expansion has had on u.s.-russia relations. >> it showed baker went right back to allies and said, sorry about the language, confusion, and drop it and will not use it anymore. but it took mikell gorbachev a while. [inaudible] no longer an offer, just a claim. when push comes to shove and there is actually a treaty negotiated, that treaty allows nato to go eastward across the former cold war lines. >> her book is "not one inch," sunday night at 8:00 eastern on q&a. you can listen on our free c-span now app. host: good morning.

it is, saturda april 16. thursday, the house oversight committee held a hearing on that subject. overseas, russia has warned the u.s. to end shipments of weapons to ukraine or risk unpredictable consequences. welcome to washington journal this morning. we are asking you your opinion on the book bands and free speech at universities. let us know what you think. we are doing regional phone lines. in the central or eastern time zones, call (202) 748-8000. mountain or pacific, call (202) 748-8001. you can sit us a text at (202) 748-8003 with your first name and city and state. we are on social media,

facebook.com/c-span, you can send us a tweet at c-span to -- at c-span wj. this is a washington post headline that says more books are banned than ever before as congress takes on the issue. here's a bit of that. it says two reports this week show the u.s. is facing an unprecedented wave of schoolbook banning, spurring congress to hold a hearing thursday focused on the issue, which free speech advocates warm will undermine democracy. here are some numbers about that from penn america, a nonprofit that advocates for freedom of expression. they found there have been 1500 86 book bands in schools over the past nine months. they targeted 1140 five unique books by more than 800 authors and a plurality, 41%, featured prominent characters who are

people of color, 33% included lb gt q themes, protagonists, or secondary characters, and 22% directly addressed issues of race and racism. the american library association published annual report on book censorship that revealed that it tracked 729 attempts to remove library, school and university materials in 2021, leading to 1590 seven book challenges or removals, the highest number recorded since the association began tracking the phenomenon 20 years ago. the washington times also had a headline about that. it says parents challenge sexually explicit books in record numbers. earlier this month, let's look the house oversight subcommittee on civil rights and liberties. they held a hearing to examine

that issue of book bans, academic censorship and their impacts on student well-being. here's the subcommittee chair, representative jamie raskin, on those civil liberty issues. [video clip] >> somebody hates left-wing speech and somebody hates right wing speech and somebody hates hate speech and somebody wants to censor speech by the love lives about gay people and someone wants to censor huck fan because it uses the n-word and someone wants to censor the antiracist baby because they think it means babies can be racist. everyone wants a bite of the apple but if we all take them there and free speech -- if we all take them then there is no free speech left. it is not always easy, but it is incumbent on people living in a free society.

if we cancel or censor everything that people find offensive, nothing will be left. everybody is offended by something and that is why other people's level of offense cannot be the metric for defining whether your or my rights are vaporized. there's a famous story about lenny bruce, the somewhat risque comedian from the last century, and someone said his show should be shut down because a defendant him, and bruce said my parents came to america in order to be offensive and not be thrown in jail for it. host: that was the democratic chair of the subcommittee and here's how the ranking republican member, representative nancy mace discusses, specifically, free speech on college campuses and efforts by progressive activists to shut down conservative speech. [video clip] >> the first amendment

guarantees the right of speech, saying congress shall make no law restricting speech. the government should not police the speech of citizens. we don't punish thought criminals in this country unless you are maybe a main character in 1984. freedom of speech is not just a legal mandate and -- mandate in trying to our constitution. public institutions of higher education are bound to abide by the first amendment's prohibition and restriction of freedom of speech, yet often we see attacks on that freedom. public university and colleges frequently run afoul of first amendment freedom by enforcing overly broad speech codes or

