, if we want booksellers of color, booksellers across the gender spectrum, booksellers with a range of abilities and challenges, both visible and invisible, we need to at least ask them what it feels like to sell books by people who deny their humanity." (38-9)
"Through staff picks, shelf-talkers, displays, events, recommendations, conversations with readers, and on all of our platforms both physical and digital, booksellers should advocate for marginalized voices and communities, center own voices, guide readers to the books and authors that will help them grow and develop as readers, take risks to bring attention to books that might make some readers uncomfortable, use books to show how big the world is, be willing to lose the occasional sale because you have been honest with your readers about a book or an author, respect your readers' intelligence in what books you talk about and how you talk about them, and talk back tp publishers and other media in ways that develop and support that vital national discourse. Every shift, every single shift, at an independent bookstore is an opportunity for antifascist, antiracist, anti-supremacist, and anti-misogynist advocacy. What a privilege that is." (41)
"Creating a space for productive discourse between opposing ideas doesn't just happen. Simply having books with conflicting ideologies (with each other and with the general values of your staff and community) doesn't mean you're creating a meaningful exchange of ideas. Work needs to be done for people to feel safe enough to hear critique, to confront their own biases, to cope with learning that something they long held to be true might, in fact, be false. Even an event, or an event series, isn't necessarily going to create that space without preparation and active (and experienced) moderation." (43)
"White supremacy is persistent. We are here because too many people, too many White people, saw a few big wins as proof of final victory. We took our eye off the ball. We must be persistent as White supremacy. We must remember that our society didn't get this way by accident, that we don't 'just happen' to live in a White supremacist state, and we don't just 'grow out of it.' We got here actively and so cannot be passive if we want to move forward." (45)
June 11, 2021
Thoughtful and thought provoking, this essay is a must-read.
July 26, 2023
Found this gem at the cash in my local independent bookstore. Very short at 46 pages in essay format. Published in 2021.
Target audience of the essay is booksellers and owners of independent book stores, but relevant to everyone. In a nutshell captures what we have watched happen in the USA over the past 25 years and describes the tactics used by White supremacists, fascists, misogynists, and other ideologues who aim to harm and derail honest discourse about issues that require compromise.
Cook uses very simple examples (basketball and art gallery) to describe how the public attention is being derailed from focus on the issues that need our communal attention to focus on nothing of significance to the resolution of issues. Very clear examples that expose the tactics of distraction and disinformation.
The challenge in this essay is for independent book stores and publishers to critically analyze what books and images they choose to stock and display in their stores and whether those decisions align with their values, their staff values, their community values, and in so doing support honest community discourse.
Within 24 hours I have read this essay three times and will keep reading. It totally aligns with my thinking and values and as a result I am looking at the books I house on my own bookcases at home. What do my books say about me?
Target audience of the essay is booksellers and owners of independent book stores, but relevant to everyone. In a nutshell captures what we have watched happen in the USA over the past 25 years and describes the tactics used by White supremacists, fascists, misogynists, and other ideologues who aim to harm and derail honest discourse about issues that require compromise.
Cook uses very simple examples (basketball and art gallery) to describe how the public attention is being derailed from focus on the issues that need our communal attention to focus on nothing of significance to the resolution of issues. Very clear examples that expose the tactics of distraction and disinformation.
The challenge in this essay is for independent book stores and publishers to critically analyze what books and images they choose to stock and display in their stores and whether those decisions align with their values, their staff values, their community values, and in so doing support honest community discourse.
Within 24 hours I have read this essay three times and will keep reading. It totally aligns with my thinking and values and as a result I am looking at the books I house on my own bookcases at home. What do my books say about me?
March 8, 2022
"Every shift, every single shift, at an independent bookstore is an opportunity for antifascist, antiracist, anti-supremacist, and anti-misogynist advocacy. What a privilege that is."
Josh Cook's essay highlights the moral duty of booksellers to refuse to carry, display, or promote books containing hate speech or those that peddle lies in the guise of policy. In my store I've posted a sign explaining that we refuse to carry or order such material. Cook explains why such policies are not akin to censorship and why "tolerance" of intolerant ideas is a good idea.
Josh Cook's essay highlights the moral duty of booksellers to refuse to carry, display, or promote books containing hate speech or those that peddle lies in the guise of policy. In my store I've posted a sign explaining that we refuse to carry or order such material. Cook explains why such policies are not akin to censorship and why "tolerance" of intolerant ideas is a good idea.
September 15, 2022
None of this is a solution.
If anything, it's a short term solution to feel like you're doing something in opposition. Not shelving a book solves no issues.
Additionally, these terms that are thrown about with gusto are never explored by the author. What are books that "work"? Or more importantly, what is "discourse"?
The author keeps talking about discourse, but I'm concerned that all they mean by that is Twitter. Which is not discourse. It's ranting. Like, screaming at people in a traffic jam.
Anyway, a bookstore can sell what it wants to sell. I agree with focusing on community and creating a safe space, but I also worry about the strength of the bubble one creates. Safe spaces isolate you from stuff. That's their advantage and disadvantage. I may feel safer, but I also may not have any idea what's coming. It just hides what's simmering outside my bubble.
If anything, it's a short term solution to feel like you're doing something in opposition. Not shelving a book solves no issues.
Additionally, these terms that are thrown about with gusto are never explored by the author. What are books that "work"? Or more importantly, what is "discourse"?
The author keeps talking about discourse, but I'm concerned that all they mean by that is Twitter. Which is not discourse. It's ranting. Like, screaming at people in a traffic jam.
Anyway, a bookstore can sell what it wants to sell. I agree with focusing on community and creating a safe space, but I also worry about the strength of the bubble one creates. Safe spaces isolate you from stuff. That's their advantage and disadvantage. I may feel safer, but I also may not have any idea what's coming. It just hides what's simmering outside my bubble.
April 27, 2024
The authors heart is in the right place, and I’d love to know if his perspective has changed at all since this was written but I’d also love to read something like this written from a more radical perspective.
November 15, 2021
An important read. I can think of a few bookstore owners who could learn a thing or two (or TEN!!!) from Mr. Cook. Let this piece join those that will guide us through this strange world we live in.
December 8, 2023
4.5 :)
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews