> what if the collection consisted of the following?
As the only books in it? Then it'd be best marketed as the "white supremacist conspiracy theorist starter kit". Throw in Mein Kampf while you're at it.
Just because a book is controversial doesn't make it good. No books should be banned, ever. But some books don't need promoting in a curated collection, either. They're useful for people doing literature research and understanding certain subcultures, but unlike the first list, they're not something useful and interesting to promote to a mass market, which makes them not good choices for a project like this.
Books are comparatively tiny, as data goes. If you have the space for a comprehensive list of every book in the public domain, by all means include those in it. But if you're making a curated list of a handful of books, and it's that list? That's certainly a choice.
See also this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48549512
I started reading the Camp of the Saints precisely because people said I shouldn’t. It was a bad book, I couldn’t read more than a few chapters. But I think adults should be able to read whatever they want.
You are free to read whatever you want. Doesn't mean it should be part of a curated collection in a light bulb
The 'curated collection in a light bulb' in your strawman fallacy contains books you could find prominently displayed in every mainstream bookstore's entranceway. Hardly banned by any reasonable definition. Pilpul not withstanding.
The opposite of 'banned books' making it false advertising.
The Wikipedia page doesn't say anything about this book being "banned" or "censored"...
[flagged]