chilling speech across college campuses using bias response teams to investigate thought criminals. there have been disturbing campaigns on these campuses to expel students, fire faculty or just invite speakers who hold views that are considered to go against the progressive consensus. these universities and colleges are unlawfully stifling speech to call young adults at a time when there -- to coddle young adults at a time when they should be exposed to a variety of ideas. host: we are asking you that question on book bans and free speech on college campuses. critics call it censorship so i want to know what you think. let's go to our calls now, to columbus, ohio first, sandy. good morning. sandy? can you hear me? caller: yes. good morning. yes. i was calling you concerning the

censorship of the crt, critical race theory. i've heard a lot of -- i've heard a lot about that. what i have viewed as history to me is supposed to be about facts and truth and if you are going to leave out minorities history out of the history, then my solution would be no history at all in public school. why should minorities have to listen to the half-truths? that's my comment. it has been on my mind for some time. thank you for the call. host: let's go to dennis next in ashland, ohio. hi, dennis. caller: good morning. i'm really getting sick of all this stuff. they are banning everything. just because they ban something, it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

you cannot even watch gone with the wind anymore. it is ridiculous. i am fed up with this country. that is all i have to say. host: all right, dennis. steve is in ormond beach, florida. hi, steve. caller: good morning. on censorship, our governor here, governor desantis, has worked on a bill in order to interview college students before acceptance and basing their acceptance on what their political views are, which, to me, that's a pure violation of free speech. i'm 64 and up seen a few cycles of books being banned. i was in high school in the 1970's and there were books

required like catcher in the rye by jd salinger, books by walt whitman, and it is funny because when the politics change books that are required reading in high school are banned. host: do you think any book should be banned? what about sexually explicit books in k-12? caller: well, yeah, when you say "banned," they shouldn't be put in the library or, you know, i think there's a lot of common sense there, but political views are not -- political views should be explored and accepted on all ranges of the spectrum. when you start banning people's political views, that is usually by the act of someone who is an

autocrat, who wants to be a dictator, and they should not be banned. host: all right, steve. this is the washington post. it says schools nationwide are quietly removing books from their libraries, essentially ahead of any controversy that might come up. it says eight titles have melted away seemingly overnight, a panicked school aide calling them from the shelves in one district, titles including "in my mosque," "a place inside of me," and when aiden became a brother, whose main character is a transgender boy. let's talk to john in missouri. good morning. caller: good morning. i did not believe any book

should be banned children should learn the truth from the beginning. they should not be lied to to protect their innocence because they are not innocent. they're gonna grow up. they will make mistakes. host: when you say they are not innocent, what about very young children? what about a second grader, let's say? caller: they are the worst in the world in my opinion. they need to be taught how to behave. host: all right, john. let's talk to ed in ocean city, new jersey. caller: i don't think any book should be banned. i graduated from colgate university, where we had a 24 hour a day debate, and as you

get ideas out there, and if there's something in it that's destructive, it'll come out. host: let's talk about the university. when were you -- when you were at college, did you feel like you could express your political views that were different from the other students? caller: yes, colgate university, i graduated from there and anybody could say anything about anything and it was always debated and discussed rationally, and if something wasn't true, you found that out. host: all right. at last week's house oversight hearing on book banding and free speech on campus, samantha hall, a school librarian from lancaster, pennsylvania talk about efforts by school librarians to keep books on the shelves across the country and how this helps children and teens. [video clip]

>> administrators have made hasty decisions based on out of context excerpts and librarians gambled -- librarians scrambled to catch up. when books are removed, communities lose the voice that book represents. measuring the damage of loss voices is daunting. we can measure the soaring rates of mental health disorders in adolescence. many can correlate the team mental health crisis to discontent, loneliness and a lack of belonging. these are the feelings that arise when we believe we are alone in what we experience and these things can be brutal and isolating and adolescence. the ability to learn about and appreciate the diversity of human experience is crucial to gaining a sense of belonging. we can gain this through access to books and other resources. this is why a singular reaction to a book should never result in the immediate removal of resource but instead be the

