>But I wouldn't. This context incorrectly implies librarians are working from a position of restricting knowledge. In modern times, librarians are working against the factions that do that.

Peel District restricts books to materials post-2008 and deemed antiracist, which is an incredibly narrow slice of the historical body of human literature: https://www.peelschools.org/documents/a7b1e253-1409-475d-bba... https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/teacher-librarians-sp...

On the opposite end of the western culture war, we have the elimination of the corpus of queer texts at a Florida college: https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/education/2024/08/1...

Either way, it's a position, institutional or otherwise, of restricting knowledge that is inherently subject to the political pendulum swings.

>In modern times, librarians are working against the factions that do that.

Librarians apparently are the factions that do that. What books or why varies, but the "weeding" is the euphemism of the day to restrict with.

>In short, librarians are extraordinary examples of good faith.

I think this is closer to hero worship or beatification than a useful model for a political process.

Libraries stock what gets checked out.

>>In short, librarians are extraordinary examples of good faith.

>I think this is closer to hero worship or beatification than a useful model for a political process.

I assert that librarians fall toward the end of the scale we use to example good faith actors. Someone has to be there.