basis of a conversation to understand the purpose of a library and the support and resources they offer. if a student react strongly to a book, it can be a start of a conversation with their family or a trusted adult about the topic that caused the reaction. in the years i have been a librarian, i have seen the publishing industry react in support to the need among adolescents for books representing a range of thought and experience. they affect our kids well being, being able to think more innovative and empathetic. we see this in the students standing up for what they believe. those students realized early that their voice matters. school librarians have dedicated our career to responding to our students needs and it motivates to work -- and it motivates us to work hard. we work tirelessly to provide a sanctuary for students in the library, the place they feel safe. feeling safe, however, is not

always the same as feeling comfortable. growth does not necessarily happen we are comfortable. it will not happen we are -- happen when we are stagnant or uninterested. growth is uncomfortable but it takes grit and determination. to learn is to grow and in an environment to foster open meineke munication -- individuals monolithic or wind -- input about books based on out of context readings. when we take this road, we are limiting growth, stifling progress and acting in the most undemocratic way possible. in not making space for all voices to be heard, we are not making progress. librarians urge everyone to take a minute to consider why apical resource makes them uncomfortable, what it might be trying to teach us and what we

are resisting to learn. host: we are talking about your view on book bans and free speech on campus. diane in st. paul, minnesota. caller: good morning to you and the c-span community. i called because i really am dismayed about the fact that this critical race theory -- i was going to college getting my masters degree, we talked about critical race theory and what that was, but the thing of it is is our history does not reflect a true -- reflect a truth all around the world. what is being done for minority kids who have to face this kind of society every day?

when i. say minority, i am talking not just about people of color but women, the gay and lesbian community, because they have to suffer through all this. now all of a sudden everybody is concerned about what their kids are learning in school. my kids have to go through all this. we had to deal with this at home, the trauma they felt from going to school and not having history that talked about them. we had to fight to be in the history books. that is my dismay about all of this. we are not thinking about all the kids or what's going on in society. and that is not right. that is what we have got to end if we are going to have a society that works for everybody. and it should be -- and there should be no banning of books. host: you are talking about for kids, which i hear your point. what about on college campuses?

what do you think about conservatives feeling like they cannot express themselves? they feel like they are being censored or are self censored on liberal college campuses. caller: that is wrong also. everybody should have a voice. this is america and we all should have a voice and be able to express that voice and as citizens we have the right to go and check out information that we get to see if it's right. host: jonathan is next in canton, ohio. caller: good morning. happy resurrection weekend. i have a concern about how they are trying to take the books and the different things away from society. i'm 53. when i was younger, it was about how some children were on a waiting list to be armed certain

types -- to be on certain types of schools, and where i grew up, we had secondhand books, so it seems people of color, of all different races and nationalities and genders and whatever they are, i think everybody is coming up on an equal platform and they are -- the people that are trying to take these books away is like -- like how they talk about the crips and bloods, drugs and guns , they are not any better than the people they call criminals, just for the simple fact that i don't understand how they could say that part of history. when i got to college, and i

went, the curriculum opened my mind to some things i never had learned about the origins of -- that i was not even taught in junior high school. sad that they are being so stringent on this. they will take away romeo and juliet, that kind of stuff. host: let's talk to june in cheyenne, wyoming. caller: good morning. ironic that free speech is coming up relating to the twitter purchase. when i was in grade school, which was quite a while back, if a book in the library was

offensive, the library and would take it out and probably take it to the next school board meeting. the free speech has gone too far. everything in this country has accelerated to the point where we don't even know what we are doing. we have one problem than another than another -- one problem and then we have another and then another, and it is causing problems with the mental capacity or mental thinking of the american people, and, if a book is offensive, take it out. if it is not offensive, leave it in. it is just that simple. host: but who decides that? what might offend me might not offend you. caller: that's true, but everybody has the right -- to say if it is offensive or not. that's their right. and if it is offensive to one, then it should be taken away,

and the one person who has that little narrow tunnel of thinking will find the book regardless. they will find it regardless. when i was in grade school, in the bathroom of our house in wyoming, were a big series of playboy magazines, and i bet everyone in the country relates to that. and, boy, you didn't touch those magazines, you know? host: all right. one of the witnesses called by committee republicans was a conservative -- an individual from the conservative group the american council of trustees and alumni. he discussed issues of censorship in k-12 classrooms and higher education. [video clip] >> since this is concerned with caselaw, i would like to make three points specific to it. k-12 schools are funded by

taxpayers to advance the public interest. their curricula should therefore balance interests while leveraging the expertise of educators. not a while ago -- not long ago, they were removing books like huck finn, which features the n-word, meaning communities made a judgment about curricular value, no matter how many may disagree with it. discussions about curriculum should be at the state and local level. the framers understood educating children is a profound -- is a paramount parental responsibility, the kind of function that should be kept close to the people. in a federal democracy, local communities will settle on different policies and teach different books. that is the point of that. the american library association's list of the top 10 most challenged books helps us

understand what the real issue that brings us here is today. the first and second entries on the list, gender queer and long boy, are so graphic that parents average p -- parents have repeatedly been shocked. if public school systems were systematically targeting the rights of, say, civil-rights leaders do to political pressure, i would not be testifying here today. as justice heyer he -- as justice harold blackman has written -- social perspectives discussed in them. that is not what is happening in the majority of these cases. these books are being challenged because they contain age-appropriate sexual content that is not necessary to create and inclusive learning environment. in conclusion, the most serious

threats to free speech in higher education today, not k-12. on our campuses, some censorship is endemic, discrimination is the norm and students and faculty are routinely targeted for the political content of their speech. host: what do you think of that. we are talking about book banning. he was talking about sexually explicit materials, sexually inappropriate material for children, also talking about free speech on campus and conservatives feeling that they are self censoring their discussions on campus. let's talk to jim in grand forks, north dakota. hi, jim. caller: hi. i have not been able to get through in a while. can you hear me ok? host: icam. go right ahead. caller: first time i have seen you. nice to see you. talking about college campuses and censorship, it spills over

into the media we have. as a side note, this is not off-topic, look at the recent shooting on the subway by that man frank james. the next day, msnbc and everybody, for a couple hours, talked about, well, looks as if he was angry at the mayor of new york, but if you take a couple more days of digging, because everyone on tv as their own commissar, we have to be our own journalists, so we find out his rantings and ravings -- find out in his rantings and ravings that he hated jews and white people and that's what he targeted. host: you feel it is related insofar as it is the fall of journalism schools? caller: yes, because the narrative. black lives matter said something about how they would do you colonize libraries, which

is scary. i go to the library all the time -- the thing is there's a narrative. they have a hard time reporting about black on white and black on asian hater they cannot do -- hate. they cannot do appear they are afraid to do it -- they cannot do it. they are afraid to do appear direct about -- there should be a total understanding of the big picture human nature and history for kids. they should learn about the muslims -- the muslim slave trade, the first encounter of sub-saharan africans, the enslavement of whites in eastern europe for centuries by the muslims, african slavery amongst themselves in africa, and of course, africans who owned slaves in america, and if

there's a more balanced view -- like, if the kids would learn about the aztecs, you know, and their slavery and sacrifice, how they tour the hearts out of their slaves and how things have a more -- if little kids can learn about the whole world, the fact that slavery is a human institution that's been around since the stone age and the fact that -- what i learned in school, i went to school in the philadelphia suburbs, and i remember i learned was -- remember what i learned was race neutral. we learned about the civil war and learned that we ended slavery and, when i went home, i was a very happy kid. i loved my country and my teachers did a good job of teaching me not to hate myself -- host: i wonder, jim, if the

african-american kids went home happy as well. i guess that is the question. i appreciate you calling in. to a text we got. it says, "the left started banning mr. potato head, pepe love -- pepe le pieu, long before sensible people started saying get these books out of the schools." finally, derek says "cancel culture that only cares about history in this nation from one perspective, from people scared to learn anything outside their own bubbles." let's talk to nancy next in new jersey. five. caller: hello. thank you for taking my call. white people have been canceling cultures, especially in this

country, for centuries all over the world, but in this country since the beginning, canceling culture called genocide, so i don't want to hear about now they are all upset that people are bringing up the evils white people have done and saying don't cancel me. the conservatives on these college campuses, they have always been books. they have never had to choose at all. and you're white supremacist from north dakota, jim, please. yes, they had slavery all over the world, but chattel slavery, which is what america practiced, was totally different because they did not treat the people they enslaved as people. they treated them as animals. that was the difference, jim. host: lets talk to trina in

indianapolis, indiana. good morning, trina. caller: good morning. i grew up in a predominantly white neighborhood and i never knew anything about black history until we moved into a proper domin -- into a predominantly black neighborhood and that is when i learned about it and it frightened me. host: and how is that related to book banning? you feel there were not enough books when you were growing up about the history of ever americans in the u.s.? caller: exactly. there were not enough books and -- remember the -- we had sex talks in school where you learn about the birds in the bees with your gym teacher and it was real

sure and you had to take the notes home -- real short and you had to take the notes home, the boys with the male teacher and the girls with the female teacher? how does that fit in with your gender? host: so -- so your point being that there should be more books about gender identity accessible to kids. caller: gender identity. so you should have your gender identity and, as far as your, you know, your history books, as far as your culture, so everything should be open. our kids need to know. host: all right. take a look at the associated press. the headline says talk of race, sex in schools divides americans, and it says here that americans are divided over how much children in k-12 schools

should be taught about racism and sexuality. republicans across the country aim to make parental involvement in education a central campaign theme this election year it says, overall, americans lean slightly toward expanding, not cutting back, discussions of racism and sexuality, but about four in 10 say the current approach is about right. you can see a visual hear of a poll. the question is do either parents or teachers have too much, too little or about the right amount of influence on the curriculum in public schools? and you can see the difference between democrats and republicans. democrats saying parents have -- republicans saying democrats have too little influence and it democrats saying teachers have too little influence over the

curriculum. let's see what martha in warner robins, georgia thanks. caller: hello. i just want to say that the banning of any book to me is the most idiotic thing i have ever heard of. my father, how to read when i was three -- my father taught me how to read when i was three and i was reading in the second grade above my level and had read every book in my little children's library at the school, and i told my mother i was sick of that, reading them over and over. she went to the school library and said let martha go read in the adult library. the librarian was very upset but had no choice. i was reading in the adult library from the time i was in second grade, and it taught me many things that never hurt

me in anyway. host: were any of those sexually explicit? caller: i will be honest with you. at that age, i was not interested in sexual -- you know, i was reading books about everything, and instead of getting deep, i was not that interested. let's put it this way. my friend told me babies came from heaven and that was good enough for me. host: all right. josie is in indiana. caller: i'm a retired he -- retired history teacher and a librarian. as a history teacher, and i taught for over 25 years at the district, i found that our history is so full of many facts

that people have to understand we are who we are because of where we came from, and that is all of us. and i do not believe that we can counter the hate in our schools without understanding that everyone has a different perspective. i think that it is very important that people who call in and say we just want the facts, well, there are many facts, and the perspective as you go through your school years, you add more and more that children can discuss, critically think about and try to understand. it is a great country and the first amendment is a great thing. host: do you think any books should be banned in k-12? caller: i do not. i believe that with the right

school librarian in perspective -- children are curious. case in point is i was always a voracious reader and i would go to the public library and at the age of about 12 i started to go to the adult side, and the librarian said you cannot be over there. what would your mother say? i said my mother, who was a very fine woman, i said my mother would not ban me taking this book out. one was a biography of sigmund freud, and he was a very controversial figure when i was growing up because of his theories about -- host: i think some parents are not worried so much about biographies of sigmund freud but sexually explicit materials that's not age-appropriate for younger kids or, you know, issues relating to lgbtq issues.

what do you think? caller: well, let's be very clear. there's a struggle going on. i taught adolescents, and i always called them developmentally impaired because they are so full of energy and are going through so much that there are questions they have to ask. should we turn away from those? should we say we will discuss that at another time. many of those children are in turmoil. sometimes they need to find there others who are experiencing what they are. host: all right. let's look at a text we got from ken in ohio. he says it is not surprising to me that the very people i saw throw rocks at school buses don't want their grandchildren to learn that they did that. here's a tweet from always watching. "no book bans. everything is available online

anyway. free speech is not free speech when a university invites speakers. it is promotion. university should not have to sell venue space to make money these days." let's go to ted in san jose, california. good morning. ted? are you there? ok. let's try mike in somerville, massachusetts. caller: good morning. that last caller hit it spot on with books in the school issue and she explained that well and my take away was that all these topics can be discussed. it is just a matter of what kind of level of discussion and the context and i think conservatives often use

hyperbole to detract from these kinds of discussions. my opinion is they do not want to talk about this at all because they have certain -- a certain culture that goes to my next point, and i will only make two more. there's two cultures in this country. and -- whether it is there existence, gay marriage, and now we are moving

on to the next generation where they won't acknowledge trans people and they are slapping a new label on things called woke and they have lost this cultural battle time and time again and it is clear their culture is not compatible with the modern world and i view them as really foreign, you know. people up in massachusetts often don't act like the way the people down south in the bible belt act and it is confusing to me. host: you are pretty much saying no books should be banned. caller: i don't think, you know -- i don't know, banning books is different than going to a kindergarten class and choosing not to bring

a book into class, so i think the semantics are a little deceptive in this conversation, and from my perspective, eiffel will know these conservatives want to ban books just in general. host: they don't want to ban all books. they would not be fair to say it. caller: but for a fact, they want to ban books, to regulate the information they goes in and out of schools. they don't believe in factual reality. we have seen it with the pandemic -- host: let's not get on that subject. we will talk to samantha in capital heights, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm an aboriginal american, indigenous to north america. look up the 1828 definition of american and you will find who i am. our history has not only been banned but forbidden.

i had to do intense research to find out my history. not only has it been bad but it has been forbidden. this is like a second reconstruction. there was a time when they did not allow aboriginal americans to read books at all. it was against the law for us to read in this country and, during that time, they hit our true history. that is why you will not hear about people like chicago blackhawk, chief of the illinois confederacy. host: do you think it is because those books are being banned or you want to see more books about the diverse history of this country? caller: true hidden history. that's what we need in this country. uncover all the history. this type of history that i am

telling you about when i tell you about chicago blackhawk, head of the illinois confederacy, now they are calling it critical race theory. host: a headline -- u.s. schools pull more than 1000 book titles in unparalleled censorship bid, and this is a picture of author toni morrison. it says more than 1000 book titles, most addressing racism and lgbtq issues, have been removed from classes in school libraries over the last month, many under pressure from parents and conservative officials. that is from the organization pen america. let's talk to eddie. caller: how are you? host: good. caller: that is great. i don't think that banning necessarily is the answer.

when i was going to school as a child, in my library, we had sections for certain age groups. age group appropriate is more of what we need. i don't think we should have -- transgender sexual material, transgender things like that. we need to build a foundation. the problem with -- i am just so nervous right now. i am trying to get my point across and i don't exactly know how to do it, but what i am trying to say is we are going off on so many different directions that we have no foundation anymore. we won anything and everything to be taught to children -- we want anything and everything to be taught to children. to me, i don't think children, high school, college, have

whatever you want, but as far as children are concerned, they shouldn't have a sexually explicit material and they are teaching them things such as transgender. host: let me ask you who should decide that? could it be if enough parents complain about a certain book, should there be a committee? what do you think? caller: a parent. a parent should teach their child those types of things. that's stuff that should be taught at home. i heard this woman talking about when she had sex education or something in gym class or something. there was a while back i heard it -- it was a while back i heard it, but it seems like they did not teach about transgender or homosexuality. that was my take from that. well, biologically, there is a

man and there is a woman, there are xx and xy. that is how they determine man and woman. host: you don't think there should be books in the library about transgender specifically? caller: there should not be any type of sexual material in the library for children. host: let's take a look at the oversight hearing from last week. activist ruby bridges, author of ruby bridges goes to school, and it talks about her experience as the first black child to integrate a new orleans school. here's a portion of that. [video clip] >> when i first heard about book bans, including the targeting of my books, my initial thought was to avoid responding altogether, as i thought it did not deserve more attention and the effort would subside.

however, as these banns have gained even more momentum, i feel it is now important to speak up. i cannot understand why we are banning books. my books are written to bring people together. why would they be banned? but the real question is why are we banning any books at all? surely we are better than this. we are the united states of america with freedom of speech. in every book i have written, i have purposely highlighted and lifted up those human beings as americans who were seeking the best version of our country, like supreme court justice thurgood marshall, who helped to win the landmark case that sent me on this journey, and the six-year-old walking through the doors of this all-white element tree school in -- elementary

school in 1960. i did not walk alone. i was protected by federal marshals commission by sitting president of the united states -- by a sitting president of the united states, was nurtured and taught by a teacher, mentored by a child psychologist, all of whom were white, by the way, and mentioned in this very same book that some wish to ban. they became a part of my support system, along with a supportive community, my village, my courageous family and friends, so when i share my experiences, my story, in these books, i share our shared history, good, bad and ugly. as a six-year-old child, i had no idea i was taking a historic walk. my parents were sharecroppers raised in rural mississippi, non-activists. for them, education was a luxury

they cannot afford. they only knew that they wanted better for their own children. host: that's ruby bridges testifying in front of the house subcommittee. let's talk to walter in st. john's, arizona about book banning and free speech on campus. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: yeah, there are two points i wanted to make, one on history and one on racism, and on the history aspect, in civilizations across the world over centuries. every civilization will work to get to a point of excellence and beauty, the a pitta me of excellence. the cycle repeats itself over and over again no matter where you look at anywhere in the world. they reach the point of

excellence and then, a few generations past, and the reason they fought for excellence they forget, and they circle into depravity, falling into the pit. host: how does that relate to banning books in schools? caller: when you are in a position of excellence, the communication, the exchange of ideas is open, fluent, and there's very little restriction. when you get to the point of depravity in a civilization, that is when you have the book banning, the book burning, the censorship. host: do you think that is where we are now? caller: we are in a cycle working on the downslope. we hit a point of excellence

probably back in the -- oh, the 1920's to the 1950's, but in the 1960's, we started on that curve on the downslope, and if you look at history, it will repeat itself, and the same things happen. what brought us to a position of excellence, those generations have died off. and the ones who do not learn the reason to fight to maintain a position of excellence are doomed to fly down into depravity. host: ok, ok, walter. let's talk next to greg in chattanooga, tennessee. good morning. caller: how are you doing? host: good. caller: ok, i just think the book banning is a form of filtering and somehow, over the years, there's been someone in some group controlling the narrative and at certain times

the issue of book-banning will control the narrative and yet we do not realize that there filtering our recent history, our news, daily. that is banning. they banned crime against white people, mexicans, elder people. who is doing all this crime? we know who is doing it. there is no fooling you. there is crime going on every day and it is always one group against everybody. host: what do you think about banning books in elementary schools, middle schools? caller: no, i don't think you should been anything, but things that have questionable --

filters -- has to be gone over and reviewed and, if it is fiction, it should be put in the fiction place. host: all right, greg. let's talk to david next in concord, massachusetts. caller: good morning. i would like first to say that nettie two calls back was fantastic. i have been listening for eons and calling into washington journal since the 1990's or something. recently i am calling mostly to complain about washington journal. i think you made a mistake just in first of all -- i love you as a host. excellent. keep up the great work. but the show has been conflating -- looking at this book banning is kind of the wrong way, because this blonde

boy is not equivalent to huck finn and neither are equivalent to free speech issues on campus. you are making this big free-speech topic out of a lot of things that are really very separate, and you would have been better -- if you take long boy for example, you could not read that book on air right now. so if people do not trust me, go get a copy and read it yourself and see whether elementary school kids should be having access to that content. host: because it is too sexually explicit? caller: absolutely. you literally could not read that on your show. this is a free-speech forum. you could not read it. so it is not the same. college students grappling with free-speech issues, conservatives, whatever. that is a whole different topic. that is a separate issue,

much more like the free-speech topics we have in our public forums, but what parents are pushing back against in element tree schools has nothing to do with that. you are talking about highly radical ideas being jammed down the throats of children so i think you need separate shows on these topics. host: let's talk about your opinion on that. what do you think about how that process should play out? are there certain books you think should just not be in school libraries, even public libraries? who decides that? caller: the issue is you cannot come at it like that because, unfortunately, it is like lambs to the slaughter. the people behind these issues have no interest in the long-term fidelity of the country. these issues are so radical they are simply utilizing our -- radical.

they are simply utilizing our good manner. we want to go through the process in an orderly fashion. they are jamming highly, highly, highly radicalized social positions. this is not like kids learning about health topics and their bodies and whatever. we have vast arrays of ways to approach those topics. this is highly radicalized information that is being shoved into your kids brains and you cannot address those. it is like pornography. if somebody came to you and normalized hustler and said that should be in elementary schools, that they should be able to go to the rack and pick up hustler, most of us would say, no. we could spend it trying to figure out whether that is good or bad, but we know it is not right, so you don't do those things. host: let's talk to joe next in tulsa, oklahoma. caller: how are you? host: good. caller: i love c-span.

i generally think of myself as a very conservative person but i'm against the book ban. i'm against censorship to a great extent. who is capable of determining what i or my children should read? maybe i am capable of censoring it, but i cannot censor it for a whole classroom or for the whole school because my child might be at a different level than those children. host: all right. well, that will be our last line for this open phones segment. appreciate everybody that called impaired next -- called. next, president biden will be on the road talking about inflation in the economy. joining us next will be victoria guida, economics reporter, and

later, on our spotlight on podcast segment, arizona state university's joshua sellers and henry thomson, hosts of keeping it simple, a podcast that talks about divisive issues in a civil way. we will be right back. ♪ ♪ >> next week congress is in recess. scholars testify on insider trading before congress before the house administration committee. on tuesday, executives for appraisal firms and equal housing organizations testify about the undervaluing of homes owned by people of color compared to similar homes in white communities. that happens in of the house

financial services committee. wednesday a conversation on the modern presidency. watch next week on c-span or on c-span now, our free video app. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. book tv every sunday on c-span2 features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. coverage of the book about charlottesville. a book winning and losing the nuclear piece.

on afterwards, a former congressman with his book american reboot. he is interviewed by a republican congressman. watch book tv every sunday on c-span2. during discussions over the reunification of germany, james baker told mikael gorbachev that nato would not expand eastward not one inch. in the lead up to the russian invasion of ukraine, vladimir putin used those words to suggest the u.s. and nato were not interested in peace and could not be trusted.

sunday a history professor and author talks about the 1990 comment and the impact nato expansion has had on u.s. russian relations. >> the problem is it took gorbachev a while to say that. he started expressing that that is now no longer an offer it was just a speculative claim. when push comes to shove and there's a treaty negotiated, that treaty allowed us to move eastward. >> that's sunday night on c-span q&a. you can listen on our free c-span now app.